• Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    If a company cannot do business without breaking the law it simply is a criminal organisation. RICO act, anyone?

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      If a company cannot do business without breaking the law

      …then it doesn’t deserve to be in business.

    • theVerdantOrange@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The law they’re breaking is civil, so they can only get sued; this is basically Napster. Also this case is is Britain, so RICO doesn’t apply.

      • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        If this is OK, downloading a movie to watch it, not to make any profit, is OK, right? If it isn’t, will they get fined proportionally to the people who get fined for downloading a movie?

        • Pika@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          some countries this is actually legal, it’s just the redistributing part that is illegal

          note: I’m oversimplifying here, the countries that allow for downloading aren’t actually letting you have it for free, it’s under the basis that you’ve already purchased one form of the movie and you are downloading it so you can preserve what you have purchased already

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      If a company cannot do business without breaking the law

      I mean, which law? If Altman was selling shrooms or some blow that hasn’t been stepped on a dozen times, I might be willing to cut him some slack. At least that wouldn’t add a few million tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere.