 biff420Premium
join:2002-01-26
Berkeley, CA
 ·AT&T Yahoo
| said by jcurrier :
This is a win for the truly innocent.
I am amazed how illegal shares find this as a win for everyone. You have the balls to steal music but you don't have the balls to walk into Macy's.. blah blah blah....
 Not everyone who's applauding this victory is
a P2P shares (snicker) Some of us stopped P2P when it
was decided it wasn't legal. The Macy's shoplifting
comparison is so old it's not worth debating.
Shares huh? LMAO  |
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:4 Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to jcurrier
The law has to prove you actually stole something from Macy's before they can fine, and imprison you.
In this case, the RIAA was unable to prove that the woman they targeted for extortion had actually engaged in unauthorized distribution of their property. They are now having to pay the woman's legal fees. Fighting an unwarranted charge takes money, as well as backbone. The RIAA demands $3,000 settlements precisely because that is much cheaper than fighting the claim in court ($108,000 in this case). Most people just settle. She didn't. But she had to pay her attorneys. Court ruled that her accusers have to cover that cost.
This is not a victory for "illegal file sharers". This is a victory for those wrongfully accused of illegally sharing files. It means that the RIAA has to "go back to the drawing board", and figure out how to obtain the proof of illegal activity that they need to win in court.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
