Warp wrote:
>   Well, if you don't count the fact that in some countries just putting a
> link to copyrighted material is illegal. You don't have to *distribute* the
> material, it's enough that you *link* to the material.

That's distributing, again, not downloading. You don't get sued for 
following the link, but for publishing it.

What country is it that has links to copyrighted material being illegal?

It's illegal here (in some cases) to put a link to code that breaks 
encryption supposedly protecting copyright. That's the new DMCA stuff.

I suppose I should mention IANAL, but y'all knew that already.

> - If it's illegal to post a link to copyrighted material, is it illegal to
> post a link to a web page which has illegal material as an embeded video?
> Is it illegal to post a link to a youtube video with copyrighted material?
> 
> - Is it illegal to post a link to a page which contains links to copyrighted
> material (but doesn't distribute it itself)? How many indirection stpes are
> necessary before posting a link becomes legal, and why?

And is it illegal to include that in a search engine like Google?  (I'm 
pretty sure Google is technically breaking the law by having "cached" 
versions of your web pages on their servers, incidentally, especially since 
they mark it up with colors to match your search queries, meaning they're no 
longer serving as a "proxy", which is explicitly allowed in the copyright 
code. I'm sure they have enough lawyers to pummel that into the ground, tho.)

>   If the answer is "it hasn't been tested in court", then the law is *really*
> f'ed up. How can you obey a law which even the lawmakers can't figure out
> precisely when it's applicable and when it isn't? 

Technically, in the USA, if it's not clear enough that you know when you're 
breaking it, the law isn't a valid enforcable law. In practice, this doesn't 
always hold up. (See, for example, anti-trust laws, or "I'll know it when I 
see it" pornography laws, etc.)

> That's just crazy.

Fully agreed.

>   What do they do there if someone can't pay fines or other payments, and
> has no property to speak of?

In a *criminal* case, you go to jail. I.e., if you get caught shoplifting, 
you might get fined "$100 or 30 days in jail".

Otherwise, you file personal bankruptcy, which means the court looks at 
everything you own, excludes the stuff that is by law not possible to take, 
and takes the rest, giving it to the people you owe. There are some things 
(which vary state by state) that the court isn't allowed to take. Retirement 
money, in California, is an example, which is why OJSimpson lost a lawsuit 
for millions of dollars and is still happily retired and living a wealthy life.

Most places have "homestead laws", which means that at least some of the 
money from selling your primary house stays with you for you to pay rent or 
whatever (they won't make you homeless). In Texas, where being a farmer or 
rancher was a big thing when the laws were being made, they don't get to 
take your house at all. In California, you get something like the first $75K 
from selling your house to pay your debts.

After that, except for special circumstances, you're done. Your debts are 
gone, and the person you owe the money to is SOL. The exceptions are what 
you'd expect, like owing tax money, which just looms over your head and some 
of which comes out of your paycheck each week, taken before you even see it.

A lot of poor people are "judgement-proof", meaning that even if you get a 
judge to tell them to pay you, they have no money to pay with. A lot of rich 
people are also "judgement-proof", because they technically own nothing 
themselves. Instead, they put money in a company whose charter is (say) to 
pay them the profits from investments until they die, and then to disburse 
that money to their children. Technically that money belongs to the kids and 
you can't take it from the kids to pay the parent's debts. Also, since the 
company is required to give the parents the profit, you can't take it away 
because the kids can't pay their debts. Also, since the company is just 
buying stocks and such, they're not doing anything that could conceivably 
get them sued.

But basically you give your money over to a judge, and he decides what to do 
with it, and then you're off the hook.

For businesses, it's a bit more complicated, because it's not *too* bad to 
close down a business that's so far in debt it'll never recover, while you 
wouldn't want to execute someone simply because they've already spent more 
than they'll ever earn in their lifetime.

How about where you are? Is it more enlightened?

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message