Oh quit spreading crap. Copy protection, in any form, including copy protected diskettes were always a joke at best. It's a shame to see it has ballooned this far over the decades.
Game market crash? MY BACKSIDE! There were so many factors associated with Ataris ineptitude that you can't even begin to blame it on software sharing. I never had a problem finding games in the 80s. Maybe Atari just stunk.
that's the price you pay for having *new* video games
We've had new video games for decades without online verification.
You still haven't explained how this will work in practice.
No one's demonstrated that online verification prevents unauthorized sharing. Sure you have a nice news story about 20000 deactivated accounts, but we all know how easy it is to set up a few zombie farms to spew junk regs at the Steam server to generate the numbers.
How does the software get written and the artwork get created?
The same way it always has. The people that can do it and want to do it will. The rest of you go find something else to do.
They're doing everything they can to keep copyright law and taxpayers out of it, and still earn money as a business
You must be young. What they're doing is running a publicity campaign to feed on the recent awareness of licensing (brought from linux) to address the always present TERROR of software pirates in order to shove online registration into the public and make you think it's for your own good and that it's helping everyone.
You really need to look at the bigger picture.
After that... The rest of your post just really isn't worth responding to. You've clearly demonstrated that you have no clue.
by calling it "stealing" it doesn't sway public opinion
Yes, it does, because there is still a large percentage of the population who do not feel that sharing software is stealing, theft, or even in the remotest bit wrong. You say stealing to someone who doesn't know a thing about computers and automatically they think it's wrong. If you tell them that people write code like most people brush their teeth and that the number of copies of software in existence has absolutely NO BEARING on the wage of a programmer and suddenly software sharing isn't quite so wrong anymore.
I just argue
You win.
Justifying use of software without paying for it?
Yeah. I run Linux and I haven't played a video game in over 6 years. The last video game I played, I did buy. I have played hundreds of video games which I did not buy and, you know what, the authors that wrote those games still have a house, children, jobs, and play golf. What's wrong with not paying for software again?
I think software companies don't owe you anything (non verification) for something you buy voluntarily.
I am campaigning to ensure that more companies know that they will not continue to make money if they incorporate online verification for a game in single-player mode. Additionally, I do feel that if a software company advertises a game (how many ads say "online only", or "online verification required"?) that, when I buy a box with a CD and bring it home, it will work. Period. Anything past that raises suspicion for good reason.
Huh? I never mentioned taxes or the federal government.
Eventually we, the taxpayers and consumers, get stuck with the bill. The federal government gets stuck being lobbied for more legislation. It's inherent. To ignore it is naive.
So you do agree that piracy is a problem!?
I agree it exists. I do not agree that it is a problem.
Seems to me that's exactly what Valve is doing, dealing with it.
By misrepresenting their product and contributing to FUD about the state of and influences on the software industry. Corporate mismanagement, as in every sector, is far more to blame than piracy for poor software sales.
How are software companies making MORE profit by implementing anti-piracy measures that themselves cost money to implement?
Primarily speaking software is much more expensive than it needs to be and the public accepts the effective cartel stranglehold that major software companies hold over the price of software. A company is far more than the product on the shelves. Investments, agreements, collaborations... all of the nebulous parts of business which gamers have no knowledge of. The business world is a complex place.
Valve profits indirectly from serving the Windows platform. By serving the Windows platform Valve is aiding Microsoft in asserting its dominance as an OS--regardless of the merits of Windows vs its competitors. Microsoft has priced software primarily at the stranglehold level which has elevated the public's tolerance for what the fair price of software is. But, should the tables ever turn and people find out that quality software can be much more inexpensive, then the public will begin to wonder why games cost so much. Should Valve then engage in anti-Linux measures or should it adapt to Linux and a community that would not tolerate such insults as online verification?
So software companies use activation on a product that NO ONE is forced to buy.
And, if you would quit arguing and start doing something productive, you would aid those of us who are attempting to rail Valve to oblivion for even thinking of such a preposterous and insulting idea.
But you seem to feel you're owed a non-verification version of the product
Because it's advertised as a game and, until recently, ever game ever produced could be played in the middle of a rainforest as long as you had enough battery power.
You know there's one way to prove that, start your own company and make your own game and sell it.
Spoken like a true troll. How many companies have you started? None? At least I have an idea on how to make a better one. All you do is argue.
