You're still not getting what I'm saying. I'll try to make it more clear:
Imagine the most sarcastic guy from high school, the guy who was smart, but didn't apply himself and talked back to teachers, saying, "It's a good thing that you've had an open wireless network for a long time, thus providing an impossible burden of proof on Paramount" followed by him mockingly calling the guy "Einstein".
Is that more clear?
And I don't know how I'd be lying. It's pretty clear that the RIAA/MPAA have had serious trouble with this defense in the past, as I made clear in my posted articles above. In one case they actually had to pay the attorney's fees. Does that sound like something that could easily be disproved by laymen like us?
Last edited by Willravel; 02-07-2008 at 10:12 AM..
|