Appeals Court Reinstates $675,000 File Sharing Verdict

SilverSliver said:
I am all for penalizing people for crimes. But, the punishment has to fit the crime. This is equivalent to getting the death sentence for jaywalking.
Click to expand...

This is not criminal punishment...it's a judgment in a lawsuit...there is no criminal record attached to this stuff. He's lucky, because that would entail felony charges, and jail time to boot.

All he's gotta do is file bankruptcy, have his life suck for 7 years, and it's over. Not nearly the same thing as the death penalty. :)
 
fatrat said:
When you create something of value you want to sell for money to the public....then you will understand. :)
Click to expand...

I own several copyrights. $675k is ludicrous. Also, the artists aren't going to see a dime of it, so...
 
Arcticfox04 said:
The system has failed. Really going after a college kid for 675k is so stupid. He's basically going to have to go bankrupt and ruin his life because of these greedy A-Holes.
Click to expand...

I wonder when one of these "kids" will decide they have nothing to lose, and they end up going postal on the RIAA?
 
why you change your name vanilla ice?
nothing rhymes with winkle!

sorry i dont know why this reminded me of in living color lol
 
xxEIEIOxx said:
They can't imprison you for not paying. However they can destroy your life to the point of it not being worth living.
Click to expand...

I wish the same would happen to every single douchbag in our court system, and, at the RIAA that had ANYTHING to do with allowing this atrocity of injustice to happen.

I'm usually all about peace, love, and forgive & forget but these pukes need to dive headfirst into a septic tank.
 
So the courts decided to remain unconstitutional after all? Interesting choice. America...F*** YEAH!
 
A judgement like this is just about the same as a death sentence thus I would not hesitate to share my new found death with all of those who had a part of this judgement.
 
fatrat said:
When you create something of value you want to sell for money to the public....then you will understand. :)
Click to expand...
It's not like the person profited from this, or that the companies lost anywhere near that much.

The problem with stealing music is that there's too much of a fine line. I can turn on the radio and hear the song for free. I can walk into a restaurant or bar, and hear music for free. I call someones cell phones and hear a song instead of a ringing noise, for free.

In all this, I can take out my recorder and just record the music. Nothing to stop me. Yet, 30 pirated and distributed songs are $675,000? Do you really have to wonder why anyone would argue that companies have too much power in our government?

If I create something worth $675,000, I would take a permanent vacation.

nutzo said:
I wonder when one of these "kids" will decide they have nothing to lose, and they end up going postal on the RIAA?
Click to expand...
Don't you just love gun control in this country. Give you the weapons you need to go postal.
 
so, how do you want to get paid ?

lump sum? or yearly installments for the next 75 years ?
 
dr.kevin said:
so, how do you want to get paid ?

lump sum? or yearly installments for the next 75 years ?
Click to expand...

You can get a Stag Arms AR15 for $750. This guys life is pretty much over, he might as well have some fun and take some of the assholes with him.
 
fatrat said:
The 8th amendmnent applies to criminal penalties only...not civil (which this case is).

Don't like it? Don't pirate other peoples property...problem solved.
Click to expand...

Where does the 8th amendment say this? [Citation needed] My copy doesn't.

"Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
 
wizdum said:
You can get a Stag Arms AR15 for $750. This guys life is pretty much over, he might as well have some fun and take some of the assholes with him.
Click to expand...

I would of said, Fuck them and move up north. but this will do too. :p
 
Inu said:
This is when you start not paying taxes, nothing to report, they can't automatically take anything. Or just get payed in cash.
Click to expand...

fuck that. if this judgement sticks, i would move to another country and start over with a new identity
 
Mmmm, here is a thought....


Stop doing illegal stuff?


i know,i know, dont start the flame, the punishment is far above the crime, but in the end, they did something illegal, and got caught doing it, so of course they are making an example out of them.

Want to do illegal things, be smart about it.

It is the same people here in Costa Rica who are complaining that a $600 fine is too much cause they were going 20+ over the speed limit.... maybe stop speeding?
 
