thevorpal
join:2007-11-16
Endicott, NY | Why stop at 1.5 million
Seriously, why stop there? 1.5 Million dollars is already an absurd sum that is far beyond the damage of the initial 'crime'.
They might as well pursue 100 million while they are at it. |
|
AquaBlaze
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| I agree. They never really see these insane fees they're charging now (its more of a lawsuit settling scare tactic than anything), so...why can't RIAA get inventive and sue for...a gazillion? Or whatever.
RIAA should really nominate this guy to come up with their legal fees. |
|
Corehhi
join:2002-01-28
Bluffton, SC
| reply to thevorpal
said by thevorpal  :Seriously, why stop there? 1.5 Million dollars is already an absurd sum that is far beyond the damage of the initial 'crime'. They might as well pursue 100 million while they are at it. This just makes a forced settlement of $5,000-10,000 look reasonable. LOL. There is an evil purpose to this. |
|
Rexter
YeeHaw
join:2002-11-17
cloud 9 | reply to AquaBlaze
Yes!! They should be fined one.....hundred...........................B....illion dollars!!!!
buuuuuwaaaahahahahahahah! |
|
spamd
Premium
join:2001-04-22
Rockford, IL
 ·Insight Communicat..
| reply to AquaBlaze
»video.google.com/videoplay?docid···lindex=3
100 billion dollars.
--
When everything is coming your way, you are in the wrong lane. |
|
MrObvious
@comcast.net | reply to Corehhi
It's really quite simple.
The **AAs are defending their clients against millions of thieves. Doing anything less would be fiscally irresponsible at the very least.
Let the games begin. |
|
Rexter
YeeHaw
join:2002-11-17
cloud 9
| Simple indeed.
It's really quite simple.
The **AAs are making sure that their clients customers will never do business with them again. Doing anything less might have a ring of sanity to it.
Let the games begin .
--
With every new wave of optimism, or pessimism, we are ready to abandon history, and time tested principles, but we cling tenaciously and unquestioningly to our prejudices. (Benjamin Graham) |
|
AquaBlaze
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| said by Rexter :The **AAs are making sure that their clients customers will never do business with them again. I'll agree to that. Piracy will always be there, and threatening to extort folks for 1 bajillion dollars isn't going to stop that anyday soon. If anything, it makes paying customers like me wonder why I should be doing business with such a company in the first place. |
|
Constitution
join:2008-02-19
Annapolis, MD
| reply to thevorpal
Re: Why stop at 1.5 million
Doesn't the constitution say something about punishment must fit the crime? - I forget the exact words, but it was an attempt to end things like chopping off hands for stealing, or being burned at the stake for daring to tell the church the world wasn't flat.
There is also the old adage - If you owe the bank $100k, they own you. If you owe them $100,000,00 you own them.
Will someone please set up a website, and publicize it that does a few things such as:
Sell bumper stickers, logos, etc that say/represent: "no one buys music anymore, why do you?
The funds go to help defeat officials who take political payoffs from the riaa, mpaa etc. We need to end long term copyright, e.g. 5 years should be it for music, 10 for movies, etc, so these go to the public domain then. Not quite sure what should be done with books etc, though with things changing at an ever faster pace, 10 years is plenty. Yes I would protect trademarks etc, because that is protecting business from business. But what we need to do is protect people from greedy business.
And while I don't keep up with the music biz - I have very little interest in it - I do remember when younger that there was all kinds of corruption by the music industry to get their songs rated in the top ten. We are dealing with crooks here, greedy crooks, not angels.
I sell things for a living. I don't get to collect royalties from the buyer or my business organization on continuing use. If we let these people like the RIAA have their way, we really will move even more into a fascist state where big business is running big government.
And this 5 year / 10 year thing should cover designs e.g. of clothing, etc. Remember when back about the early 1990's when car companies tried to get design patents, so that competitors couldn't make e.g. replacement parts like fenders, etc? Today they are trying to get a bill through congress to allow them to keep their diagnostic codes for car engines and electronics secret, so that when you had a problem, you could only go to their dealers, and instead of charging you $90 for 5 min work (I get this done for free at the local auto parts supplier) maybe they'd be able to try and charge you $500. I also see this in the confluence of extended warranty scams combined with service on PCs by electronic stores, where you discover that the $300 you pay for extended warranties (worst investment you can make - $200 goes to the stores profit right away) they charge you for diagnostics, they'll always find something e.g. software problem regardless of what the real problem is, so you pay and pay.
So many businesses are nothing but scamsters, using the government as a shield. Time for a change. |
|
