|
|
#1
10-04-2007, 07:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
Jury just awarded the RIAA $220k for 24 songs that a lady had simply shared on [censored]. They didn't show that she had gotten the songs illegally. In fact, I'm pretty sure she had purchased the 24 tracks. But her simply having [censored] installed and open to sharing those 24 tracks cost her $220k
With the internet and digital delivery, how much do we really need the RIAA now anyway? 16 year old Soulja Boy got famous by putting his tracks online, only getting a record deal after the fact. Radiohead is doing their test of 'pay what you want.' Hopefully the RIAA will be obsolete soon, as they refuse to change their business model and adapt to current times. 
|
|
#2
10-04-2007, 08:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
The RIAA is playing with fire with all the lawsuits they are pushing through the courts.
Precedent is being set in cases where they havn't done their research and fail to prove that what they claim actually happened. (Judges have thrown cases out, and demanded the RIAA pay the defendants defense fees) It will bite them in the ass.
|
|
#3
10-04-2007, 08:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
Hoo boy, this thread could get unwieldy.
The RIAA is dumb; the genie is out of the bottle. I've continued to download songs for free well after Napster and other [censored] sites were shut down, as I'm sure many other non-stupid people have done. However, the RIAA's scare tactics and policies may work with casual internet users much like the UIEGA scared off plenty of casual poker players.
|
|
#4
10-04-2007, 08:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
The RIAA is playing with fire with all the lawsuits they are pushing through the courts. Precedent is being set in cases where they havn't done their research and fail to prove that what they claim actually happened. (Judges have thrown cases out, and demanded the RIAA pay the defendants defense fees) It will bite them in the ass. [/ QUOTE ] In the case referenced in the OP, they did not prove she even had file sharing software installed on her computer, much less prove she was the one sharing the music. And they still won. At one point in the trial, a witness(lawyer?) for the RIAA proclaimed that if someone rips a cd to their hard drive, they are guilty of stealing. [censored] insanity.
|
|
#5
10-04-2007, 08:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
Im pretty sure there are lots of songs that are worth way way more than 9250$. Wonder how much money Beatles "Yesterday" is worth, or what about Bing Crosbys "White Christmas"?
This woman gave away stuff she didnt have the rights to. Are you against copyrights and patents?
|
|
#6
10-04-2007, 08:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
Im pretty sure there are lots of songs that are worth way way more than 9250$. Wonder how much money Beatles "Yesterday" is worth, or what about Bing Crosbys "White Christmas"? This woman gave away stuff she didnt have the rights to. Are you against copyrights and patents? [/ QUOTE ] They didn't prove she did this at all. Are you against due process? *edit* obviously due process isn't technically the correct term her, but you get the point.
|
|
#8
10-04-2007, 08:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
IMO the biggest thing that contributes to illegal downloading/sharing songs, movies, tv shows is their lack of availability in a large easily accessible pay sight.
It makes absolutely no difference to me whether I pay 99 cents for a song or a $1.99 for a tv episode or whether I dowload them for free. If itunes had all the songs I want, all the TV shows I want, and all the movies I want, I'd be glad to pay the nominal fee just for speed and ease of operation. If the RIAA really wants to stop piracy, they should direct their resources toward making everything available online for download at a reasonably low price.
|
|
#9
10-04-2007, 08:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
If you are against copyrights and patents, you are against Jesus.
Abraham Lincoln once said that if you are a digital pirate, I will attack you with the north.
|
|
#10
10-04-2007, 08:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Apparently songs are worth $9250 each...Dumb Jury
[ QUOTE ]
IMO the biggest thing that contributes to illegal downloading/sharing songs, movies, tv shows is their lack of availability in a large easily accessible pay sight. It makes absolutely no difference to me whether I pay 99 cents for a song or a $1.99 for a tv episode or whether I dowload them for free. If itunes had all the songs I want, all the TV shows I want, and all the movies I want, I'd be glad to pay the nominal fee just for speed and ease of operation. If the RIAA really wants to stop piracy, they should direct their resources toward making everything available online for download at a reasonably low price. [/ QUOTE ] As said earlier, the RIAA is unwilling or unable to adapt to the current times. They've had a good thing going for a long time and are trying to hold onto it instead of adapting.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
