View Single Post
Old 04-08-2010, 03:34 PM   #24
dmaul1114
Wizard
dmaul1114 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dmaul1114 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dmaul1114 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dmaul1114 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dmaul1114 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dmaul1114 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dmaul1114 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dmaul1114 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dmaul1114 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dmaul1114 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.dmaul1114 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 2,300
Karma: 1121709
Join Date: Feb 2009
Device: Amazon Kindle 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy View Post
Even that wouldn't matter. Proving they have a copy of the file does not prove HOW they got that copy. Possession of a file has nothing to do with copyright infringement.
Yes, but remember in this scenario they'd have a letter saying he pirated it, and a signed check that can verify that it was him who mailed the letter and check.

Having that admission AND the file on their systems would be enough for most judge's/jury's in my experience. As they have the admission, and proof that they did have a copy of the file in question. Many people are found guilty on circumstantial evidence a lot weaker than that.

Now again, this would be a civil suit, and I'm not as familiar with the civil system--but at the same time the burden of proof is lower there--preponderance of the evidence instead of beyond a reasonable doubt.
dmaul1114 is offline   Reply With Quote