View Single Post
Old 08-22-2013, 04:45 PM   #114
speakingtohe
Wizard
speakingtohe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.speakingtohe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.speakingtohe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.speakingtohe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.speakingtohe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.speakingtohe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.speakingtohe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.speakingtohe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.speakingtohe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.speakingtohe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.speakingtohe ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 4,812
Karma: 26912940
Join Date: Apr 2010
Device: sony PRS-T1 and T3, Kobo Mini and Aura HD, Tablet
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer View Post
So, would you agree then that if evidence were to show that an extremely heavy fine had no benefit over a small fine in stopping illegal downloading, there would be no reason to set an extremely heavy fine? I would take this position, as it is fundamentally just to impose only the penalty absolutely necessary and no more.

I have no interest in seeing people punished just because they get something for free, they should only be punished if they both: (i) get something for free; and (ii) getting that something for free causes a harm to someone else.
One small case of harming someone else (and I have personally seen it actually happen at least twice this summer) Person A says I must get a book, and person B says 'Oh, don't pay for it, I've got every book that guy wrote, I'll email it to you'. In both cases that I have overheard, Person B has said "OK thanks"
In both cases it is a likely assumption that person B would have bought the book, but did not buy the book.

Not going to bankrupt anyone, but still.

Helen

Helen
speakingtohe is offline   Reply With Quote