TeenHelp
Support Forums Today's Posts

Get Advice Connect with TeenHelp Resources
HelpLINK Facebook     Twitter     Tumblr     Instagram    Hotlines    Safety Zone    Alternatives

You are not registered or have not logged in

Hello guest! (Not a guest? Log in above!)

As a guest on TeenHelp you are only able to use some of our site's features. By registering an account you will be able to enjoy unlimited access to our site, and will be able to:

  • Connect with thousands of teenagers worldwide by actively taking part in our Support Forums and Chat Room.
  • Find others with similar interests in our Social Groups.
  • Express yourself through our Blogs, Picture Albums and User Profiles.
  • And much much more!

Signing up is free, anonymous and will only take a few moments, so click here to register now!


Current Events and Debates For discussions and friendly debates about politics and current events, check out this forum.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
  (#1 (permalink)) Old
Union Of V Offline
Scepticism With A Tail
I can't get enough
*********
 
Union Of V's Avatar
 
Name: Basil!!!
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Cork, Ireland

Posts: 2,017
Blog Entries: 22
Join Date: January 31st 2009

RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 11th 2009, 08:48 PM

Noise Addicts: The Most Expensive Songs Ever
Quote:
Harvard Law professor Charles Nesson has set out to defend Joel Tenenbaum, a 25-year old physics graduate student at Boston University. The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is claiming Joel downloaded 7 songs using Kazaa and is seeking payment of $1,050,000 to the record labels. It is unclear whether Joel will get any sold-out Tool tickets, backstage passes for Miley Cyrus or rights to some of the Beatles songs. The case against Joel is extortion and a “David against Goliath” battle. However, Joel has a fighting chance. Debbie Foster is an Oklahoma woman sued by the RIAA, who won a motion for summary judgment back in 2006, asking the court to force the RIAA to reimburse her attorney’s fees (see court ruling). Professor Charles Nesson thinks the RIAA’s lawsuit against Joel is an unconstitutional abuse of law.
The RIAA should face the music and realize that P2P is impossible to stop. The reason they have been going after individuals with astronomical price tags is that they know they can’t stop P2P software. If they successfully shut one down, another will take its place.
Detailed Coverage on Copyrights & Campaigns


I've already made my views on pirating clear in another thread, so lets keep the two apart. This, however, is an open declaration of war on the part of the RIAA. They've moved from random harrasment to a ridiculous attempt to abuse the legal system, and by attempting to block the Free Trade Foundation from taking part they show utter contempt towards their users. This has quite simply gone too far.


Any other views?
  Send a message via MSN to Union Of V  
  (#2 (permalink)) Old
Pelios Offline
on Pursuit of Happiness
Outside, huh?
**********
 
Pelios's Avatar
 
Name: Andrea
Gender: Female
Location: México

Posts: 3,691
Blog Entries: 48
Join Date: January 17th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 12th 2009, 12:10 AM

That's ridiculous 1,050,000 for seven songs?
Did I read the article right..?
7 songs 7dls.


Everyone is born right-handed. Only the greatest overcome it.
   
  (#3 (permalink)) Old
eunoia Offline
(n) beautiful thinking
Jeez, get a life!
***********
 
eunoia's Avatar
 
Name: Jes
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Location: USA

Posts: 5,888
Blog Entries: 2
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 12th 2009, 12:33 AM

That is utterly ridiculous.



Someday I will be strong enough to lift not one but both of us.
I told you to be patient
I told you to be fine
I told you to be balanced
I told you to be kind
   
  (#4 (permalink)) Old
Power Cosmic Offline
Member
Outside, huh?
**********
 
Power Cosmic's Avatar
 
Name: Janos
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Location: Dundee, Scotland

Posts: 3,922
Blog Entries: 225
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 12th 2009, 12:36 AM

*facepaaalm*

I know that's not really constructive....but neither is that price-tag on 7 songs...





"My one desire is for peace -- peace for everyone"

  Send a message via MSN to Power Cosmic  
  (#5 (permalink)) Old
Deep Brown Eyes Offline
Hic Sunt Dracones
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
Deep Brown Eyes's Avatar
 
Age: 27
Gender: Male

Posts: 513
Blog Entries: 8
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 12th 2009, 12:45 AM

I'd love to see how the RIAA justifies that price tag.
They're playing a very stupid game I think. It seems like what they're trying to do is just scare people - "You steal music and we will bankrupt you". Unfortunately, it's not working, and they're making themselves look very stupid. There's no way any self-respecting judge is going to find in the RIAA's favour, especially given how disproportionate the claim is.

