The Off Topic Thread Loosely based around Law
  1 / 20    
[quote name='chiz' date='21 December 2011 - 02:04 PM' timestamp='1324497895' post='1345414']
...cut out the lawyers and courtrooms...
[/quote]

At your own risk.

Like it or not this is a legal issue and lawyers and courts are your best defense against getting screwed.
[quote name='chiz' date='21 December 2011 - 02:04 PM' timestamp='1324497895' post='1345414']

...cut out the lawyers and courtrooms...





At your own risk.



Like it or not this is a legal issue and lawyers and courts are your best defense against getting screwed.

Done.

#1
Posted 12/22/2011 02:57 AM   
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='22 December 2011 - 02:57 AM' timestamp='1324522657' post='1345575']
At your own risk.

Like it or not this is a legal issue and lawyers and courts are your best defense against getting screwed.
[/quote]

Have to disagree with that.

I would say your best defense, as in anything, is knowledge. Hiring a private guild member and being judged by that same guild, in a private and for profit court, is a recepie for disaster.
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='22 December 2011 - 02:57 AM' timestamp='1324522657' post='1345575']

At your own risk.



Like it or not this is a legal issue and lawyers and courts are your best defense against getting screwed.





Have to disagree with that.



I would say your best defense, as in anything, is knowledge. Hiring a private guild member and being judged by that same guild, in a private and for profit court, is a recepie for disaster.

CPU: Core i7 930 @ 4.20ghz 1.3v cooled by Antec Kuhler 920

MOBO: Asus P6X58D Premium

GFX: 2x Asus GTX 560Ti Direct CUII @ 900mhz Core 2200mhz Memory

RAM: Corsair CMG6GX3M3A1600C7 6gb 1600mhz 7-7-7-20 2t

PSU: Thermaltake Toughpower 850 watt

CASE: Antec 1200

APU: X-fi Titanium Fatality SPEAKERS: Logitech X-530 5.1

HDD: 1x OCZ Agility 3 60gb SSD GAMES 2x Western Digital Caviar Black 500gb in RAID 0

DISPLAY: Acer H243HX 24" @ 1920x1080 Resolution

KEYBOARD: Logitech G19 MOUSE: Logitech G5 WHEEL Logitech G25 JOYSTICK Logitech G940

OPERATING SYSTEM: Windows 7 Ultimate x64 RTM

#2
Posted 12/22/2011 03:16 AM   
[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='21 December 2011 - 09:16 PM' timestamp='1324523777' post='1345588']
Have to disagree with that.

I would say your best defense, as in anything, is knowledge. Hiring a private guild member and being judged by that same guild, in a private and for profit court, is a recepie for disaster.
[/quote]

The sole job of attorneys and courts is to interpret the law. Attorneys are trained for a minimum of 3 years to do this, and are required to take 30 hours of continuing education every year. They know the laws, and it's the desire to get rid of the courts that lets people get screwed through arbitration. Every single attempt in western history to reduce the power of the judiciary has ended poorly.
[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='21 December 2011 - 09:16 PM' timestamp='1324523777' post='1345588']

Have to disagree with that.



I would say your best defense, as in anything, is knowledge. Hiring a private guild member and being judged by that same guild, in a private and for profit court, is a recepie for disaster.





The sole job of attorneys and courts is to interpret the law. Attorneys are trained for a minimum of 3 years to do this, and are required to take 30 hours of continuing education every year. They know the laws, and it's the desire to get rid of the courts that lets people get screwed through arbitration. Every single attempt in western history to reduce the power of the judiciary has ended poorly.

Done.

#3
Posted 12/22/2011 03:45 AM   
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='22 December 2011 - 03:45 AM' timestamp='1324525548' post='1345607']
The sole job of attorneys and courts is to interpret the law. Attorneys are trained for a minimum of 3 years to do this, and are required to take 30 hours of continuing education every year. They know the laws, and it's the desire to get rid of the courts that lets people get screwed through arbitration. Every single attempt in western history to reduce the power of the judiciary has ended poorly.
[/quote]

It is not only to interpret the law, they use their power to pervert and CREATE law, ever had a look at the legal dictionary in the library of congress? its an entire room full of multiple volumes of books, why? because Attorneys at law (not to be confused with a real lawyer) are constantly CREATING new legal defenitions to suit their agendas - and they can, because the legal system is 100 percent privatized and monetized.

And you are clearly not looking back far enough into the history of the courts:

[i][b]Look up any dictionary on the word “court” and you will find its origin is frequently claimed from an alleged 12th Century French word ‘cour’ and then from the earlier Latin word ‘cohort’ is meaning courtyard. Yet if the word “court” is less than 800 years old, what did they call judicial assemblies before this time? Who created the word “court” and why? If it is only 800 years old, why did the word “court” seem to overtake all other forms of judicial assembly and why? and what is its real meaning?[/b][/i]

[i][b]Judicial Assemblies during the Hellenic (Greek) Empire

Before the rise of the Pagan Roman legal system, the Hellenic legal system conceived partly by Aristotle as tutor and architect behind Alexander the Great conceived of a professional class of judges known as ephetai that would form a new professional class of judges to replace the arkhons (or arkhai as singular) of the “the Eleven” that reviewed imprisonment and execution or the elected “horde” that would decide the fate much like choosing a favorite actor on stage under ancient Athenian law.
The Dikastea were a semi-permanent group of several hundred part-time jurors who were appointed to such a position at the beginning of a new year under oath. A normal criminal case might have involved several hundred dikastea members who observed the case virtually like an audience viewing a play as the ampitheatres were used for such court hearings, while much smaller group for normal private disputes.
As with all ancient law, Greek law was centered on the truth of the spoken word and the logic of the argument or defense under oath.
The Areiopagos adjudicated by the ephetai had four forms and rules of review, the Prutaneion, the Palladion, which dealt with cases of homicide and the killing of non citizens, the Delphinion and the Phreatto.

[i][b][i][b]Judicial Assemblies during the Roman Empire

Under the ancient Pagan Roman Empire, the Chief civil and military magistrates invested with imperium were called Consuls and periodically held called ‘consulatio’ – hence where we get the modern English words and concepts of consult and consultation.
Below the Consuls were the Praetors and the Tribunes. However, when the Tribunes met in number of three or greater, they had the power to veto laws, decrees and acts of all other magistrates except dictators (consuls granted extraordinary powers under emergency).
Criminal prosecution by late Republic was before one of the quaestiones perpetuae ("standing jury courts"), each with a specific jurisdiction, such as treason (maiestas), electoral corruption (ambitus), extortion in the provinces (repetundae), embezzlement of public funds, murder and poisoning, forgery, violence (vis).
Similar to other ancient law, Roman law considered oral testimony as primary evidence. Contrary to deliberate manipulation and corruption of history, there was no “professional class” of jurists within Rome. Instead, a citizen would on occasion, if unable to speak clearly, hire an actor to speak in their place. In such circumstances, the actor was sworn to recite the truth as told to them by the accuser or defendant on their testicals (being removed if they lied) – hence the origin of testimony.
Judicial Assemblies during the Frankish-Saxon Empires [/b]Under the revisions of Anglo-Saxon Law by the Frankish Emperor Charlamagne, two forms of Judicial review and assembly were reconstituted in the 9th Century- the Placitum (minor crime) and the Malum (major crime).
A Placitum was presided over by a judge known as a Praesideo, from which the word President is derived. The word Placitum is still known as a cause (before a court) and a plea, a pleading and judicial proceeding. A Mallum was presided over by the regional lord known as a Count, given the seriousness of such charges.
However, the most significant reform by the Pippins and later reinforced by the Saxons was the paramount importance of a person’s sworn oath or vow as their “bond” – bringing a return to a principle that was fundamental to both Greek Law, ancient Roman Law and Celtic Law with one twist. Charlemagne enshrined the fact that a man could not be convicted on testimony gained through torture – in other words, our word must be given freely and without duress if it is to be regarded as true and reliable.[/b] [/i]

