Slashdot Mirror
Copyright Infringement and Shoplifting Contrasted
awesomeO4001 wrote in to mention a post to Karl Wagenfuehr's blog where he compares and contrasts the penalties for copyright infringement vs. shoplifting. From the post: "...from what I can tell, the penalties laid out for downloading one season of a TV show with BitTorrent are much harsher than if you actually stole a DVD set of the same show from a government store...For stealing the DVD you could face no more than up to 1 year imprisonment and up to a $100,000 fine; for downloading the same material you could face statutory damages of up to $3,300,000, costs and attorney's fees"
The only time quantity of punishment will affect the behavior of somebody breaking the law is when it is accompanied by certainty of punishment.
:-) are very small indeed, but the stiff penalty puts many people off, just in case they end up losing.
Not at all: that's the very reason people play the lottery: their chances of winning are nearly naught, but millions play everyday because they reckon the enormous bounty is worth the ridicule odds.
Likewise, that's the reason a big drop was observed at the height of **AA-instigated lawsuits last year: chances of losing at the P2P game (not winning this time
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
The **AA certainly could do this! In civil court, there is no law against entrapment. The **AA could put their stuff up for download, log the people downloading it, then sue them. And it would be totally legal. And the **AA would win. Ask any lawyer.
Which is also bullshit! That intent to distribute thing has always bugged me. Since when is the potential to commit a crime also a crime? Intent is important in a murder/manslaughter situation, but when we start differentiating in victimless crimes, I start to feel my rights getting stepped on.
Send whiskey and fresh horses!