|
8 members (Sunset Poet, Andy K, bennash, texritter, Guy E. Trepanier, Irwin, 2 invisible),
94,298
guests, and
6,146
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Welcome to the Just Plain Folks forums! You are currently viewing our forums as a Guest which gives you limited access to most of our discussions and to other features.
By joining our free community you will have access to post and respond to topics, communicate privately with our users (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free; so please join our community today!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bayside
by Gary E. Andrews - 10/19/26 09:48 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 8,574
JPF Mentor
|
JPF Mentor
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 8,574 |
Kenneth,
I am not a lawyer, but I believe there are limits to the size of which a group of works may be bundled for copyright registration. If I am correct, cost would be a big factor, if not, it still wouldn't be cost effective...how would one see profit from it? From lawsuits? Once every possible song became off limits, composition would simply end, which, I'm sure, was part of your reasoning to deem it immoral.
Many things are legal which may be found immoral. If one believes in absolute morality, it is not complicated. If one is a moral relativist, then it all is subjective anyway, I guess. Yes, I'd find it immoral but not illegal for a large corporation to squash beneficial technology. I'm certain it has been done already many times. However, I think it would be a bad thing to try to legislate morality. It's involves too "democratic" a decision, democracies don't work well for long, thank God we're a democratic REPUBLIC. It would lead to democratic totalitarianism and open the door to state sponsored religious persecution. In the old days, morality was legislated and they burned witches at the stake.
I believe that education, and discourse, such as we are having here, becomes a "safety valve" or "lubricant" to the friction between morality and law. What I find most important is not so much whether we can convince each other of what is right or wrong, but that our discourse is being had in a public forum which is being viewed by people who may be forming their opinions and ideals concerning the topic. (Midnite, I would submit that as a reason why, time permitting, I always welcome discussions with folks as long they are kept polite and civil. We who write posts on forums should be well aware that our "audience," if you will, is much larger than the cadre of participants.)
So yes, I think law and morality are two sets with intersections, unions, members, quantifiers and all that is applicable to basic set theory.
More simply, I believe in rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. (and I don't mean Caesar the dog whisperer.)
You've got to know your limitations. I don't know what your limitations are. I found out what mine were when I was twelve. I found out that there weren't too many limitations, if I did it my way. -Johnny Cash It's only music. -niteshift Mike Dunbar Music
|
|
|
|
We would like to keep the membership in Just Plain Folks FREE! Your donation helps support the many programs we offer including Road Trips and the Music Awards.
|
|
|
Forums118
Topics129,163
Posts1,186,119
Members21,480
| |
Most Online236,505 Jul 1st, 2026
|
|
|
"Defeatist Pessimists and Rose Colored Glasses Optimists are lonely companions, victims even. Both ideologies imply predestined outcomes, and therefore breed inactivity in its victims. Inaction is the only sure way to lose at anything in life. All positive action guarantees at least a fighting chance." -Brian Austin Whitney
|
|
|
|