A perfect argument in a perfect world. Since the world is imperfect, and the falsely engineered success will sway the opinions of otherwise logical people, it is necessary to campaign against these things beyond boycotts.
but people shouldn't act like they have some right to violate a ELUA simply because they couldn't read it when they bought some software product
Who said EULAs had a right to dictate any terms? Terms of sale are negotiated at the counter. After the sale I, as the consumer, own it. Any court rulings which say otherwise are flawed and should be overturned.
FACE REALITY: If you make a product which is easily copied then people will copy it without asking you first. Wake up tomorrow and there are no copyright laws. Right, wrong, or indifferent we simply do not waste taxpayer money chasing these concepts. Deal with it. You have every right to quit making products.
That's the price we pay, for being able to have video games.
Not true. We've had video games for long before this junk.
When you come up with a better mechanism, patent it, and license it out dirt cheep to game developers, so we won't have this problem any more.
There is a better system. Face reality. Wake up tomorrow and there are no copyright laws. Deal with it. Evolve your business model without the aid of legal thuggery or silly online registration.
If pirates didn't steal games (say, 20,000 of them in the first month of a game coming out), then developers wouldn't go to these extremes.
So many leaks happen before the original release... why is it a taxpayer burden to clean up their mess if they can't safeguard their product before release? It sounds to me like their internal business model is severely flawed.
There is no convincing argument that developers need to go to these lengths even if the pirate argument is given the benefit of the doubt. One wonders how the software industry ever made it through the 80s and 90s if online registration were a necessary extreme.
No. It's not. You only think it is because you believe them. They own you.
Get off "the world owes me something" bandwagon.
Whoa. Wait a minute. You (and software companies) think that the world owes you a watchdog. You feel that I owe you my tax money so that you can hunt down people who share software. I don't owe you anything and neither does the world. You're an intelligent human being, aren't you? Here's a tip: If you make something which is easily copied then people are going to copy it. That is REALITY. Deal with it.
Wake up: Tomorrow there are no copyright laws. Right, wrong, or indifferent, it's just not something that we waste taxpayer money on. Evolve your business model. Change your product line. Identify your customers better. Safeguard your products better and accept responsibility for legitimate and legal users which you alienate.
Valve made it abundantly clear that you had to activate the product and made no effort to conceal that fact
They're abusing the common perception of a product and misrepresenting a rental as a sale. People buy products. 99% of the population does not buy licenses. Even in geek circles people are generally of the mindset that, if you don't want to play online, you don't need to be online.
It's all hogwash to feed the lawyers. There is no reality in licensing an intangible product. Either you sell it or you don't. Once companies begin to face reality then society will be a much better place. Rather than wasting their time (and our money) on these useless cat-and-mouse authentication schemes maybe they'll put thought into more effective and controllable distribution.
The reality is: If you don't want someone to know something, DON'T TELL ANYONE. Once you tell one person you must face the reality that they may tell someone else. Sure, you can waste your life and everyone's time/money trying a legal pursuit... Or you can quit being a dumbass and decide that, if the IP Is really that important, you should keep your mouth shut.
Go and copy me a book and make it exactly like the original
That can't be done with software either. You're basing your entire argument on packaging and presentation. Why should software code be safeguarded any more closely than a storyline or the knowledge in a book?
You can go to sites, IRC rooms, whatever, and get huge lists of games and apps to download
I can make lists all day long. So what?
The digital nature of software makes it different from almost every other copywritten material
Only in the minds of you, trolls, and lawyers.
We've seen that as sound and movies have become digital, they've had the same copyright problems
It never did occur to you that perhaps the laws are bogus, the enforcement is selective, abuse is rampant, and you as a consumer are not receiving a fair trade for your dollar? You'd rather just give software companies a blank slate to dictate to you exactly how they're going to milk you for every penny you're worth in exchange for some fancy advertising, pretty packaging, and a malfunctional product?
What I don't understand is why you resent the company rather than the thieves who've forced companies to take this position
1. No one forced any companies to take any position. The argument that unauthorized software distribution has a significant impact on corporate bottom line is nebulous at best.
2. Get off the bandwagon. They're not thieves. You can't steal software any more than you can steal air. No one is going to suffocate just because you're breathing harder.
3. The software companies have created a straw man in software piracy. Illegal software distributors may exist, but they're no more to blame for corporate losses than shoddy worksmanship, overbearing position with respect to customers, and the artificial bubble that has the world believing that entertainment is a get-rich-quick industry.