If the RIAA sued for more realistic amounts such as a few hundred USD to two thousand USD at most, it'd be much more effective. Firstly, they're much more likely to win a case for damages and actually be able to collect the settlement. Secondly, they don't look like a bunch of greedy suits who want all the money they can get their hands on. And thirdly, they'd actually manage to gain a reputation for being successful in their cases, which would be more effective if they're trying to scare the general public.

Also, they're suing a guy who downloaded 7 songs? They only caught him because he's inexperienced and doesn't know how to minimise his risk - someone with that much inexperience is not capable of causing that much damage to the RIAA. There are much bigger fish to fry and try.


   
  (#6 (permalink)) Old
Casey. Offline
Dance with me
I can't get enough
*********
 
Casey.'s Avatar
 
Name: Casey
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Location: Somewhere in my mind

Posts: 2,343
Blog Entries: 337
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 12th 2009, 05:48 AM

This is ridiculous. That much money for seven songs? Just..wow


She whispered to her own reflection "I will be strong."

"I am not what has happened to me.I am what I have chosen to become."- Carl Jung

"If ye harm none, do as ye wish."

Sometimes things just happen.


Smile through the tears.


PM me

  Send a message via Yahoo to Casey.  
  (#7 (permalink)) Old
eunoia Offline
(n) beautiful thinking
Jeez, get a life!
***********
 
eunoia's Avatar
 
Name: Jes
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Location: USA

Posts: 5,888
Blog Entries: 2
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 12th 2009, 06:28 AM

An interesting read, if you're up for it: How the RIAA Litigation Process Works. It's long, and I'm not sure if the author is at all biased.

Here's a summary (if you could call it that) posted on Yahoo! Answers:
Quote:
So how is this done? There's a series of steps the RIAA goes through. I'll try to simplify it a LOT.

First is the monitoring step. They have a bunch of people hired to monitor networks such as the Kazaa network (for Kazaa), the Gnutella network (Limewire, Frostwire, Morpheus, Bearshare, Gnucleus, and a bunch of other clients). Just like you, they'll search for something. Let's say they're looking for "The Fray." They can then look at the list of files it turns up and eventually they'll narrow it down to a single file. They create a fake file such as "The Fray - How to Save a Life.mp3" It's fake because it doesn't actually contain the song. It'll be any old file that just takes up space (so it seems legit) with a name that attracts people. Then other people will try to download the file, and that's when the whole thing starts.

The RIAA presents a screenshot of your username downloading that mock file. The judge won't know it's not actually the song, so while technically you didn't do anything wrong because it's not a copyrighted material, they won't know that.

They have another program that can find your ip address. The monitoring people take a screenshot of the p2p program, get your screenname, and put it in there so they can link your ip address to your screenname.

The second step is filing a lawsuit to get your information. With this process the RIAA uses the philosophy, "absence of proof is not proof of absence," which I will try to explain. They cannot say for sure where that person is located, so instead the sue the person in the state that the ISP main office is in under a state court. So basically you have someone living in Washington DC suing someone who lives in Montana, under the laws of California. So right now we have a situation where the person being sued isn't even subject to the laws that they're being sued for. They don't even know they're being sued, and the RIAA doesn't know either.

It's inefficient and takes a long time to sue just one person at a time. So what they do instead is they sue a whole bunch of people from that ISP at the same time. Technically this is illegal under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures. Since ISPs don't have the people to seek out the individuals who are downloading from p2p networks, they just go along with the RIAA.

The person getting sued then gets a letter, and the paperwork, from the ISP saying they aren't protecting him and that legal actions have been taken against him. What's weird is the person getting sued doesn't get the legal documents (summons and complaints, order that was filed, and the court rules needed to defend him/herself). So basically he knows something is going to happen (may not necessarily be that he's being sued), but he doesn't know why he's getting sued, the evidence that was brought up, or even why the court has already ruled against him/her.

