"this person infringed a patent willingly" requires that they haven't just harmed the patent owner, but they've harmed society because they're diminishing the exclusive incentive behind granting that patent
Is this only me who can't get the subtle meaning in this statement. Can this be put in more realistic terms?
..The government is powerless or incompetent to protect you're rights...
Even if the government were competent enough, would you really like the government to protect yourself from a DDoS attack? On one hand you would want government not to police or censor the Internet and on the other you want it to protect you from petty cyber criminals?
but if Amazon cares about the quality of their marketplace, they ought to be careful about letting any random person scrape a community-created document from the internet and publish it as an ebook.
By that definition, every tech book should be treated as non-original work since the information it conveys to the reader is already available freely on the web, though not consolidated as in a book. I think they (Amazon) need to understand that they are just sellers, not publishers and they need to be least concerned about what experience a user might derive after reading a book purchased by them.
"Don't drop acid, take it pass-fail!" -- Bryan Michael Wendt