On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 9:53 PM, drew Roberts <zotz@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> On Thursday 15 July 2010 19:50:31 you wrote:
>> IF copyright was restricted to the creator AND limited in duration to
>> a single-digit number of years AND utterly non-transferable (even to
>> next-of-kin) AND intent had to proven THEN i'd say that maybe 6 months
>> or a year in jail, with options for first offenses and/or parole
>> and/or scope of damages affecting the sentence?
>
> And why does it *have* to be criminal? Why not civil with proof of damages? (I
> could easily live with what you state above as it is way better than what we
> have here now and I am having to live with that.
it doesn't need to be criminal. i was just getting caught up in your
lead on a jail time suggestion.
the biggest problem with the kind of scheme i'm describing above is
that it relies above all on identifying the distributor/performer. its
already clear that this is fundamentally impossible to do with any
degree of reliability in the internet age.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Fri Jul 16 20:15:37 2010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Jul 16 2010 - 20:15:37 EEST