Ashbringer said:
It's not like the person profited from this, or that the companies lost anywhere near that much.

The problem with stealing music is that there's too much of a fine line. I can turn on the radio and hear the song for free. I can walk into a restaurant or bar, and hear music for free. I call someones cell phones and hear a song instead of a ringing noise, for free.

In all this, I can take out my recorder and just record the music. Nothing to stop me. Yet, 30 pirated and distributed songs are $675,000? Do you really have to wonder why anyone would argue that companies have too much power in our government?

If I create something worth $675,000, I would take a permanent vacation.


Don't you just love gun control in this country. Give you the weapons you need to go postal.
Click to expand...

Radio - plays ad's to make money and the radio station paid for the rights for the songs they play

Restaurant - also pays for it rights to play music. or they should be otherwise can be hugely fined.

People Phones - i am sure %99 of them are illegal and they don't have the rights to use them as a ring tone and i am sure they will be going after those people next.

If they could stop you from recording, they would, simply because you haven't bee busted, doesnt suddenly make it legal and okay.
 
MrGuvernment said:
People Phones - i am sure %99 of them are illegal and they don't have the rights to use them as a ring tone and i am sure they will be going after those people next.
Click to expand...

Lol, what? I can load my music on my phone and use it as a ringtone, nothing illegal about that.
 
if you downloaded it illegally no it isnt, if you bought it yes, possibly, but technically, you are not allowed to play music to public, only in private, which is what your ring tone is technically doing, i could see the RIAA trying to go after people for this next, since they are such money hungry pricks.

Read the EULA of music usage, it is ridiculous, if you play music in your house and friends are over, it is breaking their EULA.
 
They still have a chance. The district court now must decide what to do. It could follow the circuit court's recommendation and use remittitur, or it could simply enter the same constitutional ruling again.

If the district court determines that the jury's award
does not merit common law remittitur, the court and the parties
will have to address the relationship between the remittitur
standard and the due process standard for statutory damage awards,
should the issue continue to be raised.
Click to expand...
 
And they wonder why people snap and do things like shoot up a fed building or fly small planes into them... If someone held something like this over my head to the point that it would ruin the rest of my life I cant tell you what I would do (not really sure) but I can say it wouldnt be legal.
 
They are going to die off sometime soon I hope. Can't play music for friends? lol
 
MrGuvernment said:
if you downloaded it illegally no it isnt, if you bought it yes, possibly, but technically, you are not allowed to play music to public, only in private, which is what your ring tone is technically doing, i could see the RIAA trying to go after people for this next, since they are such money hungry pricks.

Read the EULA of music usage, it is ridiculous, if you play music in your house and friends are over, it is breaking their EULA.
Click to expand...

Ironically enough, thanks to a RIAA inquiry the US Copyright Office has stated that even if your ringtone is played in public it's considered private use. More importantly, a ringtone is not considered a derivative work and doesn't require a separate license. If you purchase a cd, rip it, then create a ringtone then you're perfectly within your rights to do so. If you bought the song from iTunes, you're screwed because there's a clause preventing that in the EULA.

RIAA press release:
http://www.riaa.com/newsitem.php?ne...age=7&id=FFDA71A6-BC65-F876-E846-114BD14EABE1

Actual Copyright Office Docket RF 2006-1
http://www.gehrkelaw.com/files/digital_phonorecord_delivery.pdf
Moreover, we decide that a ringtone is made and distributed for private use even though some consumers may purchase them for the purpose of identifying themselves in public.
Click to expand...

Editorial from Engadget "...written by our own totally punk copyright attorney Nilay Patel. In it we'll try to answer some fundamental tech-law questions to help you stay out of trouble in this brave new world. Disclaimer: Although this post was written by an attorney, it is not meant as legal advice or analysis and should not be taken as such.":
http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/07/know-your-rights-is-it-illegal-to-make-my-own-ringtones/

Well, the RIAA wanted to be able to distribute ringtones of its artists without having to pay them big money to do so (surprised?), and it won a decision last year before the Copyright Office saying that ringtones weren't "derivative works," meaning they didn't infringe on the copyright of the songwriter. It's a little more complicated than that, but essentially, if the RIAA hadn't won, ringtones would cost even more, since no one would be able to make them without a license from the songwriter.
Click to expand...
 
