[emodendroket]

If that was the object, why the sustained effort to imitate the official packaging, rather than just honestly admitting the discs were reproductions? Is that really the issue, when part of the defense of this guy made in the linked article is that the actual disc content was available for download for free from MS?

[syshum]

you believe sending a person to a prison for over a year where there is a high likely hood they will be raped, beaten and abused is the proper punishment for "imitation of the official packaging"

you believe that giving a person a felony conviction where by they will be denied many rights, barred from renting property, be unable to obtain many jobs, and for the rest of their lives have their economic and social opportunities limited is the proper punishment for "imitation of the official packaging"

I am honestly shocked by a callous reactions people have had to this case on HN, either people do not really understand what it means to go to a Federal prison for over year, have a felony criminal record and how that will for ever impact this persons life... forever.

Or People have a massively inflated value of "official packaging" and the protection of corporate profits/intellectual privilege .

This guy did not murder anyone, this guy did not cost anyone a job, this guy did not harm anyone, even if you are correct that he was attempting to dupe recylcers into believing it was "official packaging" what is the actual harm to the world in that?

[emodendroket]

Yikes, there is a rapid escalation in claims. Certainly we could argue about whether the length of the sentence is appropriate. Contrary to what you have written, I don't think anyone, even violent criminals, should be subject to prison rape, beatings, or abuse, nor do I think ex-convicts of any stripe should be denied housing, and I think it is absolutely a black mark on this country's justice system that such a thing is winked at. But let's not only trot out that defense when we're looking at white-collar criminals who remind us of ourselves and look the other way for others. The fact remains, though, that this guy was engaged in a for-profit criminal enterprise, and his defenders do not seem to even want to acknowledge that.

What's the harm? It's simple. It's fraud. He led people to believe they were buying one thing when they were buying another. It's no different than slapping Chiquita labels on different bananas and then turning around and saying "what's the problem, they were good bananas" when you're caught.

[syshum]

>> It's no different than slapping Chiquita labels on different bananas and then turning around and saying "what's the problem, they were good bananas" when you're caught.

It is very different, Chiquita primary business is selling banana's

Dell Business is not selling Dell Restore Discs.. It is selling the computers for which the Restore Discs are for

If you can see the difference in these things well I really do not know where to go from here.

>> But let's not only trot out that defense when we're looking at white-collar criminals who remind us of ourselves and look the other way for others.

You know nothing about my advocacy or when I do or do not "trot out that defense". I am almost universally Anti-Statism, being a Libertarian I talk about and advocate against all manner of government abuse, most of which is more massive (like police murdering people) than this.

Simply because I am also using it here does not mean I only talk about it for " white-collar criminals" nor do those other abuses negate this abuse. If that is your metric then no one should ever complain about the US Government at all since NK is worse... It is bullshit argument

> The fact remains, though, that this guy was engaged in a for-profit criminal enterprise, and his defenders do not seem to even want to acknowledge that.

I dont believe it should be considered a criminal enterprise.

I bet however you largely support the current Copyright and Patent laws, I do not, most of this persons supporters do not either. That is the disconnect I believe. People that support the concept of "intellectual Property" want to throw the book at this guy, people that generally oppose the concept of government created monopolies on ideas aka intellectual privilege do not believe this guy did anything wrong.

[emodendroket]

It goes beyond a question of intellectual property to knowingly selling customers something other than what they believe they are buying. To take another example, you could argue, I think probably correctly, that there is no sensible reason to avoid eating genetically-modified foods. But I do not think it would be ethical or that it should be legal to put a label on your food that says "NO GMOS" when, in fact, you are using GMOs. The argument here seems to be the same -- it should be OK because the result was the same, if you bought the counterfeit disc and installed it, as if you got what you thought you were buying. I don't think that's correct.

[nailer]

I think you are arguing that the defendent does not deserve a harsh punishment, which is correct.

The comment you're replying to is argiung that the defendent is guilty of deliberate fraud, which is also correct.

Neither of these affect the truth of the other.