page: 1 · 2  |
 thevorpal
join:2007-11-16
Alexandria, VA | 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. | |
|  | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: Why stop at 1.5 million 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. | |
| | | 
Rexter
YeeHaw
join:2002-11-17
cloud 9 | Re: Why stop at 1.5 million Yes!! They should be fined one.....hundred...........................B....illion dollars!!!!
buuuuuwaaaahahahahahahah! | |
| | | | | 
Corehhi
join:2002-01-28
Bluffton, SC
| 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. | |
| | | 
MrObvious
@comcast.net | Re: Why stop at 1.5 million 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) | |
| | | | | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| Re: Simple indeed. 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
| 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. | |
| gateguy
Premium
join:2001-02-12
Reisterstown, MD | Frankenstein's Monster This will not go away until we the villagers gather our pitchforks and lit torches and go burn down the evil RIAA's castle.
--
Without data, it is just an opinion | |
| | 
Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Boston, MA | Re: Frankenstein's Monster I'm thinking you either didn't read the book or completely misunderstood it. | |
| | | joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL | Re: Frankenstein's Monster Could not agree more. | |
| | 
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA | It's more akin to the days when people who didn't pay their tribute to the sovereign, had their hand cut off for payment. | |
| | | jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL | Re: Frankenstein's Monster Yeah, it was either cut off their hand or do without stolen music.
No wait, that can't be right....  | |
| | 
bcronin
Premium
join:2004-03-27
Hyde Park, NY | Or stop buying their products altogether (and of course, not stealing them either). | |
| | Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA
1 edit | Get rid of statutory damages! except in criminal cases. Here's a radical idea, make the the RIAA prove actual damages in civil cases, otherwise known as justice! | |
| | 
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
3 edits | Re: Get rid of statutory damages! said by Sammer :except in criminal cases. Here's a radical idea, make the the RIAA prove actual damages in civil cases, otherwise known as justice! That won't happen. And here is why - it costs too much money, time, & effort to go after millions of malefactors individually when the ACTUAL damages are small in each INDIVIDUAL case. But the damages are significant when grouped over all the violators. Think of this as the reverse side of a class action suit where millions sue 1 company.
So, the legislators set high STATUTORY damages, so that a huge swat in the forehead of a selected few is used to scare off the majority. Think of it as the same way the IRS goes after a very small percentage of taxpayers in order to keep the rest in line thru fear and intimidation.
Most law enforcement is based on the severity of consequences and the FEAR of getting caught - not on the likelihood of getting caught. If that wasn't the case, then we would need 1 cop for every 10 people instead of 1 for every 1000.
Here is the ACTUAL wording in the bill about statutory damages for copyright infringement:
SEC. 104. COMPUTATION OF STATUTORY DAMAGES IN COPYRIGHT CASES.
Section 504(c)(1) of title 17, United States Code, is amended by striking the second sentence and inserting the following: `A copyright owner is entitled to recover statutory damages for each copyrighted work sued upon that is found to be infringed. The court may make either one or multiple awards of statutory damages with respect to infringement of a compilation, or of works that were lawfully included in a compilation, or a derivative work and any preexisting works upon which it is based. In making a decision on the awarding of such damages, the court may consider any facts it finds relevant relating to the infringed works and the infringing conduct, including whether the infringed works are distinct works having independent economic value.'. Personally, I don't think they need this change in the statutory damages section. The statutory damages are already extremely high enough to achieve the objective of deterrence and intimidation.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
| | | Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA
1 edit | Re: Get rid of statutory damages! The problem with that is the burden of proof is too low in civil cases so our court system is abused and the results are unjust. Just because legislators are willing to be whores to corporations doesn't make laws the Nazis would be proud of right. Our Constitution is not based on the ends justify the means. | |
| | | russotto
join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA
| So, the legislators set high STATUTORY damages, so that a huge swat in the forehead of a selected few is used to scare off the majority. Think of it as the same way the IRS goes after a very small percentage of taxpayers in order to keep the rest in line thru fear and intimidation. Or the way the Mafia puts a few people who don't pay their protection money in the hospital. Or the way Al Queda knocks down a few buildings in a country whose people and government won't kowtow to them...
