Slashdot Mirror


In Mississippi: 15-Year Jail Sentence For Selling Pirated Movies and Music

New submitter patella.whack writes "A guilty plea for six counts of selling counterfeit media gets a defendant 15 years in Mississippi. An undercover reporter from the Attorney General's Intellectual Property Theft Task Force managed to buy a total of five copied movies and one music CD from the defendant, who had 10,500 pirated discs at home and two prior convictions: one for assaulting a police officer 17 years ago and one for CD piracy that got him a year under house arrest. Says the RIAA: '[This] highlights the fact that the individuals engaging in these activities are frequently serial criminals for whom IP theft is simply the most convenient and profitable way they could steal from others.' Frequently serial criminals? 15 years? I wonder how much of his sentence can be attributed to his priors rather than to other factors."

339 comments

  1. 3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe this career criminal should have stuck to misdemeanors like bank robbery and murder; he would have received an easier sentence.

    1. Re:3 strikes and he's out by SomePgmr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This kind of thing is ridiculous, and I'm not surprised the RIAA would say something so absurd and disgusting. But one has to wonder, wouldn't you shy away from selling pirated entertainment on physical media after your conviction and house arrest?

    2. Re:3 strikes and he's out by HarrySquatter · · Score: 4, Informative

      Easier sentence for murder? You realize that Federal punishment for second-degree murder is mandatory life imprisonment and first-degree is the death penalty or life imprisonment? Exaggerate much?

    3. Re:3 strikes and he's out by maz2331 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm no fan of the *AA, but it sounds like the judge made the sentences run consecutively instead of concurrently for each count. I am sure the 10,500 copies ready for distribution had more than a little bit to do with that decision, as well as finding weapons in the posession of a felon (which the Feds might still prosecute, if the state turns over the evidence to the ATF - they could tack on another 5 years).

      And only a true idiot spends years in jail for something, and keeps on doing it, anyway.

    4. Re:3 strikes and he's out by ljaszcza · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, he should have gotten a job with one of the big banks. Goldman Sachs or such. Lighter sentence yet. Rob a liquor store, get 20 years. Rob 20,000 people of $200,000 in life savings, the feds don't have a case to pursue.

    5. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The average penalty for rape in the U.S. is 11.8 years. OP's specifics may be wrong, but the idea's the same.

    6. Re:3 strikes and he's out by someone1234 · · Score: 0

      Irishman Ciaran Tobin could get away unscathed. He ran over 2 kids in Hungary leaving both of them dead.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciaran_Tobin_extradition_case
      So yeah, killing people seems to be a lesser crime.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    7. Re:3 strikes and he's out by icebike · · Score: 5, Informative

      Easier sentence for murder? You realize that Federal punishment for second-degree murder is mandatory life imprisonment and first-degree is the death penalty or life imprisonment? Exaggerate much?

      Federal penalties for murder seldom apply unless you cross a state line to commit same, or kill a mailman, and not even then in most cases.
      Its a state charge, and many liberal states have you out on the street in less than 20 years, much less if their prisons are overcrowded.
      (Don't even get me started on time off fir good behavior).

      New York, Albany EDU did a study(pdf-2006) and found that 20 years (244 months) is the Average maximum sentence imposed by state courts in the US for Murder and Non-Negligent manslaughter.

      Federal District courts in 2004 sentenced people to an average maximum of 111.2 months.
      Post sentence guideline reform the federal average has increased to the state average, and then some. Figures for 2010 show an average of 23 years handed down by federal district courts.

      So I don't know where you get that mandatory Life death penalty nonsense.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    8. Re:3 strikes and he's out by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Probably lept from 'felony' right up to what a federal court would impose, not realizing the state would handle it in all but those corner cases.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    9. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, hey... at least it's a story about actual piracy in the legal sense, rather than just uploading or downloading.

    10. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      #1 - Why would he go down on a Federal murder charge? The only way you get a federal murder charge is to kill someone like a federal official, or to do the murder on federal property where no state has jurisdiction. State charges might bring significantly lower penalty. #2 - Who said anything about first or second degree? Manslaughter and negligent homicide are right out there in the open. They can get you a relative wrist slap, and people often plead down to them.

      Most crimes defined as murder do in fact net less than a 15 year sentence. Undoubtedly his priors came into play, but this guy might very well have gotten a lighter sentence for killing someone.

    11. Re:3 strikes and he's out by VortexCortex · · Score: 2

      Actually, he should have gotten a job with one of the big banks. Goldman Sachs or such. Lighter sentence yet.

      Or just started a multi-national corporation like Apple or Google or Facebook, all of which utilize our society, air-waves, economy, Internet-backbones, etc. yet only pay a tiny fraction of their income taxes.

      Rob a liquor store, get 20 years. Rob 20,000 people of $200,000 in life savings, the feds don't have a case to pursue.

      Rob billions in taxes? You're a fucking national treasure then.

    12. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Earlier commenters have addressed some of the issues, but I'll also point out that your punishments are what you get after being convicted. This pirate pled down to 15 years from whatever he was facing. Most murder suspects who are about to go to trial will plead down as well, and get a lesser charge with a shorter sentence.

    13. Re:3 strikes and he's out by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Blue collar crime just doesn't pay very well, not to mention all the American scamming jobs that have been outsourced to Nigeria...

    14. Re:3 strikes and he's out by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

      That might be relevant if the guy getting the 15 year jail sentence was in either Ireland or Hungary, but he's not. Have you ever heard the phrase "comparing apples to oranges?"

    15. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      in other news, you get 90 days jail time for shooting bicyclists with a 45 caliber while drunk driving...

      http://siouxcityjournal.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/sioux-city-man-gets-jail-probation-for-shooting-at-cyclists/article_2602367b-1ee1-58a7-8c13-343f396ed8e6.html

    16. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easier sentence for murder? You realize that Federal punishment for second-degree murder is mandatory life imprisonment and first-degree is the death penalty or life imprisonment? Exaggerate much?

      For fuck sakes man can you understand sarcasm when its put in front of you. Jesus Christ your an idiot.

    17. Re:3 strikes and he's out by CheshireDragon · · Score: 1

      No one said he was smart. Assault of a police officer takes real brains...
      @Jane Q. Public: I think this is the first one I have heard about dealing with the physical aspect. Of course, I have been under a rock for a while.

      --
      "That's right...I said it."
    18. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In Canada, the average for first degree murders in 2002 was 22.4 years... We are pathetic

    19. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      one is an apple, and the other an orange.

      See, some people prefer the taste of apples, (even different types of apples). Other's prefer the taste of oranges.
      I myself, am an orange person. Those people very possibly go to shops, and go to the fruit section to look for something to munch on.
      When they approach the isle with a crate of apples and another crate of oranges presented, that person needs to choose which one would be best to satisfy the original reason that they came to that section of the shop in the first case. To eat something.
      This decision, could have been a pre meditated, or he could have at that moment decided on what his body feels, to satisfy a craving. There are many ways he can make this choice. But his choice, can be incorrect or not what he thought he wanted. Whether he spent 3 decades, or 3 nanoseconds deciding what the best choice is, he can still be surprised by finding himself wrong, and the moment he takes a byte from the apple, he realises, he actually wanted the orange. Some people, never realise what they wanted, and so never have to face that question of which one is better, They never had the wrong taste in their mouth.

      What he intends to carry over, is that they had a rotten apple, they cut away the bad parts, and ate and enjoyed the rest.
      Where the "$opposingItem", had a slightly bruised orange, and decided it's best just to throw it away.

      And so, he is in fact not comparing apples to oranges, he is comparing the difference of how the apple is being treated compared to the orange., and essentially, stipulating, that the orange, is getting a really raw deal.

      So I took an apple... made a hole in it, and this is how this post resulted.
      I'll probably get 30 years for this.

    20. Re:3 strikes and he's out by DM9290 · · Score: 3, Informative

      In Canada, the average for first degree murders in 2002 was 22.4 years... We are pathetic

      In Canada first degree murder carries an AUTOMATIC life sentence with NO POSSIBILITY of parole for 25 years and there is absolutely ZERO discretion in sentencing.

      --
      No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
    21. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF? Murder is a state crime, not a federal one, dipshit. My nephew's mother's killer was convicted of 2nd degree murder and was given 20 years, out in 10.

    22. Re:3 strikes and he's out by DM9290 · · Score: 1

      In Canada, the average for first degree murders in 2002 was 22.4 years... We are pathetic

      In Canada first degree murder carries an AUTOMATIC life sentence with NO POSSIBILITY of parole for 25 years and there is absolutely ZERO discretion in sentencing.

      I should correct that ---- This is the punishment for adults. So if you want to include children who are convicted of murder, then your information might be correct.

      --
      No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
    23. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Assault of a police officer takes real brains..."

      Or a lying cop. Which happens. A lot.

      Trust me, I can tell you from personal experience. 1 false arrest, 1 assault on me by a cop threatening false arrest because I witnessed him do something wrong.

      --
      This space available.
    24. Re:3 strikes and he's out by hazem · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No one said he was smart. Assault of a police officer takes real brains...

      Actually, it doesn't take much to be charged with assault of a police officer. Say you're being arrested and they twirl you around to put the cuffs on you and you stumble into one of them. You've now committed assault if the officer feels like charging you with it.

      Want to take it to court? It will be you, a scumbag defendant, vs. that upstanding officer and defender of the public in his sharp uniform, with a jury that's been purged of anyone capable of critical thought.

    25. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It strikes me that they *might* actually know that and that they think 7.5 years is still excessive for something this trivial.

      Calm thefuck down.

    26. Re:3 strikes and he's out by cdrudge · · Score: 2

      Or just started a multi-national corporation like Apple or Google or Facebook, all of which utilize our society, air-waves, economy, Internet-backbones, etc. yet only pay a tiny fraction of their income taxes.

      Good thing for Apple, Google, Facebook, et al that utilizing all those things and paying the taxes that they do (or don't depending on your POV) isn't illegal.

    27. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's funny how people who have regular run-ins with the police ALWAYS have some story that starts with "trust me."

    28. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you assault a police officer, YOU'RE GUILTY. PERIOD.

    29. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bwaa bwaaa bwaaa! Life is so rough.

    30. Re:3 strikes and he's out by coyote_oww · · Score: 1

      For better or worse, we have different penalties for trying to be evil and for succeeding at being evil. Or, you get more jail time if your good at being bad, or something.

    31. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you assault a police officer, YOU'RE GUILTY. PERIOD.

      If the police officer said that you assaulted him , YOU'RE GUILTY. PERIOD.
       
      Ftfy.

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    32. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Assault of a police officer takes real brains..."

      Or a lying cop. Which happens. A lot.

      Trust me, I can tell you from personal experience. 1 false arrest, 1 assault on me by a cop threatening false arrest because I witnessed him do something wrong.

      Or a lying person / neighbour / citizen. Which happens. A lot.

      Look at that. I corroborated my version with just as much irrefutable evidence as you did yours. Isn't the Internet fun!?

    33. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps the average is less due to deaths in custody?

    34. Re:3 strikes and he's out by James-NSC · · Score: 2

      Here is a snip from DC's laws that describe what constitutes assaulting an officer:

      "Whoever without justifiable and excusable cause, assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with a law enforcement officer on account of, or while that law enforcement officer is engaged in the performance of his or her official duties shall be guilty of a misdemeanor" it elevates to a felony if it "causes significant bodily injury to the law enforcement officer, or commits a violent act that creates a grave risk of causing significant bodily injury to the officer"

      That's a pretty broad set of actions one can commit and still constitute "assault", which is why it's often referred to as "contempt of cop". Technically, if a cop punches you in the face and cuts his hand on your teeth, you can be charged with felony assault. Hopefully that won't hold up, but as you said, if you assault an officer, you're guilty. Period.

    35. Re:3 strikes and he's out by 0111+1110 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Every story without direct video footage starts with trust. I was actually charged with assaulting a police officer. In the presence of 20-30 other cops. I'm just a shy, geeky, overweight, middle aged guy. I'm also extremely non-violent. The cop in question was much larger than me as well. Anyone who knows me knows that such an accusation is utterly ridiculous.

      Some people have yet to realize what real cops are actually like. This is solely due to lack of contact with them. They will not hesitate to lie in court and to falsely accuse you of many things. None of the defense attorneys I consulted were at all surprised by my story. They see it all the time. The cops commonly do such things because they can. The system lets them get away with it. They are just grown up schoolyard bullies. Sociopaths with unlimited power and not even a hint of a conscience.

      Just a bit of friendly advice for everyone: If a cop swears at you DO NOT swear back at them under any circumstances. It may seem fair, but the cop won't see it that way. You'll be lucky if you only end up in the hospital with broken bones. You may end up with brain damage. You may end up dead or in prison for many years based on false accusations.

      No matter what you say or how much more plausible your version of events may seem or how incredibly stupid the cop is nearly every judge and many juries will believe the cop's ridiculous story just because he is a cop. Many defendents aren't willing to roll the dice and take deals. That's what I did. I could poke holes in some details of the cop's bullshit story and prove those holes 100%. Prove that he lied in some details, but I could not prove my innocence. I could not prove that I did not punch him. And I didn't trust a potential lily white jury with no exposure to real life cops to decide my fate. Like you, they don't want to believe that such things really happen. So they don't. Real cops are nothing like the way they are portrayed on TV or in films. Well maybe Bad Lieutenant.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    36. Re:3 strikes and he's out by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Yup. That's why even those of us who can prove the cop in question is a liar still take deals. Basically you need video footage of the event to prove your innocence and pointing a video camera at a cop is a good way to get beaten to death or at least put in a hospital and then in jail when he accuses you of a list of cover charges to justify his violence against you. I firmly believe that the majority of "assault against a police officer" charges are actually police brutality cases where the cop needs a way to cover his ass. All such charges should require video footage of the event to even go to trial. Also, if the defendent was injured, the possibility of police brutality should be investigated. Every. Single. Time. The burden of proof should be on the cop and it should be a high burden. Video footage or at least corroborating civilian witnesses with no relationship to law enforcement.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    37. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a reason they are called the Brutalizing class.

