What's wrong with this picture?

Via Boing Boing: Good stuff from Daily Koz.

Regarding Grokster:

We hold that one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties,” Justice Souter wrote.

Regarding guns:

Senate Republicans on Tuesday moved the National Rifle Association’s top priority ahead of a $491 billion defense bill, setting up a vote on legislation to shield firearms manufacturers and dealers from lawsuits over gun crimes.

The president believes that the manufacturer of a legal product should not be held liable for the criminal misuse of that product by others,” said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.

[Senator Larry] Craig said such lawsuits are “predatory and aimed at bankrupting the firearms industry,” unfairly blaming dealers and manufacturers for the crimes of gun users.

4 responses to “What's wrong with this picture?

  1. Lots of people seem to misunderstand what this whole Grokster thing is about. They have not ruled that every maker of p2p programs that is mainly used for copyright infringement is responsible for that infringement. What they HAVE ruled is that the makers are responsible for it if they "[distribute] a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright." Grokster actually encouraged using the software for illegal downloading. I don't think anyone (not even the president) would be too happy about firearm manufacturers promoting people murdering each other.

  2. True enough Per but what about tabacco companies? They NEVER said smoke *because* it will give you cancer. Yet, the courts ruled that the tabacco companies still have to shell out to the consumers. Doubles standards in dictionary print. Talk about total bull shit.

    Cheers,
    Zac

  3. Um, firearm mfg's promote gun ownership as a remedy/deterrent to crime. Doesn't that include the killing of human beings? I think the implied idea is that you might shoot someone who is tresspassing and kill them. I'm a hunter/fisherman. Look through any number of hunting, security or survival magazines and you will find instances of promoting the use of a gun for potentially illegal activities.

  4. Wasn't sure if my earlier comments got through so I thought I'd comment again. Basically, check out the ads in survival/security magazines sometime. The killing of humans is referred to in some of the ads. I am a hunter/fisherman but I don't believe that any firearm company should be given a free pass when it comes to civil suits. The NRA, along with the Dobson gang, owns the GOP, that is the reason for this political maneuvering, IMHO.