The Philosophy of Piracy & Overpunishment...

[Barefoot Radio.com]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070513/ap_en_ot/music_pirates

I can't help but find this unjust.

The reason being that 750$ per downloaded/stolen song if people decide to fight in court and lose.

Why does this bug me so much? It's not that the songs are stolen, it's that the punishment is way out of proportion compared to many KINDS OF THINGS.

The fine for drinking and driving is way less, even if you were so inebriated that you were a definite danger.

There are all kinds of WORSE crimes, but somehow, the punishment for this has to be way over the top?

STEAL A CD OFF A PHYSICAL SHELF AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO PAY LIKE THIS!

The punishment is so because it's digital. It's so because the industry is petrified.

I'm not saying piracy is ok, I'm saying that it's NOT WORSE THAN MANY OTHER THINGS.

Lobbyists need to get the F*CKING F*CK out of Washington AND JUST LET THOSE WORMY LEGISLATORS DO WHAT'S RIGHT WITHOUT EXTERNAL PRESSURE$$$$!!!!!!


WAAAAAAAAA!!!!! What an imperfect world!!!! We can make digital copies of music for NOTHING!

WAH!!!!!!!!!!!

[X Pat Radio]

People "steal" music because the RIAA has made it way to hard to buy it leagally.

[atthetable]

actually, people steal music because they are sick of paying $12US for one or two new songs.

[WyethDigital]

Unfortunately there are more things wrong with this than just the fines. The whole law is out of date. The fines in place are meant to penalize large-scale profiteers making money from selling pirated copies. I doubt very much that the "misdemeanor" aspect of this crime has been evaluated extensively, given the pro-business, pro-corporation congress that was in charge (up until recently) for 12+ years.

What is more disturbing to me is the extortionist nature of the letters and emails being sent to college students. These aren't truly legal documents, based on due process (especially the emails). They're letters intended to bully and intimidate students into admitting guilt without the burden of proving that they've done something wrong. By making the fines so high, they are avoiding small claims court civil litigation, where they would likely have a harder time trying the case, in part because the defendant could more easily defend themselves. I wonder what the EFF is doing about these letters. Any one know if they're challenging any of this?

Eric

[Slone]

actually, people steal music because they are sick of paying $12US for one or two new songs.

ha ha ha oh how true!!

RIAA Shipping Report
http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/041707.asp
The overall retail value of the U.S. record industry was $11.5 billion in 2006, a 6.2 percent decline compared to 2005. There were 615 million CDs shipped to retail and specialty outlets in 2006, a 12.8 percent drop from the previous year.We all know this though already...

Our continuing mission is to help level the playing field so retailers and legal services don?t have to compete with piracy and to work for parity in a marketplace with increasing convergence between various music distribution and broadcast outlets.In other words...
Our bottom line is hurting and this report confirms our ongoing fears. RIAA will continue to discover other ways to increase revenue. Move over... :rolleyes:

Sorry for the off beat response... They kill me!
-Scott

[Barefoot Radio.com]

I believe the fine for going to court and losing is so high because it acts as a deterrent to people getting their day in court.

Hey, you can settle in court for 3g, or you can risk TOTALLY ruining your life if you go to court an lose.

This is not the first time I've seen the law set up to keep you from getting your day in court. They want to turn folks away to save themselves the time and money.

I could see those kinds of fines if you're a mass pirater, copying, burning selling etc....

These kids are just listeners. Moreover, these are the fans of whatever music they download.

Digital....boo hoo.

How do you kill such overgrown financial monsters in the USA? I don't think it's possible, which makes it more ironic to me that they constantly need to turn the heat up under people. They're not even doing it because they're fearful for their existence, they do it because of a pansy little percentage on the bottom line that is huge overall when you're dealing in such huge numbers.

NOBODY, I mean NOBODY deserves to have their lives ruined because of downloading a few digital copies, or even a few hundred or thousand. It's madness. Look what you can do with deep pockets and lawyers. You can turn general fairness and justice on it's head.

Free Market?? Really? Really FREE?

Give the earth back to mom and pop.

I have NO problem buying a cd if I dig the band. I would definitely buy the cd before paying for some d*amn compressed track. I just spent over 20 on an import. I've spent almost 40 on certain imports.

[Asiadeep]

Can't seem to access the news article but just have to say something about this madness. I personally believe that its nonsense that such hard levels of justice has to be used for such petty crimes. I mean, granted that theft isn't something to be taken lightly but when the punishment isn't balanced properly then you have a peversion of justice.

I suspect that this peversion also has something to do with the media big boys "lobbying" their concerns a little too hard. The watchdogs should step in to control this before it goes out of hand.

[Barefoot Radio.com]

Should the punishment be WORSE than a drunk driver gets???

You mean someone who puts lives at risk is less of a criminal than a kid downloading a song?????????????????


I hope someone is bold and turns this legal lynching around.

[RobotsLove]

This whole subject is dirty business, the RIAA has sued elementary school girls and deceased grandmas.

From an artist's standpoint, the majority of recording artists don't see a profit from CD sales. The profits are designed to power the record companies albeit some money does go into fronting for recording sessions, touring, promotions, legal dealing, etc. Many artists also leak their albums themselves before the release date.

Apple and EMI took a huge step forward with selling high quality unprotected ACC files for EMI artists. Apple has endorsed DRM-free media from the start but had to cave because it was the only way to wrangle major lables. The largest supplier of DRM-free music are also RIAA members themselves... it's called CD's.

RIAA members actively refuse to embrace the digital revolution and will be left in the dust by smaller labels and acts who do.

My friends and I use the "sneakernet" you can't track that.