If they stole it then they shouldn't be able to use it
You can't steal software any more than you can steal air. It's everywhere, there's plenty of it, and if you breathe harder it's not going to deprive anyone else of any air.
Quit with the thief/pirate/stealing fanatacism and start thinking rationally about how to productively solve the problem without criminalizing every person who takes two when the bowl of jelly beans says "take one".
Perhaps people are discovering that when you steal any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really stolen anything
You can't steal software anymore than you can steal air. There's an unlimited amount of it, it's easily replaced, and it's not taking any away from anyone else if you breathe more.
If the bowl of jelly beans says "take one" and a child takes two your mindset labels them a thief. Good job!
No, you didn't pay to own it... you paid to license it
Will trolls give up on this "licensing" thing already? It's a fancy word for a rental. Valve is renting the game to you. The only reason why trolls want to use the fancy license jargon is so they can campaign for a federal offense rather than breach of a rental contract.
Piss off trolls. The whole concept of licensing intellectual property is hogwash meant to feed the attorneys. Either you sell it, or you don't. There is no reality in renting an intangible object which can be easily replicated.
Yeah, the disc is yours, but the IP on that disc is given to you under terms of their licsence
I wish people would get over the holier-than-thou ego trip that they get from invoking licensing.
Face reality. A license is a fancy name for a rental concocted by lawyers to turn the breach of a rental agreement into a federal felony.
Face reality. There is nothing real in an attempt to enforce a rental agreement of intangible material such as intellectual property. The software industry can't, in reality, license software any more than I can license to you a method to make biscuits. Either you sell it or you don't.
Stop feeding the trolls/lawyers. Quit hiding behind licenses.
You have purchased something. A license to play the game on the terms and conditions that are told to you by the company
Will trolls give up on this "licensing" thing already? It's a fancy word for a rental. Valve is renting the game to you. The only reason why trolls want to use the fancy license jargon is so they can campaign for a federal offense rather than breach of a rental contract.
Piss off trolls. The whole concept of licensing intellectual property is hogwash meant to feed the attorneys. Either you sell it, or you don't. There is no reality in renting an intangible object which can be easily replicated.
Will you trolls give up on this "licensing" thing already? It's a fancy word for a rental. Valve is renting the game to you. The only reason why trolls want to use the fancy license jargon is so they can campaign for a federal offense rather than breach of a rental contract.
Piss off trolls. The whole concept of licensing intellectual property is hogwash meant to feed the attorneys. Either you sell it, or you don't.
It follows logically from the first one. At the end of the first one you can either join the government G-man and submit to their plan to conquer society/the world, or else you can be teleported directly into a den with a gazillion of the worst big-bad ugly demon-devils that the game had to offer and the game would fade to black and end assuming your untimely demise.
So... government controlled cities is just what happened during the commercial break. It was bound to happen.
If Coca-Cola said some study proves their cola is good for teeth, but the study shows it is harmful to teeth, don't you think the gov't, media, and a flock of 3rd party lawyers would descend upon Atlanta post-haste?
Alcoa already did this with fluoride and everyone involved (gov't, media, 3rd party lawyers) saw that it was profitable and actually turned around and helped to support the falsification.
What about my rights, enumerated in the US Constitution as you have already stated, which protect my expression of an idea?
You have no more right to your ideas than a shop owner has to items that he leaves out on the sidewalk without supervision. Possession is, always has been, and always will be 99% of ownership.
Why should I lose these rights because you are a cheap fucking bastard?
As long as you want to trade insults, why should I pay money for something you're too stupid to keep to yourself? But, on that track, Linux is free by design. So tell me again how I'm being cheap.
Your rights to fair use only exist in case law and interpretation of US Copyright law through the judicial system.
With a strict interpretation of the Constitution, 99% of US Copyright Law was passed without the proper jurisdiction or authority.
Slashdot Mirror
but I imagine the EULA or other agreement specifies this is within their bounds.
That's a good point. When is the public going to wake up and reject EULAs?
1980's, Atari, copy protected diskettes...
Game market crash. Will it happen again?
Oh quit spreading crap. Copy protection, in any form, including copy protected diskettes were always a joke at best. It's a shame to see it has ballooned this far over the decades.