    38. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Chazz, rock stars don't go to jail. Christ, Vince Neil only did 30 days and he killed somebody!"
      -Airheads

    39. Re:3 strikes and he's out by destroygbiv · · Score: 1

      Go further with this and refuse to speak with police officers ever! Obviously sometimes you gotta, but keep it as short and concise as possible. Scum of the earth, if you ask me (but if you're a cop I won't respond)

    40. Re:3 strikes and he's out by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      Every story that has video evidence starts with "trust me". Or, have you forgotten the videos that were put out showing "police unprovoked assaulting peaceful protesters" that are missing the previous five minutes of violence by the protesters?

      Sorry to break it to you but in these days one cannot trust pictures or video.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    41. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How to stay out of the police's eye
      1. Don't be black
      2. Don't act black
      3. Stay away from people who are black

    42. Re:3 strikes and he's out by blade8086 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The kind of thing where a repeat, professional, career criminal (aka 'organized criminal') is awarded a tough sentence for manufacturing large amounts of illegal counterfit goods for resale aka establishing his own 'criminal enterprise' ?

      What exactly is the problem here?

      Yes, I agree that some aspects of copyright law are rediculous - but this case, no.

    43. Re:3 strikes and he's out by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      I suppose that's a good point. Even if I had had a video of the incident it wouldn't have proved that I didn't punch the cop right before the camera was turned on. Or that the part of the video where I punched him was not cleverly edited out.

      Nevertheless if I had had a video of the entire incident (and I did consider filming it with my phone but was afraid it would escalate things or that I would be prosecuted for it under surveillance laws), I probably would have been willing to not only turn down any deals and go to trial but also sue the cop afterwards for the usual police brutality charges. It isn't 100% proof, but it is very persuasive.

      Of course, if the cop had a video of me punching him that would prove that I had assaulted him. I find it telling that the cops in my state have stopped using video supposedly because it hurt the state's cases far more often than it helped them. That certainly doesn't surprise me. When most of your police officers are violent maniacs with no respect for the law themselves video is definitely not something you generally want.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    44. Re:3 strikes and he's out by tragedy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Real cops are nothing like the way they are portrayed on TV or in films.

      The cops portrayed in TV and films these days seem to violate the constitution a few times per episode but are still portrayed unquestioningly as the good guys. Since it's fiction, they also have ridiculously high closure rates on their cases. They also have a ridiculously high number of "ticking time bomb" situations where such things are portrayed as necessary and right. I would be fine with it as fiction, as long as people still maintain a realistic view of police in the real world, but too many people don't seem to be able to distinguish reality from fantasy.

    45. Re:3 strikes and he's out by tragedy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem is that it's completely non-violent white collar crime being treated as if it were a murder. There are some white collar crimes that can be considered to be in that ballpark, such as Bernie Madoff's giant Ponzi scheme. Of course, the scheme Madoff ran actually did lead to quite a few deaths. It seems very unlikely that the piracy scheme in this case did much more than cost the entertainment industry a relatively tiny amount of money.

    46. Re:3 strikes and he's out by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      It's not funny, it's rather sad that it happened all to often.

      While I'm not going to say all the cops out there are corrupt or abusive, I do know some who are and they brag about it quite a bit. I have had run ins with some too. You won't remember the cop that drives by on patrol, but you do remember the ones with a John Wayne syndrome that thinks because you are walking down the street, you are up to no good so a search it warranted and of you ask what the problem is, you are disrespecting their authority and deserve to be slammed around. Hell, I know of people who were charged for resisting arrest when there was no charge or arrest outside of the charge of resisting arrest.

    47. Re:3 strikes and he's out by boudie2 · · Score: 1

      The thing is that almost nobody gets charged with first degree murder. Not that many years ago a person shot another at a party, in the head from three feet away. He was charged with manslaughter and was out on day parole in less than 2 years. You'd have be on your second or third killing or murder a Mountie to get more than 20 years.

    48. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference is in the USA an encounter with the average citizen is likely to be less harmful than with the average cop.

    49. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think even Facebook makes the average person happier than Goldman Sachs ever did.

    50. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, hey... at least it's a story about actual piracy in the legal sense, rather than just uploading or downloading.

      Apart from not killing people or threatening to do so, this is definitely actual piracy.

    51. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just wear a suit that stuns anyone who touches you.

      Get pulled over, activate it.
      They start to walk to you, activate it.

      But judge, I warned em not to touch me.
      I didn't move a muscle, they just fell over all twitchy like.

      How did I know he had a bad heart that couldn't take 2 million volts at 35 amps of current????

      He didn't have a sign posted saying "Warning, I'm a fucking wimp, I cannot take being stunned!!!"

      I did have a sign on me that read "Stay back, don't fucking touch me, or you're dead meat dumbass!"

      He read it, and decided to accost me over my choice of words that I used to express myself and my distrust in the crooked cops.

      It's his own damned fault for illegally trying to accost me over my 1st amendment rights!

    52. Re:3 strikes and he's out by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      I like the way you think, but in my situation (a DUI roadblock) a gun wouldn't have helped because I had no idea beforehand that the guy was going to go nuts and try to kill me or whatever. There was no warning. All of a sudden (after I swore back at him) he was whirling me around getting ready to slam me to the ground. Hard. And then jump on my back with his 250 lbs or whatever and start strangling me. I was utterly pinned beneath him. My face was pressed so hard against the pavement that I was sure he had broken my nose and damaged my eyes when my eyeglasses were crunched into my eyes with great force.

      If I had had a gun I would have used it though once he started strangling me and crushing my trachea and larynx. I really thought I was going to die. While it would have meant certain death for me as well among at least 20 cops I would have at least had the chance to avenge my own murder.

      After the incident I did some googling and found that the same group of guys were suspected of a murder just a couple of years earlier due to very suspicious circumstances in which a guy died while being arrested for marijuana possesion at another DUI roadblock. Not a single officer was ever charged with anything of course. They can quite literally get away with murder. As long as there are no (living) civilian witnesses.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    53. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have the right to remain silent. Physically and verbally.

      Exercise this right as needed, but with discretion. Sometimes, and such a time is very, very rare, you will need to fight back. In such a situation, I can only recommend that you leave no witnesses. Unfortunately, people, not just judges or prosecutors, rank the opinions of law enforcements higher than any individuals. Removing the opinions is the only method of removing the bias.

    54. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posting anonymous but what you describe is pretty much exactly what I've experienced concerning the corruption that seems to be pervasive in our law enforcement organizations.

      I'm a middle-aged, overweight geek that was charged with assault and resisting arrest by a cop in that was 6 inches taller than me and outweighed me by a good 50+ lbs. The arrest occurred in plain view of 3 other officers and their reports all corroborated the arresting officer's story.

      At first I wanted to fight this all the way to the supreme court but my attorney informed me that such things happen all the time and that I should actually feel lucky that the prosecutor was offering a plea bargain to reduced charges.

      I took the plea bargain rather than risk a jury convicting me and sentencing me to several years in prison.

    55. Re:3 strikes and he's out by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      See, you start with a good story, but then you totally fail to notice when you wrap right around to the other side: absolutism about "bullies and sociopaths". WTF dude? And the racial comment was really uncalled-for. If you ever wonder why nobody listens to your sob story, this is why.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    56. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your nephew's mother? You mean your sister / sister-in-law?

    57. Re:3 strikes and he's out by pete6677 · · Score: 1

      And you were found not guilty, and then sued for false arrest? No? Because the entire thing is bullshit.

    58. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 2

      Yes, of course a lying person/neighbor/citizen happens a lot.

      Point is, a lot of ALL people are liars, and it doesn't stop just because they happen to be wearing a badge.

      --
      This space available.
    59. Re:3 strikes and he's out by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      'Black' determined, of course, by the paper bag test. Gotta make sure they get in the 'browns' who might be passing.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    60. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Charges were dropped. Because it was obvious BS. And nobody including the judge believed it, but these kinds of charges were routine.

      Sue for false arrest?

      You've been watching too much TV.
      When you're a 18 year old kid and two cops lie on the police report, you don't sue.

      You consider yourself lucky that the charges were dropped and that your lawyer only cost you $350.

      --
      This space available.
    61. Re:3 strikes and he's out by xenobyte · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actual piracy? - Where's the peg leg, the parrot and the ship?

      --
      "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
    62. Re:3 strikes and he's out by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's pretty pathetic. An advanced civilization would be capable of rehabilitating people much more quickly.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    63. Re:3 strikes and he's out by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      Shooting at random passersby is evil even if you miss. Selling counterfeit DVDs is probably neutral (chaotic neutral).

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    64. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      was he found on the high seas in a galley shooting cannons at passing frigates and saying oo arr?

    65. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      15 years is what is wrong. 1 year in prison and fine would be more than enough.

      I don't know the cost of putting someone in jail in the us, but if the price is just roughly the same as in denmark, putting him to prison for 15 years cost around 2million usd.

      Why would you, as a society, spend so much money on an idiot like that?

    66. Re:3 strikes and he's out by McGuirk · · Score: 1

      I don't really have sympathy for this guy.

      Downloading for personal use is an entirely different ballgame where the laws are ridiculous.

      This, however, very directly contributes to loss of sales. This is selling other people's work for personal gain. It's wrong, and it's very rightly illegal.

    67. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Real cops are nothing like the way they are portrayed on TV ...

      Have you watched 'Law and order'? The police on it are outright thugs. Even the white-collar detectives 'L & O: criminal intent' spent a couple of seasons beating down the perpetrators. The 'CSI' police are minor thugs. The 'Third watch' police were thugs to known career criminals. I don't remember that much abuse in 'LA law' or even tough-guy drama 'Starsky and Hutch'.

      Such police show teach the populace: 1) The police arrest the criminal 2) Police have to be dishonest and violent.

      ... they don't want to believe that such things really happen.

      I disagree. As per point (1) above, my explanation is jurors think 'The police are always right'.

    68. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He had TEN THOUSAND COPIED DISCS. That's only about 12 hours of prison time for each offense. Seems pretty fair to me.

    69. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Hillgiant · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All suspects are guilty. Otherwise, they would not be suspect.

      --
      -
    70. Re:3 strikes and he's out by godefroi · · Score: 1

      Just a bit of friendly advice for everyone: If a cop swears at you DO NOT swear back at them under any circumstances.

      Ah, forgot to look up what assault actually is before you went around antagonizing officers, did you? Sorry, not the cop's fault. Maybe what you thought was assault is actually battery?

      I know a few cops personally. I'd say they are, on the whole, normal guys.

      --
      Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
    71. Re:3 strikes and he's out by godefroi · · Score: 1

      Of course, if the cop had a video of me punching him that would prove that I had assaulted him.

      No, that would prove you committed battery. Assault and battery are two completely different things. Punching him is battery, not assault. Assault is what you did when you yelled at him right before punching him.

      --
      Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
    72. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is ridiculous is the amount of money the taxpayers will have to shell out to incarcerate this dangerous criminal when compared to the actual value of the counterfeit goods. Let the punishment fit the crime. Five movies? Ok, fine the guy $1000 and be done with it.

    73. Re:3 strikes and he's out by kylemonger · · Score: 1

      Unless you know what state (or country!) the OP resides in, you can't say with certainty what assault is, or whether it differs from battery. Here in Washington state, yelling at a cops is definitely not assault under state law. There isn't any crime of "battery" at all.

    74. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Ravaldy · · Score: 0

      I can second Jafafa. I've seen two cases close to me. Although I don't take away from the facts that there are plenty of honest cops.

      I wish they left me alone on my way to work. Jeez, I'm only going 20km over the speed limit!!!

    75. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell that to the guy the just got 18 years for cutting off his wife's head.

    76. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know more than a few cops and let me say most of them are bat shit crazy, and should not be trusted with the responsibilities that they are given. Drunk driving, its ok I know where the check points are, and even if I do get pulled over my buddy will drive me home in the back of the car without any other questions. Cops are not to be trusted, question them, and ask to see what statute you have violated if you know it is an out right lie.

    77. Re:3 strikes and he's out by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      There weren't any cameras, only cops. I'll bet he's from Chicago. And race does matter to a cop (I'm lucky I'm white).

      Obryckaâ(TM)s lawyers contended a code of silence protected former Chicago cop Anthony Abbate from punishment until the damning videotape was made public.

      Obrycka contended during the trial that Abbate, other officers and higher-ups tried to cover up and minimize her February 2007 beating as part of an unofficial "code of silence" policy within the department.

      The trial in federal court came nearly six years after Abbate attacked Obrycka at Jesse's Short Stop Inn when he went behind the bar.

      The eight-woman, three-man jury found that Abbate was part of the conspiracy to cover up the beating and that the Police Department had a widespread code of silence that emboldened Abbate to beat up Obrycka.

      The videotape of Abbate pummeling a woman about half his size marked one of the most embarrassing chapters in recent Chicago Police Department history and contributed to the resignation of then-Superintendent Philip Cline.

    78. Re:3 strikes and he's out by godefroi · · Score: 1

      I know, right, I mean, there you are, minding your own business, drunk and behind the wheel, and some asshole cop has to pull you over, and get all up in your face about laws and sobriety tests and shit, and all you want is a pepsi!

