Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Wants to Depose Dead Defendant's Children
Exchange writes "In Michigan, in Warner Bros. v. Scantlebury, after learning that the defendant had passed away, the RIAA made a motion to stay the case for 60 days in order to allow the family time to "grieve", after which time they want to start taking depositions of the late Mr. Scantlebury's children. Recording Industry vs The People have more details"
Go ahead and sue dead kids, that'll get the public on your side.
I don't care. People should start shooting RIAA staffers in the streets. Someone needs to carbomb their offices and burning down the homes of their executives. These fuckers will not learn until a few hundred of their family members are lynched from lightpoles.
Copyright infringement is NOT theft.
I've seen that argument so many times, but let me present you with this scenario. If you come up with an idea that is unique, and some schmuck takes that idea and beats you to the USPTO with it, don't you consider that idea stolen? Of course you do. But why? You haven't lost the idea.
Sure, copyright infringement does not literally equate to actually stealing the music since you are only making a copy, but you are stealing the "right to copy", the literal definition of copyright. A simple lookup on dictionary.com yields this result:
copyright...The legal right granted to an author, composer, playwright, publisher, or distributor to exclusive publication, production, sale, or distribution of a literary, musical, dramatic, or artistic work.
It seems to me that not only by the letter of copyright law, but also by the definition of the very word "copyright", it's a pretty clear case. Don't get me wrong, I too believe the RIAA is satan-incarnate, but if you are going to make arguments against them, make damn sure that you do it properly and don't keep repeating some bogus argument such as copyright infringement is not theft, because according to the law, it is.