Game market crash? MY BACKSIDE! There were so many factors associated with Ataris ineptitude that you can't even begin to blame it on software sharing. I never had a problem finding games in the 80s. Maybe Atari just stunk.
that's the price you pay for having *new* video games
We've had new video games for decades without online verification.
You still haven't explained how this will work in practice.
No one's demonstrated that online verification prevents unauthorized sharing. Sure you have a nice news story about 20000 deactivated accounts, but we all know how easy it is to set up a few zombie farms to spew junk regs at the Steam server to generate the numbers.
How does the software get written and the artwork get created?
The same way it always has. The people that can do it and want to do it will. The rest of you go find something else to do.
They're doing everything they can to keep copyright law and taxpayers out of it, and still earn money as a business
You must be young. What they're doing is running a publicity campaign to feed on the recent awareness of licensing (brought from linux) to address the always present TERROR of software pirates in order to shove online registration into the public and make you think it's for your own good and that it's helping everyone.
You really need to look at the bigger picture.
After that... The rest of your post just really isn't worth responding to. You've clearly demonstrated that you have no clue.
by calling it "stealing" it doesn't sway public opinion
Yes, it does, because there is still a large percentage of the population who do not feel that sharing software is stealing, theft, or even in the remotest bit wrong. You say stealing to someone who doesn't know a thing about computers and automatically they think it's wrong. If you tell them that people write code like most people brush their teeth and that the number of copies of software in existence has absolutely NO BEARING on the wage of a programmer and suddenly software sharing isn't quite so wrong anymore.
I just argue
You win.
Justifying use of software without paying for it?
Yeah. I run Linux and I haven't played a video game in over 6 years. The last video game I played, I did buy. I have played hundreds of video games which I did not buy and, you know what, the authors that wrote those games still have a house, children, jobs, and play golf. What's wrong with not paying for software again?
(relatively)
Backpedaling.
Perhaps you know of an economy that's more free than the US's?
It's cold in hell because there's no place hotter?
I think software companies don't owe you anything (non verification) for something you buy voluntarily.
I am campaigning to ensure that more companies know that they will not continue to make money if they incorporate online verification for a game in single-player mode. Additionally, I do feel that if a software company advertises a game (how many ads say "online only", or "online verification required"?) that, when I buy a box with a CD and bring it home, it will work. Period. Anything past that raises suspicion for good reason.
Huh? I never mentioned taxes or the federal government.
Eventually we, the taxpayers and consumers, get stuck with the bill. The federal government gets stuck being lobbied for more legislation. It's inherent. To ignore it is naive.
So you do agree that piracy is a problem!?
I agree it exists. I do not agree that it is a problem.
Seems to me that's exactly what Valve is doing, dealing with it.
By misrepresenting their product and contributing to FUD about the state of and influences on the software industry. Corporate mismanagement, as in every sector, is far more to blame than piracy for poor software sales.
How are software companies making MORE profit by implementing anti-piracy measures that themselves cost money to implement?
Primarily speaking software is much more expensive than it needs to be and the public accepts the effective cartel stranglehold that major software companies hold over the price of software. A company is far more than the product on the shelves. Investments, agreements, collaborations... all of the nebulous parts of business which gamers have no knowledge of. The business world is a complex place.
Valve profits indirectly from serving the Windows platform. By serving the Windows platform Valve is aiding Microsoft in asserting its dominance as an OS--regardless of the merits of Windows vs its competitors. Microsoft has priced software primarily at the stranglehold level which has elevated the public's tolerance for what the fair price of software is. But, should the tables ever turn and people find out that quality software can be much more inexpensive, then the public will begin to wonder why games cost so much. Should Valve then engage in anti-Linux measures or should it adapt to Linux and a community that would not tolerate such insults as online verification?
So software companies use activation on a product that NO ONE is forced to buy.
And, if you would quit arguing and start doing something productive, you would aid those of us who are attempting to rail Valve to oblivion for even thinking of such a preposterous and insulting idea.
But you seem to feel you're owed a non-verification version of the product
Because it's advertised as a game and, until recently, ever game ever produced could be played in the middle of a rainforest as long as you had enough battery power.
You know there's one way to prove that, start your own company and make your own game and sell it.
Spoken like a true troll. How many companies have you started? None? At least I have an idea on how to make a better one. All you do is argue.