The idea behind this is you have only a certain amount of days to stop the motion. When you get your lawyer, there's nothing you can do, since you don't have the legal documents saying what's happening to you. So the lawyer is basically helpless in this case. The time it takes to figure out what's actually happening to you is how long you have. So even *if* you find out what's happening to you, you don't have any time to file a motion to dismiss the issue. The RIAA knows that if you find out what the subpoena is about, your lawyer could file a motion against it, and in pretty much every single case, you'd win since the evidence against you doesn't have enough substance to it.

Since you will most likely not be able to show up in court - you don't know what state, and if you do, you've lost the time it takes to get transfer to a lawyer practicing in that state which is a very long process - you are ruled against under the law. That's really all the judge can do.

In the US Justice system, when one party requests something, the other party can argue against the movement of this motion. However, there are cases where the judge can move forward without both parties being present, which used to be a rare thing. Nowadays ex partes happen frequently. So when the RIAA requests an immediate discovery it's pretty much guaranteed that it's going to be granted. It is at this point the RIAA can actually file a subpoena to your ISP and discover who you are (yeah, up until this point, they don't know who you are).

Your ISP doesn't have the money or manpower to fight all the subpoenas for its customers. So what ends up happening is they give your information away to the RIAA. From here the RIAA drops its suit since what they just did is actually illegal. They have the information they need now. From here, they move onto the third step.

This third step is a settlement demand. They ask that you join in a contract with the RIAA, if you do they won't sue you and that you agree that the RIAA is right that you owe them x amounts of dollars without negotiation and many provisions on what you can do so you don't get sued by the RIAA while you let the RIAA do anything it wants. It also states that you say that p2p downloading is illegal (it really isn't, technically speaking), and the RIAA won't protect you.

What happens if you don't sign the contract? The RIAA sues you for $750/song. If you end up losing there are additional RIAA fees, and you have to pay for RIAA's legal fees, and your own legal fees.



Someday I will be strong enough to lift not one but both of us.
I told you to be patient
I told you to be fine
I told you to be balanced
I told you to be kind
   
  (#8 (permalink)) Old
Double X Offline
bee boop
I've been here a while
********
 
Double X's Avatar
 
Name: Kyle
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Boston

Posts: 1,621
Blog Entries: 5
Join Date: March 11th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 12th 2009, 10:37 AM

is anyone really surprised?


"We will ask nothing. We will demand nothing. We will take." -- May 1968, French Graffiti
   
  (#9 (permalink)) Old
Blackwing Offline
I can't get enough
*********
 
Blackwing's Avatar
 
Name: Zack
Gender: Male
Location: Arizona(Usa)

Posts: 2,830
Blog Entries: 3
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 12th 2009, 12:34 PM

Such a big bill for little product..


  Send a message via AIM to Blackwing  
  (#10 (permalink)) Old
TigerTank77 Offline
Rage is the best anesthetic
I've been here a while
********
 
TigerTank77's Avatar
 
Name: Ben
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Location: NY

Posts: 1,534
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 12th 2009, 04:09 PM

And people wonder why I hate the RIAA.

Fucking greedy motherfuckers.


Often I lie wide awake, thinking of things I could make.
But I don’t seem to have the parts to build them.
I am so scared of what will kill me in the end, for I am not prepared.
I hope I will get the chance to be someone, to be human.





  Send a message via AIM to TigerTank77 Send a message via MSN to TigerTank77 Send a message via Skype™ to TigerTank77 
  (#11 (permalink)) Old
Union Of V Offline
Scepticism With A Tail
I can't get enough
*********
 
Union Of V's Avatar
 
Name: Basil!!!
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Cork, Ireland

Posts: 2,017
Blog Entries: 22
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 12th 2009, 06:53 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessie View Post
An interesting read, if you're up for it: How the RIAA Litigation Process Works. It's long, and I'm not sure if the author is at all biased.

Here's a summary...
Thanks for that jessie - interesting read. What happens next is also interesting. The RIAA, as part of the case, siezes your PC for forensic examination regardless of whether it is claimed it has been used to download music or not. They then neglect to return it. Confiscation of hardware happens in France also, although it's considered part of the fine.