[i][b]Judicial Assembles under the Venetian/Genoese/Florentine Guilds


The creation of the Catholic Church in Rome by the father and uncles of Charlemagne in 751 marked a turning point in Judicial law and assemblies. By 1057, aided by St. Peter “the Venetian”, Gregory VII became the first satanic anti-Pope of the Roman Cult and the world and law would never be the same again.
Aided by the Medieval Warming Period and their new found claims of right over all of Christianity through the false Roman Cult, the elite anti-semitic Khazarian Trading families of Venice, Genoa and Naples grew increasingly wealthy in controlling trade, especially in the formation of guilds, or closed markets for manufacture, law and distribution.
Nowhere was the refinement and innovation of the guilds stronger than in the rise of the Genoese outpost of Florence by the turn of the 13th Century through the Medici family originally from Genoa. In Florence, they helped organize a system of guilds called the Arti (from which we get the word ‘art’ in terms of secret practices) of five (5) major Guilds called the arti mediane and seven (7) minor guilds called the arti minori. Next to the cloth and wool merchants Guild being the most powerful of all, came the Arte de Guidici e Notai or the “Guild of Judges and notaries”.
Yet this new breed of professional class of jurists was unlike anything the world had seen before. Instead of being professors, philosophers and experts of law first, they were merchants first and their product to sell was not simply law, but the commercialization of penalties- quite simply bonding, securities and bailment.
The place where these traders in commercializing law plied their trade was called a cautio or what we know as “court”, with cautio meaning in Latin literally “bonding, securitization and bailment (of vow/oaths/cases)”; The claim that the word “court” comes from cohort a clumsy and deliberate lie.
Yet, the Venetians upon seeing the money that could be made upon the “monetization of sin” through the cautio of the Guild of Judges and Notaries suddenly saw the benefit of strengthening their investment in the Roman Cult and by 1249/1250 issued the first “Jubilee” in the forgiveness (retirement) of all sins and debts and the commencement of the wholesale trade of indulgences- or insurance against “sin”.
Thus the Guild of Judges and Notaries continued to grow in prestige and influence through their cautio (courts) in plying their trade of the monetization of sin first and the dispensing of any resemblance of justice second. When the system was promoted into England, the Guilds became the Liveries and also thrived.
Fast forward to the direct descendents of the Guilds of Judges and Notaries of Florence, Venice, Genoa and Liveries of London being the Bar Associations and the Court remains the same model of commercialization of sin of the guilds- bearing no resemblance to the function of law for thousands of years prior to the 13th Century. [/b][/i][/b][/i]

Skimming but the surface of course, but hopefully that gives you a better idea of what I am trying to say.

All that info was sourced from the highest court in existance, from which all other INFERIOR ROMAN COURTS derive their authority from.
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='22 December 2011 - 03:45 AM' timestamp='1324525548' post='1345607']

The sole job of attorneys and courts is to interpret the law. Attorneys are trained for a minimum of 3 years to do this, and are required to take 30 hours of continuing education every year. They know the laws, and it's the desire to get rid of the courts that lets people get screwed through arbitration. Every single attempt in western history to reduce the power of the judiciary has ended poorly.





It is not only to interpret the law, they use their power to pervert and CREATE law, ever had a look at the legal dictionary in the library of congress? its an entire room full of multiple volumes of books, why? because Attorneys at law (not to be confused with a real lawyer) are constantly CREATING new legal defenitions to suit their agendas - and they can, because the legal system is 100 percent privatized and monetized.



And you are clearly not looking back far enough into the history of the courts:



Look up any dictionary on the word “court” and you will find its origin is frequently claimed from an alleged 12th Century French word ‘cour’ and then from the earlier Latin word ‘cohort’ is meaning courtyard. Yet if the word “court” is less than 800 years old, what did they call judicial assemblies before this time? Who created the word “court” and why? If it is only 800 years old, why did the word “court” seem to overtake all other forms of judicial assembly and why? and what is its real meaning?



Judicial Assemblies during the Hellenic (Greek) Empire



Before the rise of the Pagan Roman legal system, the Hellenic legal system conceived partly by Aristotle as tutor and architect behind Alexander the Great conceived of a professional class of judges known as ephetai that would form a new professional class of judges to replace the arkhons (or arkhai as singular) of the “the Eleven” that reviewed imprisonment and execution or the elected “horde” that would decide the fate much like choosing a favorite actor on stage under ancient Athenian law.

The Dikastea were a semi-permanent group of several hundred part-time jurors who were appointed to such a position at the beginning of a new year under oath. A normal criminal case might have involved several hundred dikastea members who observed the case virtually like an audience viewing a play as the ampitheatres were used for such court hearings, while much smaller group for normal private disputes.

As with all ancient law, Greek law was centered on the truth of the spoken word and the logic of the argument or defense under oath.

The Areiopagos adjudicated by the ephetai had four forms and rules of review, the Prutaneion, the Palladion, which dealt with cases of homicide and the killing of non citizens, the Delphinion and the Phreatto.



[i]Judicial Assemblies during the Roman Empire



Under the ancient Pagan Roman Empire, the Chief civil and military magistrates invested with imperium were called Consuls and periodically held called ‘consulatio’ – hence where we get the modern English words and concepts of consult and consultation.

Below the Consuls were the Praetors and the Tribunes. However, when the Tribunes met in number of three or greater, they had the power to veto laws, decrees and acts of all other magistrates except dictators (consuls granted extraordinary powers under emergency).

Criminal prosecution by late Republic was before one of the quaestiones perpetuae ("standing jury courts"), each with a specific jurisdiction, such as treason (maiestas), electoral corruption (ambitus), extortion in the provinces (repetundae), embezzlement of public funds, murder and poisoning, forgery, violence (vis).

Similar to other ancient law, Roman law considered oral testimony as primary evidence. Contrary to deliberate manipulation and corruption of history, there was no “professional class” of jurists within Rome. Instead, a citizen would on occasion, if unable to speak clearly, hire an actor to speak in their place. In such circumstances, the actor was sworn to recite the truth as told to them by the accuser or defendant on their testicals (being removed if they lied) – hence the origin of testimony.

Judicial Assemblies during the Frankish-Saxon Empires
Under the revisions of Anglo-Saxon Law by the Frankish Emperor Charlamagne, two forms of Judicial review and assembly were reconstituted in the 9th Century- the Placitum (minor crime) and the Malum (major crime).

A Placitum was presided over by a judge known as a Praesideo, from which the word President is derived. The word Placitum is still known as a cause (before a court) and a plea, a pleading and judicial proceeding. A Mallum was presided over by the regional lord known as a Count, given the seriousness of such charges.

However, the most significant reform by the Pippins and later reinforced by the Saxons was the paramount importance of a person’s sworn oath or vow as their “bond” – bringing a return to a principle that was fundamental to both Greek Law, ancient Roman Law and Celtic Law with one twist. Charlemagne enshrined the fact that a man could not be convicted on testimony gained through torture – in other words, our word must be given freely and without duress if it is to be regarded as true and reliable.




Judicial Assembles under the Venetian/Genoese/Florentine Guilds





The creation of the Catholic Church in Rome by the father and uncles of Charlemagne in 751 marked a turning point in Judicial law and assemblies. By 1057, aided by St. Peter “the Venetian”, Gregory VII became the first satanic anti-Pope of the Roman Cult and the world and law would never be the same again.

Aided by the Medieval Warming Period and their new found claims of right over all of Christianity through the false Roman Cult, the elite anti-semitic Khazarian Trading families of Venice, Genoa and Naples grew increasingly wealthy in controlling trade, especially in the formation of guilds, or closed markets for manufacture, law and distribution.

Nowhere was the refinement and innovation of the guilds stronger than in the rise of the Genoese outpost of Florence by the turn of the 13th Century through the Medici family originally from Genoa. In Florence, they helped organize a system of guilds called the Arti (from which we get the word ‘art’ in terms of secret practices) of five (5) major Guilds called the arti mediane and seven (7) minor guilds called the arti minori. Next to the cloth and wool merchants Guild being the most powerful of all, came the Arte de Guidici e Notai or the “Guild of Judges and notaries”.

Yet this new breed of professional class of jurists was unlike anything the world had seen before. Instead of being professors, philosophers and experts of law first, they were merchants first and their product to sell was not simply law, but the commercialization of penalties- quite simply bonding, securities and bailment.

The place where these traders in commercializing law plied their trade was called a cautio or what we know as “court”, with cautio meaning in Latin literally “bonding, securitization and bailment (of vow/oaths/cases)”; The claim that the word “court” comes from cohort a clumsy and deliberate lie.

Yet, the Venetians upon seeing the money that could be made upon the “monetization of sin” through the cautio of the Guild of Judges and Notaries suddenly saw the benefit of strengthening their investment in the Roman Cult and by 1249/1250 issued the first “Jubilee” in the forgiveness (retirement) of all sins and debts and the commencement of the wholesale trade of indulgences- or insurance against “sin”.

Thus the Guild of Judges and Notaries continued to grow in prestige and influence through their cautio (courts) in plying their trade of the monetization of sin first and the dispensing of any resemblance of justice second. When the system was promoted into England, the Guilds became the Liveries and also thrived.

Fast forward to the direct descendents of the Guilds of Judges and Notaries of Florence, Venice, Genoa and Liveries of London being the Bar Associations and the Court remains the same model of commercialization of sin of the guilds- bearing no resemblance to the function of law for thousands of years prior to the 13th Century.




Skimming but the surface of course, but hopefully that gives you a better idea of what I am trying to say.



All that info was sourced from the highest court in existance, from which all other INFERIOR ROMAN COURTS derive their authority from.

