(A) to transport, transfer, or otherwise dispose of, to another, for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain, as consideration for anything of value; or (B) to make, import, export, or obtain control of, or possess, with intent to so transport, transfer, or otherwise dispose of; and (B) the term “financial gain” includes the receipt, or expected receipt, of anything of value.
This sounds like it was gleaned from narcotics law (also note the ability to “confiscate” or impound computers). I want to assume they are talking about real pirating operations that have warehouses of duplicated media ready to ship. But the laws pushed by the RIAA have generally been to battle online pirates. When is the last time you read about a major pirating operation involving real CDs? So if this assertion were true as to the online nature of this law then how exactly does anyone determine “intent to so transport”?
Narcotics law likes to lump criminals into two neat catagories. Consumers and Suppliers.
In zero tolerance states it’s a no win situation if possession is provable. States with softer laws generally let the little fishes (users) go without much harsh prison time. If you are a dealer then pack up the soap on a rope. Take the example of someone who was busted for possession of an illegal drug. Let’s say they have 10 ounces of this drug. If the 10 ounces are all in one container then the amount (this of course depends on the drug) could be considered “personal use” and fines are levied and community service mandated. This of course is a best case scenario. If the authorities discover the suspect has the 10 ounces of illicit substance divided into 10 neat little bags then the punishment is different. Now the person is a dealer and has “intent to distribute”. Where is the little baggy in the computer piracy world? If I burned a copy of the CD does that prove intent? How about just having the music in my “shared” folder for whatever p2p application I’m using. Does this constitute intent?
Post a Comment