Recommended Posts

Posted
I watched an MSN video about a woman that was fined 2 million dollars for downloading 24 songs off of Kazzaa. I guess she down loaded more but in the case that went to court it was for 24 songs. It turned out to be about 80,000 each song. What do you all think of that? $0.99 is much more affordable imo...
  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

I read that article a couple of days ago and thought...What the ????? I thought it was a ridiculous fine for 24 songs.

Posted
I hear u Pammy. That sure is a lot of money. Then again it is a Federal offense and there are all kinds of fines that can go along with that so it could have been what? $250,000 each song. I don't think she has it and I wonder how much she will actually pay out for those fines. I wonder...
Posted

I used to download from kazaa..but there's a lot of nasty stuff on that site so I blocked it from my computer.

Posted

I've never tried it but have always heard that it puts a lot of viruses on computers. Did they ever do that to yours Pammy?

Posted

Never to mine though I have known a couple of people that did have that problem with the site.

Posted

lol Moksha,

I think what the judge did was completely reprehensible. It was like either he wanted to punish her for all sins of all pirates or he wanted an insane amount that would influence the next judge to overturn the judgement.

And Limewire is another program that is never allowed on my computer.

Posted

Now the RIAA wants to scrap that idea and instead have ISPs shut off access to the internet for those who download. The plan is to have the ISP send a 'strongly worded letter', and if that doesn't stop someone, they will shut off your internet access. All this without due process, they want to bypass the legal system entirely. I can't see how they can legally do that, but that is their next plan. Personally, I don't download anymore although I will admit I used to. The fact is, downloaded songs generally sound crappy and lots of times are either not what they claim to be or are not complete.

Posted

While the fines do seem pretty steep, to make an example no doubt, but the fact is she stole, got caught and convicted.

Yes, she broke the law, but shouldn't the punishment fit the crime? Should a kid spend life in prison for stealing a pack of gum? I think the real crime here is that the RIAA is allowed to destroy people's lives for relatively minor transgressions that didn't hurt anyone.

Posted

The thing is, the artists, whom the RIAA claims to represent, have not received one dime of royalties for any of this legal mess RIAA has created. Plus, I've never heard of any band going out of business or losing popularity as a result of file sharing. If anything, downloading their songs makes them more popular and makes people want to go out and buy their music so they can get it in good quality. If anybody is losing money it's because their music stinks anyway.

Posted

Sounds like it's time for a musical tea party :P

ahahahaha, I can see it how. Let's all get together with our CD's and throw them all into the ocean :lol:

Posted

You can justify it however way you want but it is still stealing.

It amazes me how kids do not even realize that anymore. Like, everybody is doing it, why shouldn't I? One site shuts down and there's a mad dash to find another one. Geez... go buy the song. If you can't afford it, then wait until you can! This culture is being built where parents are even in on it!

I do agree the fine is a bit harsh. It should be treated the same way as a shoplifter.

Posted

Sure, the artist's make money on sold music but I think they get their most money from the concerts (but I'm not sure)...

Posted

Yes, she broke the law, but shouldn't the punishment fit the crime? Should a kid spend life in prison for stealing a pack of gum? I think the real crime here is that the RIAA is allowed to destroy people's lives for relatively minor transgressions that didn't hurt anyone.

I agree it does seem excessive but Punishment is not meant to fit the crime but to deter the crime.

Posted (edited)

Here are details of the case.

The original judgement was for $9k per song, total of $222K. She had shared 1702 songs, but charged only for 24. She had ignored a cease-and-desist letter.

I have little patience or sympathy for people who break the law, and refuse to stop breaking the law, and then whine and cry when a big ten ton CONSEQUENSE of their actions falls out of the sky and flattens them. but yeah, $1.92 million really is overboard. That's not justice. Justice involves restoring the harmed party to it's former state, and punishing the bad guy so they feel it. I can see the original judgement. Heck, I could even see a tenth of the original judgement. I could see a week in jail and a month of community service and a $5000 fine. $1.92 million is stupid.

LM

Edited by Loudmouth_Mormon
Posted

I agree it does seem excessive but Punishment is not meant to fit the crime but to deter the crime.

By that reasoning, why not make all crimes punishable by life imprisonment or a 5 billion dollar fine? In my opinion, some crimes are more damaging to society than others and so they should carry different consequences depending on the severity of the crime.

Posted (edited)

Now the RIAA wants to scrap that idea and instead have ISPs shut off access to the internet for those who download. The plan is to have the ISP send a 'strongly worded letter', and if that doesn't stop someone, they will shut off your internet access. All this without due process, they want to bypass the legal system entirely. I can't see how they can legally do that, but that is their next plan. Personally, I don't download anymore although I will admit I used to. The fact is, downloaded songs generally sound crappy and lots of times are either not what they claim to be or are not complete.

Most ISP have something in the terms of service against illegal activities and the like, all the RIAA has to do is, first convince the ISP to care, demonstrate that their terms of service have been violated, poof you just violated the contract and its now null and void, no internet for you.

Edit: RIAA's New Piracy Plan Poses a New Set of Problems - PC World This article talks about it and mentions they have some major ISPs on board. I'd don't quite see what the ISPs are gaining out of this by losing customers unless they are figuring that the fear of losing service will deter pirating in general and cut down on bandwidth usage.

Edited by Dravin
Posted

By that reasoning, why not make all crimes punishable by life imprisonment or a 5 billion dollar fine? In my opinion, some crimes are more damaging to society than others and so they should carry different consequences depending on the severity of the crime.

No. Obviously not. And i agree this crime isn't as damaging as many, but they need to find a way to stop it.

I think they should treat it like other crimes, drunk drivers, lose cars,and the right to drive, burglars lose their "tools." I say take her computer and kick her of the internet for a year or 2

Posted

The irony is that these music pirates are getting heavier fines than the real pirates off Africa, who are mostly being returned to shore and turned loose.

Guest TheLutheran
Posted

According to the account in our local newspaper, the RIAA offered to settle this case early on for between $3,000 and $5,000. :sunny:

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...