CPU: Core i7 930 @ 4.20ghz 1.3v cooled by Antec Kuhler 920

MOBO: Asus P6X58D Premium

GFX: 2x Asus GTX 560Ti Direct CUII @ 900mhz Core 2200mhz Memory

RAM: Corsair CMG6GX3M3A1600C7 6gb 1600mhz 7-7-7-20 2t

PSU: Thermaltake Toughpower 850 watt

CASE: Antec 1200

APU: X-fi Titanium Fatality SPEAKERS: Logitech X-530 5.1

HDD: 1x OCZ Agility 3 60gb SSD GAMES 2x Western Digital Caviar Black 500gb in RAID 0

DISPLAY: Acer H243HX 24" @ 1920x1080 Resolution

KEYBOARD: Logitech G19 MOUSE: Logitech G5 WHEEL Logitech G25 JOYSTICK Logitech G940

OPERATING SYSTEM: Windows 7 Ultimate x64 RTM

#4
Posted 12/22/2011 04:38 AM   
I would add:

[i][b]Judges, Lawyers and members of the Bar are not bad people

Judges, lawyers and members of the Bar Guilds are not generally bad or evil people. On the contrary, many dedicate their spare time to help the less fortunate in the community as well as actively participate in the support of non-profit organizations. Instead, they have been carefully educated and indoctrinated into a system where they are completely ignorant to its real history, its function and the fact that the law is secondary to the Bar making a profit from the commercializing of sin. [/b[/i]

[i][b]Plausible deniability

Most members of the Bar are completely and wholly ignorant of its creation, its purpose, the true origin and meaning of court and to whom they ultimately serve.
This is not their fault initially. However, because the process of indoctrination takes place over years and often decades, it is almost impossible for most good people who are members of the Bar to even comprehend what is revealed in these pages, let alone even consider the truth in these words.
Instead, their education and the open promotion of arrogance, superior feeling of knowledge of the law and aggressive competitiveness all serve to protect the Bar through plausible deniability – in other words if a highly educated professor in law has never heard of these things and denies them, then ipso facto they must be false.
This kind of self serving, circular reinforcement of isolated thinking and self satisfaction is why the Bar Guilds along with Medical Practitioners are arguably two of the most unhappy groups of professionals “cut off” from the ideals and dreams of youth. [/b][/i]
I would add:



Judges, Lawyers and members of the Bar are not bad people



Judges, lawyers and members of the Bar Guilds are not generally bad or evil people. On the contrary, many dedicate their spare time to help the less fortunate in the community as well as actively participate in the support of non-profit organizations. Instead, they have been carefully educated and indoctrinated into a system where they are completely ignorant to its real history, its function and the fact that the law is secondary to the Bar making a profit from the commercializing of sin. [/b




[b]Plausible deniability



Most members of the Bar are completely and wholly ignorant of its creation, its purpose, the true origin and meaning of court and to whom they ultimately serve.

This is not their fault initially. However, because the process of indoctrination takes place over years and often decades, it is almost impossible for most good people who are members of the Bar to even comprehend what is revealed in these pages, let alone even consider the truth in these words.

Instead, their education and the open promotion of arrogance, superior feeling of knowledge of the law and aggressive competitiveness all serve to protect the Bar through plausible deniability – in other words if a highly educated professor in law has never heard of these things and denies them, then ipso facto they must be false.

This kind of self serving, circular reinforcement of isolated thinking and self satisfaction is why the Bar Guilds along with Medical Practitioners are arguably two of the most unhappy groups of professionals “cut off” from the ideals and dreams of youth.

CPU: Core i7 930 @ 4.20ghz 1.3v cooled by Antec Kuhler 920

MOBO: Asus P6X58D Premium

GFX: 2x Asus GTX 560Ti Direct CUII @ 900mhz Core 2200mhz Memory

RAM: Corsair CMG6GX3M3A1600C7 6gb 1600mhz 7-7-7-20 2t

PSU: Thermaltake Toughpower 850 watt

CASE: Antec 1200

APU: X-fi Titanium Fatality SPEAKERS: Logitech X-530 5.1

HDD: 1x OCZ Agility 3 60gb SSD GAMES 2x Western Digital Caviar Black 500gb in RAID 0

DISPLAY: Acer H243HX 24" @ 1920x1080 Resolution

KEYBOARD: Logitech G19 MOUSE: Logitech G5 WHEEL Logitech G25 JOYSTICK Logitech G940

OPERATING SYSTEM: Windows 7 Ultimate x64 RTM

#5
Posted 12/22/2011 04:51 AM   
[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='21 December 2011 - 10:38 PM' timestamp='1324528695' post='1345634']
It is not only to interpret the law, they use their power to pervert and CREATE law, ever had a look at the legal dictionary in the library of congress? its an entire room full of multiple volumes of books, why? because Attorneys at law (not to be confused with a real lawyer) are constantly CREATING new legal defenitions to suit their agendas - and they can, because the legal system is 100 percent privatized and monetized.
[/quote]

Do you really want to insult what I do for a living? Put a sock in that one, Prince.

I don't even know what you do for a living, but I'd never spend as much time demeaning your line of work as you do mine. I'm a staunch proponent of human and civil rights while working for a corporate law firm, and all the attorneys are of fairly similar mindsets regardless of voting habits. If I were to walk into court and argue your ideas I'd be held in contempt and rightly so.

We use a totally different system stateside derived from the English common law with a mixture of Spanish colonial common law in the southwest and the Jeffersonian code on the Gulf of Mexico. None of those systems is based on the Roman system which uses a tribunal whereas the English system uses a bench, bar, and jury system. The Roman system never even became the primary legal system during the empire let alone the middle ages.

Since THIS is the system all Americans have to work with --this is the only system that counts. Violating the system is considered criminal and will wind you up in a hospital for the mentally ill or in the corrections system.
[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='21 December 2011 - 10:38 PM' timestamp='1324528695' post='1345634']

It is not only to interpret the law, they use their power to pervert and CREATE law, ever had a look at the legal dictionary in the library of congress? its an entire room full of multiple volumes of books, why? because Attorneys at law (not to be confused with a real lawyer) are constantly CREATING new legal defenitions to suit their agendas - and they can, because the legal system is 100 percent privatized and monetized.





Do you really want to insult what I do for a living? Put a sock in that one, Prince.



I don't even know what you do for a living, but I'd never spend as much time demeaning your line of work as you do mine. I'm a staunch proponent of human and civil rights while working for a corporate law firm, and all the attorneys are of fairly similar mindsets regardless of voting habits. If I were to walk into court and argue your ideas I'd be held in contempt and rightly so.



We use a totally different system stateside derived from the English common law with a mixture of Spanish colonial common law in the southwest and the Jeffersonian code on the Gulf of Mexico. None of those systems is based on the Roman system which uses a tribunal whereas the English system uses a bench, bar, and jury system. The Roman system never even became the primary legal system during the empire let alone the middle ages.



Since THIS is the system all Americans have to work with --this is the only system that counts. Violating the system is considered criminal and will wind you up in a hospital for the mentally ill or in the corrections system.

Done.

#6
Posted 12/22/2011 04:54 AM   
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='22 December 2011 - 04:54 AM' timestamp='1324529684' post='1345640']
Do you really want to insult what I do for a living? Put a sock in that one, Prince.

I don't even know what you do for a living, but I'd never spend as much time demeaning your line of work as you do mine. I'm a staunch proponent of human and civil rights while working for a corporate law firm, and all the attorneys are of fairly similar mindsets regardless of voting habits. If I were to walk into court and argue your ideas I'd be held in contempt and rightly so.

We use a totally different system stateside derived from the English common law with a mixture of Spanish colonial common law in the southwest and the Jeffersonian code on the Gulf of Mexico. None of those systems is based on the Roman system which uses a tribunal whereas the English system uses a bench, bar, and jury system. The Roman system never even became the primary legal system during the empire let alone the middle ages.

Since THIS is the system all Americans have to work with --this is the only system that counts. Violating the system is considered criminal and will wind you up in a hospital for the mentally ill or in the corrections system.
[/quote]

Whoa, you really think I am trying to demean you? sorry about that buddie, that was not my intension at all. Just trying to expose you to information you likely would otherwise not come across. You can make of it whatever you like.

I work in the IT industry, and you can feel free to demean me for that as much as you like, I am sure it would not be any worse than what I get from my colleagues anyway lol

I have walked into a court mate, and I have made the judge my servant, using the knowledge I express here and have breifly shown you - the cleark thought as you did, and kept looking at me, and then the judge, wondering why he was not holding me in contempt - the Judges DO know this stuff mate, I can ASSURE you.

And you may think you are operating under a different legal system to that of the British, but that does not explain why they have a copy of your constitution in the HQ of their private BAR guild, to which ALL those practicing law in your country belong to.

And it is BECAUSE you seem to me, to be such a staunch supporter of civil rights that I wish to share this with you, because you are in a unique position to impliment it and spread it further. I am sorry that you seem to react so negatively to it, a bit of due dilligence can confirm what I am saying.

