From: no@hotmail.com   
      
   "Gene"  wrote in message   
   news:13qsdm69etoap72@corp.supernews.com...   
   > FRED  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>> After thinking about it for a while, instead of writing you off as some   
   >>> kind   
   >>> of troll or net.kook, would you be so kind as to explain to me what you   
   >>> think I don't have a clue about?  I'm honestly interested in knowing   
   >>> what   
   >>> you think.   
   >>>   
   >>> g.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> You don't make any sense I thought the whole point of donating to Ira's   
   >> site   
   >> was that the community could share it, at least that's the impression I   
   >> got   
   >> and why I donated money disks and magazines, all Ira has done is increase   
   >> the value of the disks of software that were being sold on eBay because   
   >> of   
   >> supply and demand.   
   >>   
   >> It would make more sense to have the collection available again and thus   
   >> stop the resellers being able to make their profits.   
   >>   
   > Wow, I'm just not getting you folks.  You seem to present the attitude   
   > that   
   > Ira should expose himself to being sued off the face of the planet, just   
   > to   
   > keep some dirtbag from selling DVDs of Ira's site on eBay?   
   >   
   > Boiled down a bit further:   
   >   
   > "Ira should expose himself to financial destruction because I don't want   
   > to   
   > have to buy his stuff from some dirtbag on eBay"   
   >   
   > I think I get it finally.  Ira's doing what he needs to do in order to   
   > accomplish two goals:   
   >   
   > 1. Archive as much material related to Tandy computers as he can.   
   >   
   > 2. Avoid financial ruin in the process.   
   >   
   > Your problem seems to be that #2 is inconvenient for you, therefore Ira is   
   > some kind of greedy jerk.   
   >   
   > Witness the recent RIAA award wherein some single mother got whacked for   
   > over $9000 per song.  (their case was pathetic and they got a stupid   
   > judge,   
   > but essentially they won by the woman "making available" those songs.   
   > They   
   > never proved anyone actually downloaded anything)   
   >   
   > Now imagine what could happen to Ira and count the number of disks,   
   > magazines   
   > and books he (had) online.   
   >   
   > Having a real-world example of what could happen, do you still think that   
   > your   
   > "entitlement" to that software is more important that the possibility of   
   > Ira   
   > having to live under an overpass?   
   >   
   >> I'm sure that there would not have been all the donations if people had   
   >> been   
   >> told this was all for his private collection.   
   >>   
   > What part of "waiting until a more sane copyright term is created" wasn't   
   > clear?   
   >   
   >> Jumping up and down about bandwidth and hosting is irrelevant because   
   >> he's   
   >> not sharing anything other than a few lists. I'm sure he was a great   
   >> asset   
   >> to the community but that's in the past and not the present situation.   
   >>   
   > You're entirely correct.  Bandwidth and hosting IS irrelevant, especially   
   > in the face of the financial risks involved with a copyright infringement   
   > lawsuit.   
   >   
   > Ira never stopped being a great asset to the community.  He just happened   
   > to   
   > turn off the free lunch until his risk exposure is minimised, much to the   
   > great disgust of you entitlement-minded whiners.   
   >   
   > g.   
   >   
      
   This is very very old software not a copy of Windows Vista !!!!   
      
   YOU IDIOT   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)