arstechnica.com — As Capitol v. Thomas heads to the jury, the attorneys sparred over the question of whether making a file available over a P2P network was infringement. The judge's proposed jury instructions say that "an actual transfer must take place" in order for copyright infringement to occur.
Oct 4, 2007 View in Crawl 4
jcountermanOct 4, 2007
Can I digg the first half of your comment and bury the second?I'm just asking.
akkibabaOct 5, 2007
God bless the Staes.
Closed AccountOct 5, 2007
I'm not trying to piss on your parade, but Radiohead are literally days away from signing a record deal (with parlophone again, i assume). I'm not sure of the exact reasoning behind it, but it's a fact nonetheless.
uncertainOct 5, 2007
It's a shame that all too often the jury seems to forget that no matter what "instructions" the judge gives, it's solely the jury's province to adjudge innocence or guilt. All they have to say is "guilty" or "not guilty," no explanations necessary. Just make a decision in good conscience and go with it.
hollicOct 5, 2007
Dear god, I apologize for offending the gods of semantics. I'm baffled at our legal system. Hosting is bad, taking is ok. It's like a crack dealer is totally wrong, a crack user is totally cool. What?!
cerebronOct 5, 2007
exactly. that is the point of being tried by a jury of peers, they can discard the judges instructions if they feel the need.