Hey Hadopi, You’re Breaking The Law. (opens in new tab)

How can I reason and speak about something I can't look at but for second hand testimony? Why should anyone limit his or herself to the second-hand testimony of people who could afford to look at the facts when the only obstacles are social? Why are facts, cultural or otherwise, even behind a gate? Why should I be a second-class human because I can't afford to license the means to think?

To put it differently: reduce, reuse, recycle. Once a work is made, why should anyone pay for it again beyond the cost of transcription? If investors can't cope with the product being the dividend, maybe the effort wasn't worth it...

(Of course, these are just my own thoughts.)

Reiterating my previous comment: Information wants to be free, man! Except, you know, when it's my information, then it's just a breach of privacy.

"Piracy" is pretty anti-sharing language IMHO.

Not exactly. More like phased out slowly.