Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> I think the point is that it was willful infringement. That is, they told 
> her to stop, she said "bite me", so the fine includes punishment as well as 
> restitution.

  You mean robbery is not "willful infringement" unless the shop owner
specifically tells the robber to not to do that?

  I don't think that argument makes any sense. I have never heard that
a fine is grown several orders of magnitude just because the property
owner told the criminal to stop. I can't even believe there's such a law
in the US or anywhere.

  And again, the punishment was in no way proportional to the crime, no
matter how "willfully" the criminal did it.

  What next? A child steals a candy from a store and he is given a fine
of a couple million dollars? What do we need a sense of proportion in
criminal law?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message