Agreed. Still, I stand by my original points:

1: The destruction of a computer (and perhaps more importantly, the loss of data with such an event) is too extreme for the crime, and too irreversible to occur without due process.

2: Such a mechanism would be too easily exploitable by those with malicious intent (Hackers or terrorists), and will likely be rendered ineffective as the worst offenders find ways around it.

3: I feel this can lead to the virtual elimination of privacy, and open wide the doors as to what the government can and cannot monitor in the future. Given the tendancy of the current administration to throw people in prison as “Enemy Combatants” with only the weakest of information liking them to terrorism, I feel that such paranoia about civil rights and liberties is more than justified right now.

I’m sure Senator Hatch’s statement was less than one-half serious. But it does bring up the question: What should be done by law enforcement to stop the stealing of music?

Entertainment in digital form is one industry that adds positvely to the nation’s balance of trade. Intellectual property theft (software, music, etc.) can be measured in the billions of dollars. That’s lost jobs, lost profits to the owners of enterainment businesses and software companies (pension funds public, private and union, mutual funds, small investors, etc.) not to mention lost income to sogwriters, music publishers and recording artists. This is in no way a victimless crime.

I’d like to hear from a music thief their rationale for stealing something that can be easily obtained for $.99. So what’s the answer? Some highly publicized arrests of seemingly ordinary people who engage in habitual theft? Should they be charged with senseless pettiness?

What punishment fits the crime?

What punishment fits the crime?

The reason why this is disturbing is not ‘does the punishment fit the crime?’  The question we should all be asking is whether the method of investigation fits the crime.  I think KS’s comments are more relevant to this discussion than the right way to punish a thief (which imo should be done the same way as other thieves: fines, probation, prison time, etc.)

Well, quite honestly, I think it is a criminal act to put Proud Mary behind some car commercial or use Walk Away to sell beer (you cannot always get to a mute button), it appears as though holding title to any thing gives one the right to abuse the thing as they see fit without respect to other peoples’ feelings.

The solution to this dire situation is the worst thing you can imagine: chivalry. In medieval days, dishonorable behaviour led to summary death - all we honor these days is the profit margin, and the only summary punishment is skid road.