source61 said:
I'm saying there should be exceptions to copyright when appropriate

And when permitted by law.

source61 said:
and there is, it's called Fair Use.

Fair Use has limitations under the law (it's not a warm fuzzy blanket covering all cases). But even if you have a valid Fair Use defense, you still have to prove it in court, if the IP owner takes you to court. And going to court is expensive.

But even if you have a valid Fair Use defense, you still have to prove it in court, if the IP owner takes you to court. And going to court is expensive.

Then again you could get sued for just about anything, say crossing the road and somebody who gets into an accident blames you for wearing a particularly bright or shiny piece of clothing or accessory.
Does that mean living in fear is a viable, reasonable and meaningful way to live life?

source61 said:
Does that mean living in fear is a viable, reasonable and meaningful way to live life?

Each person takes risks every day. Each person has his own risk comfort level. Nobody is shoving closed-minded opinions down everyone else's throats.

Tom Sloper said:

Each person takes risks every day. Each person has his own risk comfort level.

Agreed.

Nobody is shoving closed-minded opinions down everyone else's throats.

My signature wasn't targeting you or necessarily anyone in particular, it's just a reminder that I really do prefer open minded conversations over online teeth- and hair-pulling with random people you've never ever talked to before.

It's probably going to ease up over time as I come up with something less… defensive.

fleabay said:

That's why Steve walks wearily down the street with his brim pulled way down low.

Sure.

JoeJ said:

Oh, i thought different opinions usually ARE the reason to discuss something at all.
But maybe ‘moving on’ is the better option. Better chance to meet comfortable agreement and confirmation, i guess.

I'm such a circlejerk you have no idea.