If I buy a game/movie/book/song, regardless of where or in what format, I should be able to:
If I produce a game/movie/book/song, regardless of where or in what format, I should be able to... dictate all the terms upon which I agree to sell it. You have the right to agree to those terms, or not.
So where do either of you lie on the "human rights vs property rights" spectrum? Because that's the real discussion to be had here. To quote Cory Doctorow:
> But when it comes to a "post-politics that is neither right nor left," the definition I turn to most often comes from science fiction writer Steven Brust, who once told me:
> "Left" and "right" have had the same meaning since the French Revolution. If you want to know if someone is on the left or the right, ask them, "What is more important: human rights or property rights?" If they say "Property rights are a human right," then they are on the right.
> That's it. That's the crux. If you think that property rights are a tool for achieving human rights, then you're on the left. You might support the right of farmers to block attempts to expropriate them via eminent domain in order to build a data center, or the right of people to not have their homes or devices searched by cops, or a library's right to own and archive digital books, even if the publishers insist that ebooks are never "sold," merely "licensed."
If I produce a game/movie/book/song, regardless of where or in what format, I should be able to... dictate all the terms upon which I agree to sell it. You have the right to agree to those terms, or not.