In my opinion, and I'm sure many would agree, is that she would be forgiven if she every actually apologized for what she did.

Youthful? She was well into her '20s when she plagiarized from other media. She was also a published writer, so she really should have known better.

Her novels may not be plagiarized, but her Harry Potter fanfic did indeed plagiarize whole swaths of text from a then out-of-print book series.

Taking property or ideas that is not your own without permission and without intent to pay for such property or ideas.

She's also a talented plagiarist.

It's surprising that not one person in all of 77 responses realized that you were being satirical.

Piracy certainly is wrong as it takes potential income away from people who worked long and hard to provide media to consumers.

You really don't understand the definition of "stealing," or perhaps you're just performing some mental gymnastics to justify your own piracy/theft.

You really don't understand the definition of "stealing," or perhaps you're just performing some mental gymnastics to justify your own piracy/theft.

You really don't understand the definition of "stealing," or perhaps you're just performing some mental gymnastics to justify your own piracy/theft.

How are counting unpaid for downloads as lost sales "obviously wrong"? If they're not paid for and the user is playing the game than clearly the download was a "lost sale."

You really don't know what you're talking about, do you?

I'm not really embarrassed.

The first site you listed specifically goes into how Buddhism is NOT a religion to many people.

I wasn't asking about the amount of money requested, but how it was utilized.

It's not, actually. I'm not a monk in a temple, nor do I have to practice the tenets of the philosophy to believe in nirvana, reincarnation or bodhisattvas.

Buddhism isn't a religion. And, as an agnostic, I very well can believe that atheism is a stupid practice. It's utterly fatalistic and undeterministic.

"You" people? I'm an agnostic Buddhist. I don't subscribe to Christian theology. I just don't feel the need to interpret it literally, nor believe that one translation suggests anywhere near the original intent.

Just because the English translation uses the term "serpent" doesn't mean the original intention was in reference of a snake.

The Bible never states that the creature from the Garden was a snake. Also, parrots can speak.