Should it look like they may loose the trial, they block it and wait until lawyer costs hit the thousands. They then retract their claim, and amazingly they don't have to pay for the defendant's court fees - hence indirectly fining them anyway (surely there should be a slander law against this?)
  Send a message via MSN to Union Of V  
  (#12 (permalink)) Old
noise94 Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
noise94's Avatar
 
Gender: N/A

Posts: 3,231
Join Date: January 11th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 12th 2009, 09:43 PM

Wow, that's utterly ridiculous. I mean, they could have made him pay, $7 or something, but $1,050,00 is... insane and unjustified. If they want to go after people, they could at least go after people who download massive amounts?
   
  (#13 (permalink)) Old
Dasha Offline
Dude......woah.
Regular TeenHelper
*****
 
Dasha's Avatar
 
Name: Dasha
Gender: Female
Location: South-East Longways

Posts: 409
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 12th 2009, 11:58 PM

They could also possibly be suing for the uploading of those songs as while while downloading and maybe after. This is totally unfair though. I love how record company's are suing their customers.


"For is it not death nor dying that I fear. But lack of life and purpose."
-----------
Love what is mortal; hold it against your bones knowing your own life depends on it; and, when the time comes to let it go, let it go.
-Mary Oliver
  Send a message via AIM to Dasha Send a message via Yahoo to Dasha Send a message via Skype™ to Dasha 
  (#14 (permalink)) Old
Union Of V Offline
Scepticism With A Tail
I can't get enough
*********
 
Union Of V's Avatar
 
Name: Basil!!!
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Cork, Ireland

Posts: 2,017
Blog Entries: 22
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 13th 2009, 10:23 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dasha View Post
They could also possibly be suing for the uploading of those songs as while while downloading and maybe after. This is totally unfair though. I love how record company's are suing their customers.
I thinks they're only sueing for download (since they're trying to use his PC as evidence).

In related news this case has merged with the only case to try to claim back legal fees and initiated a $100 million lawsuit against the RIAA on the grounds that they used illegal means to track down the people and that they do not actually own the copyrights so shouldn't be involved in the cases (interesting that one).
  Send a message via MSN to Union Of V  
  (#15 (permalink)) Old
Brandon Offline
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
Brandon's Avatar
 
Name: Brandon
Age: 29
Gender: Male

Posts: 2,540
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 13th 2009, 01:59 PM

I can't stand when businesses take advantage of society. I believe that some businesses aren't concerned about illegal songs being the fact that they are illegal, but I think it's more of a money thing -- they know millions of people illegally download music, so they have an almost unlimited supply of victims to charge ridiculous prices.

It's like...the world is a lake, society is the fish, and the businesses that are trying to take action against illegal downloads are the fishermen.

A million dollars over seven downloaded songs isn't justice, it's abusing the system. It's using the justice system as an advantage to charge these cruel prices. A million dollars can ruin a person's life if they can't pay for it. I think that there should be punishment for doing illegal things, but not to an insanely large extent.

It's just ridiculous...
   
  (#16 (permalink)) Old
Penguin Queen Offline
Penguin queen!!
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
Penguin Queen's Avatar
 
Name: Annie
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Location: UK

Posts: 509
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 13th 2009, 08:30 PM

Surely they can only ask for as much as it cost them- i.e. the amount the songs would have cost, and REASONABLE legal costs.




fait
h is a bluebird that you see from afar
it is real and as sure as the first evening star
can't touch it, or buy it, or lock it up tight
but its there just the same
making things turn out right



LE PE
NGUIN QUEEN


   
  (#17 (permalink)) Old
udontno Offline
</3?
I can't get enough
*********
 
udontno's Avatar
 
Name: Amanda Kate
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Location: VA, USA

Posts: 3,039
Blog Entries: 24
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 14th 2009, 03:11 AM

That is a LOT of money for seven songs.


--A
   
  (#18 (permalink)) Old
Double X Offline
bee boop
I've been here a while
********
 
Double X's Avatar
 
Name: Kyle
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Boston

Posts: 1,621
Blog Entries: 5
Join Date: March 11th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 14th 2009, 03:31 AM

I can't help post in this thread again. Every time I see this thread in New Posts I want to march down to DC and yell at the ceo.