Don't buy the product
A perfect argument in a perfect world. Since the world is imperfect, and the falsely engineered success will sway the opinions of otherwise logical people, it is necessary to campaign against these things beyond boycotts.
but people shouldn't act like they have some right to violate a ELUA simply because they couldn't read it when they bought some software product
Who said EULAs had a right to dictate any terms? Terms of sale are negotiated at the counter. After the sale I, as the consumer, own it. Any court rulings which say otherwise are flawed and should be overturned.
FACE REALITY: If you make a product which is easily copied then people will copy it without asking you first. Wake up tomorrow and there are no copyright laws. Right, wrong, or indifferent we simply do not waste taxpayer money chasing these concepts. Deal with it. You have every right to quit making products.
That's the price we pay, for being able to have video games.
Not true. We've had video games for long before this junk.
When you come up with a better mechanism, patent it, and license it out dirt cheep to game developers, so we won't have this problem any more.
There is a better system. Face reality. Wake up tomorrow and there are no copyright laws. Deal with it. Evolve your business model without the aid of legal thuggery or silly online registration.
If pirates didn't steal games (say, 20,000 of them in the first month of a game coming out), then developers wouldn't go to these extremes.
So many leaks happen before the original release... why is it a taxpayer burden to clean up their mess if they can't safeguard their product before release? It sounds to me like their internal business model is severely flawed.
There is no convincing argument that developers need to go to these lengths even if the pirate argument is given the benefit of the doubt. One wonders how the software industry ever made it through the 80s and 90s if online registration were a necessary extreme.
OR they could use the free market system already in place
It's not a free system when the government can and has passed entire libraries of regulations on it.
Such EULAs have been repeatedly upheld by the courts.
Admissable only if you completely ignore political influences which have nothing to do with justice.
the case was overturned on appeal
Which further supports the case that the concept of true justice in the court system is being negated in favor of right by monetary might.
So you advocate using mass ignorance to sway public opinion in order to bolster your private little crusade?
Software piracy is a real problem for companies.
No. It's not. You only think it is because you believe them. They own you.
Get off "the world owes me something" bandwagon.
Whoa. Wait a minute. You (and software companies) think that the world owes you a watchdog. You feel that I owe you my tax money so that you can hunt down people who share software. I don't owe you anything and neither does the world. You're an intelligent human being, aren't you? Here's a tip: If you make something which is easily copied then people are going to copy it. That is REALITY. Deal with it.
Wake up: Tomorrow there are no copyright laws. Right, wrong, or indifferent, it's just not something that we waste taxpayer money on. Evolve your business model. Change your product line. Identify your customers better. Safeguard your products better and accept responsibility for legitimate and legal users which you alienate.
Valve made it abundantly clear that you had to activate the product and made no effort to conceal that fact
They're abusing the common perception of a product and misrepresenting a rental as a sale. People buy products. 99% of the population does not buy licenses. Even in geek circles people are generally of the mindset that, if you don't want to play online, you don't need to be online.
It's all hogwash to feed the lawyers. There is no reality in licensing an intangible product. Either you sell it or you don't. Once companies begin to face reality then society will be a much better place. Rather than wasting their time (and our money) on these useless cat-and-mouse authentication schemes maybe they'll put thought into more effective and controllable distribution.
The reality is: If you don't want someone to know something, DON'T TELL ANYONE. Once you tell one person you must face the reality that they may tell someone else. Sure, you can waste your life and everyone's time/money trying a legal pursuit... Or you can quit being a dumbass and decide that, if the IP Is really that important, you should keep your mouth shut.
Go and copy me a book and make it exactly like the original
That can't be done with software either. You're basing your entire argument on packaging and presentation. Why should software code be safeguarded any more closely than a storyline or the knowledge in a book?
You can go to sites, IRC rooms, whatever, and get huge lists of games and apps to download
I can make lists all day long. So what?
The digital nature of software makes it different from almost every other copywritten material
Only in the minds of you, trolls, and lawyers.
We've seen that as sound and movies have become digital, they've had the same copyright problems
It never did occur to you that perhaps the laws are bogus, the enforcement is selective, abuse is rampant, and you as a consumer are not receiving a fair trade for your dollar? You'd rather just give software companies a blank slate to dictate to you exactly how they're going to milk you for every penny you're worth in exchange for some fancy advertising, pretty packaging, and a malfunctional product?
What I don't understand is why you resent the company rather than the thieves who've forced companies to take this position
1. No one forced any companies to take any position. The argument that unauthorized software distribution has a significant impact on corporate bottom line is nebulous at best.
