Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Tim S, 26 Jul 2006.
I'm with this guy...
Yeah but the thing with that case was that the coffee was so hot that it fused her *****, I'm not a woman but I can't begin to imagine how much that must have hurt her. Imagine dipping you wang into a boiling pan of water and holding it there for 30 seconds and i think your pretty much there
eat s*it you.... you... capitalistic pig organization that wants to consume all!!!!!1111elevenone
i hope they get served.
Aye, I read a while ago in someone's blog about this, and he linked to the court documents. Macdonalds serve their coffee 20 degrees hotter than pretty much anywhere else, which makes a huge difference in the injury stakes - 'normal' hot coffee can do some damage, but takes a while and requires rather more spillage, whereas the McDo stuff can give you serious injury in seconds.
I'm glad someone with money is "keepin' it real".
Actually, I believe they would bust you down for ANY sharing whatsoever, even a part.
But if they were to charge by individual files, even a share ratio of 1:1 wouldn't constitute sharing a full file. As far as I know, share ratios only describe the amount of "parts" uploaded to the amount downloaded. It could be very likely that all the "parts" you send out wouldn't be able to be reconstructed into a full version of the file. That 1:1 ratio could just mean you're sharing a bunch of meaningless parts to a whole.
Finally somebody with balls AND money fightin it up, i may get my music in less than desirable ways (even for me, i wish i had the $$ to get the cd's but i dont) but i get movies the right way.
I think so too... whenever they seem to find someone who's opposing them, they usually back out. RIAA and BREIN (dutch version) do the same.
But for god sake, please try to win MPAA! I'd love to see the floor crumble underneath your sleazy feet! I really hope that that guy can make the first real difference, and make the ones responsible (government?) crawl back into the caves they come from. It's about time they start to understand that what they're doing is against the law (or it should be).... privacy while using the internet anyone?
I hope the MPAA maintain their arrogance and fight this all the way, they will loose so much credibility (if they even have any left) nevermind the millions of dollars in lawyer fees...
sadly, if the MPAA gets to court, then looks like losing, I'd bet they pull out suddenly to ensure that no precedent get set. If precedent does get set, then that may open the floodgates for all those who have settled previously, and it will certainly put an end to the John Doe suits ...
I say we hit the MPAA and RIAA headquarters with Precision Micro-Nukes and wipe them all out
Difference is, I'd be sensible enough not to balance a scolding hot cuppa on the family jewels...
Amen brotha, btw, whos that in your avatar pic? Shes hot!
That would be the delectable Mandy Moore
Also, was it not the MPAAs own statement that said they would only target those that shared 'hundreds of files'?
Why then are they targeting someone who they claim has download only one movie? Unless there is more to this story than has been released?
Am I the only one who thinks it's sad that it takes a millionaire to stand up to the MPAA/RIAA/etc?
He needs to claim that an IP address isn't a person. That seems to get cases dropped pretty sharpish... apparently.
I think the reason it takes a millionare to do it is because they have the money. If they were to sue me, I would have no way to be able to afford a lawyer and fight it. Plain and simple. I am poor, this guy they are now sueing isn't. I hope he wins and everyone at the RIAA and MPAA die in a fire.
OOO feeling the love for the MPAA
I hope that this guy hands their collective arses/genitals to them on a flaming hot griddle plate, it looks like they picked on someone who's got the money and resources to fight back this time not a pensioner or a child
Or no computer... or dead.
Separate names with a comma.