      --
      Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
    79. Re:3 strikes and he's out by godefroi · · Score: 1

      Either way, in general, most jurisdictions have some sort of statute that can be used to nail you for yelling "fuck you!" at a cop, because that constitutes a verbal threat of violence.

      So don't do it.

      Don't talk to cops, that's generally good advice, but don't be an asshole, either.

      --
      Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
    80. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are some white collar crimes...

      I believe this was a black collar crime.

    81. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thou' art' correct. A first time killer can usually pull 5 years.

    82. Re:3 strikes and he's out by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      What part of "career criminal" can't you wrap your head around?

    83. Re:3 strikes and he's out by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      We're not talking feds here, nor are we talking Ireland or Belgium as some other poster stupidly said earlier in the thread. We're talking about Mississippi.

      Since Mississippi joined the Union in 1817, several forms of execution have been used. Hanging was the first form of execution used in Mississippi. The state continued to execute prisoners sentenced to die by hanging until October 11, 1940, when Hilton Fortenberry, convicted of capital murder in Jefferson Davis County, became the first prisoner to be executed in the electric chair. Between 1940 and February 5, 1952, the old oak electric chair was moved from county to county to conduct executions. During the 12-year span, 75 prisoners were executed in the Magnolia State for offenses punishable by death.

      In 1954, the gas chamber was installed at the Mississippi State Penitentiary. It replaced the electric chair, which today is on display at the Mississippi Law Enforcement Training Academy. Gearald A. Gallego became the first prisoner to be executed by lethal gas on March 3, 1955. During the course of the next 34 years, 35 death row inmates were executed in the gas chamber. Leo Edwards became the last person to be executed in the gas chamber at the Mississippi State Penitentiary on June 21, 1989.

      On July 1, 1984, the Mississippi legislature partially amended lethal gas as the stateâ(TM)s form of execution in ÂÂ 99-19-51 of the Mississippi Code. The new amendment provided that individuals who committed capital punishment crimes after the effective date of the new law and who were subsequently sentenced to death thereafter would be executed by lethal injection. On March 18, 1998, the Mississippi legislature amended the manner of execution by finally removing the provision lethal gas as the alternate form of execution.

      So no, unless you think dieing is less punishment than fifteen years, all of you guys are just plain wrong.

    84. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and the bad guy always confesses at the end of the movie/tv program even though all they have is circumstantial evidence.

    85. Re:3 strikes and he's out by tqk · · Score: 1

      The problem is that it's completely non-violent white collar crime being treated as if it were a murder. ... It seems very unlikely that the piracy scheme in this case ... cost the entertainment industry anything.

      FTFY. On the other hand, it does appear these days that the MafiAA is going out of its way to generate as much bad press as it can (cf. Chris Dodd), so a stupid three time perp. sent to jail for infringing isn't exactly what they would ordinarily be proud of. A homeless Mom with five kids sent to jail is more their style.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    86. Re:3 strikes and he's out by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Comparinjg Iowa with Mississippi is like comparing France to Somalia. Different place with different laws and different penalties.

    87. Re:3 strikes and he's out by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      I am well aware of that common distinction, officer. But "assault" the way it is commonly used is different from its legal sense. I was using "assault" in the way it is commonly used to mean "physically attack".

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    88. Re:3 strikes and he's out by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      If you were under the impression that I yelled "fuck you" you are incorrect. I said it very quietly, slowly, and deliberately, but I was standing quite close to him. Good guess on the swear used however. It was in response to him calling me an asshole. BTW, you are wrong about the legality of swearing at a cop. At least in the US it is 100% legal. This was verified by at least 6 defense attorneys. When I said it I didn't know that however and I was expecting to get arrested for it. He did arrest me, but not for that and not until he had broken several ribs, made my face into a bloody mess, injured my larynx badly enough that the next day I almost suffocated, gave me a serous concussion that affected my memory etc, etc. Needless to say, if I ever have another encounter with the police that is more than a speeding ticket I will be running for my life now that I know getting arrested is not the only possibility. I am also planning to leave the state for one with less gun control and no road blocks and I will be armed at all times when in a situation where I might have an encounter with the most dangerous thugs in the US: the police.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    89. Re:3 strikes and he's out by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      I understand your desire to post anonymously, but I would love to get in touch with you and compare notes. Not sure how that's possible from slashdot though.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    90. Re:3 strikes and he's out by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Many cops are sociopaths and bullies. That is exactly what they are.

      And the racial point was also made by several attorneys as well. The town the court was in was mostly white. Although both the cop and I were white , a black person is more likely to have been in a situation where they could see the dishonesty of cops. Maybe they've been stopped for driving while black or heard of people who were etc. Probably a slim chance, but I really didn't want to take a plea bargain. I wanted to fight it.

      As for my story people will believe what they want to believe. That's the reality of the world. That's why people don't trust juries to deliver a fair verdict and take deals so often. The only people I've told my story to are friends and relatives and I'm posting this at least semi-anonymously for a reason. If I start giving the psycho, murderous cop a hard time he may decide to silence me and it would be easy enough for him to get away with exactly that. As soon as I can leave the state however and start buying firearms and learning how to use them I intend to tell my story to the FBI and do whatever I can to get my accusation on record in some way so that when he does this again to someone else (and he will) there will be more evidence to dismiss the case.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    91. Re:3 strikes and he's out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you read the article carefully, and you know anything about Mississippi and about names, you can really see that this isn't what you think it is. This is a small time informal Video palace for poor Americans of color. Run by a black man. Who got in trouble for being uppity as a kid. And cut some informal Cds in the early 2000's. So yeah, he had a lot of other disks because he is serving a market that can't afford to pay for, or can't get to real DVD stores. These places are everywhere, if you know where to look. They do not threaten Hollywood anymore than DangerMouse threatens the music industry. In fact they support it in an unusual way. So this guy isn't a career criminal. Why do you think he got 15 years? Why do you think the other guy in the story got 2? What was his name?? Why do you think Jammy Thomas gets hammered with huge fines while most people get their cases dismissed? Think about it.

      And I am not a person of color, so don't think I'm just being sensitive.

    92. Re:3 strikes and he's out by randyleepublic · · Score: 1

      Stupid is as stupid writes...

      --
      Social Credit would solve everything...
    93. Re:3 strikes and he's out by godefroi · · Score: 1

      It's legal to swear at a cop, unless the cop interprets it as a verbal threat of sexual violence, which is illegal in many/most jurisdictions (it's assault in many/most places). If the cop is already looking for a reason to arrest you, you can bet he'll take advantage of that. You handed it to him on a platter.

      Your decision to escalate the arms race, and flee at any encounter with a police officer, I can only guess is an unwise one. You'll simply give him more reasons to hunt you down, and hand him proof that you're a bad actor. Next time he won't come at you with fists and a night stick, he'll simply draw his firearm, since you'll be well-armed.

      --
      Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
    94. Re:3 strikes and he's out by godefroi · · Score: 1

      I'm sure, but when the cop arrested you for "assault", he was using "assault" in the way that allows him to arrest you for it.

      --
      Karma: Poor (Mostly affected by lame karma-joke sigs)
  2. What would the sentence be: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What would the sentence be for rape of manslaughter?

    1. Re:What would the sentence be: by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      About the same.

    2. Re:What would the sentence be: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Or for the rape of the English language.

    3. Re:What would the sentence be: by HarrySquatter · · Score: 3, Informative

      At the Federal level, manslaughter is fines and/or up to 10 years. Rape is fines up to life imprisonment. First-degree murder is death penalty or life imprisonment and second-degree murder is life imprisonment.

    4. Re:What would the sentence be: by X0563511 · · Score: 2

      How do you rape manslaughter?

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    5. Re:What would the sentence be: by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Funny

      Very carefully.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    6. Re:What would the sentence be: by GrumpySteen · · Score: 2

      First you track manslaughter down. That will probably be the hardest point since he/she has never posted anything. Once you've done that, you should be able to figure the rest out.

    7. Re:What would the sentence be: by TubeSteak · · Score: 2

      And almost no one gets those maximum sentences since 90%~95% of all cases are plea bargained before ever going to trial.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    8. Re:What would the sentence be: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the Federal level, manslaughter is fines and/or up to 10 years. Rape is fines up to life imprisonment. First-degree murder is death penalty or life imprisonment and second-degree murder is life imprisonment.

      Gee, how sweet. Someone else rambling on about the "standard" punishment scale at the Federal level...that's nice.

      Now, would you care to publish the Hollywood/Rich/Elite/1% "standard" punishment scale, so that we can all see how shit actually works? Might help shed a bit more accurate light on this comparison.

  3. Three Strikes Laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    These laws are dumb as shit since they make the judge irrelevant, as it takes away the courts power to hand down an appropriate sentence.

    Mississippi is a three strikes state. So this is another "20 years for jaywalking" piece of nonsense.

    1. Re:Three Strikes Laws by amiga3D · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I gotta say that if you already were busted once for selling pirate media you should be aware they're out to get you. I think it's harsh but I can't feel sorry for him. It's not like he was using it for his own viewing, he was selling it for income.

    2. Re:Three Strikes Laws by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Three strikes laws should be thrown out as unconstitutional. If you've done your time for the first two strikes, then you've done your time. Any additional punishment for those crimes falls afoul of double jeopardy.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:Three Strikes Laws by Firethorn · · Score: 4, Informative

      While I agree that three strike laws shouldn't be, I don't think it runs afoul of double jeopardy and think that it, at most, would violate 'cruel and unusual'. Of course, unusual would be covered by it being state law 'impartially' applied, and 'cruel' is up to the justices of the supreme courts, state and federal.

      You see, double jeopardy is that you can't be tried twice for the [i]same[/i] crime, it doesn't mean that your past crimes can't be used to establish a pattern of behavior when sentencing for a new crime that you have duly been convicted of.

      Even without 3 strike laws, it has been traditionally been a judge's option to increase sentence for a repeat offender. 3 strikes, depending on the state, varies between allowing a judge to increase sentence even more to mandating high minimum sentences. The former is good when you get somebody who's obviously 'criminal scum' that's best kept behind bars even if the individual things he's been caught on are minimal. The latter is a tragedy when you get somebody dumb who does something like stealing a loaf of bread for the 3rd offense, or is still a drug/gambling addict*.

      *Medical condition in my view. It's certainly a more effective way to treat the problem.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    4. Re:Three Strikes Laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has nothing to do with double jeopardy, it has to do with a willful pattern of criminal behavior.

    5. Re:Three Strikes Laws by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 2

      In California, we just voted to get rid of mandatory three-strikes sentencing for non-violent, non-serious offenders. I'm not uncomfortable to giving someone life for, say, their third rape sentence. I'm extremely happy that we collectively decided to no longer give someone life for shoplifting a loaf of bread.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    6. Re:Three Strikes Laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Exactly. The short version . . .

      Judges considering prior convictions during sentencing. That's common sense and has been done forever.

      The legislature tying the judges hands and mandating huge sentences. A significant over stepping between branches of government.

    7. Re:Three Strikes Laws by TFAFalcon · · Score: 1

      Is probation unconstitutional as well then? With three strikes, every crimes carries a 50% eternal probation - if you commit 2 more crimes you're screwed.

    8. Re:Three Strikes Laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and what's wrong with income?

      Really, this should be a civil matter, not a criminal.
      No person was harmed in his actions.

    9. Re:Three Strikes Laws by tibit · · Score: 1

      Yep. In plenty of jurisdictions your traffic tickets become more expensive if you had any tickets within a certain amount of time. Say $25 extra if there was one ticket in the last 12 months, or a mandatory court appearance for 2+ tickets.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    10. Re:Three Strikes Laws by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      He's in direct competition with the content owner selling what they produced and he pirated. That is criminal by law. He is exactly who they should be after.

    11. Re:Three Strikes Laws by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      I remember a case where a bicyclist got 3 tickets simultaneously for running red lights - the cop saw him run all three. The standard is to treat them all as first offense tickets(punishment not being effective if it hasn't happened yet), but somehow they ended up doing it as strike 1, 2,3 - Something like $200 first, $600 second, $1k third. So what should of been $600 ballooned into $1.8k.

      Note: I think the guy SHOULD get tickets for running the red lights, but the cop should of pulled him over for the first and not let him continue for the 2nd, 3rd. Basically 1 red light ticket unless he was doing it crazy stupid AND the cop couldn't catch him quick enough.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    12. Re:Three Strikes Laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree. He was running quite an operation, with 10k copies ready for sale, and not the first time he's done it. He had it coming.

      He still wasn't stealing though.

    13. Re:Three Strikes Laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These laws are dumb as shit since they make the judge irrelevant, as it takes away the courts power to hand down an appropriate sentence.

      Mississippi is a three strikes state. So this is another "20 years for jaywalking" piece of nonsense.

      Maybe he should have taken cue ball after the 1st strike. It's not like public officials came at him and say "surprise! 3 strikes! didn't ya know, too fucking bad".

    14. Re:Three Strikes Laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if they have served their time then their 2nd amendment rights are returned? Oh, you're from that alternate, fair, dimension.

    15. Re:Three Strikes Laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish I had mod points - I would so mod you up. I completely agree. He was charged with selling this to an undercover officer - who knows what all else he had. He had a previous conviction for piracy, and was sentenced.

      I honestly don't understand why the Slashdot community is so upset about this. It wasn't fair use, he didn't download a few songs to throw on his iPod, or torrent some TV show he couldn't get in his area. He was copying discs and selling them for profit, and from the article, it sounds like he was making a substantial amount from this. He knew what he was doing, he knew the punishment, he had been convicted before on similar charges, he got exactly what he deserved.

    16. Re:Three Strikes Laws by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Really the only comment I have against it is the fact that the punishment seems very harsh, equivalent to murder or rape sentencing.

