Quote:
Originally Posted by elcreative
So you actually think that if you can't serve somebody then any case is unfair... great defence against crimes... I'll do what I want then flee the jurisdiction and carry on committing crimes by remote in your jurisdiction... did you read the full judgement relating to the inability to contact TPB owners... do you seriously mean that because of that, there should be no action to take because "it's not fair, if they can't defend themselves..." when they've made the choice to move out of their home country and scatter round the world... your opinion may be that the process was unfair but that tends to make your opinion, at the best, incredibly naive... there have been many court cases where defendants are not present (usually by their choice) and nobody denies their legality so what's so special about running a "pirate" site that requires the owners get special treatment when thay can't be bothered to defend themselves in courts anyway...
|
Elcreative, you're confusing civil and criminal law. In civil law (copyright and patent falls under civil law), you must be served before you can be sued. Deadbeat dads (in some cases, very rich deadbeat dads) avoid child support suits by always dodging the process server. (This is US law, other countries laws vary wildly...)