_________________
a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a pig

Bring it on

hmm...RIAA may have been cocking up but copyright law still stands

RIAA just took the piss as always.

_________________
"Destiny finds those who listen, fate finds the rest"

The point of the article is not to make a stand against copyright laws, its about a company breaking the law to sue people, hence, it should be fined heavily.

If a murderer kills one of my family member, and then I kill one of the murderers family members to get back at him, am I still not breaking the law?

_________________
a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a pig

"Moral" law but if you are religious if may be in your "religion" to do the whole "eye for an eye" thing, personally i'm all for an eye for an eye, if not that then life should mean life.

Uhhh, no it is actually the law... murdering someone is against the law believe it or not, not just in 'moral' law I'm talking about the actual law here, rather than religious/moral suggestions/opinions.

_________________
a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a pig

Actual law is based on morals, If we as a society didn't have said morals then there would be no law prohibiting murder

The point was that religious law has nothing to do with my analogy, even if you do follow the 'eye for an eye' thing, you're still going to get arrested if you murder someone. The same way your going to get fined if you use illegal evidence.

_________________
a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a bird in a pig

This is the worst use of miss quotation I can think of. The Torah, The Bible and the Koran never instruct you to take and eye for an eye, eye for an eye is a reference to compensation; if we fight and I take your eye I must offer my own as compensation. Not only this but in several points of exodus it says Vengence is the province of God.

I'd also like to point out that Codes of Law and Morals existsed in tadem and can not be easily seperated. Followers of Jean-Jacques Rousseau a prominent proponent of naturalist jurisprudence suggest all laws should and do derive from moral codes. Where as the ultilitarian view was that those in power set the law and its punishment. This gets worse when you start to read Kant, Nietzsche, Bentham or Hume. Kant argued that laws should be chosen through moral imperative and "be chosen as though they should hold as universal laws of nature" where Bentham/Hume suggested real law is entirley sepperate from religion and morality. Then everyones pal Nietzsche weighed in with the Law as a "Will to power" idea. When the greatest thinkers of our tim can not sepperate the two I don't think we'll have much sucess here (though I may be wrong.)

The one thing they all agreed on (except Nietzsche); There is nothing moral about murder.

_________________