    17. Re:Three Strikes Laws by sciencewhiz · · Score: 1

      Prop 36 didn't change the penalty for a two strike offender that shoplifted a loaf of bread.

    18. Re:Three Strikes Laws by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      That's a remarkable claim. Can you provide evidence for it?

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    19. Re:Three Strikes Laws by sciencewhiz · · Score: 1

      Shoplifting a loaf of bread is a misdemeanor which California's 3 strikes doesn't cover. Prop 36 only covered non-violent felonies.

  4. worse than rape by godrik · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Prison sentences for rape are not uniform. A study made by the U.S. Department of Justice of prison releases in 1992, involving about 80 percent of the prison population, found that the average sentence for convicted rapists was 11.8 years, while the actual time served was 5.4 years. This follows the typical pattern for violent crimes in the US, where those convicted typically serve no more than half of their sentence.[11]"

    source: wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_regarding_rape

    1. Re:worse than rape by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Quite right. If it's not your wife or daughter.

      Now they need to apply the same rules to the corporations that steal IP, ignore patents and slime their way through the politicians to buy "laws" to further their profits.

    2. Re:worse than rape by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      Right... that's cause they get to do the additional time on parole. Who says this guy is going to serve all 15 of his years?

    3. Re:worse than rape by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

      Prison sentences for rape are not uniform. A study made by the U.S. Department of Justice of prison releases in 1992, involving about 80 percent of the prison population, found that the average sentence for convicted rapists was 11.8 years, while the actual time served was 5.4 years. This follows the typical pattern for violent crimes in the US, where those convicted typically serve no more than half of their sentence.

      Must be God's will.

    4. Re:worse than rape by steelfood · · Score: 1

      So in Mississippi, 5 DVD's and 1 CD is approximately equivalent to 1.5 rape victims in the eyes of the justice system. That's real good to know.

      Actually, rapists have to be on those sex offenders lists when they get out, which is basically a life sentence. Maybe it's better to compare it to some other crime, like manslaughter.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    5. Re:worse than rape by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Expect there to be a list for IP offenders soon.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    6. Re:worse than rape by cdrudge · · Score: 1

      It would be easier and a smaller list to just keep a list of those who are NOT IP offenders.

    7. Re:worse than rape by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

      Expect there to be a list for IP offenders soon.

      what, you mean, like, people running AppleTalk?

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    8. Re:worse than rape by russotto · · Score: 1

      Right... that's cause they get to do the additional time on parole. Who says this guy is going to serve all 15 of his years?

      Seems unlikely. Software pirate in a Mississippi prison? He'll be lucky if he survives the first night; he'll have AIDS within a week.

    9. Re:worse than rape by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      So in Mississippi, 5 DVD's and 1 CD is approximately equivalent to 1.5 rape victims in the eyes of the justice system. That's real good to know.

      Sorry but it is a little more complicated than that. The ratio changes between 1.3 and 2.0 depending on the length of the womans skirt and whether she was dressed as a "slut" at the time she was raped.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    10. Re:worse than rape by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      source: wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_regarding_rape

      Excellent choice of sources!

  5. 5 years for assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I'm more shocked that he got 5 years for assaulting a police officer. Seriously? Like someone getting arrested takes a swing at a cop (and then suffers a serious beatdown, taser-fest, etc., etc.) and gets 5 years? Most cops are corrupt fascists who bully society. Cops are just a gang.

    1. Re:5 years for assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, cops protect society, mostly from people like you.
      The penalties for assaulting them should be very severe.

    2. Re:5 years for assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      all of my family is in law enforcement, so i tend to agree with you. not saying there are not bad cops, i have just not met one.

    3. Re:5 years for assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, cops protect society, mostly from people like you.
      The penalties for assaulting them should be very severe.

      People like me? Really, you're launching into personal attacks?

      Maybe you feel that cops are above criticism? Doesn't that just prove my point?

    4. Re:5 years for assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, cops protect society, mostly from people like you.
      The penalties for assaulting them should be very severe.

      No, actually cops protect the people who have money and power.

      The have-nots are ignored by the police as much and as often as possible.

      If you think the cops are on the side of the common man you are either naive,
      or an idiot, or maybe you are a cop yourself and engaged in self-delusion.

      Plenty of cops are assholes. I've met more than a few. The job attracts people who
      have a desire to bully, and the decent people are not attracted to the job, so the very
      job itself self-selects for assholes. And fuck you if you don't agree with me, I could care less
      what some cop-loving twat "thinks".

      capcha = inequity

      The irony doesn't get any better than that.

    5. Re:5 years for assault by N0Man74 · · Score: 1

      Cops have the job to protect the public. Their performance on that job and the amount of corruption that occurs in them carrying out that job varies immensely depending on the individual cop.

    6. Re:5 years for assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      all of my family is in law enforcement, so i tend to agree with you. not saying there are not bad cops, i have just not met one.

      What about all those cops captured on video abusing their authority, lying about the facts, committing crimes, etc.?

    7. Re:5 years for assault by thomasw_lrd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What about all the cops not caught on video abusing their authority, not lying about the facts, not comittig crimes, etc.?

      It's kinda like the IT business, for every time some guy steals all the passwords to San Francisco, there are a hundred thousand of us, that do absolutely nothing wrong.

      Of course there are bad cops, there are also bad pizza delivery drivers, bad waiters, bad soldiers, and so on and so forth.

      It's not like they are politicians or lawyers, where everyone is bad.

    8. Re:5 years for assault by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      This here is a troll thread. See how theyre all ACs? Just back away slowly and dont make eye contact, and you may yet escape with your life.

      Also, all posters are the same person.

    9. Re:5 years for assault by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      That's great and all, but when saying "wait, what?" is construed as "resiting arrest" we have a problem.

      I like cops, in general. They fill a very important role and the ones I've delt with have been pleasant enough. It's the assholes who abuse the system that are the problem.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    10. Re:5 years for assault by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 4, Informative

      all of my family is in law enforcement, so i tend to agree with you. not saying there are not bad cops, i have just not met one.

      What about all those cops captured on video abusing their authority, lying about the facts, committing crimes, etc.?

      This comes under "Officers of the law, being from time to time exempt from statutes of the law, must be held to a higher standard than those who are under the law."

      On the other side of the argument:

      There are as of 2006, 683,396 full time state, city, university and college, metropolitan and non-metropolitan county, and other law enforcement officers in the United States. There are approx. 120,000 full time law enforcement personnel working for the federal government adding up to a total number of 800,000 law enforcement personnel in the U.S.

      --answers.com

      How many cases of cops abusing their authority etc. have we seen?
      http://www.policemisconduct.net/2010-q2-npmsrp-national-police-misconduct-statistical-report/
      3,240 Law enforcement officers cited in recorded police misconduct reports in first half of 2010.

      So, assuming that number is representative, we have approximately 0.8% of all police officers cited in misconduct cases per year. Note that this is *cited* meaning a complaint has been *lodged*. This means it includes unfounded complaints and misses unreported complaints. It also means that 99.2% of police officers are likely operating within their mandate, which means it's easily likely that someone who hangs out with a bunch of cops will never have met one of the "bad" ones.

      That said, being held to a higher standard and actually *being* a higher standard of human being are not the same thing. Due to the stressful type of job policing is and the personality type that gravitates toward the job, there's likely a statistically significant level of abuse that would go unnoticed in most parts of society, but is highly visible and unacceptable here.

    11. Re:5 years for assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not personal when you posted as an anonymous coward. In fact how do we know that you are or are not the OP or the respondent as well, heck I could be all of us.

      Cops are not above criticism but unsupported blanket accusations are not criticism. Just as it would be false to say that all Anonymous Coward posts are made by drunk 12 year old idiots with no clue about anything.

    12. Re:5 years for assault by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Cops have the job to protect the public.

      Not according to the SCOTUS.

      BTW, that is a 7 year old decision, there is absolutely zero excuse for such ignorance at this point. For shame.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    13. Re:5 years for assault by VAXcat · · Score: 1

      If your family was not in law enforcement, it's much more likely you'd have have a bad encounter with a cop. Cops divide people into 3 groups - Cops, Cops' families, and scumbags. If you have cops in your family, you are likely getting a pass on all the bullshit a normal citizen has to put up with from law enforcement.

      --
      There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
    14. Re:5 years for assault by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 1

      It's not like they are politicians or lawyers, where everyone is bad.

      That's an equally ignorant statement by your own logic. I had a rant, but it's not worth the time.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    15. Re:5 years for assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about all the cops not caught on video abusing their authority, not lying about the facts, not comittig crimes, etc.?

      It's kinda like the IT business, for every time some guy steals all the passwords to San Francisco, there are a hundred thousand of us, that do absolutely nothing wrong.

      Of course there are bad cops, there are also bad pizza delivery drivers, bad waiters, bad soldiers, and so on and so forth.

      It's not like they are politicians or lawyers, where everyone is bad.

      That's a stupid comparison. Other folks don't go around with guns and badges, with a gang of others to call upon.

    16. Re:5 years for assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It also means that 99.2% of police officers are likely operating within their mandate

      That doesn't follow from the 0.8%, because (as you mentioned) these are just from the ones that were lodged and every cop that "follows the rules" and covers for a bad cop, is also a bad cop. There are good cops out there, but the US police force is still rotten to the core.

    17. Re:5 years for assault by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      It also means that 99.2% of police officers are likely operating within their mandate

      That doesn't follow from the 0.8%, because (as you mentioned) these are just from the ones that were lodged and every cop that "follows the rules" and covers for a bad cop, is also a bad cop. There are good cops out there, but the US police force is still rotten to the core.

      While very plausible, there is no "US Police Force" -- which is probably why some forces appear to be rather sub-par. When you can have some guy and his brother being the judge and sheriff for a county with minimal outside oversight, even good-intentioned people can mess up.

      Of course, NYC is often cited (along with LA) as the places with rotten cops -- and these are huge forces that should have processes in place to stop most of the malpractice.

      There probably need to be stiffer penalties for covering up a known offense by a fellow officer though.

    18. Re:5 years for assault by DeadCatX2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Any time a "good cop" observes a fellow police officer committing a crime and chooses to do nothing (or worse, publicly campaigns for them to be above the law), then they are no longer a "good cop".

      Here's my opinion.

      You're a cop, and you get caught breaking the law? You lose your pension.

      You know a cop broke the law, and you didn't turn him in? You lose your pension.

      You know a cop broke the law, and you *did* turn him in? You get his pension added to yours.

      Implement this system and watch how fast the cops begin policing themselves.

      --
      :(){ :|:& };:
    19. Re:5 years for assault by houghi · · Score: 1

      So, assuming that number is representative, we have approximately 0.8% of all police officers cited in misconduct cases per year.

      So is this more or less that the average?

      And what are *unfounded* complaints? Are they really unfounded or are they the ones where they were found not-guilty or those who were dropped.

      Without any serious comparison, the number means nothing. It is as if you are comparing Windows and Linux installations.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    20. Re:5 years for assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it's the 99% that make the other 1% look bad.

    21. Re:5 years for assault by Sollord · · Score: 1

      It's a well know fact you have to be evil to run for office and win just like lawyers and anyone with an MBA sell there souls and mothers out for every dime they scrape up

    22. Re:5 years for assault by Sollord · · Score: 1

      So your saying no one has ever lied about something a cop did or said? The cop always did it but he was just found not guilty?

    23. Re:5 years for assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, cops protect society, mostly from people like you.
      The penalties for assaulting them should be very severe.

      No, actually cops protect the people who have money and power.

      The have-nots are ignored by the police as much and as often as possible.

      If you think the cops are on the side of the common man you are either naive,
      or an idiot, or maybe you are a cop yourself and engaged in self-delusion.

      Plenty of cops are assholes. I've met more than a few. The job attracts people who
      have a desire to bully, and the decent people are not attracted to the job, so the very
      job itself self-selects for assholes. And fuck you if you don't agree with me, I could care less
      what some cop-loving twat "thinks".

      capcha = inequity

      The irony doesn't get any better than that.

      I know plenty of cops too. Do you know what I found underneath that uniform you despise so much?

      A man or a woman, just trying to put food on their table by doing their job

      And all people like you do is ask them to NOT do their job ("C'mon man, won't you give me a break..."), and then get fucking pissed when they won't oblige you, and choose to protect their employment instead.

      This is something that fucking gorillas such as yourself who barely made it a rung or two up the evolutionary ladder need to be reminded of.

      Oh, and fuck you very much for assuming I wear a uniform. I don't. I merely have a mutual respect for fellow human beings (at least until I get to know them) unlike your presumptuous ass.

      A "desire to bully". Yeah, that's fucking rich there. Because I know so many cops who instead of wanting a nice quiet uneventful day at work just "desire" to go find some tweaked out ex-murder to go fuck with for no reason. I mean hell, the thought of getting shot or killed practically sounds like fun, right? I'm sure you do this all the time at your job.

    24. Re:5 years for assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cops have the job to protect the public.

      Not according to the SCOTUS.

      BTW, that is a 7 year old decision, there is absolutely zero excuse for such ignorance at this point. For shame.

      Yes, and now thanks to SCOTUS as well, they can strip-search you for *any* offense.

      Link

      "The Supreme Court on Monday ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband."

      So you "assault" a police officer (you may not have even touched him) as he is hassling you for jaywalking, he can arrest you, take you in, and strip search you.

      Perhaps this wheelchair-bound drunken man's "assault" of the officer (swiping at his face as the cop tried to get his jacket off) deserved the cops response? Who really "assaulted" who here?

