And Nintendo pushed for, and somehow the judge explicitly agreed with this argument, an absurdly harsh sentence to “set an example”. Despite no evidence whatsoever that such “examples” even deter anybody - I suspect the effect is rather the opposite, if anything, especially in the long run.
And so they stuck that guy with having 40% of his wages garnished for Nintendo for the rest of his life.
How the fucking hell did anyone look at that sentence and decide it was morally acceptable or legal.
I hope he’s able to find a great pro-bono lawyer and the gumption to appeal, but I haven’t gotten the impression so far that he will.
And Nintendo pushed for, and somehow the judge explicitly agreed with this argument, an absurdly harsh sentence to “set an example”. Despite no evidence whatsoever that such “examples” even deter anybody - I suspect the effect is rather the opposite, if anything, especially in the long run.
And so they stuck that guy with having 40% of his wages garnished for Nintendo for the rest of his life.
How the fucking hell did anyone look at that sentence and decide it was morally acceptable or legal.
I hope he’s able to find a great pro-bono lawyer and the gumption to appeal, but I haven’t gotten the impression so far that he will.
remember, kids - pirating Nintendo games and emulating them (you get better performance too :)) is the morally correct thing to do.