Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Sues a Child
dniq writes "You may remember the previously posted story about a case against a mother, which was dropped by the RIAA right after her lawyers moved to dismiss the case.
Well, guess what? The RIAA has brought a lawsuit against the mother's daughter - now a 14 year old girl - and moved for appointment of a guardian at litem."
You're right Dave, there are a bunch of pro copyright infringment assholes on Slashdot. There is no way they can justify breaking the law to me, also I am sure that they feel justified.
> 1. The copyright holder is only deprived of *potential* income. As neither of us knows
> if a specific person would have paid for the crap he downloaded and never listened to,
> you can't say that he was deprived of any real income. He only lost something he never had.
1. Hey dictionary head! How come NOBODY on this newsgroup EVER gets all antsy about the number of articles or posts about "Identity Theft". Nobody ever steals your identity. You still have it. It's just an abstract notion of "potential value". The information you possess has "potential value" which may or may not be realized. "Identity Theft" may or may not infinge on that value.
2. The whole of our economic system is based on the ownership, transfer and sale of "potentional income". Unless you still live in a world where sheep and goats are traded you will find "potential income" is exactly what is traded everyday. Futures, derivitives, options, variable interest rates, currency exchange markets. It is all an abstract concept in the transfer of VALUE and perceived VALUE.
Programmers are meant to be great abstract thinkers but the number of posts bitching the Copyright Infringement not being theft amazes me. Just swap identity theft for copyright infringement and then repost and see how stupid you look. It's about as daft as the gun control lobby trying to claim that there is a justification in the Constitution for military assault weapons.
The bikini - security through obscurity since 1943
Your logic and reason are not welcome here.
Only waiting now for the people that can't argue the actual facts start in on your spelling. But regardless, why do they have such a hard time seeing the difference between theft and copyright violation? This isn't "newspeak" definition of "theft"...it's copyright violation. Also, being copyright violation instead of theft still doesn't mean one should condone it. But please, get the terms right.
Would you call murder the "theft" of ones life?
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
I want in on that sweet scam that the RIAA has going...
Loss of potential income? I want to sue everyone in my city because they are not buying my products. I have a potential income of 1 million a year but will settle for $250,000.00
That is the difference between most of us IT people and the Legal profession.
in IT you are tought truth. in the legal profession you are tought to lie your ass off at every chance you get. and who drives these legal suits against people? Lawyers.
do the world a favor, vote to have all lawyers killed today!
Sorry but you're a fucking idiot who simply doesn't know what he's talking about. First of all...game consoles ARE sold at a loss (want an education in that business model?), secondly they ARE sueing the woman's daughter. What exactly is a lie? Perhaps you would like to discuss the lies the RIAA spews forth every year?
STFU and go back into whatever whole you came from. Feel free to come out when you actually know what the fuck you're talking about.
Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. -- H. L. Mencken