Sooo, Amazon, facebook and twitter are just... unauthorised movie sharing sites? That's all I got from your post. Where was file sharing even mentioned in the article, and how in the hell did you jump from your second paragraph to the third? It's like I was reading a book about dolphin migration, fell asleep on page 23, woke up with page 96 in front of me and the subject had turned to DIY power tool maintenance. Seriously, your paragraph transitions are like a car pile up on the interstate. Take a pill.
Would you pay $1000+ for a drive just because it had some files already on it?
Thought not.
I dunno, I think I'd still prefer the one the rest of the world gets its time from.
wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/
There are more than three people in my house. House only has one IP address. Magnets?
In my country, if the police find drug paraphernalia in a shared house, nobody can be charged if the paraphernalia is in a common area, regardless of whose name is on the lease agreement.
Why should a string of ones and zeros be treated more harshly than illicit drugs?
Hollywood takes many Hong-Kong and Japanese films and remakes them. The Departed and The Ring immediately come to mind.
Err... they were battling it out in the marketplace, then Apple got genuinely scared they would lose to the competition and took the cowards option and sued.
You can't "battle" with someone who just runs away and deploys the nukes when they're losing.
dont know what happened to my post above 1/2 of it missing
Littering causes "actual" harm, to the environment. This is proven fact.
Speeding has the "potential" to cause "actual" harm, to the public. This is proven fact.
File sharing "may" only have the "potential" to deprive the content creator of a "mythical" sale, causing "hypothetical" harm. No amount of research, however, has been able to prove this is a guaranteed fact.
Now, in my country, littering incurs a greater fine than speeding, due no doubt, to the actual vs. potential harm involved. Makes sense then that illegal file sharing attracts a far lesser fine than speeding, due to only the possible, potentially hypothetical, mythical harm involved.
I'd say the original judgement was indeed quite fair.
Not a long time reader obviously. When you pick someones pocket, they no longer have the physical object you took. When you share digita.... you know what, never mind. You'll never get it.
How many than's can you fit in an articale and than still get away with it?
No. Reality is infringing on The Onion's copyrights.
Sony's TVs have been crap for years. LG have crap digital tuners. Samsung have made consistantly good TVs since the Series 4's. In the States, Vizio make excellent bang-for-buck units. If they were available in Oz, I would buy one. But Samsung LCDs I would recommend. For plasma, can't look past Panasonic.
I don't know. My neighbours usually complain when I turn the sound up just beyound barely audible. Besides, I can't pirate. I don't own a boat.
Sweet! I just signed up. When does my first post appear?
So you are saying that sueing Napster has caused a reduction in recorded music sales. Congratulations, sir, you have just proved a point.
Re: Sharing?
No problems. You can come and make a copy of my new speakers if you like. I'll be cooking sausages on the BBQ also. If you want some, feel free to make copies of my sausages and I will cook them for you.