Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r21450680 en Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:51:56 EDT Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:51:56 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21460555 anon : Nothing is ever black or white. Right and wrong are subjective and have varying degrees. Real world problems are tricky like that.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21460555 Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:19:51 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21457062 Sammer :
said by Goober See Profile :

I would imagine the RIAA is scrambling to figure out how to bail out of this. Losing this lawsuit probably doesn't fit very well into the RIAA's business plan for the future.
They'll probably either settle (terms too good for Joel to pass up under non disclosure) or find some reason to drop this lawsuit, then Charles R. Nesson will have to find another client.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21457062 Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:30:40 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21456036 Goober : Thanks Fiberguy. I don't have a horse in this race, so I'm just trying to make fact based comments. I'm not trying to take a position one way or another.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21456036 Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:53:01 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21456011 Goober : You make a good point.

It'll be during discovery where they'll try to get some detailed evidence. But, they have at least something that they feel was good enough to get them into court. I suppose the judge could toss the case it if he feels that the RIAA is bringing a frivolous lawsuit forward. But, I doubt that happens.

I will say, though, that I strongly doubt that this is the kind of fight the RIAA was looking for when it filed the original lawsuit. I would imagine the RIAA is scrambling to figure out how to bail out of this. Losing this lawsuit probably doesn't fit very well into the RIAA's business plan for the future.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21456011 Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:49:28 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21456003 fiberguy : Goober, I'll 2nd you, and respect your input - at least I recall what you do for a living and where your background is. As for the other side of this coin, well, he just needs to remain face down, preferably in the gutter. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21456003 Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:47:45 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21455974 wentlanc : Can they prove that any transfer actually occurred to anyone but themselves? It just seems to me that they are making a lot of assumptions about what could have possibly happened...

cw]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21455974 Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:38:02 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21455061 Goober : I don't have to choose a side and neither does the RIAA. They can choose who they want to pursue based on whatever internal criteria they have. There's no obligation that they pursue everyone. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21455061 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 23:30:54 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21454810 wentlanc :
said by Goober See Profile :

In your example, your copies weren't virtually perfect and you supplied only to a limited number of people.

In the cases being pursued by the RIAA, virtually perfect copies are being distributed to potentially millions of people.
How can you permit it depending on quality of the material and quantity of people receiving it? It's either right, or it's wrong. Pick a side.

cw]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21454810 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:32:34 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21453031 Sammer : There is nothing civil about the RIAA racketeers!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21453031 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:40:38 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452993 Goober : That really applies in criminal laws.

This is civil.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452993 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:32:39 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452970 Sammer :
said by Goober See Profile :

I'm saying the $1M is statutory, not compensatory.
So if $1 Million for sharing 7 songs is cruel and unusual punishment (any reasonable person would think it is) the statute must be unconstitutional?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452970 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:27:13 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452949 Goober : In your example, your copies weren't virtually perfect and you supplied only to a limited number of people.

In the cases being pursued by the RIAA, virtually perfect copies are being distributed to potentially millions of people.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452949 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:22:37 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452934 wispalord : i could see feds involvement if he was profiting from the copyrighted works, but not just SHARING. i dont see how its different from recoring it off the radio and making copys for friends, i did that alot when i was younger. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452934 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:18:55 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452924 Goober :
said by kamm See Profile :

said by Goober See Profile :

$150K * 7 = $1.05M

I guarantee you that I'll be correct compared to you in regards to IP matters 99.99% of the time.
Might be - though we will have to see that because you really sound like someone with little clue about the very flimsy or flat-out false constitutionality of these "copy-right" or IP laws, the lingering illegality of the DMCA etc - but again, you are NOT CORRECT here.
I don't see my math being wrong.