      Youtube video

    25. Re:5 years for assault by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 2

      Actually, cops protect society, mostly from people like you.

      You made an assumption about someone you don't even know. Do cops protect society? Maybe some. Maybe most. However, not all.

      Of course, some people think the TSA protects society...

      The penalties for assaulting them should be very severe.

      No more severe than assaulting a person that doesn't even have a gun or any real power!

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    26. Re:5 years for assault by nbauman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Maybe it's my observer bias, but that figure sounds too low to me.

      Those reports are only cases that were reported in newspapers. Lots of cases don't get into the newspapers.

      Back in the 1960s, newspapers had a taboo on stories about police abuse. That came up during demonstrations against the war in Vietnam, and counter-culture issues generally. I'd go to a non-violent demonstration, get beaten up by the cops, see other people get seriously injured, pick up the newspapers the next morning, and see a report on the demonstration written exclusively from quotes from the cops, with no mention of police violence. There was a newspaper called the East Village Other that used to print photographs of cops beating up demonstrators that the regular newspapers wouldn't print.

      One reason for that was that the cops supplied reporters with news about crime, and the reporters didn't want to alienate their sources.

      The cops used to beat up black people all the time. It was only when they started beating up privileged white kids that it became an issue.

      The big change came in the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, where Mayor Daley decided that the First Amendment didn't apply to people who disagreed with him. The great thing was that a lot of the out-of-town reporters -- the same guys who had been ignoring police brutality up to then -- got their own asses kicked by the cops. It was in all the national newspapers, in Life magazine, on TV. It sort of broke the taboo.

      But if you get beaten up by the cops, even if you file a complaint, and you call up a newspaper reporter to tell him about it, the chances of his doing a story about it are pretty low. A lot of these caught-on-video cases didn't make it into the newspapers until the video came out.

      Here in New York City, there was lots of police misconduct during political demonstrations -- against the Iraq war, against the Republican Convention, and now Occupy Wall Street. Now a lot of it is caught on video. They even had a high-level office, Anthony Bolognia, get caught on video spraying protesters who were obeying all the laws.

      And in my personal contact with cops on the street, I've found a lot of them to be rude, abusive bullies. I approach a cop in with a polite request, and his attitude to me is, "fuck off."

      So you get points for looking up the data. Next step -- validating the data. I think the misconduct rate is much higher.

    27. Re:5 years for assault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've known quite a few cops, a Sheriff, some deputies and a couple of Feds as well.
      And you know what? There are good ones, bad ones and mediocre ones, just like the rest of the people in this world.

      Unfortunately, some of the good ones slide into mediocrity after getting burned out in the first 13 to 15 months on the job.

      Then they start taking the easy way out.

      It takes a strong personality with an overpowering sense of justice to remain a good one in today's society.

      Let the good ones know you appreciate them, report the mediocre ones, and contact the feds about the bad ones.

    28. Re:5 years for assault by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I'm more shocked that he got 5 years for assaulting a police officer. Seriously?
      I'm shocked, too. Around here, you can get thrown in jail for life for shooting and killing a gun wielding robber. I can't imagine what they would do if you assaulted a police officer.
      Of course, what they mean by assaulting a police officer is that he probably accidentally stepped on the officer's foot while being pushed into the cop car.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    29. Re:5 years for assault by steelfood · · Score: 2

      What about all the cops not caught on video abusing their authority, not lying about the facts, not comittig crimes, etc.?

      Funny you should phrase it that way. Whether it was caught on video or not still makes it a crime, or at least a perversion of the justice system. That it's not provable only means that it cannot be proven and said offender cannot be found guilty in a court of law, not that it didn't occur or that it wasn't a perversion of justice.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    30. Re:5 years for assault by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      Good point, since there's no such thing as the EFF, ACLU or any of the many firms specializing in protecting people against predatory business practices.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    31. Re:5 years for assault by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      Definitely partially true at minimum. I've seen people get out of party ordinance citations and moving violations just by virtue of bringing up their cop dads.

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    32. Re:5 years for assault by euroq · · Score: 1

      I personally have a friend/acquaintance from high school who became a cop after he and some friends were busted by two cops at a standard high school party (nothing really bad going on, probably some drinking or whatever). He decided to become a cop after that incident because he wanted the power and fun that those cops had.

      No, he doesn't want to get shot or killed at, but yes, he did become a cop because he had a "desire to bully".

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
  6. Yet another misleading headline. by Nutria · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's not selling pirated movies, it's selling pirated movies on an industrial scale, which is *completely* different from sharing a dozen MP3s.

    --
    "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    1. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah that only gets you millions of dollars in fines.

    2. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by taustin · · Score: 3, Informative

      Indeed. And I notice the /. summary, while it mentiones the 10,500 pirated disks they caught him with, doesn't mention the copying equipment. He was clearly in the business of piracy.

      Yeah, it's a long sentence for a white collar crime, but so was Bernie Madoff's 150 years, and many of the same people complaining this is too long complained that Madoff got off too easy.

      It's only a long sentence if you approve of the crime of commercial copyright infringement.

    3. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by jon3k · · Score: 1

      And he was a third time offender. Three strikes law, and all.

    4. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      Who sells pirated movies on non-industrial scale? Do you know any one who does? To me, "selling" made it pretty clear what the story was about.

    5. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's only a long sentence if you approve of the crime of commercial copyright infringement.

      Strawman argument. False dichotomy.

    6. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Absolutely.Geek · · Score: 2

      Agreed but getting 15 years for selling pirated material is retarded.....in fact getting any jail time is just wrong. Confiscate all his shit and smack him with a big fine. Will it stop him doing it, probably not but there have to be better uses for that prison cell.

      As the above post points out this is more time then the average rape sentence.... and no matter how you play it piracy (not the type on the high seas) is NOT worse then rape. Or for that matter a bunch of other violent crimes which have sentences are around the same duration.

    7. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because he understood that the only way to combat the RIAA was to undermine their business model ;-)

    8. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did he have 10,500 physical discs or just that many titles downloaded to his hard drive? Was the copying equipment multiple banks of burners or just his personal computer's DVD drive?

    9. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Nutria · · Score: 1

      Who sells pirated movies on non-industrial scale?

      The same kind of people who sell anything on a non-industrial scale? (Low-volume cottage industries do still exist...)

      Do you know any one who does?

      That would require me to know someone who sells pirated movies.

      To me, "selling" made it pretty clear what the story was about.

      Right. But the implied outrage attempts to link this guy with some shlub music sharer.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    10. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Synerg1y · · Score: 2

      Ok... I'm anti-RIAA and all, but... this one is real easy to relate to, if he was stealing bikes & selling them for profit, with 2 priors, would it be fair to say he's a career bike thief? I think so.

    11. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Kjella · · Score: 1

      And I notice the /. summary, while it mentiones the 10,500 pirated disks they caught him with, doesn't mention the copying equipment.

      I thought that was rather obvious when you have 10k discs, seriously who burns that one by one in a CD/DVD burner?

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    12. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      To me, "selling" made it pretty clear what the story was about.

      Right. But the implied outrage attempts to link this guy with some shlub music sharer.

      Could you refer to the phrase that implies the connection with a shlub music sharer. The title clearly does not. How much more clear can it be when it says "selling"

    13. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Kittenman · · Score: 1

      And he was a third time offender. Three strikes law, and all.

      That's it. He didn't get 15 years without the option for selling pirated whatever. He got 15 years for being in trouble with the law - sufficiently - three times.

      He might have got picked up for shoplifting a twinkie, or something, and still got 15 years. But then it wouldn't be here on slashdot...

      --
      "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
    14. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Nutria · · Score: 1

      This is /., where the default assumption is that the Mafiaa is *always* wrong.

      --
      "I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
    15. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      It's only a long sentence if you approve of the crime of commercial copyright infringement.

      Well, youre posting on slashdot, so all bets are off.

    16. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      This is /., where the default assumption is that the Mafiaa is *always* wrong.

      ...and the default assumption is more often then not correct.

    17. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Absolutely.Geek · · Score: 2

      Ok so sending this guy to prison for years at $40k / yr is better use of taxpayers money then confiscating all his gear and selling it and giving him a big fine (which he wouldn't pay anyway). Maybe forcing him to get a job to pay for food etc...

      But send him to jail and after being in jail for X years, he wont be employable. Likely he is close to unemployable now. He will probably go back to a life of crime, which may well be worse then selling pirated materials.

      I know this has been said on /. many times over but equating the piracy to theft of a physical thing just fails the definition of theft. Theft is the unlawful taking of something from somewhere, in the process depriving someone / group / business the use of that thing. From Wikipedia: "In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it"
      In piracy no one is deprived of anything, describing this guy as a career pirate is probably correct. Since he has one prior regarding selling pirated music. Piracy is a petty crime at best, punishment should reflect the harm done to society / individuals because of the crime.

      I see little actual harm being done here, using the argument "if the punishment is so light then everybody would do it" is invalid. When the punishment is so light it becomes a moral choice, piracy is easy and the likelihood of being caught is very low, thus if you don't pirate it is because you have chosen not to the law is not really a deterrent here. This guy was doing it on a commercial scale and thus should have a harsher punishment but jail time is far in excess of the harm being done.

    18. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That isn't industrial scale. I deal with industry and 10k of an item is pittance. Now if you said he had 10k of each of those movies then maybe we could start calling it industrial scale. This was small time stuff. It's like a small business owner's inventory. Not industrial scale by a long shot.

      When I go up to companies for manufacturing 99% won't even talk to me if I try and order a mere 10k of any particular item.

    19. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by ClioCJS · · Score: 1
      He sold 5 discs. The 10,000 in his house could just be his personal collection. If you backup a netflix movie (8G) to a DVD-4 you're gonna need 2 discs if you insist on no compression. If you keep 2 copies of everything, it's now 4 discs. And 1080p rips are often >8G.

      2500 movies in a personal collection is not at all unheard of.

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    20. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't all these logical fallacies require an underlying, provable truth? "Long sentence" is entirely subjective, therefore I think fallacies are legit...

    21. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      The 15 years is cumulative; six counts of rape or any other violent crime would get way more than 15 years (probably six consecutive life sentences for a third-strike offender if I'm reading it right, but IANAMSL), so the direct comparison to a single count is somewhat misleading. Debate over whether a custodial sentence is justified in this instance aside, we could limit the terms for an indefinite number of non-violent crimes to less than the minimum for a single violent crime, but since that's effectively offering a bulk discount anyone breaking a law would have to be pretty stupid not to do it on a grand scale. Of course, that's one way of cutting down the number of petty crooks...

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    22. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by bzipitidoo · · Score: 1

      You can't compare physical property, such as bikes, with data. What muddies the picture is the accused ran an operation to produce physical copies. Did he pass off his copies as genuine items, complete with shrink wrapped jewel cases and printed covers that cannot be easily distinguished from genuine items? That's counterfeiting, which ought to be treated differently. The article doesn't say. Even if he did that, 15 years is much too harsh. The industry keeps trying to conflate copying, stealing, and counterfeiting.

      There's another issue here: destructive court actions. Others have already pointed out that the sentence is disproportionately high. But what I find very bad about this is the waste of 15 years of someone's life over a petty white collar crime. They got him for selling just 6 items. What's the punishment for shoplifting those same 6 items? No one was physically injured. No one lost anything-- thousands of people did not lose their homes to fraud. This did not cause the economy to tank. Jail time for this is ridiculous. Mozillo didn't get any jail time, why should this guy? (Though, my opinion is that Mozillo should be in jail.) Fine him for a percentage of the profits he made (100%? 120%?), and let him go on his way.

      In addition to the entirely inappropriate jail time, the court is likely to order destructive remedies such as the shredding of all the media. 10000 discs is a lot of plastic. What a waste. They sure don't shred confiscated money. But somehow, acts such as ordering Vonage to stop signing up new customers, or ordering RIM to shut down the Blackberry network are given serious consideration. And there is of course the famous case of Steve Jackson Games, in which they were nearly destroyed by overzealous law enforcement inappropriately holding their equipment hostage. Many innocent 3rd parties would have been seriously inconvenienced if RIM had been forced to shut their network down. A confiscated car is auctioned off, not sent to the crusher. Something ought to be done to curb courts' powers to destroy business, wealth and unrelated activity and property.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    23. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by houghi · · Score: 1

      http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/wtf-funny-18.jpg?w=500

      And Madoff was the exception because he stole from people who can afford lawyers.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    24. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speak for yourself. Don't think we're a bunch of goose steppers like you.

    25. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by blade8086 · · Score: 1

      Because noone who was mostly broke but can borrow a CD burner from their friend with a laptop ever burned a couple $1 cds to sell to go buy 10x as much worth in groceries?

      really.. wake up. lots of people are broke.

    26. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not selling pirated movies, it's selling pirated movies on an industrial scale, which is *completely* different from sharing a dozen MP3s.

      Yeah, sorry about not catching that. In any other forum, 10,500 CD's would seem rather "industrial".

      To us Nerds, that's merely last years porn archive.

    27. Re:Yet another misleading headline. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Don't all these logical fallacies require an underlying, provable truth?

      He said, "It's only a long sentence if you approve of the crime of commercial copyright infringement." That is indeed a false dilemma even if "long sentence" is subjective. The problem is he's saying that either you approve of the crime of commercial copyright infringement and believe the sentence is too long, or you disapprove of the crime of commercial copyright infringement and think it's just right/too short. You can be against copyright infringement but still believe that the punishments don't fit the crime.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  7. Meanwhile, in South Africa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A woman got sentenced to 12 years in prison today for brutally murdering her five children. She stabbed four of them with a knife, and drowned the other. And yet here we are, where some guy in Mississippi gets three years more for selling pirated goods. Who's the greater danger to society?