MrGuvernment said:
Mmmm, here is a thought....


Stop doing illegal stuff?


i know,i know, dont start the flame, the punishment is far above the crime, but in the end, they did something illegal, and got caught doing it, so of course they are making an example out of them.

Want to do illegal things, be smart about it.

It is the same people here in Costa Rica who are complaining that a $600 fine is too much cause they were going 20+ over the speed limit.... maybe stop speeding?
Click to expand...

This would be more like a cop pulling you over for doing 20+ over the limit, and having him just shoot you in the face when he gets to the car. The fine is excessive. $600 is a deterrent (and a kind of small one), $600,000 is bullshit.

nobody_here said:
Lol, what? I can load my music on my phone and use it as a ringtone, nothing illegal about that.
Click to expand...

If other people can hear the music playing on your phone, you are illegally broadcasting it.
 
Neb said:
Ironically enough, thanks to a RIAA inquiry the US Copyright Office has stated that even if your ringtone is played in public it's considered private use. More importantly, a ringtone is not considered a derivative work and doesn't require a separate license. If you purchase a cd, rip it, then create a ringtone then you're perfectly within your rights to do so. If you bought the song from iTunes, you're screwed because there's a clause preventing that in the EULA.

RIAA press release:
http://www.riaa.com/newsitem.php?ne...age=7&id=FFDA71A6-BC65-F876-E846-114BD14EABE1

Actual Copyright Office Docket RF 2006-1
http://www.gehrkelaw.com/files/digital_phonorecord_delivery.pdf


Editorial from Engadget "...written by our own totally punk copyright attorney Nilay Patel. In it we'll try to answer some fundamental tech-law questions to help you stay out of trouble in this brave new world. Disclaimer: Although this post was written by an attorney, it is not meant as legal advice or analysis and should not be taken as such.":
http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/07/know-your-rights-is-it-illegal-to-make-my-own-ringtones/
Click to expand...

thats good to know, the courts finally made one good decision!
 
JosiahBradley said:
Where does the 8th amendment say this? [Citation needed] My copy doesn't.

"Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
Click to expand...

That is a limitation on government, in criminal proceedings, does not apply to civil lawsuits by private parties.

From Wikipedia
 
MrGuvernment said:
Mmmm, here is a thought....


Stop doing illegal stuff?
Click to expand...

It's not actually reasonable for us to be held legally acountable for preventing others from illegally copying music that we have.

Suing someone for "sharing" music is no more justifiable than it would be for a candy company to sue a grocery store that had some candy bars shoplifted.

The only reason copyright is even getting applied to digital music files in the first place is corrupt corporate perversion of our legal system.
 
So a fine larger than the disposable income someone can be expected to earn over their entire lifetime is deemed "fair."

I'm trying to think of how I can phrase this to not get in legal trouble but...if that kind of judgement stuck and didn't get lowered through yet another appeal, I'd just take the bastards out with me. An entire life ruined for a few clicks of a button in Limewire or wtfever p2p system he used.

What a fucking travesty.
 
Neb said:
...If you bought the song from iTunes, you're screwed because there's a clause preventing that in the EULA....
Click to expand...

EULA is worth less than an artists interpretation of poop-stains on used toilet paper.

I no of no case ever where a EULA could reasonably be considered equivilant to a legal binding contract between two parties!

EULA is like, after you buy something one party adds "Oh, and by the way..." AFTER the sale.

If I'm going to buy a computer game or something, I'm simply purchasing entertainment, I'm not entering into a contract. If I have to "press OK to continue" my cat does that for me, and no way have I ever actually READ what they are proposing that I agree to (which I do not, and have not done).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top