Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dr. Harry" data-source="post: 2724449" data-attributes="member: 5468">I broke uyp the original flow of the narrative because I see this as a constructed chain of reasoning that I can agree with up to a point, and so I wanted to show what I agreed with -- and what I didn'tI agree with the first sentence completely.  I also agree with the second statement, though the use of a friend or library who has purchased the right to have a copy of the book does not extend to the book, however you can get ahold of it.  I am not saying that this is necessarily your position, but I say this to clarify that there can be limitations on your ability to examine the book (or any other thing.) All well and good, but this does not translate to an obligation (just to be clear) on the part of the vendor to offer you the opportunity to check out the material as thoroughly as you might choose.While it is phrased in the thread's bits of anecdotal evidence (and we all know how much that's worth) that the illegal downloading led to a sale, I do not feel that this incident justifies the use of p2p filesharing to distribute copyrighted material, nor do I feel that the oft-made claim of "really, most people buy them afterward" has been supported.</blockquote>