    1. Re:Meanwhile, in South Africa... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A woman got sentenced to 12 years in prison today for brutally murdering her five children. She stabbed four of them with a knife, and drowned the other. And yet here we are, where some guy in Mississippi gets three years more for selling pirated goods. Who's the greater danger to society?

      Unless the lady on a completely different fucking content somehow ends up here, the guy selling copies of other people's shit. Hands Down.
      Look, I'm all for IP reform but you have to draw the line at straight up ripping someone else's disc and then selling it. The artists don't see anything from those sales, and it counts as a "lost sale" as well, even if only counted at a discount/bargain rate.
      Does it merit 15 years? Well he's a convicted felon who also had an assault rifle he wasn't supposed to have, one conviction for assault on a Cop, and a prior counterfeit charge. Maybe it doesn't deserve 15, but then again that other lady doesn't deserve only 12... unless there's more to that sentence which you're not telling us.

    2. Re:Meanwhile, in South Africa... by pregister · · Score: 1

      Does she have any more kids?

  8. No sympathy here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He got caught selling pirated content - the 15 year term might be harsh, but I doubt it would have been as tough if it didn't seem like he was intent on mass-producing and selling.

    1. Re:No sympathy here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My sentiments exactly. Selling bootlegs for profit is a vastly different thing than pirating for personal consumption.

      I tell this to DJ's too - they're complete idiots if they charge for their DJing services and play pirated music, but it's pretty commonplace.

    2. Re:No sympathy here by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Even if they buy legitimate CD's, DJ's are still required to pay performance royalties for each song they play, the amount depending on roughly the number of people at the event.

    3. Re:No sympathy here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only in ridiculous countries like Germany or when playing music from silly big name labels. This is not the case with most underground dance music where since it's pretty much only DJs who buy anything at all, purchasing in any form includes public performance rights.

  9. Jerks like this by jimmifett · · Score: 1

    There is a jerk like this at the local grocery store every weekend selling cheap rips of current movies out of a shopping cart right under the No Soliciting and No Loitering sign. No one else cares because, well it's, Miami, hardly anyone speaks english at that store (much to my annoyance) or cares much about anything.

    Personal use is one thing, outright selling pirated discs is another.

    P.S.
    MPAA, I hate you. Please burn and die.

    But, if you are by chance reading, this jerk operates at the Publix on sw 132 and 8th street during weekends. Throw away the key.

  10. However... by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I RTFA this morning. This isn't Joe Blow getting a few movies from the pirate bay, this is a counterfeiter. Copyright infringement isn't theft, but I'd say this is, as the criminal is getting the money that should have gone to the movies' producers.

    Also, the guy was imprisoned for the very same offence before, as well as going to prison for some violent crimes.

    This isn't Joe Nerd getting fifteen years for sharing movies, it's Joe Beentoprison making money off of someone else's work.

    1. Re:However... by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      All that considered the punishment is still overly severe. 15 years for non-violently misappropriating a couple thousand dollars? The amount that this person "stole" wouldn't even pay for one year of his imprisonment.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:However... by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      A couple thousand dollars? When someone has industrial-grade copying equipment and over 10,000 discs of illicitly copied material that is clearly intended to be sold, I seriously doubt there were only a few thousand dollars at stake. It's one thing to share a few songs online. It's something else entirely to sell them for enough profit that you can making a living off of the illegal proceeds.

    3. Re:However... by Firethorn · · Score: 2

      a couple thousand dollars?

      10k discs, if we figure $3/pop*, that's $30k worth of pirated materials, or enough for 'grand theft auto' of a new vehicle. And that was his active stock. Most stores turn that over in, what, about a month? Of course, that would be approximately 60 discs/hour if he was running a retail store, so I figure he was producing/distributing the stuff to street venders who'd actually sell to the public(and rat him out when they're busted for selling forged discs). Figure $1/profit a disc for him - that's $120k of income a year.

      Hardly a 'few thousand', I'd say.

      *Going rate over in the desert for 'bootleg' stuff is ~$3/disc.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    4. Re:However... by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, but I don't understand why this would be theft while the usual (somebody/site sharing movies for free) would not.

      The usual arguments for why that isn't theft are, among other:
      1. The product wasn't stolen, they still have it and can do with it what they want - including sell it.
      2. People who download it wouldn't have bought it anyway or at least not at that price, or at that venue, etc. etc.

      Those same arguments still apply here. The only difference is that the guy made money from doing so.

      Then again, that could be reflected back to binaries 'news' servers that charge e.g. $8/month subscription, or torrent indexing sites with ads. ( I know, I know... the torrent indexing site doesn't actually host the files. So if this guy had an accomplice who would point to the guy whenever somebody asked them where to find a particular movie and only the accomplice would receive money.... etc. Oh, the hum^H^H^Hanalogy. )

    5. Re:However... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All that considered the punishment is still overly severe. 15 years for non-violently misappropriating a couple thousand dollars? The amount that this person "stole" wouldn't even pay for one year of his imprisonment.

      It smells like a plea bargain to me, he was a felon in possession of an assault weapon. In addition, the repeat crimes and the cop assault. They probably scared him with some kind of "One of the IP's in the swarm belonged to blah terrorist blah blah blah" I'm guessing he'll be able to get early release for good conduct, IANAL but usually nonviolent stuff like this gives him parole in something like 3-5 years if he's a good boy in the 'can.

    6. Re:However... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is small scale operation. I can't even order 10k of the majority of my product from an industrial manufacturer. He probably didn't have 10K of one particular movie. While $120,000 in sales might seem like a lot to you it's not exactly huge and a 15 year sentence is unreasonable. Seize his assets (after a conviction) and throw him jail for a year. If you want more than damages then make it punitive and put him away for two or three years. It'll be stealing his income and probably considerably more than what he made.

    7. Re:However... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The term the both of you seem to be looking for is 'fraud'.

    8. Re:However... by TFAFalcon · · Score: 1

      Except that the people DID buy it. So they were obviously willing to give money for the product.

    9. Re:However... by blade8086 · · Score: 2

      ok - so lets double it, since thats still within margins.

      So - someone owning and operating a quarter mil/year, multi tier, criminal organization that likely 'employs' (and encourages criminality) among probably 20-50 'employees' who is also a repeat offender with violent tendencies and is secondarily violating their existing parole in other categories such as firearm posession, etc, shouldn't be given the max?

      Lets substitute the same dollar figure and number of employees for heroin, or gamboling, or prostitution, or even microbrewing beer illegally if those examples are too controversial for you.. and would you still say 15 is too much then? One year for running a small gang of 'insert X here' with multiple priors? you're nuts.

    10. Re:However... by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

      Of course they were willing to give money. You'll find that from most pirates. They're perfectly willing to give money. Just not the $25 they want. They'd be happy to spend, say, $2 if it were an online movie download. But it's not an online movie download. So this guy, maybe he was selling them for $20. So people were willing to spend $20, not the $25. You still can't claim that $20 was 'stolen' as they're not offering it for $20 so they would never have gotten the $20.

      Or perhaps they would be willing to spend $25, but not at Amazon, or at Best Buy, or whathaveyou - but they're perfectly willing to pay it at the street corner where this guy was, because it was more convenient.

      Quite basically, you can't rationally say it's not theft when there's no direct exchange of money, and then say it is theft when there is, or you'd have to consider whether it's $0.01 that makes it theft, or $fullprice that makes it theft, or somewhere in between - and then exactly at which point that would be.

    11. Re:However... by Dodgy+G33za · · Score: 1

      Interesting moral stance, and one that makes little sense ethically. Either a persons intellectual work is protected, in which case you should not copy it without paying the person a fee, or it isn't, in which case you can make 1 or 1000 copies.

      You might try to argue the "I wouldn't have bought it anyway so there is no loss" argument, but that may well apply to all of this guys customers.

      Personally I don't think there should be such a thing as intellectual property. The world needs to come up with another way of rewarding the creators of cultural and scientific artifacts that achieves the aims of creating valuable culture without preventing the wide dissemination of said culture. We already have Arts Councils, and kickstarter doing just this. Remember, where there is demand, there will be supply, and supply may require those creating culture to get paid.

      If we remove these laws it will be corporations that lose out, not people.

    12. Re:However... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I RTFA this morning. This isn't Joe Blow getting a few movies from the pirate bay, this is a counterfeiter. Copyright infringement isn't theft, but I'd say this is, as the criminal is getting the money that should have gone to the movies' producers..

      I see. Considering the money trail alone, tell me something. How is 10,500 pirated CDs in the possession of one man any different than 10,500 people in possession of one pirated CD? In either case, the producer is still left sans payment.

      Sorry, but false logic is false.

    13. Re:However... by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      I RTFA this morning. This isn't Joe Blow getting a few movies from the pirate bay, this is a counterfeiter. Copyright infringement isn't theft, but I'd say this is, as the criminal is getting the money that should have gone to the movies' producers..

      I see. Considering the money trail alone, tell me something. How is 10,500 pirated CDs in the possession of one man any different than 10,500 people in possession of one pirated CD? In either case, the producer is still left sans payment.

      Sorry, but false logic is false.

      In one, RIAA would like to fine one guy for what those other 10,499 did, too. In the other, not only is one guy breaking the law 10,500 times, those he would have sold to would have been breaking the law, as well, unwittingly or not. That's the difference.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    14. Re:However... by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      I RTFA this morning. This isn't Joe Blow getting a few movies from the pirate bay, this is a counterfeiter. Copyright infringement isn't theft, but I'd say this is, as the criminal is getting the money that should have gone to the movies' producers.

      Interesting, so you do consider it theft if they are making money but not if they are doing it altruistically.

      And who says there are no lefties in america? :)

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    15. Re:However... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      2. People who download it wouldn't have bought it anyway

      That's the crux of the matter. They DID buy it, only from the bootlegger rather than WalMart. The money the bootlegger got belonged to the producers is why it's theft. The bootlegger didn't steal a movie, he stole money in a roundabout way.

    16. Re:However... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      15 years for non-violently misappropriating a couple thousand dollars?

      He'd already spent a year in prison for the same damned thing. How would another year alter his behavior? I would aggree with you if he was a first time offender, but he wasn't. Hold up a liquor store and you might get off with a couple of years, do it again when you get out and you're looking at a far longer sentence. And robbing a liquor store nets a lot less cash than this guy got.

    17. Re:However... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You might try to argue the "I wouldn't have bought it anyway so there is no loss" argument, but that may well apply to all of this guys customers.

      But they did buy it, that's the point. You can't say that with a Pirate Bay download.

      Personally I don't think there should be such a thing as intellectual property.

      I never heard the term "intellectual property" before the Bono Act, which is what's wrong with copyright -- it lasts way too long. Art is stagnating; it's like science and tech, in that everything new comes from something old. Imagine how technology would stagnate if patents lasted as long as copyrights?

      If we remove these laws it will be corporations that lose out, not people.

      No, people will lose out, corporations will be strengthened. If I write a book without copyright protection, how many copies could I sell compared to Barnes and Noble or Amazon? In times past a musician couldn't cut a record without a label, because it was hugely expensive. Technology has changed that, and as a result the record companies are in trouble. I know musicians personally who have told RIAA lables to fuck off when they tried to sign them; they don't need them. But if there was no copyright, they would need no contract, just press a few hundred thousand disks they copied from the intependant's disk.

      Copyright is to protect authors from publishers. When the US first enacted copyright, they didn't honor British copyrights, so publishers didn't publish books by American authors.

    18. Re:However... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Interesting, so you do consider it theft if they are making money but not if they are doing it altruistically.

      Yes. The money he made on the counterfeits is money that would have been spent on legit copies had the counterfeiter not been there, quite unlike a download.

    19. Re:However... by QuasiSteve · · Score: 1

      But they wouldn't have given that money to the producers because the producers weren't offering their product at a price / time / place that the buyers were comfortable with.

      I'll just refer you to my earlier reply to somebody with much the same argument:
      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3249443&cid=41976693

    20. Re:However... by euroq · · Score: 1

      Regardless of the fighting the criminal act, the loss incurred by 10,000 discs of illicitly copied material is much, much, much less than the cost it will take to house a prisoner in America for 15 years.

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
    21. Re:However... by euroq · · Score: 1

      1. That's figuring that this guy was good enough to sell 120,000 discs in a year. I, and you probably, highly doubt that.
      2. How much does it cost society to house this guy in a prison for 15 years?

      I don't think what he did was right. My problem is that our society is spending our money incorrectly.

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
    22. Re:However... by euroq · · Score: 1

      Dude, don't be a dumbass. You can't compare distributing heroin, gambling, and prostitution as a similar crime which deserves the same sentence.

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
    23. Re:However... by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      Interesting, so you do consider it theft if they are making money but not if they are doing it altruistically.

      Yes. The money he made on the counterfeits is money that would have been spent on legit copies had the counterfeiter not been there, quite unlike a download.

      Do you not think that some of the people who download stuff for free would have bought it had they been unable to download it?

      I have had this debate with you before but that seems to be the main point we differ on as I think some of the people who download stuff would actually pay for it if they were forced to. It is probably a much smaller percentage though than if they bought it illegally.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    24. Re:However... by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Sure, but where are you going with that logic? Are you suggesting we implement the death penalty for copyright infringement in order to cut costs? Or that we should reduce punishments such that they cost no more than the monetary impact caused by their criminal activities? If neither, then I don't see why the cost matters, except as an indictment of how expensive it is to house criminals.

    25. Re:However... by euroq · · Score: 1

      The cost matters as it relates to the severity of the crime. Why should we spend a hundred thousand dollars to imprison someone who has stolen a loaf of bread? I am not implying that we should never spend more on fighting crime than the cost of the crime, but instead take a look at that particular law which landed a guy in jail for 15 years for the theft of a few thousand dollars.

