How Much Is Your Stolen Music Worth

[0roo0roo]

..

 

[MercenaryForHire]

I could take out a whole zip code and get off with less.

- M4H

 

[lobadobadingdong]

less than that to kill someone who works for the riaa 😀

 

[tranceport]

Man... this sort of stuff is getting out of hand.

 

[Eli]

That's fscking insane.

 

[Rip the Jacker]

Uh. I thought you get sued if you UPLOAD not DOWNLOAD?

Or did he do both?

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Seriously, how long until someone plants a bomb or an Anthrax letter to RIAA/MPAA headquarters?

 

[Amused]

It will keep increasing in pressure until people stop believing they have a right to the work product of another.

 

[AbAbber2k]

Is it just me or is it wrong for "damages done" to be any greater than "retail value?" I mean really, if you pirate a 99cent song, what does that cost the record company? Half that? Or do they consider "damages" as potential loses for you hosting the song and other people pirating it from you? The later doesn't make much sense either because then if you consider "potential" damages you really begin reaching towards some kind of infinite, unfathomable amount of money.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Originally posted by: Amused
It will keep increasing in pressure until people stop believing they have a right to the work product of another.

keep dreaming... it's free.

 

[illustri]

HOT DAMN! I'M FRIGGIN" RICH

/what? doesn't work the other way
//dang

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Amused
It will keep increasing in pressure until people stop believing they have a right to the work product of another.

So am I stealing when I rip my legally purchased CDs into mp3's on my hard drive, simply for my own listening convenience, and never share them with anyone?

It's true that no one is entitled to another's work without payment or permission, but this sh!t is getting out of hand... again.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson

Originally posted by: Amused
It will keep increasing in pressure until people stop believing they have a right to the work product of another.

keep dreaming... it's free.

No, it's theft.

I bet you'd be the first person to bitch and whine if your boss took the fruits of your labor and refused to pay you.

 

[VirtualLarry]

"Remember kids - 'Sharing' is Communism. Don't share. Be a good consumer and always buy your own."

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Amused
It will keep increasing in pressure until people stop believing they have a right to the work product of another.

So am I stealing when I rip my legally purchased CDs into mp3's on my hard drive, simply for my own listening convenience, and never share them with anyone?

It's true that no one is entitled to another's work without payment or permission, but this sh!t is getting out of hand... again.

The MPAA and RIAA are only targeting people who distribute/download. I highly doubt they'll come after people who make copies for personal use only and do not post them online.

 

[Delleet]

"statutory damages go as high as $150,000"

HAHAHA

 

[mwtgg]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson

Originally posted by: Amused
It will keep increasing in pressure until people stop believing they have a right to the work product of another.

keep dreaming... it's free.

No, it's theft.

I bet you'd be the first person to bitch and whine if your boss took the fruits of your labor and refused to pay you.

The gubment already takes a lot of money from me, so I'd probably kill my boss. 😉

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
"Remember kids - 'Sharing' is Communism. Don't share. Be a good consumer and always buy your own."

"Sharing" the work product of another without payment or permission is theft.

Without intellectual property rights all incentive to innovate, create and invent is gone.

And yes, loss of incentive is one of the major downfalls of communism.

 

[EyeMWing]

$150k per file times.......

Well, I don't feel comfortable posting that number.

(If you're really curious, it's $0)

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Amused
It will keep increasing in pressure until people stop believing they have a right to the work product of another.

So am I stealing when I rip my legally purchased CDs into mp3's on my hard drive, simply for my own listening convenience, and never share them with anyone?

It's true that no one is entitled to another's work without payment or permission, but this sh!t is getting out of hand... again.

The MPAA and RIAA are only targeting people who distribute/download. I highly doubt they'll come after people who make copies for personal use only and do not post them online.

No... but they could, and that's what's so scary.

Besides, if you're concerned with intellectual property rights, the RIAA is the first place to look. Most artists get under 10% of their albums' sales.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
"Remember kids - 'Sharing' is Communism. Don't share. Be a good consumer and always buy your own."

Now, now, that's not fair sarcasm. Do you work for free? Of course not. You're not entitled to take another's work and not compensate them.

This particular case is disturbing though. Punishing the individual for unlawful distribution was entirely appropriate IMO. These excessive damages for simple possession however are not. The music industry, in its overzealous paranoia and in its use of the threat of piracy as a way to increase their own profits, continues to push for making it illegal to own archival copies or to tranform the content from one media to another, and this I am entirely against. They are basically trying to force consumers to purchase the same content more than once, i.e. buy the CD, buy the mp3, etc., and this is BS.


edit: Wow, Gurck, you and I agree on something. Amazing...

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Gurck


Besides, if you're concerned with intellectual property rights, the RIAA is the first place to look. Most artists get under 10% of their albums' sales.

Feeble argument. They SIGN a MUTUAL contract with the record companies. And overhead eats the majority of revenue no matter what business you're in. I get less than 10% of my sales too. Take a business class.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson
Seriously, how long until someone plants a bomb or an Anthrax letter to RIAA/MPAA headquarters?

when they decide to sue some young haris and klebold😛 just a matter of time.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Gurck
Besides, if you're concerned with intellectual property rights, the RIAA is the first place to look. Most artists get under 10% of their albums' sales.

Feeble argument. They SIGN a MUTUAL contract with the record companies. And overhead eats the majority of revenue no matter what business you're in. I get less than 10% of my sales too. Take a business class.

I have to agree with this. In my industry, it is illegal under federal law to receive more than 8% gross revenue per sale (HOEPA 1995). Some individual state laws reduce that to 5% and even 4%. And typical is MUCH less than that even, closer to 1% to 2%.

 

[deftron]

WOW ... even Bill gates himself couldn't afford my hard drive