Ridiculous unless what we're punishing is the wrongful obtaining of a thing of value (rather than wrongfully depriving another of a thing of value). There's an important distinction there.
If that's the case, then shouldn't we compensate the property owner for the value of the wrongfully taken property? Of course, the flip side is that then the person who's taken the property probably ought to be allowed to keep it.
Actually, I think the calculation of value is based on fair market value. That means the calculation is based on what you'd pay to legally purchase the product.
The fact that folks who illegally download music probably wouldn't buy it if given the chance isn't really much of a distinction. Folks who steal cars probably wouldn't buy them if given the chance either.
That's the whole point of downloading it illegally, right?
Actually, I think it's not so much of a matter of turning to electronics for comfort as it is a matter of using electronics as a distraction from a frightening and potentially painful situation. Mom and Dad are still the best source for comfort.
I don't think there's anything wrong with using electronics as a distraction. In fact, I think that's probably the best use for them.
Yeah, but relatively speaking there's a substantial difference between a foam disc launcher and a shotgun.
Based on the hypo in the great-granparent, I'll stand by my position that you'd be hard pressed to find a jury that's going to find foam discs to be unreasonable.
Probably not. Generally, you can use force to defend your home. You just can't use unreasonable force.
Here, the intruder would have to show that the use of the sentrybot constituted an unreasonable risk of physical harm. Frankly, I doubt any jury in the country would go for that, especially when the person who's suing was illegally breaking into the protected home.
The legal system doesn't blame video games. Politicians blame video games. Society blames video games. Murderers blame video games. The legal system generally says, you did the crime, you're going to do the time. In a court of law, it's utterly irrelevant that someone plays video games or dressed up like pikachu before going on a six-state killing spree.
What matters is what did the defendant do, and what was his or her mental state at the time.
A prosecutor can't aim for a higher sentence on appeal, it's against the law. Every criminal defendant has a due process right to have his or her conviction reviewed by an appellate court. If the prosecutor could go for a greater penalty on appeal, it would be an unfair burden on the exercise of the right.
Also consider how the jury reached the value of the punitive damages, and why they did.
McDonalds lowballed this woman on her medical bills. That's all she wanted from them; the cost of her stay in the hospital.
So, her lawyers asked the jury to punish McDonalds by fining them the profits they would have made on coffee sales for the amount of time she was in the hospital.
Punitive damages aren't about making the plaintiff rich. They are about punishing the defendant for unreasonably risky conduct.
Bullshit. Class action lawsuits are a vehicle for people with piss pot, chump change claims to band together and go after the bastards who've screwed them out of their money.
There's no way I'd sue MS over $149.99. Even if I did, MS wouldn't care. But when me and 10,000 of my friends get together and sue MS for $1.5M, and trebel damages under the relevant consumer protection act, they're going to notice (not much, but some).
Sure, I may have to give up 33% of my recovery to a lawyer. But for my $50, I've gotten an attorney to take my case to trial. Try doing that for less than $25,000.
Caveat Emptor-- That's the crap that inspired Congress to pass the Magnusson-Moss consumer protection laws. Modern American commerce has little in common with Adam Smith's captialism.
Today, you deal with a retail, who dealt with a wholesaler, who dealt with a manufacturer. Because the manufacturer doesn't know you, he doesn't give two shits about you.
In good ole' Adam Smith's day, you dealt with a manufacturer. If the product didn't work, you told your neighbors about the shoddy workmanship, sued the manufacturer to get your money back, and watched the bastard go out of business.
My wife and I registered for an Xbox for our wedding. She wanted a DVD player. I wanted Steel Batallion, Halo, and JSRF.
Six months after the wedding, it died. We were watching some dumb movie we'd rented, and it froze up. From that point on, it wouldn't re-boot, and it wouldn't eject the disc drive.
Remember how we were watching a rented movie?
It cost us $153.00 to have it repaired. This was just after the Xbox mark down, so a new Xbox would have cost only $199.99.
Fortunately, the folks at Blockbuster were quite reasonable, and decided not to charge us late fees for the two months it took for the Xbox service center to figure out that the logic board had died. Eventually, we got the Xbox and the movie back.
Also, we were fortunate because once the repair work was done, the extended warranty period re-opened and we were able to get more coverage.
