...and then listened to that tape or watched that video a year later -- how much money did I "steal" from the record companies or from NBC?

How many companies went bankrupt and how many people became homeless because I (and a few thousand others) watched 6 mins of an old episode of the Thundercats from 1986??????

This isn't about the law or about small Mom and Pop companies like Atlantic Records or CBS who will go bankrupt if we don't plop down $80 to buy the "official" Thundercats cartoon on ebay.

It's just about fresh new ways to rip off the public.

(Kinda like subscription music services. Why "buy" an album once and be burdened with ownership when you can "rent it" for $120 a year? What a rip off!)

How is YouTube "hurting" these billion dollars companies if I watch 10 mins of a show that was canceled over a decade ago?

I'm the one driving around in a broke down Geo Metro. THEY are the ones living in million dollar mansions -- and yet they have the balls to claim they are the ones suffering because I watched a 6min clip from a cartoon made 15 years ago? Are even a 3 min clip from a show that aired last week?

In order to use YouTube you have to have internet. 99 percent of planet America just buys the TV/Internet combo for $99 bucks a month -- so we're already PAYING. Again, if I taped Keith Olbermann and watched it again, no harm and no foul. What if I forgot to tape it, but then watched it again on YouTube? How is that "stealing" it when I already paid for the shows content via a cable bill??? I could have taped it with my DVR, but decided to watch it on YouTube instead. I paid for it, so it's not stealing.

Cable basically means we already paid for it!

And since advertisers are still running commercials every 7 mins AND I'm paying a cable bill AND there are advertisements on every fracking web page I visit -- I've PAID!

I would love to take see this in court because it simply can't be stealing if we all have paid for it several times over already.

Diddlypop wrote "The problem is that if people can get their media for free, then there is no point in paying for it. And as soon as the perception solidifies that it doesn't matter if you steal it, it'll all work out, a cancer forms on the entertainment industry."

But TV used to be broadcast for FREE!

Radio IS broadcast for free now!

No one paid for it. They simply viewed it.

On the Internet no one pays for it. They simply view it.

I'm not understanding how TV could be broadcast to all of America for free in 1984 -- yet, mysteriously, we are all required to pay to view sitcoms that should be free.

If you have a TV antenna -- it's free.

So why is it "not free" now?

I just have to re-emphasize what froggy said – the police dept, the fire dept, libraries, and basic education are all tax-payer supported and work pretty darn good!

I just cannot believe that anti-healthcare advocates can’t do simple math!

How much is taken out of your paycheck to pay for 24hr police and fire access? For putting your kids through high school? For driving on a highway systems that stretches across the entire US?

Now compare this to paying AT LEAST $300 a month just in premiums for health insurance!

Now add on the co-pays!

Now tack on the ADDITIONAL bills the hospitals send you because the insurance didn’t cover that procedure or didn’t pay it in full (I don’t think any insurance pays any procedure in full. Ever.)

Don’t forget all those prescriptions. My wife recently had a throat infection. Total cost of three prescriptions WITH insurance? $79.00!

How in God’s name is private insurance “cheaper” than simply paying an extra 5, 10, or 20 bucks in taxes????

And let’s clear one thing up right now: The only thing that changes under single payer insurance is that the doctors send the bill to the government and not to you.

That’s it.

So instead of outright denying a woman with breast cancer chemotherapy (as they currently do if they are uninsured) or sending an insured woman a bill for $50,000 that will never get paid – the bill goes to the government. Kind of like how police detective investigating a rape don’t send the bill to the rape victim. A woman that develops breast cancer isn’t a “consumer” but a victim of a terrible illness and should be treated as much. We all should! What if we did, in fact, treat rape victims the exact same way we treat women with breast cancer? Would you like to get the following letter in the mail from the Police Dept?

“Dear Rape Victim:

Thank you for choosing Denver police to investigate your sexual assault. Your police protection insurance provider has been billed and paid $2,176 of your $45,372 bill. The DNA fingerprinting was not covered nor was the additional detective hours required to investigate your case. Please remit to us the outstanding $43,196 with 7 days or else your account will be turned over to our attorneys. Failure to pay your debt within 7 days may jeopardize your credit score and result in garnished wages. Don’t jeopardize your credit by ignoring this bill!

Have a super day!”