Let's add this one up. Ventriloquism, misrepresentation of the law, inequivalent analogy. All in ONE short paragraph!


Since Froggy Non-Socks is handing you your ass on the ethical side, I'll attack you from the technical side: How do you propose to place controls on peer-to-peer filesharing technology? Keep in mind that most of the traffic in this arena is taking place in China and other countries where US copyright law may arguably apply, but can't be easily enforced.

To be fair. Some of that was you and the pirates refusing to accept my proof.

In one case I pointed out the evidence I would have needed to establish damages in court, when someone had illegally used one of my illustrations for their business. (By using my established rates, proof of sale of similar pieces, etc...).

But because I wouldn't give allen the exact figures he claimed it wasn't proof enough.

We weren't arguing about the guy who used your illustration for his business, Joe. We agreed that it wasn't okay for him to do that. It's easy to demonstrate how he cuts into your profits.

But then we asked you about the bloggers. And you stormed off without answering.

And technology has evolved to the point of being able to manufacture instant celebrities. You take the good, you take the bad. You take them both and there you have... the facts of life.



My bittorrent client says you're wrong.

Or I had other stuff to do?

Generally speaking, when someone responds to a question with "fuck off," I assume they're storming off.

Exactly so. I've been more than forthcoming with you and Bungee over my financial stake in this. It's really only fair you should do the same, Romney.

Wow you really hold a grudge.

I thought I had been nothing but civil to you here today, that was my intent sorry If I came off any differently, but it sounds like this is going nowhere, I'm sure you can respect that at least, you and I obviously have firmly entrenched beliefs on this and I am obviously not the best advocate for the piracy-is-wrong argument, or apparently any argument, so I'm just going to leave the discussion, calmly and respectfully, before it deteriorates into something silly, and hopefully to allow others a chance to weigh in. Because this is an important topic, deserving of much more serious consideration than I can afford to give it at the moment.

I'll believe it when I [don't] see it.

Not really, unless you count "reading an old thread when it comes up again" as "holding a grudge." And yeah, you stormed off in a huff. I don't see any reason to play along with the idea that you totally had some awesome point to make, but got distracted and never had a chance to make it.

You couldn't defend your point; you stormed off. Which is fine, but let's not rewrite history.