RICO also occurred to me when I read the following paragraph:
According to the suit, Getty and its affiliates have not only sold unauthorized licenses of Highsmithâ(TM)s photos, but they have sent threatening letters to people that they believe have infringed the copyright.
Then I see that someone here objects thusly:
RICO? Who did they conspire with?
That's a cool parlour trick you've got there: pack all the accused into one side of the court room, then wave your hand toward the empty half.
So, I guess I'm to understand that if the Mafia were to incorporate itself, it would no longer be a conspiracy, because the collective decision to become a fictitious legal individual sloughs off all conceptual notions of with-hood.
At that moment their eyes were opened, and they suddenly felt shame at their nakedness. So they sewed LLC fig leaves together to cover themselves.
That makes so much more sense than the original version, and it's blindingly obvious in retrospect how easily the three "LLC" ink scratches could have been neglected at some juncture of the inter-generational hand-me-down.
Also, we're all sure the person receiving one of these shakedown letters has no feeling at all of being the one pitted against the many, aren't we?
Let me hazard a guess that what gives you the largest dopamine rush in any debate is to find something that costs you next to zero cognitive effort (you seemed not to even notice your use of the word "they" in your question "who did they conspire with?") while demanding that your adversary fill in the tedious technical blanks to your exacting and high standards of approval.
What gives me a big dopamine rush is to notice that the person attempting to wield this kind of argumentative posture has already failed to notice the nose on their own face.
But then I'm more interested in laughing than winning. Each to his own, I guess.