[amluto]

This movie is IP, not a physical thing. Which leads to my question: suppose someone does leak it and the studio “destroys” it. Then the studio sues for copyright infringement and wins. Did they just commit retroactive tax fraud?

This whole area of law seems utterly absurd.

[gonzo41]

You never know, maybe they're printing a thousand dvd's ready to scrap for this tax effect to work.

[pjz]

I hope so; the dump site will surely be found, and the movie will be rescued. I'm reminded of someone digging up a trove of ET cartridges for the Atari 2600 from the dump where they were disposed of.

[gretch]

> This whole area of law seems utterly absurd.

Only if you don't understand it

> Did they just commit retroactive tax fraud?

That's not how fraud works and that's not what the IRS is trying to do

Fraud: you have to knowingly misrepresent your position aka lie about something. Making a mistake on your taxes is not fraud (source - I am a US citizen and have received letters from the IRS for making a mistake). It is definitely not fraud to be caught in unexpected IP theft.

IRS: they are not trying to get people in "gotcha" situations. They just want to collect the fair amount of revenue that people owe the federal govt and their punishment is proportional.

[breather]

> Only if you don't understand it

Presumably understanding it is the basis of its being referred to as absurd.

[gretch]

It's not absurd though. It actually works. Is it suboptimal and a bit confusing at times? sure. But man these internet people sure are watering down the meaning of the word "absurd".

It's like a tax lawyer saying that computer programming is "absurd". No sir, computer programming is based on sound principles of mathematics and linguistics.

The hypothetical that GP comment posed demonstrated that they didn't understand how tax collection and the IRS works.

[breather]

If I were you I would start with trying to understand the other person first.