Vice versa 1988 download torrent for free#
Vice versa 1988 download torrent how to#
Vice versa 1988 download torrent movie#

I know, he's rich, so the money doesn't matter. If possible, let's get the donation thing rolling. What time would be better to draw this to the front line? I'm considering it, but I'm still holding out hope (for some reason) that they may eventually become some what more interesting.

Vice versa 1988 download torrent how to#

They are, in essense, intentional dupes.ДЄnd, yes, I know how to disable them. There's really nothing to add to Backslash stories in the comments, since the story just happened, so they're usually fairly vague and useless. In many web forums, it'd likely be called 'necroposting' - attempting to resurrect a discussion that had mostly completed by posting something vague and useless to it, causing it to move to the top of the topic list. This made more sense in 1998 when Slashdot was named and most radio ads would spell out the entire URL.)Д«ut, yeah, Backslash is kinda lame. (If you're going to try to spell out the full URL, it would sound like: Aych tea tea pea colon slash slash dot dot org slash. Slashdot was named Slashdot explicitly to make it hard to spell out the URL. Yes, the two names are confusing: this is likely done on purpose. Backslash - an aggregate of highly modded comments from a previous story.Slashback - an update to (usually several) existing stories.OK, enough people seem to be confused about this, so I'm just going to try and clear this up. We wouldn't try to alter their behavior, but would instead try to live with it, which is important since 1) the law should serve them and 2) they'll do it anyway. Copyright can remain vital in the commercial and non-natural person areas, but ordinary people should never have to care about it in their day to day affairs. Personally, I think that legalization is the way to go.

Vice versa 1988 download torrent for free#

But Bob couldn't sell copies to Carol, DaveCo couldn't sell copies in its stores, and the Eve Charitable Organization couldn't give away copies for free even in pursuit of its charitable mission. Thus, Alice and Bob could share files with one another and it would be lawful. The appropriate thing to do here is to legalize otherwise infringing acts, if they're engaged in by natural persons, noncommercially. And that disrespect led to disrespect for laws that were actually important, it led to support for organized crime, etc. On the other hand, if no one respects copyright, it would be somewhat similar to no one respecting physical property rights.

Vice versa 1988 download torrent movie#

Wal-Mart can't sue you for hundreds of thousands for stealing a DVD in their store- why should the MPAA be able to for stealing a movie online? The punishment doesn't fit the crime, and the legal system does nothing to prevent corporate entities with unlimited legal resources from demanding incredibly exaggerated sums from average people who can't be expected to have the means to fight or pay. This should be a case in small claims court.

Right now the sky is the limit- why are they allowed to sue a teenager for tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars for a song that costs $1 on itunes, or a movie that costs $7 at Best Buy? Even taking the fact that they are uploading it back to others into consideration, that still is not more that (in all practicality) a dozen to a hundred people.

There has to be an obligation to prove real damages. However the MPAA/RIAA should not have the ability to financially devastate an individual for downloading a song or movie. I agree, many are probably guilty (though the number is probably less that 99%.)

Unfortunately 99% of MPAA lawsuits are valid because people are, in fact, breaking copyright laws and getting stuff for free.