Yeah, I got it now. It's terrorism. | |
| | | |
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| Re: Get rid of statutory damages! said by russotto :So, the legislators set high STATUTORY damages, so that a huge swat in the forehead of a selected few is used to scare off the majority. Think of it as the same way the IRS goes after a very small percentage of taxpayers in order to keep the rest in line thru fear and intimidation. Or the way the Mafia puts a few people who don't pay their protection money in the hospital. Or the way Al Queda knocks down a few buildings in a country whose people and government won't kowtow to them... Yeah, I got it now. It's terrorism. It is also how law enforcement works, and has worked, for centuries. Unfortunately, left to their own consciences, a large percentage of the populace are pretty much amoral scum and would steal other people blind if there was no penalties for doing so.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
| | | | | russotto
join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA
1 edit | Re: Get rid of statutory damages! It is also how law enforcement works, and has worked, for centuries. Unfortunately, left to their own consciences, a large percentage of the populace are pretty much amoral scum and would steal other people blind if there was no penalties for doing so. So there's no difference between law enforcement and protection rackets or terrorism? The Law is merely the biggest gang in town? A lot of people would agree with you but most of them are anarchists of some stripe...
In systems of _justice_, the punishment is supposed to fit the crime, or in civil cases the compensation should fit the injury. Simply ramping up the punishment or damages to the point to where it is ruinous to be caught doing the activity may be convenient for the beneficiaries of the law, but it is not justice. And it doesn't work, after a point; they can only ruin you once. Sue an average college student for $100,000 or $1,000,000 or $1,000,000,000; the judgement is equally uncollectible either way. | |
| | | | | wtansill
Ncc1701
join:2000-10-10
Falls Church, VA
| said by GOLFnSUN :It is also how law enforcement works, and has worked, for centuries. Unfortunately, left to their own consciences, a large percentage of the populace are pretty much amoral scum and would steal other people blind if there was no penalties for doing so. Actually, TK, I think that for once you've hit the nail squarely on the head. It's only the perpetrator that you've misidentified. Specifically, I think that we should all file a class action suit for the perpetration of massive fraud and theft against the RIAA/MPAA, and the organizations that back them.
Think about this. The original intent of copyright was to provide protection to authors for a limited time so that they could profit from their works. Beyond the initial time period (plus extensions), the works were to fall into the public domain so that others could create derivative works and enrich society as a whole. The system worked well, but now, after numerous rounds of copyright extension, we have ridiculous limits on copyright terms, and draconian punishments for even miniscule violations (a mix CD causing 1.5 million in damages? Please!).
My belief is that with each successive extension of copyright, the public has been deprived, unilaterally, of the good intended by the framers. This, to me, is theft by legal means, and should be prosecuted as such.
Beyond that, we have seen over and over again that when laws are passed that the public at large thinks are ridiculous, the laws will not be obeyed, generating scorn for the law in general, and weakening society in the process. That squandering of public good will is, to my mind, even worse that the outright greed. But that's just me. Thanks for giving me the intro...
--
"In every generation, there are those who want to rule well - but they mean to rule. They promise to be good masters - but they mean to be master."
--Daniel Webster
| |
| | | 
pog
Premium
join:2004-06-03
Kihei, HI
 ·Hawaiian Telcom
| said by GOLFnSUN :... Think of this as the reverse side of a class action suit where millions sue 1 company. A class action, however, results in a portion of the award being given to each individual person. The sum, IOW, of all these portions, plus lawyer fees etc, equals the agreed upon figure.
A true reverse of a class action would have all responsible parties paying a fair share of the damages... not just a few people paying colossal amounts while everyone else pays nothing.
... a huge swat in the forehead of a selected few is used to scare off the majority. Deterrence, on its own, is not justification enough.
Think of it as the same way the IRS goes after a very small percentage of taxpayers in order to keep the rest in line thru fear and intimidation. The IRS will not audit me and then require me to pay my own back taxes and penalties plus those of everyone else in my town.
