A copy is defined in the Copyright Act (17 USC 101) as a material object in which a copy is fixed. A hard drive is a material object, a flash drive is a material object, RAM is a material object. But data coming in over the network is not a material object. The downloader causes that data to be written to some sort of storage medium on his end, thereby making a new copy. The person on the other end of the connection is in trouble too, but it is clear in the statute, and settled in the caselaw, that downloading can be infringing.

That's like saying that murdering someone with a gun is no more murder than murdering them with a knife or with poison. All of the things you mention are also infringing, if of copyrighted works and without permission. There may be applicable exceptions, but there just as easily might not be.

It didn't. In fact, if you read the Sony case, you'll see that the Court expected that not all home taping of TV would even be a fair use. All that mattered was that there was enough possibility of VCR recording being legal sometimes that copyright didn't require that the technology be banned altogether.

It's a public performance, and would be prima facie infringing.

There are no laws against "piracy" per se; rather there are laws against copyright infringement, which downloading commonly is.

The statute doesn't require infringement en masse, nor does it require selling them for a profit. Perhaps you'd like to read it? It's 17 USC 501. It refers to other sections, in particular 17 USC 106, and 101.

No it's not. The correct legal term would be copyright infringement.

No, any copyright infringement which meets the prerequisites of 17 USC 506 is a crime. For example, if you willfully download a work in an infringing manner, and that work has a retail value of over $1,000 (easily doable with certain computer programs), that's a criminal infringement.

This is the first, and perhaps only thing in your post that's correct.

When you download, you necessarily make a new copy. If the work is copyrighted, and you lack permission or an applicable exception to copyright, you're infringing.

This, a thousand times owner. I rely on 'net connectivity for a living. If my internet drops, I'm packing my bags and going to one of my backup locations. One of those is a McDonalds, another is a local gas station that has wifi (?) and a friends house. The friends house is my first pick of course and usually the one I get. But if I have to go to McDonalds or the gas station and somebody is making it impossible for me to make a living and feed my family because someone is torrenting, I will feel every bit justified in using bithammer. Why?

Because I have every right to use the network as the guy making it impossible for me to use it.

... and that's why we we need Windows 10; Windows 9 just isn't enough.

The Chinese would like to be able to invade Taiwan, but the presence of a Carrier Battle Group in the region has a deterrring effect. An Antiship ballistic misdle capability would deter the carrier from doing much interference.

(The US has certain obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act).

I know. I goofed up a copy/paste edit because I was super tired. Gonna re-submit later.

I have a 8GB USB flash drive that does have a write protect switch, and I use it for transferring files to known-infected machines. Love that thing...

Pong: The future is in your hands.
A cross genre action-scifi-romcom with human drama and real meaning.

-

Why not give users the option to use both?

The dumb thing is pinning a run command to the task bar: this requires both mouse input and keyboard input to do anything. It's far more sensible to use a keyboard shortcut for "run"; I can type alt-f2 (linux) or meta-R (windows) and then a program name and get it without reaching for the mouse.

You are suggesting that every single one of a multitude of completely independent temperature records are all wrong. You are trying to dismiss them on the irrational basis that they all point in the same direction by slightly different amounts.

Furthermore you are assuming that every single one of a multitude of completely independent temperature records are all wrong in the same direction, imposing your pre-determined bias upon them.

You are baselessly filtering out any satellite data that doesn't fit the story you want to hear.

You are baselessly filtering out ocean temperatures, which account for 90% of climate heating, because it doesn't fit the story you want to hear.

You are engaging in wild conspiracy-theoryism claiming (or implying) that some hundredthousand scientists are ALL too stupid to account for novice-level obvious measurement difficulties, or that they are ALL conspiring to deliberately lie.

And most of all you're denying THE LAWS OF PHYSICS.
CO2 lets sunlight in and blocks the escape of thermal radiation. There is no possible dispute there. End of argument. The science is utterly and unarguably settled. All that's left at that point is determining the size of the effect.

It's astounding that it somehow doesn't make it into your conscious awareness that you are baselessly ignoring anything and everything that doesn't fit the story you want to hear.

-

Maybe you should start deleting programs and files instead of merely killing off processes-- odds are decent that you have enough memory (i.e RAM), it's the system partition that's under contention.