> First, we're talking criminal law here, so the state has to argue their case and prove your guilt, not you have to prove your innocence Although factually co

> First, we're talking criminal law here, so the state has to argue their case and prove your guilt, not you have to prove your innocence Although factually correct, this is not how the system works in most circumstances. If someone in power believes you committed a crime based upon the current law and you get charged for that crime, fat chance you will be arguing semantics in court. You will be taking a plea deal unless you are extremely well funded. I’m mostly wondering why we need to make these explicit laws to give more ammo to prosecutors. Is this really something that needs to be addressed now? Do we need to further criminal liability because the copyright enforcing industry can shift the expenses of policing their content onto publicly funded mechanisms?