"We will ask nothing. We will demand nothing. We will take." -- May 1968, French Graffiti
   
  (#19 (permalink)) Old
Gidig Offline
Optimistic pessimist
I can't get enough
*********
 
Gidig's Avatar
 
Name: Maria
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Location: Colorado

Posts: 2,123
Blog Entries: 390
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 14th 2009, 07:29 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by thecryingangel View Post
Surely they can only ask for as much as it cost them- i.e. the amount the songs would have cost, and REASONABLE legal costs.
Dude, even like, $200 for doing something illegal or something of that sort. Not a bajillion dollars.



The best wayout is always through~
-Robert Frost

Proud member of the LGBT community.

   
  (#20 (permalink)) Old
Tomb Offline
Member
Junior TeenHelper
****
 
Tomb's Avatar
 
Age: 31

Posts: 319
Join Date: January 8th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 14th 2009, 04:19 PM

This is perfectly reasonable. The RIAA acts like a reverse lottery ticket.

They sue random internet pirates, with huge law suit charges which scares away alot of internet "pirates". They will get instant media exposure.

Because if you look at it this way... Suing every1 who pirates music is way too expensive.

All they are trying to do is to scare people from doing illegal internet activites.

RIAA is not greedy its the americans who are too greedy to break the law.

Most likely the RIAA will get far less then what they are asking for probaly like 200,000 dollars. But thats enough to pay the legal fees. plus some damages to pay the singers.
   
  (#21 (permalink)) Old
Homophobia is gay
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
DoesThisLookInfected?'s Avatar
 
Name: Cameron
Age: 26
Gender: Male
Location: a place surrounded by lakes: it's cold, and poor, and named Detroit

Posts: 606
Blog Entries: 5
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 14th 2009, 06:44 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomb View Post
This is perfectly reasonable. The RIAA acts like a reverse lottery ticket.

They sue random internet pirates, with huge law suit charges which scares away alot of internet "pirates". They will get instant media exposure.

Because if you look at it this way... Suing every1 who pirates music is way too expensive.

All they are trying to do is to scare people from doing illegal internet activites.

RIAA is not greedy its the americans who are too greedy to break the law.

Most likely the RIAA will get far less then what they are asking for probaly like 200,000 dollars. But thats enough to pay the legal fees. plus some damages to pay the singers.
Read this

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessie View Post
An interesting read, if you're up for it: How the RIAA Litigation Process Works. It's long, and I'm not sure if the author is at all biased.

Here's a summary (if you could call it that) posted on Yahoo! Answers:
It's pretty bad. You have no idea that you're getting sued...




ENTER SHIKARI! BEST BAND EVER!!
(little thanks to Just.Tegan for showing me these guys)
   
  (#22 (permalink)) Old
Deep Brown Eyes Offline
Hic Sunt Dracones
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
Deep Brown Eyes's Avatar
 
Age: 27
Gender: Male

Posts: 513
Blog Entries: 8
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 14th 2009, 08:02 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomb View Post
This is perfectly reasonable. The RIAA acts like a reverse lottery ticket.

They sue random internet pirates, with huge law suit charges which scares away alot of internet "pirates". They will get instant media exposure.

Because if you look at it this way... Suing every1 who pirates music is way too expensive.

All they are trying to do is to scare people from doing illegal internet activites.

RIAA is not greedy its the americans who are too greedy to break the law.

Most likely the RIAA will get far less then what they are asking for probaly like 200,000 dollars. But thats enough to pay the legal fees. plus some damages to pay the singers.
Let's put your views on piracy aside for a moment. Hypothetically speaking, if you were being sued for a $1m for seven songs you illegally downloaded, would you still think it's perfectly reasonable? Would you settle and pay up?

Secondly, lawsuits with ridiculous damages claimed like this one is more damaging to the RIAA than beneficial. This story hit the media, and there's a negative opinion towards the RIAA. Sure, there are people who will react like "Well done RIAA, you show them pirates they can't mess with you!", but the majority are calling this completely overblown and ridiculous.

Subsequently, they are increasing the media exposure of piracy whilst ruining their image. The only people that they are scaring are the people who wouldn't pirate music anyway. People who are web-savvy and pirate music anyway, in general, aren't scared of these ridiculous lawsuits and know how to avoid being detected anyway.

Quote:
RIAA is not greedy its the americans who are too greedy to break the law.
There are so many things wrong with this statement, I don't know where to begin. I find that sentence offensive and I'm not even American!

