That was my whole point. We don't have the right to any other media, either. Newspapers are not required to print your opinions in the Opinion section; radio stations are not required to give you air time; Tower Records is not required to print your songs onto CD's.
The problem is that it moves beyond that, and that the state becomes involved. There is the possibility of a public forum (not as in an internet forum, but as the original meaning), which is being limited. Youtube isn't allowed to have a public forum, as they somehow have the responsibility of their posters. This
is a limitation on freedom of speech, as the medium is effectively not allowed not to self-police.
Doesn't give you the right to censure or limit speech on the internet, either. The entertainment companies printing the CD's and DVD's? They have every right to say what they want on them, including "Don't Steal This Movie".
Where the f*** did that come from?
And who the hell claimed that they doesn't have the right?
Strawman much?
Hell, even CFC's forum rules agree with me: "Your right to free speech does not apply here". For some strange reason, I don't see the Supreme Court censuring CFC for violating our Constitutional rights.
Again, are there anybody here that claims otherwise?
Where is that torch for this strawman?
Go back and re-read the thread at post #66. Akka started this, not me. Don't go yelling at me about it. And don't go yelling at him, either; he had every right to start a parallel argument, and I was perfectly happy to jump in and argue with him.
Okay, granted, I was a wee bit drunk last night when I posted that.
YouTube has already fully opened up the new market, and the results disprove your argument very solidly. The new business model is even more vulnerable to piracy than the old one. And the fact that the old model hasn't collapsed proves that the old model still works. Hell, I prefer the old model myself; having a movie, song, or video game on an actual disk produces far fewer headaches than the dicey security methods they use with direct-download. Also, it's faster. Instead of spending six hours downloading Diablo 3, I could simply walk right over to the local computer store and buy the actual disk. Takes about fifteen minutes. Plus about a dollar's worth of gas.
Okay, this is amusing to say the least. Go educate yourself first. Some of the links I have posted should get you started.
BTW, it is
not faster, unless you have a stoneage connection (or, as in the case of Diablo 3, a billion people accessing at the same time (hyperbole), if they were all at the store, there would be an enormous line).
Yeah, well, next time you see that text banner across the top of a web page saying "please disable your ad-blocker; we depend on ads to keep this web site going", stop for a moment and realize that you're seeing the new version of an unskippable 20-second warning. And realize how little has really changed.
Both true and false. The unskipable warning is not quite the same, but your point stands, and it is a problem.
Edit: by the by, when you see one of those banners castigating you for having an ad blocker? A lot of those are actually hosted from off-site, and frequently you can have your ad blocker filter those out, as well. That's right: you can have your ad blocker block the ad asking you to remove your ad blocker.
I know, I am somewhat fluent in internet.
JavaScript is easy to use, gives certain possibilities, but boy-o-boy is it a security hell hole.
I had to turn the volume down, and I decided to read this thread to try to find a way to skip it. Help me please to learn how to skip these things.
