|
|
Posted by Morton Davis on 12/29/05 23:20
"Sarge" <not@home.com> wrote in message
news:6JZsf.6739$oW.486@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
> "Dave D" <dave_d@dave_d.com> wrote in
> news:doGdnScszpFHyizenZ2dnUVZ8t2dnZ2d@pipex.net:
>
> >
> > A levy on P2P use is the only fair solution AFAICS. An internet tax is
> > too general.
> >
>
> Dave,
>
> You have all valid, intelligent points backup up with great examples and
> analogies. I agree that a P2P tax is a fair solution. But how is it
> possible for an ISP to prevent the non-P2P accounts from file sharing?
>
> You said something about blocking/allowing certain ports, etc. Can't P2P
> applications and file sharing communities use whatever port(s) they want?
>
> --Sarge
The RIAA and MPAA are wrong in their thinking. P2P isn't hurting sales. The
P2pers weren't going to buy their garbage in the first place. If they find
something worthwhile - they'll buy it after trying it out.
The movie industry has made a deal with China to release LEGAl copies of new
theatrical releases on DVD in China for $2.00 each, just twice what the in
theater bootlegs cost. However, those same DVDs will cost you $20.00 each.
And these morons (the MPAA) can't see what is wrong with THAT.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|