Most law enforcement is based on the severity of consequences and the FEAR of getting caught - not on the likelihood of getting caught. If that wasn't the case, then we would need 1 cop for every 10 people instead of 1 for every 1000. Fear of getting caught is not independent of likelihood of getting caught, though. You can't run law enforcement, for eg, with a death penalty for jaywalking and 1 officer for 1,000,000 people... and, unfortunately, I think this not so far removed from what we have with the music industry and the general public.
The statutory damages are already extremely high enough to achieve the objective of deterrence and intimidation. The damages are insanely high and, I figure, were conceived in an era when the bad guys were professional counterfeiters and rip-off artists... NOT grandma firing up her computer and grabbing a few tracks.
--
My Site | |
| | | 
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA | Who do you think composed the proposed statute?
NV | |
| | Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | you should only be liable for the value of the merchandise. figure using itunes as a standard each track only has a value of 99cents and albums 9.99
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| NeoandGeo
join:2003-05-10
Harrison, TN | . Go after those that sell and profit from pirating. Don't go after the people that are downloading, which is the same thing our parents did when they recorded a song from the radio for their listening leisure. | |
| |
Corehhi
join:2002-01-28
Bluffton, SC
| Re: . said by NeoandGeo :Go after those that sell and profit from pirating. Don't go after the people that are downloading, which is the same thing our parents did when they recorded a song from the radio for their listening leisure. What do you mean parents? I use to do that and it was decided in court that it was legal. The big thing back then was tape to tape recorders. Music industry did stop DAT. | |
|
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
1 edit | Here is a list of Sponsors/Cosponsors of this bill »thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z···279:@@@P
H.R.4279
Title: To enhance remedies for violations of intellectual property laws, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [D][MI-14] (introduced 12/5/2007)
Cosponsors:
Rep Berman, Howard L. [D][CA-28] - 12/5/2007
Rep Chabot, Steve [R][OH-1] - 12/5/2007
Rep Cohen, Steve [D][TN-9] - 12/5/2007
Rep Feeney, Tom [R][FL-24] - 12/5/2007
Rep Goodlatte, Bob [R][VA-6] - 12/5/2007
Rep Issa, Darrell E. [R][CA-49] - 12/5/2007
Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [D][TX-18] - 12/5/2007
Rep Keller, Ric [R][FL-8] - 12/5/2007
Rep Schiff, Adam B. [D][CA-29] - 12/5/2007
Rep Smith, Lamar [R][TX-21] - 12/5/2007
Rep Wexler, Robert [D][FL-19] - 12/6/2007 I doubt this will proceed as is. But if you want this defeated and one of these Congressmen represents you, contact them and let them know how you feel.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page | |
| | kingofdsl
join:2002-12-11
Afton, OK
| Re: Here is a list of Sponsors/Cosponsors of this bill said by GOLFnSUN :» thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z···279:@@@PH.R.4279
Title: To enhance remedies for violations of intellectual property laws, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14] (introduced 12/5/2007)
Cosponsors:
Rep Berman, Howard L. [CA-28] - 12/5/2007
Rep Chabot, Steve [OH-1] - 12/5/2007
Rep Cohen, Steve [TN-9] - 12/5/2007
Rep Feeney, Tom [FL-24] - 12/5/2007
Rep Goodlatte, Bob [VA-6] - 12/5/2007
Rep Issa, Darrell E. [CA-49] - 12/5/2007
Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] - 12/5/2007
Rep Keller, Ric [FL-8] - 12/5/2007
Rep Schiff, Adam B. [CA-29] - 12/5/2007
Rep Smith, Lamar [TX-21] - 12/5/2007
Rep Wexler, Robert [FL-19] - 12/6/2007 I doubt this will proceed as is. But if you want this defeated and one of these Congressmen represents you, contact them and let them know how you feel. Your first mistake is saying these people represent a citizen of the U.S., they do not.
They represent Corporations such as the RIAA. | |
| | | 
DHRacer
Fire Survivor
join:2000-10-10
Lake Arrowhead, CA
·Charter Pipeline
·Verizon west (ex G..
| Re: Here is a list of Sponsors/Cosponsors of this bill Absolutely. Since when do companies get to call the shots in a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people"?
