View Single Post
Old 08-20-2009, 07:10 AM   #132
rlauzon
Wizard
rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.rlauzon put the bomp in the bomp-a-bomp-a-bomp.
 
rlauzon's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,018
Karma: 67827
Join Date: Jan 2005
Device: PocketBook Era
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jellby View Post
Regardless of that, "under penalty of perjury" means that you will be guilty of perjury if what you claim is false, I believe that phrase pretty much overrides whatever usual definition of "perjury" there is. So, if you are going to make a claim "under penalty of perjury", you better check that it is true (or that nobody will be able to prove it is not), just believing it is not enough.
And it's fairly easy for a large corporation to fabricate "evidence" of copyright ownership that will get them out of perjury. I've already outlined way in a previous message.

And if real evidence comes to light, the company can just say "oops, we must have goofed in our record keeping" and they get off without penalty.
rlauzon is offline   Reply With Quote