View Single Post
Old Sep 7, 2012, 10:36 PM
ilef's Avatar
ilef ilef is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 306

Originally Posted by TerraEpon View Post
Even if no file sharing is going on, and we've had the debate before, it's hardly any 'better' to buy something, rip it, and resell than it is to simply download it without buying it. Anyone who thinks they can get free (or mostly free) music that way and feel high and mighty that they aren't some lowly pirate about themselves are simply deluded.
I personally agree with you, but still, look at the example linked above: the user isn't doing anything wrong, legally... As far as I know, law doesn't forbid you to resell an album as soon as you get your hands on it. You may not like it, but well... shit happens. And, if the user is going to keep a digital copy of the product after the sale, it would be his/her goddamn problem... legally-wise, that is. I mean, with the situation at hand we MIGHT guess that the user's going to be a bad guy and keep a digital copy to himself, but that would remain a guess. For the way the stuff is "worded", there isn't really much to go against.... There's room for multiple, possible, outcomes.

It's not like the user can actually force anyone to buy the album off him/her... So, here's to you an example of a "legally-accepted" situation: actual copy+digital copy. I hate when people assumes too often something bad/illegal is going to happen, and want to stop it BEFORE something... again good or bad... actually happens.

If you're going to stop people from adding unreleased stuff into a sale list, you might as well make every collection automatically private and disable private messaging.... That way you'll prevent stuff like folks still requesting to share rips of your albums and, even worse, those who ask you to sell stuff when you don't have a sale list (= not planning to sell anything, theoretically), too.
“Now interested, Asuka.”
Discord: Dark Slayer#8440

Last edited by ilef; Sep 7, 2012 at 10:57 PM.
Reply With Quote