Cheap Subscription to SuperBike Magazine

I just wanted to let you know that you can get a year's subscription
to the digital edition of SuperBike for just £15.97.

Here's a sample of the July issue - http://www.zinio.com/express2?issue=214260754.

The cheap subs offer can be found - http://www.zinio.com/offer?issn=02628456&of=ZH2&ns=zuk

 

how do you read it on the dunny?

mh

 

Where there's a will, there's a way...

http://tinyurl.com/2uj9lb
http://tinyurl.com/2bgvht
http://tinyurl.com/2xmh8p

--
Bob Milutinovic
Cognicom - "Australia's Web Presence Specialists"
http://www.cognicom.net.au/
telephone (0417) 45-77-66
facsimile (02) 9824-2240

 

Thief

 

That is no defence.
BTW, you realise someone pays for what you don't.
Hows the UBD going? Not only are you a thief, you have to brag about it.
Whats your reasoning behind that?

 

So did someone rob peter to pay paulh?

 

This is true in some cases but you are never forced to download/take it.

;-P

 

So Peter, would you care to point to the part on the page that says
copyright infringement is stealing.

It may be illegal it's not however the crime of theft. Not even close.
That lovely line used by those who have a vested interest in
protecting it is patently untrue.

JL

 

I'd like to wipe that pun away

 

At its most general, it is literally "the right to copy" an original
creation.

or try

http://www.fact-uk.org.uk/

 

I doubt there are many people on this newsgroup who don't have a handle
on what copyright is. Sure as hell both GB and I do anyway.

The problem is in support of your claim that breach of copyright was
theft, you referenced a wikipedia entry which didn't support your claim
one iota.

<sigh> well it beats studying, OK, I'll bite, <peruse>

OH goodie, you still don't get the point. Yes, those who are wanting to
protect their copyright can be quite agressive about it.

Now can we accept that breach of copyright isn't theft ? Or do you wish
to provide some more irrelevant urls ?

I'll take that as a yes

JL

 

My cat's breath smells like cat food.

 

And taking goods without paying for them is taking goods without paying for
them not theft? I have better things to do than discuss Semantics.

 

Try the other end, I'm guessing it smells better.

 

Fruit guy has apples on a stand on the footpath outside his store.
Some student takes apple without paying for it and starts to eat the
apple.
This is stealing,
Fruit guy looses income from lost apple.
Fruit guy looses income from lost sale to student.
The student profits by not spending money on apple.
Now if student starts to sell apple or apple juice it is even worse and
more insulting.
Stealing is theft, you can call it what you like but in MY BOOK its
theft.
Someone takes your helmet from your bike without asking/paying or
permission and I bet you would see it the same way.
If someone moves your funds from your bank account into some account in
Africa you don't call it fraud, you call it everything else and make
sure we all know about it.
Just ask Hew Griffiths, though he was only a pirate and never actually
took/sold anything real he is going to be serving some real time.
If you write and publish a book and someone else copies that content and
prints it up with their name you call it plagiarism, theft along with
copyright violation.
Just because this thread was started because we were talking about
digital media such as a pirated street directory or a hacked
subscription to a mag does not make any difference.
Teams of people put work into creating that mag or street directory and
you are taking money/income from their pockets.

 

Copyrighted material without permission.

 

If you can prove it to me, I

You already have.

 

No he's not. They still have the original work.

The only possible way they could be out of pocket is if he would have
bought it but pirated it instead. If he never intended to buy it in the
first place then they've lost nothing even if he did subsequently pirate it.

 

Well, it seems we might be getting somewhere. Yes taking **GOODS* is
theft.

So when random 12 year old in New York city(1) takes a copy of her
friend's Pink album, does the the friend still have that album in her
sweaty little hand ? Yup. Does the record coy. still have a master
copy in their vault ? Yup. Has a sum of money been removed from the
bulging coffers of aforementioned bloated record coy. ? Nope.

Theft requires depriving the owner of physical possession or use (2).

I guess that's an easier response than "OK I was wrong, copyright
infringement isn't theft"

Y'see you have to understand that in this newsgroup there are quite a
few people who can actually see beyond the superficial spin doctoring.
I think PaulH's post comparing "copyright is theft" to "meat is
murder" pretty well sums it up. Neither are true statements in our
societies. Both however use a deliberately false emotive statement to
buttress a weak case.

Go play with the dumber folk on another newsgroup, they might fall for
it, stooge.

JL
(1) Real case - RIAA sued a 12year old - for the 25 odd albums she'd
downloaded - noice...
(2) Layman's definition - I can go look up the correct/exact legal one
if you like

 

Yup, that's theft, keep working at it, you'll understand the
difference soon, I'm sure.

Ahhh yes, but has he been charged with theft at any point in time ?
Errm, no. He's been charged(1) (and sentenced to a total of 4.5 years,
3 of which he has already served in Oz waiting for trial) for....wait
for it.... copyright infringement(2) !!

JL
(1) I assumed you're referring to the guy from the central coast who
got extradited to the US in yet another blatant abuse of our legal
system by the US and the federal govt.
(2) and some ancillary stuff around the same point