I'm sorry if I've caused conflict - but I don't mean to insult the members here, and I refuse to believe that getting a copy of something which you can legally choose to pay for is anything but freeloading. I said the same thing to people who claimed they would keep their VHS copies of SW, skip the OUT release and wait for the X0. Sharing fan edits and genuine preservations is a great idea. "Sharing" (ie freeloading) off stuff you have a choice to pay for isn't.

"I just got a new DVD, would you like me to burn you a copy?"

How about I share my copy of Windows XP with you all?

Now I'm not that familiar with the laws of the UK, so forgive me if I'm wrong - but isn't recording for yourself legal, but making copies of that recording for friends illegal? So that would mean that, legally, it's called freeloading.

Now lets take it back a notch... isn't it understood that to get a fan preservation, or a fan edit that you should, where possible, own a legal copy. Is that not the general understanding with the "sharing" of the fan-edits and preservations here, isn't that the "spirit of things"??

Baby Hum has said that he "can't afford" to have a Sky subscription (he then went and said something else that appears to contradict this) - but let's be honest here, if I can't afford a Porsche - then what right would have to expect to have a Porsche?

So even though baby hum has come on, publicly stated he is choosing not to buy this product, but he would like for someone to burn him a copy - no one except me seems to see a problem with this. Well we all have to choose how to spend our money. If baby hum would rather spend his money on life's other luxuries then on pay-tv, how is it that he can still expect to enjoy the benefits of pay-tv?

Until I get an intelligent reply, rather then the "you're so stupid, Boris" bullshit flaming I just keep repeating what I've already said.