What if the facts were different? assume that goldsmith was hired as a computer technician solely to set up the servers. the people who hired him did not explain what they were going to do with the computers and servers. would the result be different? 1. in this scenario, goldsmith’s act was to . 2. goldsmith to facilitate copyright infringement. 3. the act, alone, a wrongful act. 4. however, goldsmith had of the plan to allow and facilitate copyright infringement. 5. under these facts, goldsmith a wrongful mental state. 6. given goldsmith’s act and mental state, goldsmith likely commit criminal copyright infringement.

1. In this scenario, Goldsmith's act was to set up servers that allowed copyright infringement.

2. Goldsmith did not intend to facilitate copyright infringement

3. The act, alone, was a wrongful act.

4. However, Goldsmith had no knowledge of the plan to allow and facilitate copyright infringement.  

5. Under these facts, Goldsmith did not have a wrongful mental state.

6. Given Goldsmith’s act and mental state, Goldsmith likely did not commit criminal copyright infringement.

the answer is tom watson. tom watson created this epitaph because he wanted to increase the sympathy felt by people towards the murder of mary phagan.

a factory opens that mass-produces light bulbs.

explanation:

not sure if that's an answer to your questions but this is an example! : )