And you should also be aware, I am an active member of the 'community' who teach and practice sovreign law, so I am not 'alone' in my delusions by any means :) and nor is it specific to any one country.

The person who I learned this info from in fact, is so good at what he does, and so deep is his understanding and knowledge of law, that when he makes an appearance in court (usually on behalf of someone else who is to afraid to invoke their rights on their own) the Judges (who actually know and respect him alot, and have learned much from him) force him to wait and have the case heard last - why?

Because they do NOT want anyone else witnessing what is about to take place. This information is real, and powerful, and to be taken seriously, since once invoked, you take on a large amount of responsibility in law that previously was left up to "judges"
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='22 December 2011 - 04:54 AM' timestamp='1324529684' post='1345640']

Do you really want to insult what I do for a living? Put a sock in that one, Prince.



I don't even know what you do for a living, but I'd never spend as much time demeaning your line of work as you do mine. I'm a staunch proponent of human and civil rights while working for a corporate law firm, and all the attorneys are of fairly similar mindsets regardless of voting habits. If I were to walk into court and argue your ideas I'd be held in contempt and rightly so.



We use a totally different system stateside derived from the English common law with a mixture of Spanish colonial common law in the southwest and the Jeffersonian code on the Gulf of Mexico. None of those systems is based on the Roman system which uses a tribunal whereas the English system uses a bench, bar, and jury system. The Roman system never even became the primary legal system during the empire let alone the middle ages.



Since THIS is the system all Americans have to work with --this is the only system that counts. Violating the system is considered criminal and will wind you up in a hospital for the mentally ill or in the corrections system.





Whoa, you really think I am trying to demean you? sorry about that buddie, that was not my intension at all. Just trying to expose you to information you likely would otherwise not come across. You can make of it whatever you like.



I work in the IT industry, and you can feel free to demean me for that as much as you like, I am sure it would not be any worse than what I get from my colleagues anyway lol



I have walked into a court mate, and I have made the judge my servant, using the knowledge I express here and have breifly shown you - the cleark thought as you did, and kept looking at me, and then the judge, wondering why he was not holding me in contempt - the Judges DO know this stuff mate, I can ASSURE you.



And you may think you are operating under a different legal system to that of the British, but that does not explain why they have a copy of your constitution in the HQ of their private BAR guild, to which ALL those practicing law in your country belong to.



And it is BECAUSE you seem to me, to be such a staunch supporter of civil rights that I wish to share this with you, because you are in a unique position to impliment it and spread it further. I am sorry that you seem to react so negatively to it, a bit of due dilligence can confirm what I am saying.



And you should also be aware, I am an active member of the 'community' who teach and practice sovreign law, so I am not 'alone' in my delusions by any means :) and nor is it specific to any one country.



The person who I learned this info from in fact, is so good at what he does, and so deep is his understanding and knowledge of law, that when he makes an appearance in court (usually on behalf of someone else who is to afraid to invoke their rights on their own) the Judges (who actually know and respect him alot, and have learned much from him) force him to wait and have the case heard last - why?



Because they do NOT want anyone else witnessing what is about to take place. This information is real, and powerful, and to be taken seriously, since once invoked, you take on a large amount of responsibility in law that previously was left up to "judges"

CPU: Core i7 930 @ 4.20ghz 1.3v cooled by Antec Kuhler 920

MOBO: Asus P6X58D Premium

GFX: 2x Asus GTX 560Ti Direct CUII @ 900mhz Core 2200mhz Memory

RAM: Corsair CMG6GX3M3A1600C7 6gb 1600mhz 7-7-7-20 2t

PSU: Thermaltake Toughpower 850 watt

CASE: Antec 1200

APU: X-fi Titanium Fatality SPEAKERS: Logitech X-530 5.1

HDD: 1x OCZ Agility 3 60gb SSD GAMES 2x Western Digital Caviar Black 500gb in RAID 0

DISPLAY: Acer H243HX 24" @ 1920x1080 Resolution

KEYBOARD: Logitech G19 MOUSE: Logitech G5 WHEEL Logitech G25 JOYSTICK Logitech G940

OPERATING SYSTEM: Windows 7 Ultimate x64 RTM

#7
Posted 12/22/2011 05:10 AM   
[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='21 December 2011 - 11:10 PM' timestamp='1324530622' post='1345647']
Whoa, you really think I am trying to demean you? sorry about that buddie, that was not my intension at all. Just trying to expose you to information you likely would otherwise not come across. You can make of it whatever you like.

I work in the IT industry, and you can feel free to demean me for that as much as you like, I am sure it would not be any worse than what I get from my colleagues anyway lol

I have walked into a court mate, and I have made the judge my servant, using the knowledge I express here and have breifly shown you - the cleark thought as you did, and kept looking at me, and then the judge, wondering why he was not holding me in contempt - the Judges DO know this stuff mate, I can ASSURE you.

And you may think you are operating under a different legal system to that of the British, but that does not explain why they have a copy of your constitution in the HQ of their private BAR guild, to which ALL those practicing law in your country belong to.

And it is BECAUSE you seem to me, to be such a staunch supporter of civil rights that I wish to share this with you, because you are in a unique position to impliment it and spread it further. I am sorry that you seem to react so negatively to it, a bit of due dilligence can confirm what I am saying.

And you should also be aware, I am an active member of the 'community' who teach and practice sovreign law, so I am not 'alone' in my delusions by any means :) and nor is it specific to any one country.
[/quote]


Prince, you are as always heavy on rhetoric and light on evidence. PM me when you get some :)
[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='21 December 2011 - 11:10 PM' timestamp='1324530622' post='1345647']

Whoa, you really think I am trying to demean you? sorry about that buddie, that was not my intension at all. Just trying to expose you to information you likely would otherwise not come across. You can make of it whatever you like.



I work in the IT industry, and you can feel free to demean me for that as much as you like, I am sure it would not be any worse than what I get from my colleagues anyway lol



I have walked into a court mate, and I have made the judge my servant, using the knowledge I express here and have breifly shown you - the cleark thought as you did, and kept looking at me, and then the judge, wondering why he was not holding me in contempt - the Judges DO know this stuff mate, I can ASSURE you.



And you may think you are operating under a different legal system to that of the British, but that does not explain why they have a copy of your constitution in the HQ of their private BAR guild, to which ALL those practicing law in your country belong to.



And it is BECAUSE you seem to me, to be such a staunch supporter of civil rights that I wish to share this with you, because you are in a unique position to impliment it and spread it further. I am sorry that you seem to react so negatively to it, a bit of due dilligence can confirm what I am saying.



And you should also be aware, I am an active member of the 'community' who teach and practice sovreign law, so I am not 'alone' in my delusions by any means :) and nor is it specific to any one country.







Prince, you are as always heavy on rhetoric and light on evidence. PM me when you get some :)

Done.

#8
Posted 12/22/2011 05:17 AM   
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='22 December 2011 - 05:17 AM' timestamp='1324531048' post='1345648']
Prince, you are as always heavy on rhetoric and light on evidence. PM me when you get some :)
[/quote]

What would be sufficient evidence for you my friend?

I have notarised legal documents I can send to you if you like? I can also put you in contact with people who have a greater depth of understanding than my own in these matters if you like?

Better yet, why dont you just search youtube for videos of Sovereigns challenging court authority - there are HEAPS.

There also plenty of forums (not unlike this one) where people share their success stories (and not so successfull) stories in their legal dealings, you can get advice, template legal forms etc for basically any country you can think of.

We cant ALL be heavy on the rhetoric and light on the evidence, can we?

In any case wether you believe me or not is entirely up to you - I know for a fact, their is truth in my words, and I don't need your approval, just thought you would be interested to know, even if you investigated it only to disprove it. So far you have offered nothing in the way of evidence to disprove MY claims, so who is dealing in rhetoric now?
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='22 December 2011 - 05:17 AM' timestamp='1324531048' post='1345648']

Prince, you are as always heavy on rhetoric and light on evidence. PM me when you get some :)





What would be sufficient evidence for you my friend?



I have notarised legal documents I can send to you if you like? I can also put you in contact with people who have a greater depth of understanding than my own in these matters if you like?



Better yet, why dont you just search youtube for videos of Sovereigns challenging court authority - there are HEAPS.



There also plenty of forums (not unlike this one) where people share their success stories (and not so successfull) stories in their legal dealings, you can get advice, template legal forms etc for basically any country you can think of.



We cant ALL be heavy on the rhetoric and light on the evidence, can we?



In any case wether you believe me or not is entirely up to you - I know for a fact, their is truth in my words, and I don't need your approval, just thought you would be interested to know, even if you investigated it only to disprove it. So far you have offered nothing in the way of evidence to disprove MY claims, so who is dealing in rhetoric now?

