Copyright violation and illegal downloading
Copyright violation and illegal downloading have been a major problem for the entertainment industry. People all over the world downloading songs, movies, books etc. Without knowing that they might be breaking the law.

1.
In text 1 Peter Sunde is telling us his attitude to the media industries willing to evolve like every other kinds of industries. And when somebody like him are trying to go up against them, he tells a story which is very close to Hollywood’s own mafia films, where corruption and false play is a part of the daily diet. He believes that copying movies is not wrong, and that moviepiracy should become legal. He also makes it clear, that he thinks people and organizations who oppose the legalization of movie are at fault, and therefore should change themselves. Peter Sunde also urges people to fight against the copyright violation law, and to stop letting a corrupt industry control the internet.
Opposite Peter Sunde, Wendy Cope intensively fights copyright violation, first of all by writing and publishing her article ”You like my poems? So pay for them”, but also by writing on the subject ”copyright violation” in an attempt to stop the spread of the ignorance of the copyright law. In her article she points out different reasons for there to exist a law protecting author’s and moviemakers from being robbed their work and money, and why internet piracy is wrong. One of the reasons and arguments is that many author’s make a living by selling their work. Not buying an author’s work and casually sharing it would prevent the author from making their living, because she believes that internet piracy must have an effect on the books that are being sold. In the end, though, she admits that it is difficult to stop internet piracy from hapenning.

2.
In both of the texts, the tone is determined but not unfriendly. The language is cultivated, without hostile and aggressive terms. In text two’s four comments referring to Peter Sunde’s article, the use of sarcasm and irony is obvious. Through the comments, the reader is also able to sense indirect allusions. The commentators use a coffee shop as an example to make people more able to relate to the topic. It is also noticeable that the examples given in the comments includes the reader on a personal basis, and makes the reader either seem like the producer or the “customer” “I’ll be allowed to charge you for every piece of cake or cookie you look at but I don’t have to give it to you” (p.4, s.2-6). In a comment on the Internet, it can almost be expected that the commentators will be using cyber language, which surprisingly cannot be seen in the few chosen comments.
The length of the text in a comment is among others one of the things which characterizes a comment. A comment has to be short, but the commentator’s opinion and message still has to shine through.
The language used in the comments is very easy to understand and does not consist of difficult technical terms or terminology.
On the other hand, in text three, Wendy Cope uses many poems through the text to express herself and her opinions. She also takes use of many short sentences “Another beef concerns literary festival.” (P.6, s. 100), but opposite the comments, she writes much more. She takes good time and space to write on the topic, and uses many examples from her own life as a substance. She does not use indirect allusions; instead, she is very clear about her opinion “He knows all too well that I am obsessed with copyright.”

3.
I believe that Wendy Cope has double standards, and I almost believe in her being a little bit hypocritical. The reason for my belief is that she openly and clearly posts other authors poems in her article, and even her own poems, but at the same time isn’t fond of an author’s work being published in a place, where everybody and everyone has free access to it.
In her article she also claimed, she had asked her sister if she wanted a copy of a poem, which I believe gives the readers a bad impression of her.

Though she has a positive attitude, and claims she wants to stop people from illegally sharing poems, she does not herself do the same in her article. This is one of the main causes, which I think prevents the stop of Internet piracy.
Although I agree that it is difficult, if not impossible, to stop Internet piracy. I believe the reason for this is, just like john Clayton expresses in his comment, where one doesn’t unwillingly want to be ripped off, if the movie isn’t worth buying.
I do not think there should be a law protecting the copyright of music, texts and films; because I do not believe that, there is anything in it, which needs protection. I do not believe in the idea of paying lots of money for every movie you want to watch. I do not believe that being an author is some kind of a career, which will make you a living; I see it more as a hobby.
Everyone, especially here in Denmark, has access to all the books and poems and movies for free through their local library. Therefore, borrowing the movie from the library or “borrowing” it from the Internet does not seem different in my world.
If the movie is worth it, I would personally not mind buying it, but otherwise I would not mind watching it with my friends on the Internet either. The only thing preventing me to do so would be that I do not like and I do not support any kind of violation to the law.