I am curious as to what you guys think about this,
There was a court trial back in 2007, Virgin v. Thomas, which an American, Jammie Thomas, was caught pirating music. RIAA had said that she had about 1700 songs on her computer and was sharing those over . They chose 24 songs to pursue copyright infringement on.
The plaintiffs chose to pursue statutory damages, which allowed them to request monetary damages for each of the songs.
Thomas had not much room to maneuver in regards to copyright infringement, and her lawyer attempted to
The jury found Thomas guilty of copyright infringement, and in line with the plaintiffs' statuatory damages, had ordered Thomas to pay a total of $222,000. A subsequent retrial, Capitol V. Thomas, had the amount increased to a $1.92 million fine by the jury.
More recently, the judge in the trial downgraded the fine to $54,000 saying the original fine was "monstrous".
Thomas insists however the fine is still beyond her scope.
Now, what is your opinions on the matter? Did RIAA ask for too much? Should Thomas have settled in the first place? If RIAA is allowed to do this to her, what stops them from trying to place similar charges on other people?
And more importantly, how is this one case helping RIAA? Shouldn't RIAA be finding more "productive" ways to combat piracy rather than bagging on one person? It seems to me they are shooting themselves in the foot here, as they usually do.
She's obviously being used as an example for others who pirate music. A scare tactic to make people think twice about downloading that new album off the internet. The fine they imposed on her was excessive in the extreme, but again, it was more to set a scary example than anything else. Personally, I think $50,000 is still somewhat excessive, but eh.
What is this place?
16th February 2007
I think a $2.4k fine is more appropriate. 100 for each song they selected. I've never been a big fan of the RIAA but I stand by their objective. Piracy is considered stealing, but they want 2 million? That's fucking outrageous. Even 54k is stupid. I understand that they are trying to prove a point, but a fine of that magnitude, reduced or not, is bullshit. I mean, come on, I understand they want compensation for the losses they got, but that much? Be reasonable.
This is a waste of time and a waste of money. And even $2000 per song is pretty outrageous. Instead it should be something like $20-50 at the most. If she had just used the songs privately without sharing them or anything, maybe $1 per song would be more appropriate.
What is this place?
16th February 2007
Mr. Pedantic;5221686This is a waste of time and a waste of money. And even $2000 per song is pretty outrageous. Instead it should be something like $20-50 at the most. If she had just used the songs privately without sharing them or anything, maybe $1 per song would be more appropriate.
Even then, why can't the RIAA just leave us alone. The court costs will out weigh the reward. RIAA = technological bullies. If you want to go after people, go after the assholes who setup cameras and record movies while they're in theaters.
Leave her alone and go to the mass production thieves in India and China.
The whole thing seems pretty pointless.
I didn't make it!
Going after individuals will never stop pirating, in fact I'd argue it will increase it as more and more people see it as the big company attacking individuals. For once I'm going to agree with jack on something and suggest they go against large retailers of pirated material, in particular out of China. It's not that easy of course, but it's the more worthwhile target. The other thing they need to do is consider the individuals buying their product and poll and survey them to find out the reasons for piracy, and to ask other questions regarding what they can do to get people to actually pay money for music.
I think music companies should especially look into the idea of voluntary payments, such as I believe Radiohead made famous awhile ago. As far as I know they made as much off of that album as they did any others. You can give incentive to pay more by doing something like giving posters to people who pay a certain amount, or something like that.
I think they'd be surprised at the results. The amount of respect the general public would have for a music company that even tried out a system like this would be enormous.
The RIAA is full of bullshit. The person behind most of their bullshit claims that burning CD's is copyright infringement. By that thinking, singing in the shower could also be considered copyright infringement.
If RIAA had their way there would probably be capital punishment for offenders.
Anlushac11;5222238If RIAA had their way there would probably be executions for offenders.
Fix'd. I wonder how many assassinations have been targeted at RIAA executives and lawyers.