"someone with little clue . . . " BIG LOL!!! You're a funny little self-inflated ego maniac.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452924 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:17:05 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452911 kamm :
said by Goober See Profile :

$150K * 7 = $1.05M

I guarantee you that I'll be correct compared to you in regards to IP matters 99.99% of the time.
Might be - though we will have to see that because you really sound like someone with little clue about the very flimsy or flat-out false constitutionality of these "copy-right" or IP laws, the lingering illegality of the DMCA etc - but again, you are NOT CORRECT here.
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE]]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452911 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:14:22 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452866 Goober :
said by kamm See Profile :

said by major marco See Profile :

said by Goober See Profile :

Statutory copyright infringement damages don't have anything to do with compensatory damages. Different animals.
WTF are you even talking about. Your comment makes about as much sense with regard to the topic as saying that red apples and a blue sky are different animals. :uhh:
On top of that he's dead fuckin' wrong about pretty much everything WRT statutory infringement damages: the statute provides for damages $750 to $30k per work (up to $150,000 if proven to be deliberate) so $1M just doesn't make sense anyway, it was obviously pulled out of the bottom part of some skinny 'hot stud' studio boy by his fat boss...
$150K * 7 = $1.05M

I guarantee you that I'll be correct compared to you in regards to IP matters 99.99% of the time.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452866 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:04:33 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452834 kamm :
said by major marco See Profile :

said by Goober See Profile :

Statutory copyright infringement damages don't have anything to do with compensatory damages. Different animals.
WTF are you even talking about. Your comment makes about as much sense with regard to the topic as saying that red apples and a blue sky are different animals. :uhh:
On top of that he's dead fuckin' wrong about pretty much everything WRT statutory infringement damages: the statute provides for damages $750 to $30k per work (up to $150,000 if proven to be deliberate) so $1M just doesn't make sense anyway, it was obviously pulled out of the bottom part of some skinny 'hot stud' studio boy by his fat boss...
--
said by bicker See Profile :

Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21452834 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:59:12 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21451217 Goober : Okay. Whatever you say . . .]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21451217 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 11:00:52 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450844 major marco :
said by Goober See Profile :

Statutory copyright infringement damages don't have anything to do with compensatory damages. Different animals.
WTF are you even talking about. Your comment makes about as much sense with regard to the topic as saying that red apples and a blue sky are different animals. :uhh:]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450844 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:38:37 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450745 Goober : Oh, I agree. This one is going to be fun to watch. The RIAA has got to be squirming big time on this development.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450745 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:17:35 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450740 Goober : Sorry I wasn't clear. I'm saying the $1M is statutory, not compensatory.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450740 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:16:33 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450736 Goober : Copyright violation is a federal offense though. So federal court is the proper jurisdiction.

But, I agree that the statutes are being abused by the copyright holders.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450736 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:15:13 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450717 boogi man : so 7 songs equals $1million in compensation??? I don't see it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450717 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:12:36 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450709 spewak :
said by Goober See Profile :

Statutory copyright infringement damages don't have anything to do with compensatory damages. Different animals.
Either way Goober, the process by which the RIAA has witch-hunted file traders is about to be vetted in the court system. About time I say! Here, Here!! :mad:
--
The weekend is here, grab a can of beer! ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450709 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:09:59 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450694 SSX4life : True.... but considering both are means to the same end you would think it would end up in civil courts not federal.
--
»www.google.com is your best friend... please use it before asking your question.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450694 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:06:38 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450680 Goober : Statutory copyright infringement damages don't have anything to do with compensatory damages. Different animals.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450680 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:00:03 EDT Re: Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450664 DownTheShore : Boy, this report brings a smile to my face. About time some high-powered people put up some opposition to this. It doesn't matter what your position is on P2P sharing - the point is that the RIAA should not be allowed to act in the manner it has, and to impose/request these outrageous penalties.
--
Patriotism is not waving a flag, it is living the ideals]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450664 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:56:12 EDT Bout time! SICK EM BOYS! http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450632 SSX4life : 7 songs != 1 Million dollars in losses no matter how you cut it.

Fine lets go with the argument that downloading songs is EXACTLY like stealing them out of a store. You don't see a million dollar fine for a petty 5 finger grab.

Even if you consider the fact that every single download is a lost sale it doesn't equate to 1 million dollars. Not to mention that even the RIAA has stated that a download does not equal a lost sale.

Sorry to burst your bubbles on this one but common sense must prevail in this country, for too long we have had our heads stuck up our corporate asses thanks to lobbiest in congress etc.

I really REALLY REALLY hope that this is the start of something better.
--
»www.google.com is your best friend... please use it before asking your question.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,21450632 Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:47:01 EDT