Bogus

There was some muttering a few weeks back where all of us "pirates" would tremble due to a federal law that Gonzales was pitching. It was to "relax" the evidence statues to include intent as well as commitment. I read that one and the current copyright law with one distinction noted: Copyright infringment is a CIVIL offence that you can be sued for. Theft is defined as the production and distribution of copyrighted information for profit. Every paragraph and clause in federal copyright theft law is in reference to the sale or profit from and not for personal use and distribution. Copyright theft statues are geared to stop the "discount" DVD suppliers and counterfeit software vendors. This is the first case I've heard where this is applying to an individual that was not profiting from his actions. (I could be wrong here if he was charging for site membership or something like that) Because infringement is a civil offence it has to be initiated by the company that is being infringed as a law suit--hence why the RIAA has their ghestapo legal team issuing out suits to every teen with a torrent client and not sicking the Feds after them. I'm not a lawyer so take this with for what it's worth and the laws may be different in other countries. This shouldn't have become an extredition case but a fat law suit case by every software company that has had their product cracked. It would be a far greater punishment as he would effectively be paying them off till he dies.