On Nov. 7, Maurice Robberson pled guilty to conspiracy and felony copyright infringement, while Thomas Robberson pled guilty to a single count of felony copyright infringement.

said by TKJunkMail :

Copyright infringement is ALSO a criminal offense when the gov't wants to bother to prosecute it.

said by p92460 :

Yes, we've got those "vicious" pirates behind bars. Now, how about all of those violent criminals who are still out on the streets killing people

said by p92460 :

Yes, we've got those "vicious" pirates behind bars. Now, how about all of those violent criminals who are still out on the streets killing people?

said by p92460 :

Yes, we've got those "vicious" pirates behind bars. Now, how about all of those violent criminals who are still out on the streets killing people?

I guess if you're not a multi-million (billion?) dollar corporation that's losing a few dollars in software sales, then you just don't get enough attention as a "victim". (Yeah, I exaggerate... a little.)

Boy... do I feel safer now!

said by 81399672 :

here is big differences that you seem not never understand. They were selling pirated stuff as such as that is illegal and as you correctly posted will put you in jail. Downloading pirate software is not against any criminal law and such will not put you in jail. Technically it's not even illegal to download pirated stuff and not illegal to upload it as that is the only people riaa ever goes after. Sorry tk junk mail i know you really try to scare people but it's not working

There are four essential elements required to prove felony copyright infringement: (1) that a registered copyright exists, (2) that the defendant infringed by reproduction or distribution of the copyrighted work, (3) that the defendant acted willfully and (4) that the works infringed were at least 10 copies of one or more copyrighted works with a total value of $2,500 within a 180-day period. Willfulness continues to be a very illusive concept, but the statute provides no definition.

Until recently, the prosecution was required to prove that copyright infringement was done willfully and for commercial advantage or private financial gain. Now the law provides for prosecution in the absence of these monetary considerations. Specifically, the current statute, as codified at 17 U.S.C. § 506(a)(2), allows for prosecution in cases involving large scale illegal reproduction or distribution of copyrighted works where the infringers act willfully, but without a discernible profit motive.

Cases alleging illegal distribution of copyrighted materials without commercial gain have been charged all over the country. In August 1999, the first person was convicted for illegally posting computer software programs, musical recordings, and digitally-recorded movies on his Web site, and allowing the general public to download and copy these products free of charge. The Oregon defendant pleaded guilty to a felony.

Prosecutors should not hesitate to utilize this avenue of enforcement. In many cases the damage to the victim may be enormous although the infringer is not profiting financially. In fact, because the copyrighted materials are provided without charge to the entire Internet-using public, the demand for the infringing goods provided for free may increase dramatically and result in great potential loss to the rights holder.

said by zachary1 :

I think the word you're looking for is ASSERTION, not "insertion" lol