CPU: Core i7 930 @ 4.20ghz 1.3v cooled by Antec Kuhler 920

MOBO: Asus P6X58D Premium

GFX: 2x Asus GTX 560Ti Direct CUII @ 900mhz Core 2200mhz Memory

RAM: Corsair CMG6GX3M3A1600C7 6gb 1600mhz 7-7-7-20 2t

PSU: Thermaltake Toughpower 850 watt

CASE: Antec 1200

APU: X-fi Titanium Fatality SPEAKERS: Logitech X-530 5.1

HDD: 1x OCZ Agility 3 60gb SSD GAMES 2x Western Digital Caviar Black 500gb in RAID 0

DISPLAY: Acer H243HX 24" @ 1920x1080 Resolution

KEYBOARD: Logitech G19 MOUSE: Logitech G5 WHEEL Logitech G25 JOYSTICK Logitech G940

OPERATING SYSTEM: Windows 7 Ultimate x64 RTM

#9
Posted 12/22/2011 05:36 AM   
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='22 December 2011 - 10:10 PM' timestamp='1324591841' post='1346040']
It's lawyers who maintain your rights more than anyone else.
[/quote]

That would be why Obama, a constitutional lawyer, signed the NDAA then eh? and in doing so dismantled the bill of rights and violated the 2nd amendment.

And who drafted the Nuremberg laws depriving all German Jews of their rights in 1933? (the same year the US declared bankruptcy and introduced the system of voluntary slavery, ie the private citizen) some of the most gifted lawyers of the time, is the answer.

Lawyers deal EXCLUSIVELY in case law, which is their own private version of law. Anyone that thinks they can win in a system where the odds are that obviously stacked against them is delusional.
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='22 December 2011 - 10:10 PM' timestamp='1324591841' post='1346040']

It's lawyers who maintain your rights more than anyone else.





That would be why Obama, a constitutional lawyer, signed the NDAA then eh? and in doing so dismantled the bill of rights and violated the 2nd amendment.



And who drafted the Nuremberg laws depriving all German Jews of their rights in 1933? (the same year the US declared bankruptcy and introduced the system of voluntary slavery, ie the private citizen) some of the most gifted lawyers of the time, is the answer.



Lawyers deal EXCLUSIVELY in case law, which is their own private version of law. Anyone that thinks they can win in a system where the odds are that obviously stacked against them is delusional.

CPU: Core i7 930 @ 4.20ghz 1.3v cooled by Antec Kuhler 920

MOBO: Asus P6X58D Premium

GFX: 2x Asus GTX 560Ti Direct CUII @ 900mhz Core 2200mhz Memory

RAM: Corsair CMG6GX3M3A1600C7 6gb 1600mhz 7-7-7-20 2t

PSU: Thermaltake Toughpower 850 watt

CASE: Antec 1200

APU: X-fi Titanium Fatality SPEAKERS: Logitech X-530 5.1

HDD: 1x OCZ Agility 3 60gb SSD GAMES 2x Western Digital Caviar Black 500gb in RAID 0

DISPLAY: Acer H243HX 24" @ 1920x1080 Resolution

KEYBOARD: Logitech G19 MOUSE: Logitech G5 WHEEL Logitech G25 JOYSTICK Logitech G940

OPERATING SYSTEM: Windows 7 Ultimate x64 RTM

#10
Posted 12/22/2011 10:42 PM   
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='22 December 2011 - 05:10 PM' timestamp='1324591841' post='1346040']
Voice acting isn't what's driving up the costs. Other than Bethesda hiring people like Jan Luke Picard and Oscar Schindler the voice actors don't get paid that much. Even with great voice actors in RPGs it's mostly the suits who get the money. Once you compound that with the fact these asshats are using my tax dollars to make the game --they can sod off.

[url="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/technology/rich-tax-breaks-bolster-video-game-makers.html?pagewanted=all"]http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/technology/rich-tax-breaks-bolster-video-game-makers.html?pagewanted=all[/url][/quote]
Its not just the quality of the voice actors, its the [i][b]quantity [/b][/i]as games nowadays are almost entirely voice-acted. Still, the quality is improving as well where you see some big name actors in the credits of games. Hell even a game with a moderate budget like World In Conflict had Alec Baldwin voice their game. But you have leaders in the industry like Bioware and Bethesda and the results are undeniable with games like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Skyrim and The Old Republic which are almost entirely voice acted now. They continually raise the bar for the industry and as a result, development costs increase as well. Now imagine if you want to localize your title for multiple markets? Yeah, costs quickly rise as a result.

But surely you aren't implying that some writer typing a wall of text costs the same as paying a voice actor, are you? Because that's what games were 10 years ago, and that simply doesn't cut it nowadays where games are more like interactive art or cinema rather than just "video games".

As for the tax breaks and all that other incidental detail, EVERY major business gets those same kinds of tax credits from local governements because of the jobs they create and the impact on social welfare and infrastructure...this is nothing new. If your local governement didn't subsidize them, they'd take their jobs and go somewhere else.



[quote]If there is any form of penalty whatsoever that's a legal issue. If there is any law involved that's a legal issue. Piracy is a crime making it FOREVER a legal issue. There is no distinction whatsoever. Shoplifting is handled by the courts too. You are separating criminal and civil issues, and if you want piracy to only be a crime --I agree with you. Internet piracy should be a misdemeanor and about on par with toiletpapering a house, graffiti and other nonviolent property crimes.

I also agree that there should be a MAXIMUM penalty of the value of the pirated data plus a government fine not to exceed $1000 for downloaders. The uploaders however are more culpable and should be held more accountable with stiffer penalties --and the crackers should probably face a year or two of jail time.

Still anyone who actually wants to get rid of lawyers doesn't understand the system. It's lawyers who maintain your rights more than anyone else.
[/quote]
Again, its only the legal issue that is now because there are no reasonable legal statutes in place to handle piracy. On the contrary, shoplifting more often than not is treated and handled as a civil issue. You do not automatically go to jail or court if you are arrested for shoplifting, as the merchant often has numerous avenues to pursue to their satisfaction. Look up your local shoplifting laws and you will often see terms like "civilly liable" or "civil penalty".

I still think the penalties you're suggesting are far too harsh, because again, the bigger the risk and penalty, the more resistance and backlash there will be. The penalty needs to be reasonable and I think CD Projekt got that right.

But I'll leave you with another example of a "crime" being treated as an automated, civil issue with speeding and the use of speed traps and cameras. People hate them, but at the end of the day, people don't resist them when busted. Why? Because 1) there's undeniable proof of an infraction and 2) the penalty is still less than the alternative of being pulled over by a policemen with lower fine amounts and no points.

Argue all you like, but there's undeniable evidence these speed trap cameras are effective at reducing speeding in the areas they're deployed. Similar statutes and legislation with regard to piracy empowering ISPs and content owners would effectively cut down piracy, imo.
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='22 December 2011 - 05:10 PM' timestamp='1324591841' post='1346040']

Voice acting isn't what's driving up the costs. Other than Bethesda hiring people like Jan Luke Picard and Oscar Schindler the voice actors don't get paid that much. Even with great voice actors in RPGs it's mostly the suits who get the money. Once you compound that with the fact these asshats are using my tax dollars to make the game --they can sod off.



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/technology/rich-tax-breaks-bolster-video-game-makers.html?pagewanted=all

Its not just the quality of the voice actors, its the quantity as games nowadays are almost entirely voice-acted. Still, the quality is improving as well where you see some big name actors in the credits of games. Hell even a game with a moderate budget like World In Conflict had Alec Baldwin voice their game. But you have leaders in the industry like Bioware and Bethesda and the results are undeniable with games like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Skyrim and The Old Republic which are almost entirely voice acted now. They continually raise the bar for the industry and as a result, development costs increase as well. Now imagine if you want to localize your title for multiple markets? Yeah, costs quickly rise as a result.



But surely you aren't implying that some writer typing a wall of text costs the same as paying a voice actor, are you? Because that's what games were 10 years ago, and that simply doesn't cut it nowadays where games are more like interactive art or cinema rather than just "video games".



As for the tax breaks and all that other incidental detail, EVERY major business gets those same kinds of tax credits from local governements because of the jobs they create and the impact on social welfare and infrastructure...this is nothing new. If your local governement didn't subsidize them, they'd take their jobs and go somewhere else.







If there is any form of penalty whatsoever that's a legal issue. If there is any law involved that's a legal issue. Piracy is a crime making it FOREVER a legal issue. There is no distinction whatsoever. Shoplifting is handled by the courts too. You are separating criminal and civil issues, and if you want piracy to only be a crime --I agree with you. Internet piracy should be a misdemeanor and about on par with toiletpapering a house, graffiti and other nonviolent property crimes.



I also agree that there should be a MAXIMUM penalty of the value of the pirated data plus a government fine not to exceed $1000 for downloaders. The uploaders however are more culpable and should be held more accountable with stiffer penalties --and the crackers should probably face a year or two of jail time.



Still anyone who actually wants to get rid of lawyers doesn't understand the system. It's lawyers who maintain your rights more than anyone else.