Maybe change it to "of the people, buy the politicians, and for themselves" and it would make more sense?
We need to stop corporate lobbying cold or the only citizenry left in this country will be corporate america.
--
"No one will believe you solved this problem in one day! We've been working on it for months. Now, go act busy for a few weeks and I'll let you know when it's time to tell them." (R&D Supervisor, Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing /3M Corp.) | |
| | | | SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| Re: Here is a list of Sponsors/Cosponsors of this bill said by DHRacer :We need to stop corporate lobbying cold or the only citizenry left in this country will be corporate america. That is status quo in all dealings except on paper. And paper, such as the kind the Constitution is written on, and, as demonstrated by the current Administration, does not matter worth a squirt of piss in the sea. The U.S. as we knew it for the first 200 yrs of our history died in 2000. It just hasn't been sufficiently televised. | |
| | | | | ender7074
join:2006-11-21
Saint Louis, MO | Re: Here is a list of Sponsors/Cosponsors of this bill BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Please... Give me a break. | |
| | | | | |
Rex
@gtconnect.net
 from:
Gemologist
| Re: Here is a list of Sponsors/Cosponsors of this bill You think it's funny???
Every day, your freedom is slowly but surely taken away from you.
Your rights to privacy, freedom, free speech have essentially been stripped away from you. Try to go to a political event wearing a t-shirt that just says "b ring the boys home" without even saying a word. You will be escorted out. Try to voice your opinion at such an event, you will be tazed.
Your economy is getting wrecked, resulting in a disappearing middle-class. You're being turned into a slave.
You already have a 50000$ debt that your government has taken into your name which you will never be able to pay.
Most major corporations in your country are already owned by foreign country due to their massive debt.
Even your banks are having a hard time staying in business because your economy is so wrecked.
WAKE UP! YOU are a slave.
And those people. The politicians, the corporations, the wealthy, the mass media, the people who control YOUR country and your government do not give a rat's ass about you.
As long as you obey and serve, they are happy.
Keep laughing... | |
| | | | | | | ender7074
join:2006-11-21
Saint Louis, MO
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Here is a list of Sponsors/Cosponsors of this bill /yawn. Regurgitating lame CNN crap doesn't go real far with me. My biggest fear is to get some socialist Democrat pig into the White House. Then, yes, I will agree that we are being enslaved. Oh, and most of your points are really, really funny. Thanks for the laugh! | |
| | | | | 
Rocky67
Pencil Neck Geek
Premium
join:2005-01-13
Orange, CA | Howard Berman: BARF
This guy did a shitty job of representing me when I was paying him for it.
--
"Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand." - Homer | |
| 
jmycknshk
...bring your green hat
join:2004-07-02
West Chester, PA
| wow, just wow. look how clearly defined:
"To enhance remedies for violations of intellectual property laws, and for other purposes"
other purposes? i guess there's no room for interpretation there...
--
Blogging is fun... »techblik.blogspot.com
| |
|
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
·RoadRunner Cable
1 edit | edit: I've become a parrot to TKJunkmail! In that case, I have nothing to say.
Oddly enough, publicknowledge.org took the time to strip the party identities from the news posting that they otherwise copied verbatim.
»judiciary.house.gov/newscenter.aspx?A=887
Here is the original opening line.
"House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI),
Ranking Member Lamar Smith (R-TX),
Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property Chairman Howard Berman (D-CA),
and Reps. Adam Schiff (D-CA),
Tom Feeney (R-FL),
Darrell Issa (R-CA),
Steve Chabot (R-OH),
Steve Cohen (D-TN),
Ric Keller (R-FL),
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX),
Bob Goodlatte (R-VA),
and Robert Wexler (D-FL)
introduced the "Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property (“PRO IP”) Act of 2007" to combat what they say is an increasing problem."
Looks like a pretty even party split.
Anybody here in your district? If I can find the time, I'll amend this to include contact info for each of them.
I recommend letting them know your opinion as well as anyone in your area that might vote on it.
