Porn isn't copy-write protected? Lawsuit says so...
 

Looks like she was downloading porn torrent style and it caught up with here and now she is suing the production company.

http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_ne...copyright-porn

it's copyright btw :winkwink:

Hahahahahahaha!

Porn is not obscenity. Obscenity has no definition yet. But the judges know it when they see it. ;-)

What a stupid whore.

Where would that leave us?

It wont happen, but how would we cope if it did?

Too bad she doesn't live somewhere like Polk County, FL.

By asserting that what she knowingly downloaded (what she believes to be) obscene material she has, in effect, admitted to the sort of criminal act that redneck sheriff's love to make a big fuss about.

What he said.

What a stupid bitch...Too bad she doesn't live in South Carolina either.
Wong Can't make a Wight in this case. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Stupid yes, but what if, what if she get a very catholic judge??

Well, if she wins the law suit, the DA will have grounds to charge her with possession of
obscene material.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh Good point!

.

It's not illegal to possess obscene material with the exception of CP or Bestiality only to disseminate obscene material. So if she was using torrents and was sending packets while she was receiving packets, then she would be guilty of obscenity distribution. I forget the exact case but I believe it was Georgia and maybe Sirkin who argued on the legality of being able to possess it legally but not being able to purchase it which creates a catch-22.

Her strategy isn't that bad. If the courts can find the material obscene then the company cannot allege infringement because you cannot copyright obscenity. If it can be proven obscene, the DA won't give a shit about the downloaded because they will have a much bigger fish to fry with the pornographer.

I hope someone smashes her in the face with a shovel.

Prove one thing I said that is incorrect. Just one. I'll wait........