Originally posted by pellegrino
View Post
There is nothing in the definition that implies anything about ownership. The word "distribute" is used in the 4th definition sense all the time. When a teacher hands out previously turned in homework assignments with grades, is she handing out something that the student didn't previous own? And yet ... it would not be unusual to talk about that activity in terms of "distribution" at all. Your conclusory statement that a tailor or a dry cleaner does not distribute anything is just a conclusory statement ... it isn't an argument. And I don't think that conclusion is anywhere close to as obvious as you claims it is.
There is nothing in the fourth definition that would even suggest that ownership is an element of distribution, let alone that the term requires a lack of previous ownership. That is something you pulled out of thin air.
And I very highly doubt that you looked at all the uses of the word "distribute" since 2000 that are cited in the corpus as you claim. If you did, I feel sorry for you given the relatively meaningless nature of this conversation.
Comment