Quote:
Originally Posted by Catlady
And the point is that even if I protect my files, not everyone does. And those people who don't should NOT be held responsible for their failure to do so if those files are used nefariously by other people. It's just WRONG to blame the victim. How can you not see that?
|
Of course it is wrong to blame the victims, it is not wrong to suspect the innocent if there is evidence they are not innocent. It is also true that, in spite of the fact that there is plenty of watermarked material out there nobody has been accused yet. Practical aspects are a different matter, the rights holders might very well be willing to financially support a number of investigations, in order to scare off potential offenders. Let us face it, when such an investigation leads back to someone, there is a 99% likelihood that someone in that household or one of his/her friends is the culprit. The other scenarios are possible, but the chances are remote (unless they are so crazy that they have no protection at all, no anti-virus, nothing. In that case prosecute the ones who sold them and setup the computer for gross negligence). So some inconveniences when there is clear evidence pointing at you should be acceptable. Especially when it is handled properly and your data showing up doesn't automatically mean you are guilty and the penalties are proportionate. A first instance might also just mean a warning. You are not guilty yet, but you do have to explain yourself. Happens to innocent people in almost every investigation.
And it is also not right to leave the real victims (the copyright holders) with no chance of protecting themselves.