Careful about that. Research shows most adults unwittingly commit several felonies a day, under some obscure (or not so obscure) law or another. Would you like your days exposed to that scrutiny, and accept the consequences? It's the LAW, after all.
...which is rapidly tipping to one side. Traffic laws were written with the assumption that most offenses would never been seen, prosecuted or fined. Fines were high enough to discourage the behavior, but no one expected everyone to be paying them.
Now the surveillance state wants to catch everyone, at everything. That being the case, I think we have to re-think a lot of our laws.
I work for a Chrysler dealer. Yesterday, we had training session on the Uconnect internet-enabled electronics systems in our cars. We were told "People don't buy cars these days. They buy car radios; the rest of the car is just to carry the radio around." Know what wasn't mentioned? Security - at all.
There's no such thing as "enough money" - that's basic corporate governance. The question is, do the expenditures to stop "piracy" exceed the losses from that activity? If we can demonstrate the program costs, including campaign contributions, exceed the losses - maybe the stockholders will make them stop.
Claims like this are already unsupported by law. Problem is, the cost of proving it, for the umpteenth time, are so high many defendants back down. What would be ideal is a rapid way for judges to look at one of these, say "bullsh*t" and throw it back, with a finding for costs.
It shouldn't be all that hard to determine if this technician processed the samples from a case. If yes, then the prisoner goes free - and hopefully, the prosecutor gets it deducted from his score card. Easy. OR, are they really saying we should accept innocent people being jailed for decades, at taxpayer expense, because it's too hard to let them free?
"This is absolutely horrific...the inhumanity of rights holders refusing to formally acquiesce and declare that making an unauthorized copy of a work is perfectly legal because big, bad meanie gatekeepers have it in for the large number of people who ignore the law and generally get away with their actions without consequence."
Yeah, no. You're missing the point. As military organizations learned millennia ago, the quickest way to undermine your authority is to issue orders you know won't be obeyed. You can only push so far - Prohibition in the USA proved that.
When I was a kid, they warned us if the "commies" won, we would live in a country... very much like America today. (Well, with more lines). Did I miss a world war somewhere along the line? I wasn't paying attention.
The company has no procedure for fixing this problem because it's not supposed to happen. AND, their "support" system is so streamlined and efficient (GRIN) that literally no-one has the authority to do something not in the books. So, it gets referred to another department, then another...
Aside from the obvious - destroying evidence of their own thuggery - what was the supposed justification for vandalizing the video equipment? I mean, they must have had SOME legal justification ready, just in case.
Absent the POLICE T-shirts, this looks like a film of a home invasion.
There's no such thing as a false positive. It's been widely demonstrated that everyone commits some kind of crime, every day. Once you divorce searching for YOU from a specific crime they're trying to solve, it's one tiny step from just rounding up people at random. And once you're in custody, they have to justify WHY.
I mean, if they're working THAT HARD to keep it secret, what horrors must they be concealing? The entire nation will be obsessed with speculation about it! ...until some celebrity breaks up with her boyfriend or something.
Really, stalling as long as possible, until everyone loses interest, will work just fine.