Quote:
Originally Posted by GroobyKrissy
Again, I think things are being lost in translation. But, I think you're now saying that customers will go elsewhere if not treated fairly? I don't think anyone is stating differently.
Hey, I'm all for competition between businesses. I don't think you're quite being clear as to what you're saying 'treat them fairly' is all about. If you're stating that a particular company does not treat their members fairly, you should be able to back that statement up with facts though. If anyone is being treated unfairly, it is the sites who deliver the content to paying members and then have to deal with dishonest members who redistribute content illegally.
Copyright as defined in the Internet is NOT unclear. I don't know where this whole feeling comes from. Let's be clear... the Internet is just a big, fat, bloated library. Libraries are full of intellectual property that is (at least when I was a kid, it was... I haven't actually been to a physical library in some time) FREE. That doesn't mean that all the property contained in it is magically public domain. Just because something is ACCESSIBLE doesn't mean it's not owned by somebody. That's why most companies trademark their images...
Anyway... again... completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
|
I boldly assert that the problems that are discussed in this topic are partly attributable to participate in the previously written.
Another aspect is the defined rules of a group, if
I want to move here, I must act according to them. ! IF I must draw the consequences and go other routes. 3, 15 or more images is no longer the question, SSL has clearly defined the proposition.
Moreover, philosophical discussions have sometimes sexy
surprises: the first blog to your views and not the last times. friendly greetings