CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF FEDERAL COPYRIGHT LAWS
KentInformation TechnologyCivil And Criminal Penalties For Violation Of Federal *Copyright Laws
Copyright infringement is the act of exercising, without permission or legal authority, one or more of the exclusive rights granted to the copyright owner under section 106 of the Copyright Act (Title 17 of the United States Code). These rights include the right to reproduce or distribute a copyrighted work. In the file-sharing context, downloading or uploading substantial parts of a copyrighted work without authority constitutes an infringement.
Penalties for copyright infringement include civil and criminal penalties. In general, anyone found liable for civil copyright infringement may be ordered to pay either actual damages or “statutory” damages affixed at not less than $750 and not more than $30,000 per work infringed. For “willful” infringement, a court may award up to $150,000 per work infringed. A court can, in its discretion, also assess costs and attorneys’ fees. For details, see Title 17, United States Code, Sections 504, 505.
Willful copyright infringement can also result in criminal penalties, including imprisonment of up to five years and fines of up to $250,000 per offense.*
What does the Government do to those who name rape victims?
Just to make it clear, several people, including me, have said we’d be perfectly fine with news providers voluntarily choosing not to report shooter names, and/or exclusively refer to them as worthless idiots. However not one of us -not a single one of us- has stated that we think this would solve mass shootings.
Honestly it would be like using a band-aid to treat a broken leg.
(Full disclosure: The above sentence is an analogy.)
Depends on whether the government forces them to do it or not. Which leads us to…
Your posts to date are not illuminating on this subject, and your cites are not a reliable source for your opinion (what with them saying that guns are a major factor, and all). So how about you actually state the proposal you’re putting forth? Here, I’ll make it easy:
A: The government uses laws or regulations to censor news providers regarding details that identify mass shooters.
B: No laws or regulations are employed to force news providers to play along.
A or B? All you have to type is a single character.
Look, he’s been piled on so hard that he’s maybe trying to let the thread die. We should just take our victories as they come and let this thread sink down to the bottom of the forum, where the scavengers and bacteria can consume it and poop it out, thereby increasing its value.
Interesting distinction, and I gave it some thought. You can violate copyright and engage in slander and libel and plagiarism and get away with it if nobody complains about it, in these cases the copyright holder or the person being insulted or the artist being copied. If they don’t notice your action, or choose not to bother, the government will not go after you.
Kiddie porn and the OP’s proposed media name-blackout, though, invite the state to act without a specific victim complaint.
Studies that show that articles which teach good vaccination information against anti-vaxxers helps to increase anti-vaxxer count.
When Donald Trump does something bad, he works to increase awareness of it, pushes the media to promote it (as bad), and drives up his approval rating.
There is no such thing as bad publicity.
Gun homicides, in America, get a lot of publicity.
In Switzerland, everyone has a gun. No publicity.
Spree killers are, at heart, attention-seekers and they know how - in modern day America - to get it.
The media would almost certainly save all of those lives by stopping giving the killers what they want.
So does saying “fuck” on broadcast TV, along with (with a few exceptions) Nudity. The FCC has lots of rules for broadcasters, including the Equal-time rule and at one time- political fairness.
In general, the FCC does wait for a complaint, but with so many viewers…
From here. Only about a quarter of homicides in Switzerland were done with guns. If we had such a low homicide rate, we might not have the publicity either. And our guns are not getting publicized, just our murders. Suicides don’t get publicized, but they still happen, at a higher rate than murders.
Not that half the homicides in Switzerland are committed by foreigners. Are they doing it for publicity?