To the posters who support this bill, but won't even speak out against RIAA execs who have stolen billions from consumers:
How do you even live with yourself? Regarding the thing that has you supporting executive crime by omission and hammering end users; in that respect, you are a despicable person. That you won't speak to the issue is further evidence.
NV
edit:talk about your day late etc.....
--
Abortion: A Republican Plot to Thin the Liberal Herd. | |
| | | | |
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA | Re: Agenda upon agenda Excellent. Thank you.
NV | |
| | mikenolan7
Premium
join:2005-06-07
Torrance, CA
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: edit: I've become a parrot to TKJunkmail! Your representative does not have to be on that list to write them a letter. In order to get Congress to act as you wish, you must let them know what you want. There is a sticky in the filesharing software forum of a sample letter to your Representative, along with links to get their contact info. It was written against the "Campus Based Digital Theft Prevention", but could easily be modified to fit this. You don't have to be someone who shares files to disagree with the tactics of the **AA. This is an assault on technology, by those who refuse to keep up. Sooner or later, this sort of thinking will affect all who embrace technology, in one form or another. | |
| | | kingofdsl
join:2002-12-11
Afton, OK
| Re: edit: I've become a parrot to TKJunkmail! said by mikenolan7 :Your representative does not have to be on that list to write them a letter. In order to get Congress to act as you wish, you must let them know what you want. There is a sticky in the filesharing software forum of a sample letter to your Representative, along with links to get their contact info. It was written against the "Campus Based Digital Theft Prevention", but could easily be modified to fit this. You don't have to be someone who shares files to disagree with the tactics of the **AA. This is an assault on technology, by those who refuse to keep up. Sooner or later, this sort of thinking will affect all who embrace technology, in one form or another. You do realize all they do is send a boiler plated sample letter right back and continue the agenda for their Corporate masters? | |
| | | | mikenolan7
Premium
join:2005-06-07
Torrance, CA
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: edit: I've become a parrot to TKJunkmail! I wish they did that much. My Representative never even bothered to do that. At least she saved me the trouble of wondering who to vote for come November. It's the only avenue we have. Might as well try, it doesn't take any more effort than complaining here. Although it is less fun. | |
| 
Dominokat
"Hi"
Premium
join:2002-08-06
Boothbay, ME
clubs: | Copy Copy I am going to copy each and every one of my 1450 CDs. Maybe two or three copies each.
That should yield some good cash for the RIAA.
--
"Do, or do not.... There is no try." (Yoda) | |
| | 
hayabusa3303
Over 200 mph
Premium
join:2005-06-29
clubs: | what is next? Illegal to have a cd\dvd\blu-ray burner in your hands now? | |
| | 
wolfox
Gentle Wolfox
join:2002-11-27
Dunnellon, FL
| Re: what is next? said by hayabusa3303 :Illegal to have a cd\dvd\blu-ray burner in your hands now? No, because you have already paid a kickback to the xxAA's to own the device and the media to use in it. That is why it costs so much to get your paws on the materials - there is a "tax" already charged on it that goes straight to these folks for the contingency that maybe, just maybe that the drives and media were to be used to pirate and pilfer at their perceived bottom lines.
Since we already paid many times over for the *possible* misuse of blank media and their respective drive technologies, rip and burn away I say. Rip and burn away...
You would be surprised just how amazingly CHEAP drives and media are when you take away the RIAA/MPAA kickback.
--
The RIAA killed my legal webcast. Sadly it will never be mourned... | |
| DSLdewd
join:2004-06-05
Denver, CO | This mixed with the changes in bankruptcy law = complete financial ruin if you get caught sharing a single music CD?
WTF? | |
| amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
clubs:
| huh? So are they trying to stop people from making their own mix-cd's or is this more for a serious counterfeit type thing?
I'm all for the latter... Real bootleggers seem to be more of a problem than a regular music lover just making their own cd for the car or whatever. Besides, wouldn't that mean they'd have to outlaw all cd-rw drives? What about the home stereo type cd burners? I'm confused.
Do they want to make it so that a person could be fined for each song on a mix cd? That's absurd. If I have 10 albums and want to make a custom cd for the road with a couple songs from each, what the heck is the harm in that?
