It continues to look as if there's an agreed-upon silence about what would be a troubling matter once again: No one has any difficulty calling this theft yet it is tried as civil matter and not criminal matter. But theft is a criminal act by its nature and the organization that pursued it as a civil matter has not one legal possession of a single copyright-protected item. Fifteen years ago I had a self-delusional belief that as crazy as the other two branches of government got the judicial branch was likely to remain as close to reason and balance in its findings. Well, one final self-delusion was blown to hell.
"Respect the rule of law"? Well, now that the law itself has become an untempered circus of absurdity with no accountability I'm certain no court anywhere will have any trouble obeying in its findings what law it decides its findings are based on. But what law? I don't know but I have a few wild guesses not worth their mention.
But I do still have the entertaining fantasy of bringing a goose into a bakery to see how a court would adjudicate that act legally and, in fact, I would do exactly that were it practicable. Possibly something else of equal importance that is actually is feasible is what I ought to be looking into, whatever that might be.
If one thing can be said with certainty it is that long ago the "FUD" became a parody of itself. Most of what it dealt with has been intangible and, in so many mockeries of itself regarding unauthorized duplication everyone continues to refuse to see the free advertising it has both prohibited and generated. The "FUD" has been bizarre from the start and has only becomes crazier and crazier.
Slashdot Mirror
It continues to look as if there's an agreed-upon silence about what would be a troubling matter once again: No one has any difficulty calling this theft yet it is tried as civil matter and not criminal matter. But theft is a criminal act by its nature and the organization that pursued it as a civil matter has not one legal possession of a single copyright-protected item. Fifteen years ago I had a self-delusional belief that as crazy as the other two branches of government got the judicial branch was likely to remain as close to reason and balance in its findings. Well, one final self-delusion was blown to hell. "Respect the rule of law"? Well, now that the law itself has become an untempered circus of absurdity with no accountability I'm certain no court anywhere will have any trouble obeying in its findings what law it decides its findings are based on. But what law? I don't know but I have a few wild guesses not worth their mention. But I do still have the entertaining fantasy of bringing a goose into a bakery to see how a court would adjudicate that act legally and, in fact, I would do exactly that were it practicable. Possibly something else of equal importance that is actually is feasible is what I ought to be looking into, whatever that might be.
If one thing can be said with certainty it is that long ago the "FUD" became a parody of itself. Most of what it dealt with has been intangible and, in so many mockeries of itself regarding unauthorized duplication everyone continues to refuse to see the free advertising it has both prohibited and generated. The "FUD" has been bizarre from the start and has only becomes crazier and crazier.