IANAL

If you read the ruling, the judge said that:

a) Of the people who filed to squash the subpoena, 3 of the 4 people actually revealed the pertinent information (name, address etc) as part of their filings
b) That the subpoena was for the ISP to reveal name and address
c) That fulfilling the subpoena was not burdensome
d) That the time and place to defend against the accusation would be after the plaintiff actually filed to litigate against individuals

Sounds to me like at this point in the process, it's a solid ruling on the merits. Of course, once the plaintiff refiles against an individual, they can respond to the accusation with (in roughly this order):

* this court doesn't have jurisdiction
* you don't have standing to sue me in the US
* you can't prove (on balance of probabilities) it was my IP address at the time without getting the ISP to reveal my traffic through them
* you can't prove (on balance of probabilities) that my equipment wasn't a) hacked or b) setup in accordance with the ISPs instructions so any possible downloading was by intrusion on their equipment (ie, it's their fault)
* If it was on my IP, you can't prove which individual was connected to that IP at the time (wifi etc)
* if I did download it, you can't prove I infringed your copyright (is downloading an infringement)
* If I infringed your copyright, you can't prove there was any financial loss
* If there was financial loss, it was minimal
* If it was minimal, then the case should never have been brought at this level and it should be refiled in small claims (or equivalent)

Bankrupting the health insurance industry would be one of the most productive things you could do to assist the US economy.

You're absolutely right.

If your neighbor's house is burning down, why should you have to pay for the fire brigade to put it out.

If the girl next door is being raped, it's not your problem, so why should you pay for the police.

You're like that joke on the movie Airplane... "They bought their tickets, I say let 'em crash!"

What benefit do you get?

'cos it's all about you right?

I agree with you, you shouldn't have to buy health insurance. You should be taxed for it.

"letting it seed" isn't transmitting it ("making available") or copying it. It's made available once (seeded), and then each individual downloading is infringing. This means that even if they do manage to prosecute an individual, it will be for one copy made (if they catch them downloading), and one making available (if they catch them seeding).

That severely limits the potential liability, makes it a civil offence, not a criminal one and probably not worth the studio's time.

.gov is "non-national"? Since when?

I've heard that this internet thingy they've been working on at DARPA might be big one day...

Which part of deficit spending don't you understand? You think your taxes have paid for all that lovely money showered on Halliburton et al over the past 8 years?

The people who are paying for this aren't born yet. I guess you think that's an argument against Roe v Wade too?

A vote on a bill takes 50+1 to pass. A vote to stop debate on a bill and bring the bill to the vote takes 60.

The Democrats should just call the Republicans bluff. Which part of "you lost" isn't obvious?

No, it means that if the Republicans want to filibuster, the Democrats should let them try.

Make them stand there and talk and read the phone book and carry on. Cloture requires 60 votes, otherwise debate continues until no one wants to speak anymore. The Democrats should just call the Republican's bluff.

That is so much Fox Noise bullshit talking points.

No, that era is now over, thanks to a de-regulated market that used securitization to not only spread risk but to totally disconnect any responsibility for loan quality from the ultimate lenders.

Not to mention that the de-regulation of financial services allowed monolithic structures to be created that are "too big to fail" requiring the badly managed "bailout".

That's why it made so much sense to cut taxes at the same time as you're trying to fund two land wars.

And it was entirely ACORN's fault that complete de-regulation of the financial market led to fraud and inappropriate incentives for loan sellers to get bad loans and securitize them, taking a commission and absolving them of responsibility.

And it was the government's fault, not the so-called "rating agencies" that these bad loans were packaged and sold as triple A rated.

Face it, the last 8 years were a clusterfuck of enormous proportions. Republicans are convinced that government is a bad idea, and whenever they're in power, they do their best to prove it.

Maybe because parents don't want their precious snowflakes egos to be upset by having to work hard?

This the NEA that Republicans always bitching about? The one that pays for art and orchestras and stuff? The one with the 144 *million* dollar budget? That's about 50 cents for each of you a year...

So maybe take some of that money you waste on spending in the military (more than the next 45 countries *combined*) and spend it on education or bi-lingual teaching materials.

Having the "legal" population learn Spanish wouldn't hurt them either. You could have ESL and SSL classes.

Did you ever consider the reason *why* those kids are in the country? Maybe some foreign aid would help? Oh, no, better to spend it on a pointless fence and yet more pseudo-military forces.

No, much easier to just bitch about it. There's no way that all those illegals are going anywhere, cheap labor is needed to do the stuff that you guys are too proud to do yourselves.

Socialist my ass.

"I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization." - Oliver Wendell Holmes

No, Bush was spending like a *Republican*. Tax cuts and bigger government. Government grew under Reagan and under Bush I and under Bush II.

Economy has done better under Democrats back 100 years, middle class has done better under Democrats.

Middle class is being wiped out by the "trickle down" bullshit. If the middle class gets decimated, then the economy really is fucked. Who's going to buy stuff to keep the rich rich?