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
    26. Re:However... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Do you not think that some of the people who download stuff for free would have bought it had they been unable to download it?

      Not all, certainly, but I think most.

      I think some of the people who download stuff would actually pay for it if they were forced to.

      Perhaps most, but it's impossible to test.

  11. Guess it's too dangerous to have ANY **AA content by DCFusor · · Score: 1

    So, burn all your CD's and DVDs, go get a life and forget worrying about this mafia outfit entirely. Then they'll have to do like the cops do - "find" some coke or pot they dropped on your property when it turns out you're not actually guilty. Step it up a notch.

    --
    Why guess when you can know? Measure!
  12. Check the marina by Cid+Highwind · · Score: 1

    I wonder how much of his sentence can be attributed to his priors rather than to other factors.

    It's Mississippi. You should be wondering how much of this can be attributed to the cop or the prosecutor suddenly happening upon some money innocently left behind by an RIAA lawyer at one of their meetings. Either of them bought a new boat lately?

    --
    0 1 - just my two bits
  13. Something does not add up in the summary... by AttyBobDobalina · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Because no one would "plead guilty" in exchange for a 15 year sentence. That's not much of a plea bargain. The article mentioned seizures of weapons as well. Missouri has some form of "three strikes" law, which uses the phrase "prior and persistent offender." One wonders whether this sentence was lighter than what might have resulted had he been charged for gun possession.

    1. Re:Something does not add up in the summary... by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Something does not add up in the summary because no one would "plead guilty" in exchange for a 15 year sentence. That's not much of a plea bargain.

      Actually it does.

      Every person convicted in this state of a felony who shall have been convicted twice previously of any felony or federal crime upon charges separately brought and arising out of separate incidents at different times and who shall have been sentenced to and served separate terms of one (1) year or more in any state and/or federal penal institution, whether in this state or elsewhere, and where any one (1) of such felonies shall have been a crime of violence shall be sentenced to life imprisonment, and such sentence shall not be reduced or suspended nor shall such person be eligible for parole or probation.

      Assaulting a police officer 17 years ago counts as violent, the year in house arrest was his second strike, this is his third strike so if it went to trial he'd go away for life with no chance of release. Compared to that 15 years is a "good" deal.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:Something does not add up in the summary... by AttyBobDobalina · · Score: 1

      That was my point, however poorly made. The summary's sensationalist tone implied that the sentence was outrageous, but neglected to mention the other possible repercussions. If he was avoiding a three-strikes law as you point out, then it was a good deal.

  14. My sides still hurt from the laughter . . . by mmell · · Score: 2
    “This sentencing demonstrates that theft of intellectual property is treated as a serious crime in Mississippi..."

    s/theft of intellectual property/possession of an intellect/

    Fixed it.

    1. Re:My sides still hurt from the laughter . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I'm sure the guy who still sold bootlegged copies of "Madagascar 3" after already being nailed with a copyright infringement charge was quite intelligent.

    2. Re:My sides still hurt from the laughter . . . by mmell · · Score: 1

      He found a way to make money off of "Madagascar 3", didn't he?

    3. Re:My sides still hurt from the laughter . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It made $735 Million in theaters.

    4. Re:My sides still hurt from the laughter . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes, anything "intellectual" in Mississippi is very rare.

  15. copyright infringement is not theft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He would have gotten less punishment for a simple theft. Copyright infringement is almost as bad as murder, it seems.

  16. jailbait... by Yaa+101 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It seems you got more chance to get a minimal sentence when you shoot your procecutor than copy a few disks.

    This sort of imbalances in the judicial system will cost the country dearly in the end.

    1. Re:jailbait... by Dinghy · · Score: 1

      It seems you got more chance to get a minimal sentence when you shoot your procecutor than copy a few disks.

      10,500 disks is more than a few.

    2. Re:jailbait... by Yaa+101 · · Score: 2

      Shooting somebody is worse than any disks, so yes, a few, compared to your bank manager or other legal thiefs anyway.

    3. Re:jailbait... by Dinghy · · Score: 1

      Shooting somebody is worse than any disks, so yes, a few, compared to your bank manager or other legal thiefs anyway.

      There's no question that murder is worse than mass marketing copied media. I just felt the need to point out that this wasn't just some guy making copies for his friends.

  17. Good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Toss the book at him. This wasn't just some guy downloading a couple of grumble flicks. This was a commercial copyright violator.

    1. Re:Good. by euroq · · Score: 1

      He wasn't a violator. He was a commercial copyright violator!

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
  18. And this is why... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

    Everybody must do their part to eradicate criminal scum like this by simply torrenting their pirated media, rather than propping up the repulsive trade in physical copies sold at retail... The Swarm Needs You to fight piracy today!

  19. It's for our own protection. by edibobb · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Our government must protect us from those sociopathic individuals would would reduce the potential profits of giant music corporations. I feel safe!

  20. No! Context Matters. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Being a two time loser, previously convicted of CD piracy, then caught selling bootleg DVDs with 10,000 more in his posession got him 15 years.

    Context matters, asshats. No matter what your position on piracy is, this twat got what he deserved.

    1. Re:No! Context Matters. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kill yourself.

  21. Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    15 years for pirated movies. I guess the jail industry's PAC money is well spent.

  22. Kinda harsh by cynop · · Score: 1

    Even with prior convictions taken into account we are talking for a financial crime here not a violent one. I wonder if 15 years in prison has any correctional value for someone like him.

      What is the purpose here? To secure the community from the evil he represents or to make sure the producers profit what they should? It seems like he is made to be an example and nothing else.

    For some reason, i can't help but think that this could only happen in the US of A.

    1. Re:Kinda harsh by blade8086 · · Score: 1

      To keep repeat mobsters off the street and from running criminal distribution networks (which, once established, could easily also channel illegal guns, drugs, etc) like he did here?

      No really - creators and operators of medium-scale criminal production facilities are usually shut down wherever they exist, at least until such point that legal system corruption prevents that from happening.

  23. The right target by neghvar1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These are the people the RIAA, MPAA, etc. should be focusing on and suing for the large sums of money. Not the little sharer that makes no money off downloading media.

  24. Law should be turned around. by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

    You should go to jail for the sheer stupidity of BUYING pirated content in the 21st century.

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
    1. Re:Law should be turned around. by blade8086 · · Score: 1

      cheaper than an internet connection, when you are completely broke and have $5 to spend on your 'big night out' - $2 big beer, $1 cigar, $3 pirate movie. bam! yes, people are broke. you are not one of them.

    2. Re:Law should be turned around. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mathematics fail!

  25. Yet another miscomprehension by knarf · · Score: 2

    It is 15 years in prison - who cares about the headline?

    Say that this person has sold for a grand total of $100,000.- (street value) merchandise. For that he'll go to prison for 15 years.

    Now look at how much money the mafiaa has withheld and continues to withhold from those who actually create the product they peddle. Are they going to prison as well? If not, why not? If you want to talk about copyright violation on industrial scale I'd say it does not get bigger than what the mafiaa does.

    --
    --frank[at]unternet.org
  26. Michael Jackson? by Frederic54 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's say...
    Sell a CD copy of Michael Jackson : 15 years in jail
    Kill Michael Jackson : 4 years in jail

    makes sense...

    --
    "Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
    1. Re:Michael Jackson? by wcrowe · · Score: 1

      Good one. Wish I had mod points today.

      --
      Proverbs 21:19
    2. Re:Michael Jackson? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only one person gets to kill michael jackson.. Anyone can copy CDs.

    3. Re:Michael Jackson? by Grayhand · · Score: 2

      Let's say... Sell a CD copy of Michael Jackson : 15 years in jail Kill Michael Jackson : 4 years in jail makes sense...

      It depends which Michael Jackson album we're talking about. Thriller is only worthy of a five year sentence. Bad is definitely worth at least 10 years and anyone that sells an unsuspecting buyer History would get off easy with 15 years.

    4. Re:Michael Jackson? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, he was a child fucker.

    5. Re:Michael Jackson? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sell a CD copy of Michael Jackson : 15 years in jail

      No, set up an industrial shop moving tens of thousands of pirated works. Have record of being prosecuted for the same before, have another conviction for violent crime. Now you get 15 years.

    6. Re:Michael Jackson? by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Let's say... Sell a CD copy of Michael Jackson : 15 years in jail Kill Michael Jackson : 4 years in jail makes sense...

      Well, to be fair, perpetuating his music is the greater crime...

      Kidding. Sheesh. But I do change the radio station whenever his music comes on.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
  27. (Gasp) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Brown guy sells DVDs on street corner.
    Gets busted.
    RIAA claims vast copyright ring was destroyed doing gazillions of damage.
    Business as usual.

  28. Original headline wording by patella.whack · · Score: 2

    This is my first article sumbission to /. Do editors regularly change headlines? There is a huge difference in meaning between the edited headline and the initial wording, IMO. Original wording: "In Mississippi: 15 Year Jail Sentence for Movie and Music Copyright Infringement"

    1. Re:Original headline wording by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the editor did his job for once.
      This guy is a commercial content pirate with a prior criminal record, not some kid sharing files via BitTorrent.

  29. Holy misrepresentation of statistics, Batman! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Says the RIAA: '[This] highlights the fact that the individuals engaging in these activities are frequently serial criminals for whom IP theft is simply the most convenient and profitable way they could steal from others.'

    A single event highlights "the individuals engaging in these activities are frequently serial criminals"? Have these shitheads no shame?

    That's like saying, "a rare, maybe one time event occurred, from this we extrapolate that this is a frequent event.

    This is a sad and pathetic abuse of observations.

    As for "most convenient and profitable way they could steal from others," considering what they charge for shitty movies they crank out by the thousands, I guess they feel stealing from others in this way is THEIR JOB, and that's why their pussies hurt about it.

  30. Slashdot != Law Enforcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But, if you are by chance reading, this jerk operates at the Publix on sw 132 and 8th street during weekends. Throw away the key.

    If you do a cursory internet search, you'll probably find the appropriate place to send this message. Posting on slashdot is going to be only marginally more effective than praying for someone to do something about it, considering that by praying, there is a zero percent chance anything will hear and/or respond to your prayers, (unless some human being overhears you, which is unlikely to happen if you pray silently,) and a fractional percent chance if you post on slashdot.

    To highlight this, let me point out that I would DEARLY love for some gorgeous woman, about college age, to fellate me, and let me fondle her supple young body, then have intercourse with her.

    How likely do you think it is that my having posted this on slashdot alone, will directly result in this happening where if I did not post it such would not happen?

    See? Posting on slashdot isn't going to get anything done. You need to send that message to the correct place, perhaps the FBI.

    1. Re:Slashdot != Law Enforcement by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      To highlight this, let me point out that I would DEARLY love for some gorgeous woman, about college age, to fellate me, and let me fondle her supple young body, then have intercourse with her.

      See? Posting on slashdot isn't going to get anything done. You need to send that message to the correct place, perhaps the FBI.

      Are you sure that FBI is the right place in which to look for such a woman?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Slashdot != Law Enforcement by Megane · · Score: 1

      Are you sure that FBI is the right place in which to look for such a woman?

      You should probably ask General Petraeus about that.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    3. Re:Slashdot != Law Enforcement by hurfy · · Score: 1

      To highlight this, let me point out that I would DEARLY love for some gorgeous woman, about college age, to fellate me, and let me fondle her supple young body, then have intercourse with her.

      See? Posting on slashdot isn't going to get anything done. You need to send that message to the correct place, perhaps the FBI.

      Are you sure that FBI is the right place in which to look for such a woman?

      You need the CIA for that don't you?

  31. Austerity? 15 years = $375,000 that taxpayers pay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Nobody ever talks about the cost of jail. It costs around $25,000 per year to incarcerate someone. Even with parole this would only be reduced to $10,000 a year. I don't want to pay this...do you?

  32. *BIG* difference between selling physical... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ...and downloading electronic.

    One is a profit-driven criminal enterprise, the other is entertainment-driven personal desire.

    Twice I have seen "physical pirates" selling obviously pirated physical copies of movies/music/software for more-than-trivial sums but less than standard retail ($5 for a movie or CD, $20 for normally-much-more-expensive software.) Those I report. Those are the true vultures. Those are the actual *criminals* conducting *criminal* copyright violation. Those are the ones who deserve prison time. (For a first offense, 15 years would be harsh, but it sounds like this guy has other issues that made it higher.)

  33. And everybody knows about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mississippi goddam!

  34. Srsly? by wcrowe · · Score: 1

    People still have CDs? Why wouldn't he just have everything on a little lap top and let people hook up with their flash drives?

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
    1. Re:Srsly? by n30na · · Score: 1

      I would assume that anyone intelligent enough to want/be able to use mp3s would also be smart enough to just go home and torrent it, so they aren't much of a market.

    2. Re:Srsly? by blade8086 · · Score: 1

      s/intellegent/rich/
      s/smart/wealthy/
      s/torrent it/use their income on an internet connection to facillitate torrenting it/

      yes, plenty of people smarter than you are broke.

    3. Re:Srsly? by n30na · · Score: 1

      Considering that loads of places with free wifi exist (even if there are still other cost issues like transportation), it's still more cost effective to just download things if you're going to make effort to get them.. the only thing I could fathom being worth purchasing physical bootlegs of would be hd video content, particularly 1080p content, as going somewhere to download that could be impractical.

      Obviously this requires access to a computer that is not completely locked down, but you'd need one to use mp3s as well.

      It should also be noted that the above is only reasonable for the developed world, but that's what I assume we're talking about given that TFA is about the USA.