Still, $153.00 extra to get a gift fixed within six months is obnoxious.
I just haven't gotten around to buying one yet. I still have the original floppy drive that came with my Gateway back in 1994, and while I've replaced my CD-ROM drive since then, it's been 4 or 5 years since then. One of these days, I might get around to it, but as long as the CD-ROM drive (and it's cousin the CD Burner) are working fine, why should I waste money on a DVD drive?
It's not like my system is a slouch either. Intel P4 3.0, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9800 Pro. I just haven't seen the need for a DVD-ROM drive. Yet.
I mean, it's not like these folks are actually paying to use a service or anything like that. Besides, it's only 1000 people. Given that they've sold several hundred thousand units, with nice monthly subscriptions attached, they don't have to worry about a few hundred people.
After all, it's not like it'll affect anything important. You know, like the bottom line.
What's interesting to me is that the games will also air on SportsNet.
From the article:
"G4techTV video game hockey highlights will also air on Comcast SportsNet. "We'd rather be televising the live games, but until the real games resume, this presents a fun opportunity to maintain the fans' interest," comments Jack Williams, President and CEO of Comcast SportsNet. "This is a natural and creative extension of G4techTV's video game expertise.""
Slashdot Mirror
Any idiot knows that GTA leads to carjacking, murder, and solicitation of prostitution, not graffitti.
Super Mario Bros. leads to possession of illegal narcotics (but only if they're 'shrooms).
Jet Set Radio Future leads to graffitti.
The least they could do is pick the correct game for their crime.
DUH!
--AC
Wow. That's a really interesting story, especially the part about the movie "Saw."
Especially since it's not scheduled for DVD release until February 15, 2005. But it's good to see that you care about this tragic stuff.
--AC
Ridiculous unless what we're punishing is the wrongful obtaining of a thing of value (rather than wrongfully depriving another of a thing of value). There's an important distinction there.
If that's the case, then shouldn't we compensate the property owner for the value of the wrongfully taken property? Of course, the flip side is that then the person who's taken the property probably ought to be allowed to keep it.
--AC
Actually, I think the calculation of value is based on fair market value. That means the calculation is based on what you'd pay to legally purchase the product.
The fact that folks who illegally download music probably wouldn't buy it if given the chance isn't really much of a distinction. Folks who steal cars probably wouldn't buy them if given the chance either.
That's the whole point of downloading it illegally, right?
--AC
Actually, I think it's not so much of a matter of turning to electronics for comfort as it is a matter of using electronics as a distraction from a frightening and potentially painful situation. Mom and Dad are still the best source for comfort.
I don't think there's anything wrong with using electronics as a distraction. In fact, I think that's probably the best use for them.
--AC
Right.
Rip-offs.
Like Hanukkah.
Which celebrates events that took place in 165 B.C.E.
Rip-offs.
--AC
As a matter of fact, it would. The worst part is that it now blocks Google caches.
--AC
behind the worst content filter ever, could anyone summarize the changes?
--AC
If you're like me, you probably see the mascot for one of the best PC games of the year: Gordon "da Man" Freeman.
If Gordon were to show up and endorse some other game, I'd likely buy it.
Gordon's never done me wrong yet.
--AC
There was a great article on this on Slate a few weeks ago.
Here's the link.
http://slate.msn.com/id/2102086
--AC
Yeah, but relatively speaking there's a substantial difference between a foam disc launcher and a shotgun.
Based on the hypo in the great-granparent, I'll stand by my position that you'd be hard pressed to find a jury that's going to find foam discs to be unreasonable.
--AC
Probably not. Generally, you can use force to defend your home. You just can't use unreasonable force.
Here, the intruder would have to show that the use of the sentrybot constituted an unreasonable risk of physical harm. Frankly, I doubt any jury in the country would go for that, especially when the person who's suing was illegally breaking into the protected home.
--AC
The legal system doesn't blame video games. Politicians blame video games. Society blames video games. Murderers blame video games. The legal system generally says, you did the crime, you're going to do the time. In a court of law, it's utterly irrelevant that someone plays video games or dressed up like pikachu before going on a six-state killing spree.
What matters is what did the defendant do, and what was his or her mental state at the time.
