At CinemaCon this year, the Motion Picture Association Chairman and CEO Charles Rivkin said the organization is going to work with Congress to establish and enforce a site-blocking legislation in the United States.

You realize that that paper is literally calling the entire premise you’re arguing for as “unrecognized by law” and is an argument that the law needs to change, right? It doesn’t even sort of support you on the current status. It’s a giant call to action to change the law.

What you own is a license. I’m literally all cases. There is legally nothing in between copyright assignment and a license in any scenario. It does not exist, and is not capable of existing without completely rewritten copyright law.

BolexForSoup
cake
link
fedilink
1
edit-2
5M

The MPAA and record labels 1000% assume that everything you “buy” is a limited license. We can argue all day about what it functionally means - legally or otherwise

You can argue whatever you want.

But if you try to resell the “single copy” of digital content you supposedly own from any of the platforms with that marketing lie, every one of them will aggressively take action. And they’ll win every time.

Because you don’t and can’t own a copy of a file and don’t have the inherent rights ownership provides.

BolexForSoup
cake
link
fedilink
1
edit-2
5M

Dude we agree

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
!piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Create a post
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don’t request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don’t request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don’t submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others


Loot, Pillage, & Plunder


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-FiLiberapay


  • 1 user online
  • 219 users / day
  • 509 users / week
  • 927 users / month
  • 4.94K users / 6 months
  • 1 subscriber
  • 3.2K Posts
  • 78.4K Comments
  • Modlog