That is a reasonable position, and deals with rts concerns about millions of people persecuting accused cops, even seeking them out for that purpose, within hours of a YouTube video being posted. Whether accused of just policy violations or breaking actual laws, cops have as much right to the presumption of innocence as anyone else. More to the point, NO ONE should be subject to mob reprisal just for online accusations (which leads into your other point.)

In digging around to confirm cops turning off dashcams when they do not WANT witnesses remains a problem (which it evidently does,) I ran across the Wikipedia article on James Bulger. In re-reading THAT atrocity, I learned that, after the kids convicted of his brutal murder reached majority and were released with new identities, an idiot uploaded a coworkers name and picture, (falsely) identifying him as one of them, earning a conviction for endangering the mans life. Obviously, behavior like that should be discouraged, and doing so with legal penalties seems entirely justified. Sometimes I think "reckless endangerment" runs a close second to "miscellaneous" as the largest category. Digressing further, I am increasingly inclined to think Calvin may have been right about that "total depravity" thing.


Like I say, unnervingly good point, both because such uncharted unbounded territory I can only guess at what would be the best comprehensive solution, and because I would be stunned if Congress does not attempt the patchwork spasmodic approach you rightly reject as ill conceived. Unfortunately, the gradual deliberative process that works so well for not proliferating a plethora of hastily enacted poorly thought out laws is horribly unsuited to adapting national policy to new technology at the rate the latter develops. It does seem hard to separate rights to upload from rights to download.

Of course, the way THAT debate has gone I almost would not be surprised if laws against uploading THEMSELVES became illegal. Even though uploading rather than downloading pirated data is the real problem, downloaders are easier targets, and Big Media does not WANT to restrict the ability to disseminate mindless pablum—they just do not want to SHARE that ability.

To be honest, I am still a bit preoccupied by how ridiculous it is to focus on Chinese piracy when that is such a tiny facet of Western business helping China loot the West and assume its political and strategic influence to an extent Mao could never have dreamed. All thanks to unregulated free trade allowing Western businesses to routinely do things in China that would get their boards of directors thrown in prison in the US or Europe (hence we must change those laws to "compete in the new global market.") Yet all that enrichment is glorious—EXCEPT Chinese copyright infringement, which is somehow the seventh sign of the apocalypse. Like calling the cops 'cos someone stole your dope.