You get a gold star for that reply :P

Is that way the day seems to drag on?

Though it may be illegal due to signing an international agreement that bans various "inappropriate" things by governments, and one of the things on the list degradation or humiliation.

I don't know if the UK is a signatory or not, and even if they were, if that country even gives a damn about following their own laws & agreements or not. (It sure seems like the USA doesn't.)

There have been people convicted of Armed robbery despite them being verifiably UNarmed at the time. It's just that the victims thought the person was armed, so they got prosecuted on that misperception, and convicted. o.O

With the various TLA (3 letter agencies) guidelines for terrorists, yes, yes they are. Also, so are you for questioning it, and posting in public, and participating in a geek site, and probably a hundred other things.

A threat is a threat, even if it's on key and has a backbeat.

So you're saying it's time for Cox to not be dicks?

Sue the Highway Maintenance Department because truckers filled up in Mexico. Right?

Technically nothing, but it's not music. Oh, and Miley Cyrus definitely doesn't have either.

In the early days, they had almost total control over the entire industry from the radio playlists to the record store. (Research Payola.)
What changed is the internet and people suddenly discovering that there was another way to obtain, share, or sell their music.
Riaa wants to go back to the old days where everyone was their bitch, and that's not going to ever happen.

If you've looked at some of the files Rightscorp has claimed were their copyrighted files in some of their claims, you'd know they don't actually download and verify very often if at all, and are probably just using simple keyword scripts for finding potential victims.

Well, if it's because it's designed to transfer files, then you'd better kill FTP, HTTP, and all other protocols for transfering files. In case you didn't know, before bittorrent, that's what pirates used. Before the internet they used others that you've probably never even heard of. The violators of copyrights will tend to use the most efficient methods of transfering the files. Heck, at one time that was sneakernet. (AKA putting it on a disk or tape, and having someone run it over to the recipient, often literally.)

Rightscorp has followed a simple process all along.
Make threats to intimidate and milk them for money (extortion) and not actually go to court. I know the lawyers have a legal term for this kind of bad faith, but I've no idea what it is right now.
I suspect they are betting that Cox would rather fork over dough than actually go to court for anything if it's not too high of a cost, and that's what they are betting on. If Cox is dumb enough to do that, then they can use that for additional leverage to force other companies to pony up instead of going to court. Remember, often companies don't care if they are guilty or not, they just choose the cheaper method of resolution.

I have full confidence in the functionality and use of an electronic voting machine.
However, I have no faith what-so-ever in the competence of the government contractors making, or the people administrating, the current generation of machines in use. The obvious issues are numerous, and that's before anyone even tries to employ them in a real world situation.

I suspect that if anyone were to design a fully featured and as reasonably incorruptible and idiot proof system as possible/feasible, nobody would be willing to use them.

Some prosecutors have ethics and follow the rules.