[tesco samoa]

Fyron you have to rember the spirit of law is written so there is 100% understandment between all parties involved. If we took the M-W 1a) to court we would have a few problems

1) I download something and realise I downloaded something and delete it. I did not break 1a) As there was no intent to keep or make use of wrongfully. There are many different ways of taking this apart in a court of law.

Say the person who created the said item wishes for people to listen to it in what ever format they want and does not care about being paid. But they also to happen to have this release done by Blue Note in 1973 and it is not availble for purchase since it is backcat. I download it and I am still breaking your 1a) and what they want in the laws now.

THis is the beauty of Law and the theory behind it. And why it should lag behind society current thoughts. As it must stand the test of time. And when it needs to be changed. It must be changed exactly in a way that benifits what came before it and what benfits its society that it helps support. Not quite in the spirit of Hart and Holmes. but along those lines...

Geo good point.

But the question would be what are they trying to stand up to and make a point for. If it is just because they wish to listen to some songs here and there or is it because they wish to debate the structure of copyright and the errosion of public content or something else. Public content benifits a society. As societies can on benifit from the free flow of culture and ideas. It helps with the evolution of society and its art.