Tax is not ethical. Legally avoiding it is not unethical.
In my opinion Voyager is by far the better of the Star Trek versions. Followed by DS9, then TNG. Voyager had a compelling stroyline from the start until the end. They had a purpose, and that gave all 7 series a linked and common plot. And Seven was hot.
Often the word "to" is too short.
Content is content, whether it is published or not. I am arguing that people don't have an abitrary right to someone else's content.
If I make a movie and charge someone to watch it, and offer them some form of time based encryption keys and special software to allow them to watch it, have I published my content? Does someone else have a fundamental right to watch that content? I say that they don't.
If someone can find a way to record or copy it, then good for them, it's my fault for not having a strong enough protection mechanism. They are using their own property to make a copy. The only way to content producers can sop this is to technically prevent copying. That's like trying to stop water from flowing downhill.
But I do. If you sing a song, I have a fundamental right, my unalienable right to free speech, to sing that same song. Just because you sung it first doesn't mean shit. You do not have a fundamental, unalienable right to shut me up. I'm not depriving you of life, liberty or property. You have no right to use force (your own or through the government) to squash my right to free speech.
I have personal property rights, to use my property the way I see fit (as long as such use does not trespass upon the fundamental rights of another). I own a copy machine, a personal computer. If you write a book and release it, I have a right to use my copy machine to copy it. Same with a movie, or a song, or any damn thing I please. It's my copy machine, and you do not have a right to come smash it up or prevent me from using it.
You're arguing my case - what you've just said is exactly the way I see it too. Which is why I disagree with very concept of copyright. Copyright limits what people can do with their own property, and I don't believe the state should have the power or authority to place such limits.
Content is content. My point is that one person doesn't have a right to the content created by someone else unless that someone else gives them permission.
You have no right to the content in my daily journal, or the diary of someone else. That's my content and theirs. Claiming that a movie or song is "culture" is laughable. I've not stated that content is "property" - they're your words. But if I produce content of some kind that does not give to a right to view/hear/read it.
You make it sound like you have a fundamental right to content someone else produces. You don't.
Copyright is an exchange. The government protects content, for a limited time, in exchange for the "owner" releasing it into the public domain.
Though I've moved out of the US (too 3rd world for me), and the copyright laws here mean that if it's "not available" then you can't "steal" it. So, if the Game of Thrones isn't available on DVD, or on TV/cable, then it's legal to download/upload it.
If the content producer doesn't give you permission to view the content, then you don't have a legal right to view it.
The "owner" provably loses no money on the "theft", so shouldn't have any complaint, right?
It's not theft, so there is no comparison.
I don't agree with copytight law or patent law. Copyright law prevents people from using their own property in any way their wish to. E.g. Copyright law prevents me from using my pen and my paper to write out my fabourite novel. I don't think the state should have the power to tell me what I can do with my pen and my paper. A similar argument can be made with regards to bits in a computer.
But if someone has produced content and for whatever reason they don't want me to view it, then the honourable thing for me to do is to not view it. It's not about lawm, it's about ethics.
and if the content creator wants to shun an entire region of their content rather than get paid, there is nothing stopping someone from downloading the content, that is not offered legally to them in other ways.
If something is not available to you legally then it is not available to you. Nobody has a fundamental right to the content that others create.
If the producer of content has decided not to offer their content in your region, then you have no right to have it. It's their content, not yours. There is no fundamental right to the content someone else has created. As owners of the content it's completely up to them who is allowed to view it.
I see what you did there.
I thought it was very nerdy, and very interesting too.
Can we finally solve the age old question as to whether the seat should be left up or down? This is a function based on how many males vs females there are, and how often a male needs to, er, sit.
Inches? How archaic.