Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffC
Of importance , does Torrentspy have $110m - did they charge for these downloads - or was it all paid for by adverts .
If the latter , then aren't the advertisers liable too ?
|
It's not really important to the courts if TorrentSpy has $110M, any more than it would be important if a car thief had $20,000 to buy his own car, or only $20. To the law, a thief is a thief, and they (theoretically) levi punishments according to the act, not the crook's personal resources.
It's not important at all if they charged for the downloads, if they were convicted of facilitating their distribution.
I don't know if TorrentSpy had advertisers or supporters (having never been to the site), but if they did, and the advertisers/supporters knew they were distributing illegal material, then I agree they should be held liable for damages. I also know that in reality it doesn't always work that way.