Arnoud Engelfriet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 2007-11-24, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Arnoud Engelfriet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> On 2007-11-24, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> But you better hire a darn brilliant lawyer if you want to get your >>>> punishment reduced because you consistently and from the start relied on >>>> a business plan involving defrauding the customers and misappropriating >>>> copyrighted material. >>> >>> Sounds like Google? >> >> So where do they plead for reduced punitive damages because they never >> intended to recompensate anybody in the first place? > > Google's attitude is basically "we copy everyone's stuff, and > you can opt out if you know how". That's not how copyright law works.
So where do they plead for reduced punitive damages because they never intended to recompensate anybody in the first place? Focus. That was what I was talking about and what you pretended replying to. If you want to foam at your mouth about Google, feel free to start a new thread when your comment is completely irrelevant to the current posting. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