    4. Re:Srsly? by Yer+Mom · · Score: 1

      ...assuming that your computer is a laptop.

      Lugging a tower, keyboard and monitor to Starbucks is a bit impractical, and gets you funny looks from the baristas.

      --
      Never mind Spamassassin. When's Spammerassassin coming out?
  35. Gun possession? by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    It's possible that the 'weapons' were non-conforming knives, but that could have been part of the plea - drop the weapons charges, he pleads guilty to the piracy.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  36. and I say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Everybody must do their part to eradicate criminal scum like this by simply torrenting their pirated media, rather than propping up the repulsive trade in physical copies sold at retail... The Swarm Needs You to fight piracy today!"

    oops, I pirated that. Help - someone's knocking at my door....

  37. Let big media die. by hessian · · Score: 1

    We are never going to be able to bust every pirate, or even enough pirates to serve as a deterrent.

    What we're doing instead is trying to really crucify the ones we catch, as a warning to others. That isn't working because the chance of getting caught is so low.

    Instead, we should view media as a market which had a time period in which to be profitable. Before digital copying was easy, media had a monopoly on the means of its delivery and so was able to make profit.

    Now? It's like advertising: you have to give it away for free. That doesn't leave much for your advertisers, and it will cost them even more.

    As a result, the model is dying. Media can't make enough money from their product to cover costs. Right now that's true of news, but soon it will be true of movies and music.

    And so what?

    We're not losing the next Beethoven here. We're losing entertainment for the masses, and we can do that ourselves on a much lower budget. Music, art and news can go back to a normal role as a low-cost local phenomenon.

    Markets periodically foreclose themselves like this. They simply become obsolete. That time has come for media, and we'll all be richer for it.

    1. Re:Let big media die. by Nyder · · Score: 1

      What the fuck are you talking about? Media still makes money just fine. They are unhappy because they want money for every viewing of a program. That is unreal, yet it is what they want. Part of the problem is they didn't jump into the internet age, the other problem is, people are sick of their bullshit. But the media companies are making money just fine.

      Game publishing companies? No, they stupidly adopted the Hollywood method, which is to spend big bucks making just AAA titles, which of course, doesn't work for software publishing, mainly when all the AAA titles are based on hardware that is 5+ years old and technology has rolled way past that.

      The media companies need to accept how they did business is over, it's a new game. And some are, I noticed bluray copies of TV Shows like Sinbad coming out right away at the end of the season. Smart move.

      --
      Be seeing you...
  38. 15 years in Mississippi?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gets a defendant 15 years in Mississippi

    I'd rather go to prison.

  39. Re:Austerity? 15 years = $375,000 that taxpayers p by omnichad · · Score: 1

    And how much government waste is responsible for this? The poverty line is at just over $11,000 for a single person. And yet it costs $25,000 to feed and keep someone in a tiny metal box for a year? The taxpayers shouldn't be outraged at another person in jail so much as for how much our government manages to waste in doing so.

  40. Look at the priors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Assaulting an officer" - i.e. if you commit any more crimes for the rest of your life, they're going to go for the maximum allowable punishment. Does it seem strange to you that otherwise small-time crimes like littering could land you a $5,000 fine and/or a year in jail? Now you know why.

  41. He's lucky he got house arrest for the earlier by nedlohs · · Score: 2

    CD piracy conviction. If that had been a year in prison instead he'd be in for life without the possibility of parole, since combined with the 5 year assault conviction he'd hit Mississippi's version of three strikes: http://www.mscode.com/free/statutes/99/019/0083.htm

  42. Re:frist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Someone, somewhere, is keeping track.

  43. You know what they say about Mississippi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never go there for any reason.

  44. Which Mississippi? by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

    Is this Mississippi in North Korea or Iran? Or maybe China? Because it can't be the Mississippi in America: we're not that extreme, are we? Has America really jumped the shark?

    1. Re:Which Mississippi? by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      The really funny part is that the AG (a Democrat, oddly enough) is a great friend of the trial lawyers who accordingly campaigned on being a populist man-of-the-people type.

  45. Too many laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We've got too many laws and too many prisoners in the US. Did you know there's a 65-year-old guy doing hard time in Federal Prison for the crime of importing orchids without the proper paperwork?
    http://www.economist.com/node/16636027

    1. Re:Too many laws by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet people keep thinking the libertarians are the retarded ones. All the while their democrats and republicans are involved in massive human rights abuses. I'll take the party that isn't going to put innocent people in jail en masse.

  46. 15 long years... by Dahamma · · Score: 1

    ...working on an RIAA chain gang CD duplicator.

  47. "Fair and Balanced" News For Nerds by westlake · · Score: 1

    Most cops are corrupt fascists who bully society. Cops are just a gang.

    The mod-up to "Informative" comes cheap these days.

    After storm, NYC police officers, firefighters leave work to find recovery chaos back home

  48. So all RIAA / MPAA officers should be in prison... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's face it, the RIAA and MPAA are the #1 / #2 Biggest IP Thefts in the fraking Universe.

    Each and every one of their member corporate officers should be serving multiple consecutive life sentences for all the shit they've stolen, lives they've ruined, families they've torn asunder. They're worse than any 100 individuals they've sued, and they have congress backing them up due to all the bribes they've paid out.

    Unconstitutionally extended copyright to infinity due to DMCA laws.
    Failure to pay artists what they are due.
    Twisting every legal term they can to force artists who make them millions of dollars think they owe them instead of being paid by them. Have you seen where they charge the artists for Album Covers, wrappings, shipping and handling charges for digital downloads? WTF?? Seriously?

    Both groups need to be shutdown with EXTREME PREJUDICE, and all of their corporate officers imprisoned if not given lethal injections for all the harm they've caused.

    Let's use the RICO act against them. Hell, let's use the Marines against them - fucking blow the fuckers up.

  49. you sound like you trust the police by Zimluura · · Score: 4, Insightful

    never trust the police. in the united states their goal is to make arrests. if they start talking to you, they're trying to get you to incriminate yourself.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

  50. Parole by mrbrown1602 · · Score: 1

    On a non-violent crime like this, even as a prior and persistent felony offender, he will likely only serve a small percentage of his sentence and be paroled. Just sayin.

  51. Home taping is killing music by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

    so it's really 10,506 counts of murder.

    --
    Nullius in verba
    1. Re:Home taping is killing music by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      so it's really 10,506 counts of murder.

      One man's murder is another man's mercy killing or assisted suicide.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  52. Re:frist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I am! I do have to say that Anonymous Coward is in the lead so far

  53. This Does Not Surprise Me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For one, there is no such thing as intellectual property. This is a lie from the one percent copyright/patent trolls. Second, what other verdict could one expect from a state that has an "awshucks/nascar/racist/GOP" attitude to everything. Really, Mississippi? You should be ashamed of yourselves.

  54. Assault on an officer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes sir, I admit my guilt. I did willfully attack this police officer's fists with my stomach and face.

  55. Re:frist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you care enough to respond, then you care. You care. Sir, YOU care! Carer. You're like a Care Bear.

  56. well i have 10600 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    na naaa naaa naaaaa

  57. In Soviet Russia... by Roachie · · Score: 1

    15 year sentence for BUYING movie!!!!

    --
    This sig is not paradoxical or ironic.
  58. Insanity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The seemingly insane judge is a tool of terror in the justice system. By somewhat randomly slapping a defendant with a severe sentence the notion is that others will not want to play the game and will keep free of crime. It is not just Mississippi that does things like this. Most states seem to have the same types of actions. Imagine a burglar confronting a judge and getting probation and a fine whereas the next burglar who also has no record at all gets twenty years for exactly the same crime.
                    There are people in the US serving life with no hope of parole who have done next to nothing at all. Imagine the teen in Texas who broke into a vending machine, then offered a cop a joint to give him a ride across town. The kid is doing life without any chance of freedom as they classified the joint, offering it as a form of sale, and the vending machine as felonies. The three strike nonsense has taken his life.

  59. WOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A guy over here (New Zealand) got 5 years (will be out in 3) for shooting his girlfriend in the head and killing her.

    So 15 years for piracy?

    3rd strike law being applied I presume?

  60. Who the hell buy pirated movies? by madhi19 · · Score: 1

    Hey dumbass! The internet is full of it. Not to mention all the legal movie service either free or paid for.

  61. Imagine that... by Doctor_Jest · · Score: 1

    the RIAA continues to equate infringement with theft. I for one, am shocked.

    --
    It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
  62. Devolution by Evtim · · Score: 1

    What you describe seems to fit the description of the Ankh-Morpork city watch by the times of young Sam Vimes (see "Night Watch"). Bullies for hire...with some outsourcing (the Unmentionables) going on and privileges for the wealthy individuals or Guilds (corporations).

  63. Easy work around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It can be manipulated to still be constitutional. They should triple all the sentences, and as a condition for a third of the jail time they are on probation and if they commit a crime while on probation they have the remaining sentence applied plus sentences for any new crimes. If they violate probation more than three times, then they simple are not offered the option.

    rape goes to 30 years. you get out in 10. if you do it again, you get the remaining 20 years + another 10 years. Three times and you pretty much have worked it out to be 90 years. The advantage of this is it is a condition of probation, so a serial rapist isn't automatically out of their three strikes if they aren't caught and tried right away. They might end up with 5 counts for 50 years though, which doesn't seem "cruel and unusual" to me. If they get out in 50 years and do it again, then they get to serve the remaining 100 years.

  64. apparently not 3rd strike.. by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    that would be life.

    I'm only going to visit mississippi 2 times!

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  65. Oh yeah sure by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    Because if people haven't learned by the 3rd time, another soft sentence is going to teach them.

    This guy PROFITED from copyright infringement. Not shared, profited. This isn't about using a track on youtube or sharing an album, he ran a business ripping content from others and selling it on. That is a crime in most peoples eyes and gosh, in a democracy, the majority rules.

    Normal people have had it with revolving door criminals, people who just see light jail sentences as the cost of doing business. So, the three strikes rule combines "giving people another chance" with "if you fuck up we lock you up and throw away the key".

    1 offence, another chance.

    Offend again, another chance.

    Offend again, no more chances.

    It ain't that hard and is a decent enough balance between a system where people can better themselves and getting rid of those who can't.

    A recent case in Holland showed a kickboxer who had already been convicted of a mass shooting in a school years ago now succeeding in killing someone in a shooting. The bleeding hearts of course see only two crimes but forget that in Holland, owning a gun is illegal. So, just how many micro-seconds did it take this person to break the law by getting a gun? And continue to break the law every second he had it on him? Including his probation rules?

    Give him another chance? So next time he can kill two people?

    You can see the extremes in Norway, mass murderer will walk free in a decade or two. Because he deserves another chance?

    Fuck that. The average person is sick to dead of the bleeding hearts. Keep breaking the law and society is done with you.

    If you know that with 2 previous convictions any offense is going to land you in jail for a long time and you STILL re-offend, there must be something seriously wrong with you.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  66. Political prisoner by u64 · · Score: 2

    Regardless of the law, this cruel punishment seems very much like it has a political agenda.
    So in my view, Patrick Lashun King is a political prisoner.

  67. I always wanted to know by Shivetya · · Score: 1

    why call it a life sentence if you can be paroled?

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:I always wanted to know by Sqweegee · · Score: 1

      Usually referred to as "faint hope" in Canada... the idea being that if someone is sentenced to life in prison with absolutely no possibility of getting out there is pretty much no reason for them to behave or to not kill themselves. Crime in jail and suicides require additional investigations, court time, cost a lot of money and make things tougher on everyone in the system from guards to other prisoners.

    2. Re:I always wanted to know by DM9290 · · Score: 1

      why call it a life sentence if you can be paroled?

      Because the sentence is for your entire life. Being on parole is essentially early release. You are a prisoner serving your sentence in the community.

      Being on parole is not the same thing as being free. And you aren't automatically granted parole. you need to convince a parole board that you have been rehabilitated and pose no threat to the community. And even then usually restrictions are put on you, and your sentence is not commuted so you can end up back in prison for life for any small transgression.

      --
      No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
  68. Priorities by dreamstateseven · · Score: 1

    Anyone else amused that 75% of the comments all pertain to someone posting "Thank God I don't live in the USA"? Specifically, the use of "God" in that phrase.

  69. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...his priors certainly affected the sentencing. However, since one of the priors was for selling pirated stuff, I think even that would have been enough to send him away for a long while.

  70. Oh...if we could only... by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    Get these sentences for rape, armed robber and other violent crimes.

    The proof is in the pudding. Our judicial system is concerned about profits, and not protecting society.

  71. Big Money Wins Again by halfkoreanamerican · · Score: 1

    That's 1 point for the RIAA and 0 for human rights. Seriously, I am going to be afraid to even think about listening to music as it might be thoughtcrime. It's just music. We can't even get a murderer locked up for 15 years unless he causes the jury to throw up. America is not the free place it used to be.

  72. Meanwhile.. by GigaBurglar · · Score: 1

    Paedophiles get 5 years - and a cushy job, next to a school, when they get out.

  73. All the more reason to visit! by rjgill · · Score: 1

    I was really thinking I'd visit Mississippi soon and see the sights, but now I'm really excited to check out the state knowing they're fighting the good fight and focusing on the REAL issues going on in their state. Hell, I think I may move there now.. maybe raise a family.

  74. Bootlegger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Argh Matey, pirates are so 17th century... The way to make money in Mississippi is to bootleg.

  75. One of the many reason I never go South by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Reason #38746 I never go too far south- the criminal justice system is fucking joke run by a bunch of Good Ole Boys and their cousin / brother-in-laws Good Ole' Hanging Judge Yahoo.

    *shivers*