You'll never work in this industry again - Microsoft 1994
|
|
|
Judge reduces filesharer's fine
THE MUSIC MAFIAA suffered a setback to its campaign of legal terrorism after a judge lowered the damage award assessed against a filesharer.
Originally, Joel Tenenbaum was ordered to pay $675,000 (£450,000) after being found liable for copyright infringement for sharing 30 songs. The jury awarded the RIAA company plaintiffs an astonishing $22,500 (£15,000) per song, a judgment that has now been labelled "unconstitutional" by Judge Nancy Gertner.
Displaying some common sense, Gertner also called the fine "unprecedented and oppressive". Even after Gertner applied the maximum reduction within her powers, bringing the total down to $67,500 (£45,000), she said that it was "more than I might have awarded in my independent judgment."
Gertner lamented that as the duty of determining the appropriate award was that of the jury, all she could do was reduce the award by the "greatest amount that the Constitution will permit".
The reduction in damages might be just the start of dismantling the music cartel's money making scheme to exploit the US Copyright Act and wield it like a bludgeon against filesharers.
Gertner said that Congress never intended the Copyright Act to be abused in such a manner, and she found "substantial evidence indicating that Congress did not contemplate that the Copyright Act's broad statutory damages provision would be applied to college students like Tenenbaum who file-shared without any pecuniary gain."
This is the second public call for Congress to amend the Copyright Act, after Chief Judge Michael Davis implored Congress to take action.
The Big Music MAFIAA has made a practice of going after college students and other people of modest means to extort excessively high settlements. µ
Share this:
Share
You are either clearly morons or paid stooges.
The justice system was put place for PEOPLE to receive JUSTICE. Not for hugely rich corporations to price gouge customers and then have massive fines whacked on people for the trivial "losses" they may or may not have sustained.
All the while these companies will say "think of the artists that are losing out" and yet I don't see any offers to increase royalties to artists from the vast profits these companies are still making to make up the difference.
Funny that.
The model is not broken. As long as most of the world still buys music and software, which they do then the model works fine. Those who chose to pirate should be held accountable for their actions like any other criminal.
Whining about law is not going to change it. No one is going to legalize theft of copyright protected works so you might as well get in touch with reality.
they have to find another way to make money from media. its a broken business model.
Welcome to the comments section. It's always nice to see a troll join the crowd. :S
It's not that fines for "piracy" (technically the actual crime would be unauthorized download and/or distribution of the IP in question) are the issue, it's the absolute mockery the MAFIAA are (attempting to make/making - take your pick) of the legal systems of the world with their exorbitant demands for the fines.
Consider a $675,000 USD fine... how on earth is the person ever supposed to pay that off? Add to that the likely minimum monthly payment that costs more than groceries for the same period, high interest, etc. Do you really believe that to be a "fair punishment" for the crime commited? [strictly rhetorical question]
If human genes for stupidity and retardedness were copyrighted, and if the copyright law worked the way you wish it worked, then your mom could have never afforded you.
That would be sad indeed, because we would have one idiot less to make fun of.
True it is infringement, but we need some common sense applied. You know, "the punishment should fit the crime" kind of deal. So in the case of file sharing - take the amount that the item would be to buy at your local store (or itunes), multiply by the amount of times it has been shared/copied, double that amount to add in damages, and there you have an appropriate fine for the infringement. Like parking tickets, 'cause that is the type of infringement we are talking about
...that piracy is a crime and that it isn't going to stop being a crime. The purpose of punishment for a crime is to deter further crimes. Punishment will not end crime but it will make those who can't live within society's rules pay for their crimes as it should.
Anyone who pirates should be fined heavily and do jail time. For major piracy, prison time should be mandatory. Everyone who pirates knows they are violating the law so there is no acceptable excuse.
Laws are intended to protect society from the scum of the world who belong in prisons. It's not the copyright holders problem if you chose to steal - it's your problem.
@BB - congress did not elect Biden into office; the public elected Obama into office and Biden came along for the ride. The fact that Biden is the VP, is not an indication that congress intended the laws to be *upheld* in the manner they have been.
I not so sure. With RIAA stooges like Vice President Biden in power (or should I say *powerless* in the case of a VP), this dysfunctional copyright legislation may be exactly what they intended.