Among other things, a software tester's job CONSTITUTES the software development process. I think you mean "consist of"?

Then Bad Joke, too.

>..The guy that spends a week finding a five year old memory bug, that no one has every been able to find is now ineffective,

If I spent a week doing that, there'd probably be hell to pay. Point taken, though.

Ownership and proof of ownership are two separate things. You don't need a receipt to own something.

I agree that "giving" an mp3 in a material sense is sort of silly. Digital media is a new thing. So far, we've been arguing over which old metaphor it most closely resembles and basing our rules around that.

What you're missing here is that to "sell" the MP3, it is necessary that you give the MP3 to the other party. This is a "move" not a "copy", meaning, you must destroy your current copy. Yes, under the "material object" logic, you could "give" it away, as in "sell it for zero", but you give up any rights to it yourself.

With P2P, your copy stays on the machine when another downloads it from you. You now have an illegal copy (assuming you GAVE it to the first downloader).

"Internet" != "Interactive Web"

Why sensationalize this lawsuit? It's absurd enough on its own merit.

This leaves out the fact that the pirate may not buy it.. but might mention the game to a friend... who then buys it. So, the "word of mouth" thing still stands. Not sure how much, but it makes sense.

Great clarification, actually. But.. I'll keep my "funny"!

I guess they don't sue on behalf of actual artists.

No. This is the Government. That wrench cost about $2,000.