My "intent" at causing you to lose money by publishing your book is irrelevant. I may just claim it was so great a book that I want to share it with the world. You can't prove that's not what I'm thinking. Go back and read my post with some comprehension. My point isn't what JR intent is, it was what the LAT and WP's intent is.
My knowledge of law is limited, but I know that in order to collect damages, the aggrieved party must prove they are damaged in some way.
If the court ordered FR to cease and desist, your "tree in the forrest" argument might be halfway valid. The fact is a leftist Clinton judge (who's nomination was held up by republicans which the LA Times railed against in several editorials) ordered 1 million in damages awarded.
Gee, what a nice round number with no factual data whatsoever to support it. A cool million should be enough to flush a disabled vet's not-for profit forum down the toilet, no?
The whole purpose of our courts is to provide justice, not provide a staging area for political gauntlets. Nobody is being hurt and nothing is being damaged here except the leftist agenda.
Can I interest you in one of these?
They're great for driving carraiges. Unfortunately they've become completely useless since the invention of the automobile.
Bottom line is that all of this is a moot point. The hand wringing controllers are not going to have their way with the internet, it's going to have it's way with them. No matter how many Free Republics or Napsters they put down, the cat is out of the bag. They need to get that through their thick skulls.
Sorry, My ISP (DirectTVDSL) has been down so I couldn't reply sooner.
I also don't know the law well enough to be certain who's going to prevail. I only have a pretty good sense for what's objectively right and wrong.
I spend 1-2 hours/day on FR, but I visit more papers from the 5-10 minutes that I look into Drudge's linked headlines. The more news I get off of FR, the more banner ad revenue papers lose from my absence. Perhaps I'm unique is some way, but I doubt it.
Point taken regarding the focus of your "intent" comment. The WP, LAT and the judge's ruling were probably highly influenced by politics. The same could be said for defending Kuwait from Iraq or Israel from Hamas, but it's still the right thing to do.
"No matter how many Free Republics or Napsters they put down, the cat is out of the bag. They need to get that through their thick skulls."
I think you overestimate the security of stray cats. There are ways of making it difficult to run warez sites, but there's no political motivation to implement them. It's similar to the law of diminishing returns while hunting terrorists. Simply because taking down that last 10% is cost prohibitive doesn’t mean that the terrorists are going to win. But if you're willing to surrender to lawlessness, maybe you'll be interested in this:
Anarchist Yellow Pages