It's pretty ridiculous to say they haven't already been. Question is how long do you want them to be? They will be behind it as long as they are terrorized. If they aren't behind it currently, terrorizing them a bit more should do the trick.
Re: another great parody of thought from best site since The Onion
Not lies, more of a misdirection.
Hackers aren't powerless, they are just not worth worrying about. The bad stories are true, they are just few and far between, and even most of those are just about people doing regular old boring crime with computers, they aren't usually about super powered techno wizards actually breaching real security and/or doing real damage.
Re: OUR SERVANTS should always have to prove innocence,
Sheesh are you ever inconsistent.. Do you get paid per trolled thread or something?
You can't possibly honestly stand behind the sentiment behind your statement here. It's ridiculous. Of course elected officials should have to convince people of their innocence or risk people not voting for them. It's not a right to be an elected official, you don't need a trial to get rid of the ones who walk, talk and act corrupt. If you did, you would never have a prayer of getting rid of any corruption unless they decided they wanted to let you.
How about a case for the current one is bad because of IP?
IP doesn't really exist, anyway, it's just a trick of words.
Trademarks are *supposed* to be the exception, because trademarks, like you say, are supposed to be about ensuring honesty in business. Even that is now getting sullied as trademarks are starting to be used to suppress competition instead and cause other general grief with that "dillution" crap.
You don't need to make a case for how it would be better without IP. It's been getting worse and worse the more influence the mafiaa dudes get over the laws. It would be nice if they fixed some of the things really making us miserable, but it was better before, even to just stop making things worse would be nice. You can still call it "IP" if you really want (although it's a deception).
The relationship is only improper if you are against corruption. If you are against corruption, then what makes it improper is that the industry lobbiests provide direct incentives (money, cushy jobs, gifts, parties, etc, etc) to gov't reps in exchange for pushing through laws that they want passed that no one else wants passed and for otherwise acting as stooges for them.
Or, if you want to be super picky, since we don't "know" that the money etc is directly in exchange for those favours, you could say "incentives" that create a conflict of interest for the gov't reps. That much is iron clad.
There have been plenty of articles with evidence about that sort of thing, as I'm sure you are well aware.
It's the other way around, the reason we don't like hollywood is because of how corrupt they are. It's not that we randomly picked hollywood to dislike and that caused them to become corrupt or something. We just don't like the instigators of extreme corruption in the legal system. There are plenty of rights holders who are less corrupt that don't receive the same level of hatred.
We're talking about spending funds here, not enforcing the law. Get it right eh? You see piracy actually being affected?
If they actually enforced copyright law, they would not be able to make it so ridiculous. I'd love to see them busting into people's homes and hauling em away for singing happy birthday at a party. All they do is spend funds and randomly pick a few people to pick on.
I'm not sure you are correct about where the most copyright infringment happens ("IP Theft"... lol!) There are a lot of people pirating software. The software companies often will count on it as part of their business strategy. Then the music industry also probably has a lot of pirating going on since music is so much smaller to move than movies.
Anyway, the issue with the personal police is basically because the copyright issues that they are persuing are civil issues rather than criminal. Yes they are law enforcement, but that doesn't mean they should be investigating people's divorces for them and such, they should be handling actual crime.
As for domain seizures.. You shouldn't worry because being accused by hollywood of infringement will soon be a crime in and of itself anyway. They own the law.