Again, its only the legal issue that is now because there are no reasonable legal statutes in place to handle piracy. On the contrary, shoplifting more often than not is treated and handled as a civil issue. You do not automatically go to jail or court if you are arrested for shoplifting, as the merchant often has numerous avenues to pursue to their satisfaction. Look up your local shoplifting laws and you will often see terms like "civilly liable" or "civil penalty".



I still think the penalties you're suggesting are far too harsh, because again, the bigger the risk and penalty, the more resistance and backlash there will be. The penalty needs to be reasonable and I think CD Projekt got that right.



But I'll leave you with another example of a "crime" being treated as an automated, civil issue with speeding and the use of speed traps and cameras. People hate them, but at the end of the day, people don't resist them when busted. Why? Because 1) there's undeniable proof of an infraction and 2) the penalty is still less than the alternative of being pulled over by a policemen with lower fine amounts and no points.



Argue all you like, but there's undeniable evidence these speed trap cameras are effective at reducing speeding in the areas they're deployed. Similar statutes and legislation with regard to piracy empowering ISPs and content owners would effectively cut down piracy, imo.

-=HeliX=- Mod 3DV Game Fixes
My 3D Vision Games List Ratings

Intel Core i7 920 D0 @4.0GHz 1.29V | EVGA X58 Classified 760 | Win7 x64 Ultimate | Antec 620 LC
Galaxy GeForce GTX 670 GC SLI | Asus VG278H 120Hz LCD + 3D Vision 2 | 12GB Samsung DDR3 1600 35nm
Intel X25-M G2 160GB SSD | WD Black 3x1.5TB RAID 0 | Kingston HyperX 2x128GB SSD RAID 0
Sony STR-DG1000 A/V Receiver | Polk Audio RM6880 7.1 | LG Blu-Ray
Auzen X-Fi HT HD | Logitech G700/G110/G27 | CM HAF X Blue | Antec TPQ-1200W

#11
Posted 12/22/2011 10:47 PM   
[quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']
Its not just the quality of the voice actors, its the [i][b]quantity [/b][/i]as games nowadays are almost entirely voice-acted. Still, the quality is improving as well where you see some big name actors in the credits of games. Hell even a game with a moderate budget like World In Conflict had Alec Baldwin voice their game. But you have leaders in the industry like Bioware and Bethesda and the results are undeniable with games like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Skyrim and The Old Republic which are almost entirely voice acted now. They continually raise the bar for the industry and as a result, development costs increase as well. Now imagine if you want to localize your title for multiple markets? Yeah, costs quickly rise as a result.

But surely you aren't implying that some writer typing a wall of text costs the same as paying a voice actor, are you? Because that's what games were 10 years ago, and that simply doesn't cut it nowadays where games are more like interactive art or cinema rather than just "video games".
[/quote]

The voice actors aren't making millions either and the average salary is $58k USD/year. They make about the same amount as the other rank and file guys --it's the top where the money is increasingly isolated in gaming firms.

[quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']
As for the tax breaks and all that other incidental detail, EVERY major business gets those same kinds of tax credits from local governements because of the jobs they create and the impact on social welfare and infrastructure...this is nothing new. If your local governement didn't subsidize them, they'd take their jobs and go somewhere else.
[/quote]

You obviously didn't read the damn article.

[quote][font=georgia,]Because video game makers straddle the lines between software development, the entertainment industry and online retailing, they can combine tax breaks in ways that companies like Netflix and Adobe cannot. Video game developers receive such a rich assortment of incentives that even oil companies have questioned why the government should subsidize such a mature and profitable industry whose main contribution is to create amusing and sometimes antisocial entertainment.[/font][font=georgia,][size="2"][/quote][/size][/font][left][font="georgia,"][size="2"]
[/size][/font][/left][left]BTW there are very few jobs in the gaming industry outside of minimum wage retail for HS kids. TO argue that gaming is a boon to a local economy is just laughable. Gamestop --maybe, Bioware --hell no. I live in TX and can tell you that it was a better decision to subsidize the GS headquarters in Grapevine than the Bioware HQ in Austin. Gamestop isn't the one getting the big tax breaks and outright handouts.[/left][left][font="Verdana"][size="2"]
[/size][/font][/left][left][quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']<br style="text-align: -webkit-auto; ">Again, its only the legal issue that is now because there are no reasonable legal statutes in place to handle piracy. <br style="text-align: -webkit-auto; ">[/quote][/left][left]
[/left][left]What? You obviously have no clue how to find [i]anything[/i] in the US code. There is an entire section on Piracy! The problem is that the laws have absurdly harsh penalties. [url="http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92appvii.html"]http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92appvii.html[/url][/left][left]
[/left][left][quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']
On the contrary, shoplifting more often than not is treated and handled as a civil issue. You do not automatically go to jail or court if you are arrested for shoplifting, as the merchant often has numerous avenues to pursue to their satisfaction. Look up your local shoplifting laws and you will often see terms like "civilly liable" or "civil penalty".
[/quote][/left][left]
[/left][left]I do know the laws on larceny and you obviously don't. The merchants don't have to refer it to law enforcement BUT if they do it's out of their hands --LIKE ALL OTHER CRIMES![/left][left]
[/left][left][url="http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/docs/PE/htm/Pe.31.htm"]http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/docs/PE/htm/Pe.31.htm[/url][/left][left]
[/left][left][quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']<br style="text-align: -webkit-auto; ">I still think the penalties you're suggesting are far too harsh, because again, the bigger the risk and penalty, the more resistance and backlash there will be. The penalty needs to be reasonable and I think CD Projekt got that right.<br style="text-align: -webkit-auto; ">[/quote]<br style="text-align: -webkit-auto; ">[/left][left]
[/left][left]CD Projekt isn't law enforcement and therefore is in violation of the law themselves. What I'm suggesting is a massive step forward though retains the key issue here [i]piracy is a crime, [/i]and restitution isn't going to stop the activity. Overly harsh penalties AND overly soft penalties are both causes for continued criminal acts, and that's something they teach freshmen in CRCJ.[/left][left]
[/left][quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']
But I'll leave you with another example of a "crime" being treated as an automated, civil issue with speeding and the use of speed traps and cameras. People hate them, but at the end of the day, people don't resist them when busted. Why? Because 1) there's undeniable proof of an infraction and 2) the penalty is still less than the alternative of being pulled over by a policemen with lower fine amounts and no points.
[/quote]
You are so damn wrong here it's obscene. Those cameras screw up all the time and are almost always overturned with one trip to the community courthouse. In TX the errors were so frequent that now a uniformed officer is required to asses the footage and issue a full citation instead of the automatic $75 which was ruled unconstitutional by our courts.
[quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']
Argue all you like, but there's undeniable evidence these speed trap cameras are effective at reducing speeding in the areas they're deployed. Similar statutes and legislation with regard to piracy empowering ISPs and content owners would effectively cut down piracy, imo.
[/quote]

WHAT EVIDENCE?! I'm one of the guys crunching those numbers and I will gladly sends you my SPSS tables proving you are wrong.
BTW The only way you could afford SPSS is to pirate it. If you want the tables you'll need to borrow a school workstation to view them on.
[quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']

Its not just the quality of the voice actors, its the quantity as games nowadays are almost entirely voice-acted. Still, the quality is improving as well where you see some big name actors in the credits of games. Hell even a game with a moderate budget like World In Conflict had Alec Baldwin voice their game. But you have leaders in the industry like Bioware and Bethesda and the results are undeniable with games like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Skyrim and The Old Republic which are almost entirely voice acted now. They continually raise the bar for the industry and as a result, development costs increase as well. Now imagine if you want to localize your title for multiple markets? Yeah, costs quickly rise as a result.



But surely you aren't implying that some writer typing a wall of text costs the same as paying a voice actor, are you? Because that's what games were 10 years ago, and that simply doesn't cut it nowadays where games are more like interactive art or cinema rather than just "video games".





The voice actors aren't making millions either and the average salary is $58k USD/year. They make about the same amount as the other rank and file guys --it's the top where the money is increasingly isolated in gaming firms.



[quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']

As for the tax breaks and all that other incidental detail, EVERY major business gets those same kinds of tax credits from local governements because of the jobs they create and the impact on social welfare and infrastructure...this is nothing new. If your local governement didn't subsidize them, they'd take their jobs and go somewhere else.





You obviously didn't read the damn article.



[font=georgia,]Because video game makers straddle the lines between software development, the entertainment industry and online retailing, they can combine tax breaks in ways that companies like Netflix and Adobe cannot. Video game developers receive such a rich assortment of incentives that even oil companies have questioned why the government should subsidize such a mature and profitable industry whose main contribution is to create amusing and sometimes antisocial entertainment.[/font][font=georgia,]
[/font]


BTW there are very few jobs in the gaming industry outside of minimum wage retail for HS kids. TO argue that gaming is a boon to a local economy is just laughable. Gamestop --maybe, Bioware --hell no. I live in TX and can tell you that it was a better decision to subsidize the GS headquarters in Grapevine than the Bioware HQ in Austin. Gamestop isn't the one getting the big tax breaks and outright handouts.


[quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']<br style="text-align: -webkit-auto; ">Again, its only the legal issue that is now because there are no reasonable legal statutes in place to handle piracy. <br style="text-align: -webkit-auto; ">


What? You obviously have no clue how to find anything in the US code. There is an entire section on Piracy! The problem is that the laws have absurdly harsh penalties. http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92appvii.html


[quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']

On the contrary, shoplifting more often than not is treated and handled as a civil issue. You do not automatically go to jail or court if you are arrested for shoplifting, as the merchant often has numerous avenues to pursue to their satisfaction. Look up your local shoplifting laws and you will often see terms like "civilly liable" or "civil penalty".



I do know the laws on larceny and you obviously don't. The merchants don't have to refer it to law enforcement BUT if they do it's out of their hands --LIKE ALL OTHER CRIMES!




[quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']<br style="text-align: -webkit-auto; ">I still think the penalties you're suggesting are far too harsh, because again, the bigger the risk and penalty, the more resistance and backlash there will be. The penalty needs to be reasonable and I think CD Projekt got that right.<br style="text-align: -webkit-auto; "><br style="text-align: -webkit-auto; ">


CD Projekt isn't law enforcement and therefore is in violation of the law themselves. What I'm suggesting is a massive step forward though retains the key issue here piracy is a crime, and restitution isn't going to stop the activity. Overly harsh penalties AND overly soft penalties are both causes for continued criminal acts, and that's something they teach freshmen in CRCJ.


[quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']

But I'll leave you with another example of a "crime" being treated as an automated, civil issue with speeding and the use of speed traps and cameras. People hate them, but at the end of the day, people don't resist them when busted. Why? Because 1) there's undeniable proof of an infraction and 2) the penalty is still less than the alternative of being pulled over by a policemen with lower fine amounts and no points.



You are so damn wrong here it's obscene. Those cameras screw up all the time and are almost always overturned with one trip to the community courthouse. In TX the errors were so frequent that now a uniformed officer is required to asses the footage and issue a full citation instead of the automatic $75 which was ruled unconstitutional by our courts.

[quote name='chiz' date='22 December 2011 - 04:47 PM' timestamp='1324594070' post='1346057']

Argue all you like, but there's undeniable evidence these speed trap cameras are effective at reducing speeding in the areas they're deployed. Similar statutes and legislation with regard to piracy empowering ISPs and content owners would effectively cut down piracy, imo.





WHAT EVIDENCE?! I'm one of the guys crunching those numbers and I will gladly sends you my SPSS tables proving you are wrong.

BTW The only way you could afford SPSS is to pirate it. If you want the tables you'll need to borrow a school workstation to view them on.

Done.

#12
Posted 12/22/2011 11:59 PM   
[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='22 December 2011 - 04:42 PM' timestamp='1324593723' post='1346054']
That would be why Obama, a constitutional lawyer, signed the NDAA then eh? and in doing so dismantled the bill of rights and violated the 2nd amendment.

And who drafted the Nuremberg laws depriving all German Jews of their rights in 1933? (the same year the US declared bankruptcy and introduced the system of voluntary slavery, ie the private citizen) some of the most gifted lawyers of the time, is the answer.

Lawyers deal EXCLUSIVELY in case law, which is their own private version of law. Anyone that thinks they can win in a system where the odds are that obviously stacked against them is delusional.
[/quote]

Prince,

I'll never claim that all lawyers are the beacons of civil rights that the ones I work with are. You can either get screwed by the law or you can be freed by the law --or have no laws and live in Somalia --which option do you pick?

I personally choose to work within the system and if it ever breaks too badly for a repair then we'll have a revolution on our hands. That's usually how societies work.
[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='22 December 2011 - 04:42 PM' timestamp='1324593723' post='1346054']

That would be why Obama, a constitutional lawyer, signed the NDAA then eh? and in doing so dismantled the bill of rights and violated the 2nd amendment.



And who drafted the Nuremberg laws depriving all German Jews of their rights in 1933? (the same year the US declared bankruptcy and introduced the system of voluntary slavery, ie the private citizen) some of the most gifted lawyers of the time, is the answer.



Lawyers deal EXCLUSIVELY in case law, which is their own private version of law. Anyone that thinks they can win in a system where the odds are that obviously stacked against them is delusional.





Prince,



I'll never claim that all lawyers are the beacons of civil rights that the ones I work with are. You can either get screwed by the law or you can be freed by the law --or have no laws and live in Somalia --which option do you pick?



I personally choose to work within the system and if it ever breaks too badly for a repair then we'll have a revolution on our hands. That's usually how societies work.

Done.

#13
Posted 12/23/2011 12:05 AM   
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='23 December 2011 - 12:05 AM' timestamp='1324598708' post='1346085']
Prince,

I'll never claim that all lawyers are the beacons of civil rights that the ones I work with are. You can either get screwed by the law or you can be freed by the law --or have no laws and live in Somalia --which option do you pick?

I personally choose to work within the system and if it ever breaks too badly for a repair then we'll have a revolution on our hands. That's usually how societies work.
[/quote]

I never claimed all lawyers are complicit in the kinds of schemes Obama and his cohort are clearly engaged in, either. But it is pretty damn obvious which "side" if you like, holds all the power and influence, and they have now granted themselves the overt ability to re-shift the cards as they see fit, and there is not anything any of those "good guys" on the outer temple can do about it - if there was, we would not have the patriot act, the NDAA, TSA and numerous other absolutely insane draconian laws which are direct violations of laws which are supposedly put in place as protection, and to supersede all the laws of the federal government. (what good are "good lawyers" if you do not even have the right to consult one? because you have been falsely SUSPECTED of INTENSION to commit a terrorist act? which these days btw, can range from growing your own organic vegetables to buying raw milk from an Amish farmer and taking it across state lines)

The governments own experts on constitutional law, then laughingly and publicaly stated in compelte DISRESPECT to the law (lawful anarchy, or somalia, as you put it) that the supremacy clause of the constitution allows the federal government the power to veto and amend any law of any state - which is in fact the complete OPPOSITE of what is true, the supremacy clause protects the states right to veto any laws the FEDERAL government makes that are not constitutional.

Given you are from texas, a state with a long history of challenging the federal government on its BS (Texas was one of the few states that stood up to the TSA groping bill, and was threatened with having its airspace completely cut off from the rest of the US, just like the military was doing to libya at the time, as im sure your no doubt aware) I am sure you must find that quite upsetting.

As for a revolution, all the provisions provided for lawfull rebellion within the constitution have been dismantled or severly reduced, the right of free assembly is being challenged all across the world right now as we are in fact in the very midst of a social revolution, the only issue is that it is, as every revolution in history before it has, been directed by the powers that be into an un effective and divided group of lobbiysts who all have self serving agendas and fail to achieve their goals because they are unwilling to see they are in fact opposing the same force, and always have been.
[quote name='D1llw33d' date='23 December 2011 - 12:05 AM' timestamp='1324598708' post='1346085']

Prince,



I'll never claim that all lawyers are the beacons of civil rights that the ones I work with are. You can either get screwed by the law or you can be freed by the law --or have no laws and live in Somalia --which option do you pick?



I personally choose to work within the system and if it ever breaks too badly for a repair then we'll have a revolution on our hands. That's usually how societies work.





I never claimed all lawyers are complicit in the kinds of schemes Obama and his cohort are clearly engaged in, either. But it is pretty damn obvious which "side" if you like, holds all the power and influence, and they have now granted themselves the overt ability to re-shift the cards as they see fit, and there is not anything any of those "good guys" on the outer temple can do about it - if there was, we would not have the patriot act, the NDAA, TSA and numerous other absolutely insane draconian laws which are direct violations of laws which are supposedly put in place as protection, and to supersede all the laws of the federal government. (what good are "good lawyers" if you do not even have the right to consult one? because you have been falsely SUSPECTED of INTENSION to commit a terrorist act? which these days btw, can range from growing your own organic vegetables to buying raw milk from an Amish farmer and taking it across state lines)



The governments own experts on constitutional law, then laughingly and publicaly stated in compelte DISRESPECT to the law (lawful anarchy, or somalia, as you put it) that the supremacy clause of the constitution allows the federal government the power to veto and amend any law of any state - which is in fact the complete OPPOSITE of what is true, the supremacy clause protects the states right to veto any laws the FEDERAL government makes that are not constitutional.



Given you are from texas, a state with a long history of challenging the federal government on its BS (Texas was one of the few states that stood up to the TSA groping bill, and was threatened with having its airspace completely cut off from the rest of the US, just like the military was doing to libya at the time, as im sure your no doubt aware) I am sure you must find that quite upsetting.



