View Single Post
Old 08-19-2013, 01:04 PM   #23
HarryT
eBook Enthusiast
HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
HarryT's Avatar
 
Posts: 85,557
Karma: 93980341
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by usuallee View Post
We might have to agree to disagree then. I don't happen to think the value of the goods should be the primary parameter, and certainly not the sole parameter for determining the amount of the fine levied. If you do tie it to the value of the goods there must be a cap. I threw out $1000 earlier. I think a fine of much beyond that would be cruel and unusual punishment, as we say in the States.
Your argument doesn't make any sense to me, I'm afraid.

Let's suppose someone illegally downloads items that have a retail value of $10,000. You're saying that, if caught, they should only have to pay $1,000? They get $10,000 of goods for $1,000, whereas the honest consumer pays $10,000?

Sorry, but that makes no sense. The dishonest person should be punished. Saying "you'll only have to pay 10% of what you've taken" isn't a punishment at all - it's more like a reward!
HarryT is offline   Reply With Quote