--AC
A prosecutor can't aim for a higher sentence on appeal, it's against the law. Every criminal defendant has a due process right to have his or her conviction reviewed by an appellate court. If the prosecutor could go for a greater penalty on appeal, it would be an unfair burden on the exercise of the right.
--AC
Also consider how the jury reached the value of the punitive damages, and why they did.
McDonalds lowballed this woman on her medical bills. That's all she wanted from them; the cost of her stay in the hospital.
So, her lawyers asked the jury to punish McDonalds by fining them the profits they would have made on coffee sales for the amount of time she was in the hospital.
Punitive damages aren't about making the plaintiff rich. They are about punishing the defendant for unreasonably risky conduct.
--AC
Bullshit. Class action lawsuits are a vehicle for people with piss pot, chump change claims to band together and go after the bastards who've screwed them out of their money.
There's no way I'd sue MS over $149.99. Even if I did, MS wouldn't care. But when me and 10,000 of my friends get together and sue MS for $1.5M, and trebel damages under the relevant consumer protection act, they're going to notice (not much, but some).
Sure, I may have to give up 33% of my recovery to a lawyer. But for my $50, I've gotten an attorney to take my case to trial. Try doing that for less than $25,000.
--AC
Caveat Emptor-- That's the crap that inspired Congress to pass the Magnusson-Moss consumer protection laws. Modern American commerce has little in common with Adam Smith's captialism.
Today, you deal with a retail, who dealt with a wholesaler, who dealt with a manufacturer. Because the manufacturer doesn't know you, he doesn't give two shits about you.
In good ole' Adam Smith's day, you dealt with a manufacturer. If the product didn't work, you told your neighbors about the shoddy workmanship, sued the manufacturer to get your money back, and watched the bastard go out of business.
--AC
My wife and I registered for an Xbox for our wedding. She wanted a DVD player. I wanted Steel Batallion, Halo, and JSRF.
Six months after the wedding, it died. We were watching some dumb movie we'd rented, and it froze up. From that point on, it wouldn't re-boot, and it wouldn't eject the disc drive.
Remember how we were watching a rented movie?
It cost us $153.00 to have it repaired. This was just after the Xbox mark down, so a new Xbox would have cost only $199.99.
Fortunately, the folks at Blockbuster were quite reasonable, and decided not to charge us late fees for the two months it took for the Xbox service center to figure out that the logic board had died. Eventually, we got the Xbox and the movie back.
Also, we were fortunate because once the repair work was done, the extended warranty period re-opened and we were able to get more coverage.
Still, $153.00 extra to get a gift fixed within six months is obnoxious.
--AC
Is not an indicator of future results."
--AC (my stock broker, really)
Say, isn't Dunwich on the Potomac? Nah. --AC
I just haven't gotten around to buying one yet. I still have the original floppy drive that came with my Gateway back in 1994, and while I've replaced my CD-ROM drive since then, it's been 4 or 5 years since then. One of these days, I might get around to it, but as long as the CD-ROM drive (and it's cousin the CD Burner) are working fine, why should I waste money on a DVD drive?
It's not like my system is a slouch either. Intel P4 3.0, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9800 Pro. I just haven't seen the need for a DVD-ROM drive. Yet.
--AC
I mean, it's not like these folks are actually paying to use a service or anything like that. Besides, it's only 1000 people. Given that they've sold several hundred thousand units, with nice monthly subscriptions attached, they don't have to worry about a few hundred people.
After all, it's not like it'll affect anything important. You know, like the bottom line.
--AC
I'd be inclined to argue that the addition of a state to a Federation is a change of a different caliber than a successful war of secession.
Aparently others would do so as well, since many slashdotters put 1865 as the date from which we should count the U.S.'s stability.
--AC
Another small nitpick . . .
Technically, the United Kingdoms of England and Ireland were founded in 1922 (after the 26 Counties of the Republic of Ireland seceeded from the UK).
--AC
What's interesting to me is that the games will also air on SportsNet.
From the article:
"G4techTV video game hockey highlights will also air on Comcast SportsNet. "We'd rather be televising the live games, but until the real games resume, this presents a fun opportunity to maintain the fans' interest," comments Jack Williams, President and CEO of Comcast SportsNet. "This is a natural and creative extension of G4techTV's video game expertise.""
--AC