11–20 of 104 posts
I've often thought that if you really wanted to pirate something, just start an S-corp for ~$200 and put your cable account in its name. If you get sued, tell them to litigate until they're blue, the company is going under.
That would likely be a case where a corporation would not protect you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil
I believe this is similar reasoning to why a lot of states have made red light cameras and speed cameras illegal. The owner of the car is not necessarily the person who was driving at the time, and it was the driver (not the car) who broke the law.
Wasn't this ruled several times already in other trials? How many times does this have to be proven in Court before the other judges start throwing away such cases?
It's a hierarchy, from the district courts to the circuit courts on up to the Supreme Court. Basically, decisions made at one level may be binding on that court and its "descendents", but that's as far as it goes. If you want a decision to reach nation-wide, it's got to be handed down by the Supreme Court.
Wasn't this ruled several times already in other trials? How many times does this have to be proven in Court before the other judges start throwing away such cases?
This is how the judicial system works in the USA. It's a hierarchy, from the district courts to the circuit courts on up to the Supreme Court. Basically, decisions made at one level may be binding on that court and its "descendents", but that's as far as it goes. If you want a decision to reach nation-wide, it's got to be handed down by the Supreme Court.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would likely be a case where a corporation would not protect you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil
What if the business's purpose is to provide an open suburban hotspot?
Today this is difficult, since the average person doesn't have a clue how to set up a secure network. But this is a usability problem more than anything, and if our laws demanded that this be do-able even by somebody's mom, then I think manufacturers would address that usability problem.
Wasn't this ruled several times already in other trials? How many times does this have to be proven in Court before the other judges start throwing away such cases?
This is how the judicial system works in the USA. It's a hierarchy, from the district courts to the circuit courts on up to the Supreme Court. Basically, decisions made at one level may be binding on that court and its "descendents", but that's as far as it goes. If you want a decision to reach nation-wide, it's got to be handed down by the Supreme Court.
While I understand that today there are potential problems, it seems to me that a person ought to be responsible with what's done with his property. If he lets someone use his gun, he's got some degree of responsibility, and if he lets someone use his communication facilities, he's assuming some as well. Today this is difficult, since the average person doesn't have a clue how to set up a secure network. But this is…
While I understand that today there are potential problems, it seems to me that a person ought to be responsible with what's done with his property. If he lets someone use his gun, he's got some degree of responsibility, and if he lets someone use his communication facilities, he's assuming some as well. Today this is difficult, since the average person doesn't have a clue how to set up a secure network. But this is…
If I lend someone an easily obtainable item such as a pencil sharpener or a cat, and they commit a crime using it, I don't see how I'm responsible.
The question is which of those categories Internet access falls into.