So I'm curious, where you live, do you get to vote on whether or not individual police officers are hired? Do you get to veto any potential hires that you don't like? Do you get to do full research into the backgrounds and records of potential police hires? If an officer acts up, are you capable of firing them, either on your own, or through a vote of some kind?
If you answered 'No' to the above questions, then I'm wondering why exactly you want the public, who are already being screwed over by corrupt cops like the ones in this story, to be 'punished' even more, while the actual offenders get off without having to pay a cent.
Here's the thing though: Ultimately, it doesn't matter.
Whether it was a real attack or a staged one, what mattered was what came after it, both in the government, and among the public. That was were the real damage to the country took place after all, so focusing on 'Was the attack a real one, or was it staged?' is missing the forest for the trees.
A pirate isn't buying from you now, but if your work interests him/her enough, they may in the future.
Someone who purposely avoids your work, whether it be due to the fact that your creations are crap according to them, or because you yourself are the kind of person they want to avoid giving money and/or attention to is never going to buy from you, at least if they can avoid it.
Really? You were doing so well there, and then that last line... it's bad enough that the maximalists bring up rape and murder and slavery and act like copyright infringement is just as bad as the above, you really don't need to follow their example.
"The current generation of writers, performers and interpreters of music cannot have their livelihoods destroyed by advances in technology which allow persons to breach their constitutional rights with impunity.”
If one person, or even many people, pirate a particular song, or book, or movie, then other people are still free to buy that song/book/movie. Other people are still free to listen/read/watch.
Nothing about piracy stops that. One person's copyright infringement does not, in any way, stop another person from paying or getting something the 'legitimate' way.
As such, the only way that he could claim that piracy is 'destroying constitutional rights', is if he thinks that people have a constitutional right to be paid for each and every single use of their creation(or, as I'm sure is the majority of the cases, the creation of some poor sod that has signed their rights to you). A 'constitutional right to profit' basically, something I'm surprised that another country managed to beat the US to.
He further rejected requests to refer this matter to the European Court of Justice, insisting that his interpretation of the law is plenty.
Yeah, given they would probably stomp this ruling flat both because if you want to punish someone it's generally required to actually prove guilt first, and because the internet is vital enough these days kicking someone off it would be like shutting off their water or electricity, I don't imagine he would be too happy to have another judge show how wrong he is here.
Given their silence in the face of corruption and/or abuse of power and authority is a big part of the problem, I don't see any problem with that. Might suck for them sure, but maybe if they were willing to hold their own accountable, and speak up when another officer crosses the line of acceptable behavior, then perhaps it wouldn't happen so often, and the police wouldn't be sued so often.
Trying for funniest comment of the week are we? They'll never see a cent, unless the labels decided to take on any legal fees they incur to what the bands 'owe', in which case they'll see it on their bill.
And, of course, the local police union has greeted this decision with assertions that the officers involved did nothing wrong and that Judge Stewart is nothing more than an armchair quarterback,
When video evidence shows police engaging in... well, let's be nice and call it 'misconduct' for little more than refusal to grovel sufficiently...
When the facts are so contrary to what the cops claim happened that it is blatantly obvious that the cops are lying...
When even a judge isn't willing to buy the 'official' story it's so disconnected from reality...
The police and their unions still dig in and insist that cops never do anything wrong, and to even question them is unacceptable, refusing to even entertain the idea that an officer might ever step out of line and need to be held accountable for their actions. Police your own, show that you are willing to hold those amongst you who abuse their position accountable for their actions, and then, maybe, people might begin to start to trust police again. Until then, stop whining that the public doesn't trust you to act properly, you brought that on yourself.
While they're at it, they should prosecute the power companies, a whole lot of crime is carried out that requires electricity, crime that wouldn't be possible without it, so clearly they are accomplices as well.
Just a tiny difference between drugs and infringing files. You know, just a bit. In either case though, seizing assets of someone based on accusation alone, someone who has never stepped foot in a given country, is not something that should be done or accepted.
Open up that particular can of worms, and you could have any country on the planet seizing funds or assets, from US companies or people, or anyone else on the planet, and then justifying their theft by claiming that the accused refusing to travel to their country is evidence enough of their guilt.
He's a fugitive in part because he offered to come to the U.S. if the government would agree to his terms. They didn't.
And what were those terms again? Oh yes, that they would guarantee a fair trial, and allow him access to his funds so he could actually afford to pay for a lawyer, instead of having to go with whatever poor, utterly unprepared sod that was assigned to him. Yes indeedy, quite the gall he has to be making demands like those.
The seized the MU servers, and refused to let Dotcom or his legal team have access to them, or even pay for their upkeep, ensuring that they would be wiped unless the company who owned them wanted to pay the costs of maintaining them indefinitely. This despite the fact that as supposed evidence in a case, the DOJ should have been the ones paying the maintenance costs.
They may not have directly destroyed evidence and MU property, but through their actions they knowingly ensured that it would happen.
As for 'gushing', I couldn't care less about Dotcom personally, what I care about is seeing justice carried out, and having your property stolen and/or destroyed, all without stepping foot in a courtroom or being found guilty, is not justice.
Yes, it's telling that he has a functional brain, and would rather not walk into the kangaroo court that the DOJ's actions have all but guaranteed he'd receive.
The DOJ has destroyed evidence/ensured that it would be destroyed(and in the process destroyed his business, all without a finding of 'guilty' or even a trial), illegally taken evidence out of the country, knowingly lied to a court about the legality of serving him, and then tried to get the laws changed later to retroactively make their previous claims true, called for extension after extension for the extradition case in order to drain as much money as they can from him, conned the NZ police into performing a SWAT-style raid on his house by lying and claiming he could do something they knew he couldn't(remotely wipe the servers they had already seized)... do I really need to go on?
On the other hand, assuming the NZ judges are even remotely interested in seeing justice done(though given they are still bothering with the extradition and haven't given a solid answer either way yet this is up for debate), the USG's actions are providing an excellent reason to deny extradition.
If this is how they're acting when he's not even in the country, you could be sure once they got their hands on him the treatment would be much, much worse.
In all, more than 32,000 pieces of equipment were issued. Some kits are still in use, making it difficult to compile a precise inventory of what was issued and what might be missing.
Umm, no actually, that wouldn't be very difficult at all, assuming they kept even moderately accurate records. Simply check the records and see where each piece of gear was sent, then send the recipient a 'request' to check and make sure that they still have it, or provide the documentation regarding it's allocation to wherever it was sent.
Unless of course they want to admit that they don't even bother to keep track of who gets sent what, in which case I could totally believe that such a task would be difficult, if not all but impossible. In that case however, they've got bigger issues than just having some gear stolen every so often.