Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Some clarifications about the legal issues involved

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 13:12:48 10/01/02

Go up one level in this thread


On September 30, 2002 at 14:59:50, Shep wrote:

>On September 29, 2002 at 04:55:40, John Smith wrote:
>
>>And according to our laws, with respect to intellectual property, you do not
>>require a showing of intent to prove criminal liability.  In other words, just
>>being in possesion of the pirated software puts you in a world of hurt.
>
>Just for the record:
>I'm more specialized in German law than American, but I don't think the law is
>quite as broad as you put it here - if e.g. you download software in good faith
>(e.g. labeled as "Freeware"), no-one can sue you for copyright infringement if
>it turns out this was not the case.
>Just imagine if it were the case that Ruffian were a cleverly disguised clone of
>[put commercial program here], you wouldn't allude that anyone here would be
>going to jail for downloading it, right?

In the US it would depend.  IE if you accept stolen property, you certainly
forfeit
any right to keep it if it is discovered.  It is returned to the rightful owner.
 If you
are found with several stolen items, you can certainly be charged with a
criminal
act, because "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me" holds
true.


>
>>How do you think prosecutors here in the USA and overseas get to convict
>>pedophiles ?  The fact that they have images of children in sexually explicit
>>conduct in their computers, notwithstanding the defense of ignorance, is
>>evidence of criminal conduct.
>
>In that case it would be rather hard to plead ignorance. :)


Ditto if you have _multiple_ pieces of pirated software.  Something disguised as
something new would be tough to stick you with.  But if you have several pieces
of stuff with no license for them, you might find that to be a big problem...

>
>>Terry admitted that he had pirated software.  That admission, in and of itself,
>>would be enough to convict him.
>
>No, because if his confession is the only proof against him, he is at any time
>free to revoke it.


however, in a trial, if you broadcast something publicly, the jury will be aware
of it, and that will influcence the verdict no matter what legal wrangling goes
on to suppress the original confession.

>
>>There is no such thing as innocent theft.  If you have any software in your
>>computer that is not distributed as freeware, and you have not paid for it, you
>>are a thief.  End of story.
>
>In Germany, we're currently having heated discussion about the terms "pirating"
>and "theft".
>What most knowledgable people tell you is that "pirating" would mean
>"distributing illegal copies for profit" and that "theft" cannot be applied to
>software, only "copyright infringement" and "licence violation" can.
>
>Just my 2 cents, ain't going to comment on the specific issue of Terry's case
>here.
>
>---
>Shep



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.