As for a revolution, all the provisions provided for lawfull rebellion within the constitution have been dismantled or severly reduced, the right of free assembly is being challenged all across the world right now as we are in fact in the very midst of a social revolution, the only issue is that it is, as every revolution in history before it has, been directed by the powers that be into an un effective and divided group of lobbiysts who all have self serving agendas and fail to achieve their goals because they are unwilling to see they are in fact opposing the same force, and always have been.

CPU: Core i7 930 @ 4.20ghz 1.3v cooled by Antec Kuhler 920

MOBO: Asus P6X58D Premium

GFX: 2x Asus GTX 560Ti Direct CUII @ 900mhz Core 2200mhz Memory

RAM: Corsair CMG6GX3M3A1600C7 6gb 1600mhz 7-7-7-20 2t

PSU: Thermaltake Toughpower 850 watt

CASE: Antec 1200

APU: X-fi Titanium Fatality SPEAKERS: Logitech X-530 5.1

HDD: 1x OCZ Agility 3 60gb SSD GAMES 2x Western Digital Caviar Black 500gb in RAID 0

DISPLAY: Acer H243HX 24" @ 1920x1080 Resolution

KEYBOARD: Logitech G19 MOUSE: Logitech G5 WHEEL Logitech G25 JOYSTICK Logitech G940

OPERATING SYSTEM: Windows 7 Ultimate x64 RTM

#14
Posted 12/23/2011 12:21 AM   
[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='22 December 2011 - 06:21 PM' timestamp='1324599703' post='1346090']
I never claimed all lawyers are complicit in the kinds of schemes Obama and his cohort are clearly engaged in, either. But it is pretty damn obvious which "side" if you like, holds all the power and influence, and they have now granted themselves the overt ability to re-shift the cards as they see fit, and there is not anything any of those "good guys" on the outer temple can do about it - if there was, we would not have the patriot act, the NDAA, TSA and numerous other absolutely insane draconian laws which are direct violations of laws which are supposedly put in place as protection, and to supersede all the laws of the federal government. (what good are "good lawyers" if you do not even have the right to consult one? because you have been falsely SUSPECTED of INTENSION to commit a terrorist act? which these days btw, can range from growing your own organic vegetables to buying raw milk from an Amish farmer and taking it across state lines)
[/quote]

It's a cycle we go through. We just got out of the freedom cycle and are now into the paranoid cycle. It ends with a moderate uprising and a good supreme court like in the 60s. It's just as shame we got stuck living in the crappy part of the cycle.

[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='22 December 2011 - 06:21 PM' timestamp='1324599703' post='1346090']
The governments own experts on constitutional law, then laughingly and publicaly stated in compelte DISRESPECT to the law (lawful anarchy, or somalia, as you put it) that the supremacy clause of the constitution allows the federal government the power to veto and amend any law of any state - which is in fact the complete OPPOSITE of what is true, the supremacy clause protects the states right to veto any laws the FEDERAL government makes that are not constitutional.
[/quote]

The supremacy clause is definitely not for states protection and is there so the feds can overrule idiots like Rick Perry. It's the supreme court which keeps the feds in check --sadly Roberts, Scallia, Alito and Thomas forgot about that part of the job.

[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='22 December 2011 - 06:21 PM' timestamp='1324599703' post='1346090']
\Given you are from texas, a state with a long history of challenging the federal government on its BS (Texas was one of the few states that stood up to the TSA groping bill, and was threatened with having its airspace completely cut off from the rest of the US, just like the military was doing to libya at the time, as im sure your no doubt aware) I am sure you must find that quite upsetting.
[/quote]

Texas isn't just what you read on the news. We have problems too and most of them have to do with vote rigging and racial abuse. Only 42% of our state population is white non-Hispanic (Hispanics are also considered white for the most part) yet 90% of the politicians are white non-Hispanic. SCOTUS has several times told us to sod off over that one. We used to imprison gays too and SCOTUS told us off there. We've got massive gerrymandering going on right now, and sadly I doubt SCOTUS does jack crap about it. Our very own state supreme court ruled in 2009 that innocence wasn't an absolute defense againt the death penalty and SCOTUS had too make us quit executing 16 year olds.

Also most Texans try to distance ourselves from the BS that our governor does. He's a real tool, and NOT well liked at all.

That said I love it here and don't want to live anywhere else. Being Texan is awesome!

[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='22 December 2011 - 06:21 PM' timestamp='1324599703' post='1346090']
As for a revolution, all the provisions provided for lawfull rebellion within the constitution have been dismantled or severly reduced, the right of free assembly is being challenged all across the world right now as we are in fact in the very midst of a social revolution, the only issue is that it is, as every revolution in history before it has, been directed by the powers that be into an un effective and divided group of lobbiysts who all have self serving agendas and fail to achieve their goals because they are unwilling to see they are in fact opposing the same force, and always have been.
[/quote]

I disagree there, but IMO you have a point. There will be no revolution until things get much worse b/c of the isolation of wealth and more importantly the oppression of debt. By the time I finish law school I'll have over $200K USD in debt and I've only just started taking out loans in grad school. There is something wrong with that picture IMO.
[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='22 December 2011 - 06:21 PM' timestamp='1324599703' post='1346090']

I never claimed all lawyers are complicit in the kinds of schemes Obama and his cohort are clearly engaged in, either. But it is pretty damn obvious which "side" if you like, holds all the power and influence, and they have now granted themselves the overt ability to re-shift the cards as they see fit, and there is not anything any of those "good guys" on the outer temple can do about it - if there was, we would not have the patriot act, the NDAA, TSA and numerous other absolutely insane draconian laws which are direct violations of laws which are supposedly put in place as protection, and to supersede all the laws of the federal government. (what good are "good lawyers" if you do not even have the right to consult one? because you have been falsely SUSPECTED of INTENSION to commit a terrorist act? which these days btw, can range from growing your own organic vegetables to buying raw milk from an Amish farmer and taking it across state lines)





It's a cycle we go through. We just got out of the freedom cycle and are now into the paranoid cycle. It ends with a moderate uprising and a good supreme court like in the 60s. It's just as shame we got stuck living in the crappy part of the cycle.



[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='22 December 2011 - 06:21 PM' timestamp='1324599703' post='1346090']

The governments own experts on constitutional law, then laughingly and publicaly stated in compelte DISRESPECT to the law (lawful anarchy, or somalia, as you put it) that the supremacy clause of the constitution allows the federal government the power to veto and amend any law of any state - which is in fact the complete OPPOSITE of what is true, the supremacy clause protects the states right to veto any laws the FEDERAL government makes that are not constitutional.





The supremacy clause is definitely not for states protection and is there so the feds can overrule idiots like Rick Perry. It's the supreme court which keeps the feds in check --sadly Roberts, Scallia, Alito and Thomas forgot about that part of the job.



[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='22 December 2011 - 06:21 PM' timestamp='1324599703' post='1346090']

\Given you are from texas, a state with a long history of challenging the federal government on its BS (Texas was one of the few states that stood up to the TSA groping bill, and was threatened with having its airspace completely cut off from the rest of the US, just like the military was doing to libya at the time, as im sure your no doubt aware) I am sure you must find that quite upsetting.





Texas isn't just what you read on the news. We have problems too and most of them have to do with vote rigging and racial abuse. Only 42% of our state population is white non-Hispanic (Hispanics are also considered white for the most part) yet 90% of the politicians are white non-Hispanic. SCOTUS has several times told us to sod off over that one. We used to imprison gays too and SCOTUS told us off there. We've got massive gerrymandering going on right now, and sadly I doubt SCOTUS does jack crap about it. Our very own state supreme court ruled in 2009 that innocence wasn't an absolute defense againt the death penalty and SCOTUS had too make us quit executing 16 year olds.



Also most Texans try to distance ourselves from the BS that our governor does. He's a real tool, and NOT well liked at all.



That said I love it here and don't want to live anywhere else. Being Texan is awesome!



[quote name='Saijan Prince.' date='22 December 2011 - 06:21 PM' timestamp='1324599703' post='1346090']

As for a revolution, all the provisions provided for lawfull rebellion within the constitution have been dismantled or severly reduced, the right of free assembly is being challenged all across the world right now as we are in fact in the very midst of a social revolution, the only issue is that it is, as every revolution in history before it has, been directed by the powers that be into an un effective and divided group of lobbiysts who all have self serving agendas and fail to achieve their goals because they are unwilling to see they are in fact opposing the same force, and always have been.





I disagree there, but IMO you have a point. There will be no revolution until things get much worse b/c of the isolation of wealth and more importantly the oppression of debt. By the time I finish law school I'll have over $200K USD in debt and I've only just started taking out loans in grad school. There is something wrong with that picture IMO.

Done.

#15
Posted 12/23/2011 12:36 AM   
  1 / 20    
Scroll To Top