Edit

The analogy was of course a simple physical real-world analogy c.f. something that appears ephemeral and worthless to most people i.e. ones and zeroes in the digital domain. This is the difficulty in doing comparisons and analogies. It’s hard to make simple folk realise that it’s not like with like.

On the other hand and as a simpler comparison, try justifying someone copying JK Rowling’s works (at no expense) and distributing the free-to-read copies on the internet (at no expense). Remember, they don’t “make a dime” from the process but do it from the goodness of their heart to “spread the word” or some such self congratulatory phrase.
Okay, now do it yourself and see how far you get.

An action is an action is an action. It’s the same action, no matter what the wealth or status of the individuals involved or the perceived value of an object or service.

Thanks for your kind comment about our music. Apart from that, I feel like a clueless cunt because my illiteracy leads me to completely miss your last point.

The analogy was all kinds of non-nonsensical.

For one, with file sharing, the original is NEVER removed. The equivalent in the couch world would be for what’s-his-name-evil-blogger-guy to buy a couch, duplicate the couch, and then distribute the duplicated couches at no expense. He’s not going into the couch store and stealing multiple couches to distribute, he is making them himself and distributing them without earning a dime.

So, please, if you’re going to complain about people sharing music, at least give valid reasons instead of making up some half-baked analogy aimed at demonizing/criminalizing some po’ lil’ boi.

P.S. Your music’s rather good and Lovecraft is amazing, though if he were alive I’m sure your relationship would mirror that of Steely Dan and William S. Burroughs.

Edit

Edit