FirstNameLastName said:
Incorrect. The courts won't simply overlook this criminal activity just because it isn't specifically related to whether the image is his property. If I sold someone drugs and they shortchanged me, do you think the courts would overlook the drug dealing just because it isn't relevant to whether the other person stole from me? No, at most, we would both be guilty of our own separate crimes, as is the case here.
If Cracked is smart (and they surely have employees who know more law than the OP) they will use the piracy against him as a deterrent, and if he pursues they will surely bring it up. And as I've said before, even if they don't bring it up the courts will investigate where the image was taken from and surely find the thread where he admits to using an emulator.
This is a no-win situation for the OP if they pursued legal action. Even if they win the case with the image, the piracy will still bite them in the arse.
Well, you clearly have your head pretty far up your own ass, so I'm not going to waste any more time with you. Keep making the same argument over and over, it doesn't change the fact that it never held water in the first place.
I said it before, and I'll say it again. This isn't about the software, emulator, etc etc to infinity.
The court/ judge DOES NOT CARE.
Person A took a picture. Person B used it for monetary gain without asking person A. Person B owes person A money. End of story.
I'm assuming you aren't american judging by your use of the misspelling "arse" (you meant "ass"). How about you let us handle american law, and go back to eating spotted dick?
