LOGO
General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here.

Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 01-09-2008, 07:53 AM   #1
gennick

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
474
Senior Member
Default RIAA Lawsuit Defnse Challenges Copyright law
This should be entertaining [yes]


New RIAA Lawsuit Defense Tactic: Admit Liability, Challenge the Law
gennick is offline


Old 02-08-2008, 08:14 AM   #2
nannysuetle

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
480
Senior Member
Default
If i were ordered to pay 200+K for songs being shared on a p2p network, I would tell them all to go eat ****!!
I dont understand how they expect a person with a middle class income to pay such a fine...

That amount of money would make almost anyone bankrupt, so I would just leave the country and settle in some caribbean country
nannysuetle is offline


Old 02-08-2008, 10:35 AM   #3
Leczyslaw

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
647
Senior Member
Default
If i were ordered to pay 200+K for songs being shared on a p2p network, I would tell them all to go eat ****!!
I dont understand how they expect a person with a middle class income to pay such a fine...

That amount of money would make almost anyone bankrupt, so I would just leave the country and settle in some caribbean country
So you dont have the money to pay for the infringement, yet you have money to go and settle in a tropical country. lol.
Leczyslaw is offline


Old 02-08-2008, 10:47 AM   #4
stutnerman

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
492
Senior Member
Default
The RIAA claims that file sharers are liable for infringement solely for making available copyrighted works of music on peer-to-peer file sharing networks. Among the reasons the RIAA makes such an argument is because it's technologically impossible to know if a file sharer's music has been downloaded by somebody who has not been authorized to copy it. Ahh yes, the ol' "You're guilty even though there is no evidence of a crime being committed" strategy. I guess that beats the "Innocent until proven guilty" mindset this country is so obsessed with.[rolleyes]
stutnerman is offline


Old 02-08-2008, 09:12 PM   #5
gennick

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
474
Senior Member
Default
For me, the most interesting thing is that the Bush administration felt the need to take a direct stand (and to thus interfere) in/on the case. Consistently again and again, time after time, when this administration has to choose between the people and progress or the corporations and the status quo....... [thumbdown]
gennick is offline


Old 02-09-2008, 02:12 AM   #6
Leczyslaw

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
647
Senior Member
Default
and yet he was voted in twice.
Leczyslaw is offline


Old 02-09-2008, 03:26 AM   #7
nannysuetle

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
480
Senior Member
Default
So you dont have the money to pay for the infringement, yet you have money to go and settle in a tropical country. lol.
as a matter of fact yes I do, I have a dual citizenship..USA and Costa Rica!!
nannysuetle is offline


Old 03-08-2008, 08:53 AM   #8
Brutton

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
493
Senior Member
Default
and yet he was voted in twice.
I didn't vote for him.
Brutton is offline


Old 03-09-2008, 12:34 AM   #9
buchmausar

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
548
Senior Member
Default
I didn't vote for him.
Good lad - me neither [thumbup]
buchmausar is offline


Old 03-09-2008, 12:53 AM   #10
eladiopsislab

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
611
Senior Member
Default
and yet he was voted in twice.
Once. [rofl]
eladiopsislab is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:59 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity