Court Confirms $675,000 Fine For Downloading Music

[christop]

I would not pay it.

 

[eddieroolz]

If one steals several CDs from the music store, punishment would be to pay back the cost of the CDs.

If one steals several CDs from the internet, punishment would is to pay back $22,000 per song.

See what's wrong with this? A 1st Grader could tell you that.

 

[pocketdrummer]

Well, I buy music for $0.99 on iTunes... so 30 songs would be $29.70. You could move it over 2 decimal places and make that the fine. So, effectively, the fine would be $2,970. I think this is fair for pirating music considering a lot of people end up sharing it. SO, this would cover 100 downloads.

I think the problem is that they're trying to make back money for people they can't catch...

 

[Gulli]

[citation][nom]carnage9270[/nom]False again.[/citation]

I'm pretty sure purchasing a license means you can use whatever medium you prefer to access the licensed material. As far as I know there are no laws or precedents that say a license only applies to one medium (I've heard people say there is no precedent because the RIAA is afraid they would lose if they ever brought such a case to court). Therefore it remains legal, but feel free to enlighten us.

Now of course you'd have to be sure what you are downloading is exactly the same as the version you own (not a remix for example) and you have to disable uploading so you are not sharing material with people who might not own a license.

I hate it when the industry tries to make people to know only about those aspects of intellectual property and licenses that are beneficiary to the industry.

 

[itchyisvegeta]

So how much does a downloaded song cost? $1-2?

I co-own a family owned convenient store. I deal with thieves on a weekly basis. Last week, I had 2 little girls steal a $1.49 package of water balloons. Before that, 2 teenage boys steal 3 Red Bulls. Before that, an older guy stealing soda pop cups, saying he was buying a refill for refill price, but grabbing a new cup when I wasn't looking. Before that, a 70 year old man stealing bulk jerkey. I can go on.

I would LOVE, F***ING LOVE for every damn one of these guys to get a $22,500 per item fine for shoplifting. But they don't and never will. So someone explain to me why the music industry gets more rights than my store does.

 

[carnage9270]

[citation][nom]Gulli[/nom]I'm pretty sure purchasing a license means you can use whatever medium you prefer to access the licensed material. As far as I know there are no laws or precedents that say a license only applies to one medium (I've heard people say there is no precedent because the RIAA is afraid they would lose if they ever brought such a case to court). Therefore it remains legal, but feel free to enlighten us.Now of course you'd have to be sure what you are downloading is exactly the same as the version you own (not a remix for example) and you have to disable uploading so you are not sharing material with people who might not own a license.I hate it when the industry tries to make people to know only about those aspects of intellectual property and licenses that are beneficiary to the industry.[/citation]

A) You own no "license"
B) "As far as i know" is not the law.

Go read up on it, it'll tell you everything you need to know. When you buy a cd, you own that cd, not the music or any rights to it's content. Software has "licenses" to which you speak and that's an entirely different story.

 

[Gulli]

[citation][nom]carnage9270[/nom]A) You own no "license"B) "As far as i know" is not the law. Go read up on it, it'll tell you everything you need to know. When you buy a cd, you own that cd, not the music or any rights to it's content. Software has "licenses" to which you speak and that's an entirely different story.[/citation]

Please provide me with a precedent or law stating that one cannot shift mediums. I know buying a CD does more than just give me the ownership of the plastic and the tiny holes ingraved in it. If it didn't it would be just like any physical good and I could actually copy it and hand it out to everyone (the way you can legally "copy" a car and give it away as long as you don't charge money for it or claim to be the original designer).

Do you agree tough that what I said is true for software (if you paid for a key/license it doesn't matter where you get the actual software from)?

 

[Gulli]

[citation][nom]carnage9270[/nom]Go read up on it, it'll tell you everything you need to know.[/citation]

No it won't. Sources on this subject are vague and contradict each other and organizations like the RIAA have been caught lying to scare and extort people.

 

[Gulli]

[citation][nom]carnage9270[/nom]Go read up on it, it'll tell you everything you need to know.[/citation]

No it won't. Sources on the subject are vague and contradict each other. In addition organizations like the RIAA have been caught lying about the law to scare and extort people who cannot afford expensive lawyers.

 

[Guest]

Sue one person for sharing song with 20000 other people
Sue the other 20000 people for the same thing

Make off with 20001 times the profit you should

These guys are smart

 

[silky salamandr]

14 bucks for zune pass. 20 bucks for Tunebite. 100gigs of music.

Now RIAA prove that I did anything.

 

[Guest]

I dont think you can claim bankruptcy on any type of restitution..I know you cant in IL.

 

[duk3]

I am millions of dollars in debt and never knew it, fascinating.
Just make the guy pay for the songs and go home, this is absurd.

 

[aftcomet]

[citation][nom]carnage9270[/nom]Actually he can claim bankruptcy all he wants, it doesn't remove the debt.http/www.bankruptcystrategiesus. [...] judge.html[/citation]

The plot thickens. I didn't know this. This is actually pretty insane. So then his wages are going to be garnished for the rest of his life because it's like a second mortgage he won't be able to pay off.

 

[RoboTree]

Wow. Just. Wow. $22,500 per song... that must be one hell of a playlist. Even the $67,500 is more than ridiculous.

Aside from that.......... i bet the artists are going to get nnnnnnnnnone of this.

 

[keczapifrytki]

Does anyone know what we have to do to close down the RIAA forever? God damn it, I hate these people so much. They must be the lowest form of life in the universe, right under the amoeba.

 

[txsouthpaw]

This is another in a long line of symptoms of the supply-side welfare state. The swiftness and severity of the hand of justice when a corporation or trade group is the plaintiff amazes me in comparison to that of when a middle class citizen seeks the very same justice. Case in point: watch how long it takes for property owners to recoup damages and penalties from damages to property and environment caused by natural gas hydraulic fracturing.

 

[Guest]

Thats it. Im never going to give these criminals any money ever again.
Pirate Bay here I come.

 

[junixophobia]

Who is the idiot judge who favored this???

 

[lamorpa]

[citation][nom]Gulli[/nom]No, if I paid money for a Michael Jackson tape in 1985 I have the right to access those songs any way I can, for the rest of my life. I don't have to pay money to get the same songs on a different medium. This is not just my opinion, this is the law.[/citation]
You missed a couple of words when you were typing:
"No, if I paid money for a Michael Jackson tape in 1985 I WISH TO have the right to access those songs any way I can, AND I WISH for the rest of my life. I WISH I don't have to pay money to get the same songs on a different medium. This is not just my opinion, this is the ALSO NOT THE law."