why is the law bent to smash the little guy ? while handing all the authoratarian profit benefits to the big corporates ? surely this is not equality in the eyes of the law ? the software program, lets say windows operating program is sold, you buy it you then upgrade it so its worth more, you then sell it for 100 million dollars. thats tough luck for the designer ? microsoft ? no ! it makes you a hardened violent criminal where governments will spend poor working class health care dollars to extradite you from foriegn lands. i must say this is such a good example of the rotten poisonous hearted morality of such folk. soo getting down to the nuts & bolts of the legal "who gets the money" bit... the corporates claim you only purchase a right to use, not a right to own. thus you have something that belongs to them and your not allowed to give it to anyone else. even though its yours. and you bought it. software DVD's etc... you own the DVD but you dont own the content. soo doesnt this make you a legal agent by virtue of being licensed to carry someone elses content ? ... and the woah-is-me litigious corporate cannabals start pretense of political discoarse... mean while... where is the painter ? the painters content is licensed ? or owned outright ? what rule best protects creativity ?(& jobs & industry[join the chorus]) is it plausible to have open and honest discussions around copywright protection when the moral foundation is actually soo broken it is in complete meltdown ?