View Single Post
Old 07-14-2009, 12:08 PM   #192
Shaggy
Wizard
Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Shaggy's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,293
Karma: 529619
Join Date: May 2007
Device: iRex iLiad, DR800SG
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elfwreck View Post
(I don't, in fact, claim that no copies were made. I just question prosecutions on the grounds of "we proved this crime/tort was possible, therefore the jury should treat it as having happened." Dangerous legal precedent, that.)
Exactly. Nobody has any idea if she really committed copyright infringement. If this trial is allowed to stand though, the RIAA has been given the power to have people found guilty merely by accusation. That potentially lets them go out and blackmail anybody they want. That's extremely dangerous.

I have no idea if Jammie did or did not actually distribute songs. However, in order to be found guilty of breaking copyright law the plaintiff should have to show some evidence that the act actually occurred.
Shaggy is offline   Reply With Quote