Firstly, what do you actually mean? If I take your sentence literally, you are saying that Americans are so greedy that they won't break the law. Surely that's not what you meant, right?

So, I'm assuming that you what you actually meant that it's not the RIAA that are being greedy, but instead Americans are being greedy by pirating music and breaking the law.

That's an over generalisation of Americans and quite unfair. Not all Americans pirate music, or break the law at all. In fact, if I put an estimate on it, I'd say that less than 15% of the USA population pirate music. The RIAA, MPAA, IFPI and the rest of them have been known to grossly over-inflate their statistics to make themselves look like the victims.

Greed is the "excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth". Okay, so a pirate may not deserve the music they download, but who is greedier - the pirate who downloads 7 seven songs, or the RIAA who wants over $1m for it? They would never make that sort of money from the sale of those 7 seven songs, unless they were selling at around $140k per song. That's the RIAA being greedier than the pirate.


   
  (#23 (permalink)) Old
guv11 Offline
Member
Welcome me, I'm new!
*
 
guv11's Avatar
 
Age: 27

Posts: 35
Join Date: January 8th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 17th 2009, 01:04 AM

prehaps they are aware that its a ridiculous amount of money, think about it,

1. the more contravercial and outragous a lawsuit is the more media attention it gets,

2. the masses hear about it,therefore the large percentage of people who download songs do aswell,

3. the lawsuit shows action happening against 'pirates'

4. majority of the pirates will hear and at least think about stopping.

anyone else agree?
   
  (#24 (permalink)) Old
TigerTank77 Offline
Rage is the best anesthetic
I've been here a while
********
 
TigerTank77's Avatar
 
Name: Ben
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Location: NY

Posts: 1,534
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 17th 2009, 01:26 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by guv11 View Post
prehaps they are aware that its a ridiculous amount of money, think about it,

1. the more contravercial and outragous a lawsuit is the more media attention it gets,

2. the masses hear about it,therefore the large percentage of people who download songs do aswell,

3. the lawsuit shows action happening against 'pirates'

4. majority of the pirates will hear and at least think about stopping.

anyone else agree?
I'm not stopping. I'm a rampant pirate lol


Often I lie wide awake, thinking of things I could make.
But I don’t seem to have the parts to build them.
I am so scared of what will kill me in the end, for I am not prepared.
I hope I will get the chance to be someone, to be human.





  Send a message via AIM to TigerTank77 Send a message via MSN to TigerTank77 Send a message via Skype™ to TigerTank77 
  (#25 (permalink)) Old
Union Of V Offline
Scepticism With A Tail
I can't get enough
*********
 
Union Of V's Avatar
 
Name: Basil!!!
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Location: Cork, Ireland

Posts: 2,017
Blog Entries: 22
Join Date: January 31st 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 17th 2009, 09:02 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by guv11 View Post
prehaps they are aware that its a ridiculous amount of money, think about it,

1. the more contravercial and outragous a lawsuit is the more media attention it gets,

2. the masses hear about it,therefore the large percentage of people who download songs do aswell,

3. the lawsuit shows action happening against 'pirates'

4. majority of the pirates will hear and at least think about stopping.

anyone else agree?
That was the RIAAs plan. what really happened was that pirates started feeling victimized, and as a result began to see piracy as a way of getting back at the industry, which is why the RIAA has stopped sueing.
  Send a message via MSN to Union Of V  
  (#26 (permalink)) Old
Deep Brown Eyes Offline
Hic Sunt Dracones
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
Deep Brown Eyes's Avatar
 
Age: 27
Gender: Male

Posts: 513
Blog Entries: 8
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: RIAA demands $1,050,000 for 7 downloaded songs - June 19th 2009, 11:41 AM

Similar case - Woman illegally downloads 24 songs, fined to tune of $1.9 million - CNN.com

Court found in RIAA's favour, £80,000 per song. Thankfully, she's going to appeal because that is just ridiculous.


   
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
000, 050, demands, downloaded, law, music, pirating, riaa, songs

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




All material copyright ©1998-2019, TeenHelp.
Terms | Legal | Privacy | Conduct | Complaints

Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000-2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search engine optimization by vBSEO.
Theme developed in association with vBStyles.