>>Why do people keep saying this?
Because many people cite the travel ban as some kind of example of "Islamaphobia" so that they can be dismissive of it, when actually it is an example of "MotherFuckersWhoWantToKillMeAndMyFamilyaphobia" which, I must confess, I suffer from.
>>Christian extremist law is a far more realistic threat to the United States than Sharia law.
Really? That sounds crazy! How do you figure?
>>Trump's Muslim ban
Actually, the countries were singled out by the Obama administration. And there is no ban on Muslims -- that would be illegal. There are, however, travel restrictions that affect incoming flights from certain countries known to harbor large numbers of people who have threatened to kill large numbers of Americans in as spectacular a fashion as they can muster.
The studios are not the creators, in most cases, but those creators contract with the studios for distribution, and the studios have a legal obligation to ensure, to the best of their ability, that the distribution is secure. That secure distribution is in the best interest of the creators, who very often are paid a percentage of the distribution fees and box office receipts the studios collect. So if you are genuinely concerned about the creators, respect the deals they have made with their distributors.
>> And what if I disagree to very concept on owning exclusive rights to any sort of media?
Spoken like someone who has never created anything worth stealing. Seriously, you believe you have a right to drive down to the newsstand on the corner and fill up the trunk of your car with the newspapers and magazines the middleman there is selling, without paying him?
A bug in the code is worth two in the documentation.