which he has not paid. It matters not if the merchandise is apples from my orchard or the words of my book or the unique arrangement of notes of my song or images from my camera. A guy next door (or down the block or on the other side of the world) who selling goods I brought to market by the sweat of my brow and the force of my skill, is a parasite. Re: Re: Re: Re: This site is just out of touch. How about I'm none of those. My morality is driven not by any political philosophy at all, but by *my morals*. Frankly, you don't know jack about my morals. I'm not so sure why this is so hard to comprehend. That last post and this one are not making any comments on morals whatseover. It's not making any comment on my morals, your morals or anyone's morals. It's just pointing out that morals -- no matter what they are -- have no place in copyright law. You can make whatever assumptions you want about my morals, no matter how wrong they might be. It has nothing to do with this post. I am not arguing that *my morals* say morals have nothing to do with copyright law. I'm saying *copyright law has nothing to do with morals* period. you claimed that what mattered was that people felt ripped off. Trust me, when companies get beat in the market place by competitors, the losers usually feel