2. Get off the bandwagon. They're not thieves. You can't steal software any more than you can steal air. No one is going to suffocate just because you're breathing harder.
3. The software companies have created a straw man in software piracy. Illegal software distributors may exist, but they're no more to blame for corporate losses than shoddy worksmanship, overbearing position with respect to customers, and the artificial bubble that has the world believing that entertainment is a get-rich-quick industry.
If they stole it then they shouldn't be able to use it
You can't steal software any more than you can steal air. It's everywhere, there's plenty of it, and if you breathe harder it's not going to deprive anyone else of any air.
Quit with the thief/pirate/stealing fanatacism and start thinking rationally about how to productively solve the problem without criminalizing every person who takes two when the bowl of jelly beans says "take one".
Perhaps people are discovering that when you steal any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really stolen anything
You can't steal software anymore than you can steal air. There's an unlimited amount of it, it's easily replaced, and it's not taking any away from anyone else if you breathe more.
If the bowl of jelly beans says "take one" and a child takes two your mindset labels them a thief. Good job!
No, you didn't pay to own it... you paid to license it
Will trolls give up on this "licensing" thing already? It's a fancy word for a rental. Valve is renting the game to you. The only reason why trolls want to use the fancy license jargon is so they can campaign for a federal offense rather than breach of a rental contract.
Piss off trolls. The whole concept of licensing intellectual property is hogwash meant to feed the attorneys. Either you sell it, or you don't. There is no reality in renting an intangible object which can be easily replicated.
Yeah, the disc is yours, but the IP on that disc is given to you under terms of their licsence
I wish people would get over the holier-than-thou ego trip that they get from invoking licensing.
Face reality. A license is a fancy name for a rental concocted by lawyers to turn the breach of a rental agreement into a federal felony.
Face reality. There is nothing real in an attempt to enforce a rental agreement of intangible material such as intellectual property. The software industry can't, in reality, license software any more than I can license to you a method to make biscuits. Either you sell it or you don't.
Stop feeding the trolls/lawyers. Quit hiding behind licenses.
You have purchased something. A license to play the game on the terms and conditions that are told to you by the company
Will trolls give up on this "licensing" thing already? It's a fancy word for a rental. Valve is renting the game to you. The only reason why trolls want to use the fancy license jargon is so they can campaign for a federal offense rather than breach of a rental contract.
Piss off trolls. The whole concept of licensing intellectual property is hogwash meant to feed the attorneys. Either you sell it, or you don't. There is no reality in renting an intangible object which can be easily replicated.
you bought a license to run the bits on a CD
Will you trolls give up on this "licensing" thing already? It's a fancy word for a rental. Valve is renting the game to you. The only reason why trolls want to use the fancy license jargon is so they can campaign for a federal offense rather than breach of a rental contract.
Piss off trolls. The whole concept of licensing intellectual property is hogwash meant to feed the attorneys. Either you sell it, or you don't.
It follows logically from the first one. At the end of the first one you can either join the government G-man and submit to their plan to conquer society/the world, or else you can be teleported directly into a den with a gazillion of the worst big-bad ugly demon-devils that the game had to offer and the game would fade to black and end assuming your untimely demise.
So... government controlled cities is just what happened during the commercial break. It was bound to happen.
If Coca-Cola said some study proves their cola is good for teeth, but the study shows it is harmful to teeth, don't you think the gov't, media, and a flock of 3rd party lawyers would descend upon Atlanta post-haste?
Alcoa already did this with fluoride and everyone involved (gov't, media, 3rd party lawyers) saw that it was profitable and actually turned around and helped to support the falsification.
Therefore, if a patent infringes on Linux...
Darn those patents. Can the attorneys keep them from infringing on our IP?
What about my rights, enumerated in the US Constitution as you have already stated, which protect my expression of an idea?
You have no more right to your ideas than a shop owner has to items that he leaves out on the sidewalk without supervision. Possession is, always has been, and always will be 99% of ownership.
Why should I lose these rights because you are a cheap fucking bastard?
As long as you want to trade insults, why should I pay money for something you're too stupid to keep to yourself? But, on that track, Linux is free by design. So tell me again how I'm being cheap.
Your rights to fair use only exist in case law and interpretation of US Copyright law through the judicial system.
With a strict interpretation of the Constitution, 99% of US Copyright Law was passed without the proper jurisdiction or authority.