Giving crooks a free pass just because they have a bad track record in no way excuses what they do.
We have courts for a reason, and extending caveat emptor to requiring people to be omniscient instead of making people accountable for their own words is a travesty against equity and justice.
By the way, the music is ALREADY paid for, since the movie producer most likely had to pay their own royalties to make it part of the movie in the first goddamned place.
Forget about being part of the movie or not, this is just a blatant attempt to double dip, once from the studio and again from the viewer.
Criminals aren't supposed to be above the law either.
And yet, they are in many cases.
I'm not talking about gaps in the legal system either. I'm talking about gaps in the justice system. Where someone actually *does* break a law, but gets away with it, either due to political connections, taking witnesses hostage, bribing the judge, intimidating the jury, making a clean get away by bleaching the crime scene, and so on.
Those are the only cases of vigilante justice I even remotely condone. Breaking an ethical code without breaking an actual law, not so much.
To be blunt, I don't use the ammo box until the soap box and ballot box are both broken and the jury box collapses under my feet.
That would reflect more poorly on a fucked up legal system that punishes people who defend themselves or their kids than it does someone's protective instincts.
In a sane world, people could defend themselves without having to be afraid of going to jail for it.
Slashdot Mirror
Protected Video Path.
MU got nailed because it failed to comply with DMCA takedowns.
I mean, from a technical standpoint, only keeping one copy of a file that is uploaded multiple times is just an optimization.
But it gave the feds the loophole it needed to burn them.
If they expected the client to do their own due diligence then how did they earn the 5 million dollar fee in the first place?
Giving crooks a free pass just because they have a bad track record in no way excuses what they do.
We have courts for a reason, and extending caveat emptor to requiring people to be omniscient instead of making people accountable for their own words is a travesty against equity and justice.
Using lies instead of bullets to rob someone is still called stealing.
Or to put their foot in their mouth by makign the same sort of mistake
My own typo left in on purpose.
They're probably afraid of being sued.
They are, but both cases are also impossible to fight due to a gross imbalance of power.
Just bury it in a subduction zone and let the earth's mantle incinerate it
I would only cut their balls off if they were caught in the middle of the act, as a stopping of the crime in progress.
That still means Obama lied about it.
Because politicians need campaign money to buy their caviar and wine with.
SCOTUS called the spade a spade, and obama said it was a hammer.
He still lied.
Ignorant of the fact that the feds just proved that they'll do whatever the fuck they want to anyway?
I don't call it ignorance, just learned helplessness and acquiescence.
By the way, the music is ALREADY paid for, since the movie producer most likely had to pay their own royalties to make it part of the movie in the first goddamned place.
Forget about being part of the movie or not, this is just a blatant attempt to double dip, once from the studio and again from the viewer.
Criminals aren't supposed to be above the law either.
And yet, they are in many cases.
I'm not talking about gaps in the legal system either. I'm talking about gaps in the justice system. Where someone actually *does* break a law, but gets away with it, either due to political connections, taking witnesses hostage, bribing the judge, intimidating the jury, making a clean get away by bleaching the crime scene, and so on.
Those are the only cases of vigilante justice I even remotely condone. Breaking an ethical code without breaking an actual law, not so much.
To be blunt, I don't use the ammo box until the soap box and ballot box are both broken and the jury box collapses under my feet.
There's nothing wrong with backing banks as long as all we do is keep them from taking their depositors down with them.
The problem with the US system is that we prop up zombies that don't deserve to stay in business.
But protecting innocent depositors is a good thing.
Trials are good, and I love them.
Stopping a crime in progress before they cause irreparable damage can be more important than prosecuting them after the fact though.
Particularly if there's a good chance they can get away scott free.
The only role I see for extra judicial action AT ALL is to plug gaps that the legal system leaves uncovered, but shouldn't.
That would reflect more poorly on a fucked up legal system that punishes people who defend themselves or their kids than it does someone's protective instincts.
In a sane world, people could defend themselves without having to be afraid of going to jail for it.
The only answer is that if the guy who owns the fucking playground doesn't want you on their toys, leave.
I wouldn't kill him, just castrate him.
Castration is also a common state sanctioned punishment for child molestation.
My goal would be not so much to punish him as to prevent him from doing it again.
And then only if his own self restraint failed.
Knowing that it's the TSA they'll probably whip out the state secrets card and have the case dismissed in the interests of national security.
What's much more insidious is that the two party system effectively locks out any little guys that won't accept bribes from corporate america.
It's easier to keep the gravy train from derailing when you don't have any competition with scruples.
Hello mr pedophile.
Congrats on admitting your problem, and I hope you resist the urge to molest a child.
But if I catch you doing it, heaven help the poor sucker who gets between your testicles and my bowie knife.
I too, am a red blooded american, and the parental instinct is very strong and protective.
As long as you keep your hands away from our kids I'll stand up for you though.
And then you have an agency with an incentive to fine someone just to give their own budget a boost.
Better yet is to make all criminal and civil fines devoted to paying off the national debt.