What about iPods and other portables??? Still confused about this whole thing... | |
| | | 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Personally, $1000 is way too much. This borders on absurd. Apparently the Constitution doesn't mean jack to the RIAA.
"Cruel and unusual punishment". What a joke. | |
| 
Quake110
join:2003-12-20
Ottawa, ON
·Velcom
| The RIAA is not going to last This is what we call a Totalitarian and fascist organisation.
They may be a bully right now but at some point, the recording studios and specially the artists will revolt at some point. They have to move up with the time, internet is here to stay... | |
| 
TScheisskopf
World News Trust
join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ
·Sprint Broadband D..
| They have defined and lobbied for... The government creating laws that channel them large amountsw of money as part of their new business plan, to make up for the failing and ineffective business plan they have now.
Never make the mistake of thinking that the people who run the record companies are smarter than you or have better instincts than you. They aren't and don't. They are simply more bloodthirsty and shameless than you. | |
| 
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| Confusing... Surely this is written as to confuse and be ambiguous enough to be applied however they should wish.
Back a month or so ago when the whole "RIAA is suing because this fellow ripped a CD he bought to MP3" mess came about, the RIAA's attorney made comments which were suitably vague as to present the possibility they might challenge Fair Use in the application of time or space shifting the content, such as CD to MP3, which is in fact legal today.
Of course the case really involved him uploading those tracks and sharing them with others, which is another deal altogether. The point is though they said the words that could be used to go after legal uses of the CD you bought.
Compilations? LOL They're called mix tapes in my day, and who didn't make them? We all did at one time or another. Now, if what they're looking at here are folks who go out and wholesale copy CDs for redistribution, then fine. The trouble is that the language doesn't state this, so it could be used for other purposes.
It seems every year we have to have another IP bill that the RIAA or MPAA looks to ratchet up fines which frankly do not have to be changed.
--
TheGlobalMind.com | Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | Trust the instinct to the end, though you can render no reason. Ralph Waldo Emerson
| |
|
GeorgeR
@comcast.net
| Statutory changes in PRO IP bill Sometimes I simply cannot believe my eyes when I read blog entries on this site. The wording on this new copyright bill makes complete sense. That does not mean that some theoretical mafia will be busting down the doors of innocent people who infringe unknowingly. Who are you trying to fool? Yourself?
The notion that someone willfully stealing one thousand songs (perhaps by 100 different singers, yet distributed together in a DVD compilation) and distributing in mass over the Internet should be liable for the same maximum damages award as someone stealing 1 song, and sharing it with his/her neighbor, is totally absurd.
The only way that a statutory damage claim reaches the $150K maximum amount is if willful infringement has occurred and the actual distribution (like that which occurs over the Internet) is difficult or impossible to calculate. Judges and juries have the discretion to determine something not to be willful, and move the statutory bar all the way down to $200. Why didn't you tell your readers that truth.
Second, this is not the RIAA's bill. This is a bill for the entire copyright community (mostly individuals and small companies like mine) and level headed people interested in being compensated for our hard work and our country maintaining its competitiveness in a global economy as well. China now has some tougher copyright laws than we do here in the U.S. The PRO IP bill is LONG overdue. I know. I am a graphics artists/designer who has suffered widespread intentional theft of my valuable works for years.
Third, try stealing a box of pens from your local Officemax on a routine basis and see how long it takes for the police or FBI to show up at your door. Not the manufacturer of the pens or Officemax personnel with guns and ropes. The PRO IP bill strengthens the criminal side of willful copyright infringement. How could anyone argue this is not fair?
Please don't continue to mislead people and create hysteria when you are not at all knowledgeable about the facts. I feel badly about your innocent readers/audience who think you must be knowledgeable or you wouldn't be taking this position in a public forum. Tell the truth. Can you point out a single person who has been forced to file bankruptcy, or been sent off to jail, based on copyright company attacks and/or unreasonable judgments rendered against them in court.
I didn't think so.
Remember, the truth is a far more powerful ally and positive avenue for change than deception. A level headed discussion will likely get you much further along than hysteria.
The PRO IP bill helps small companies and creative individuals (not just huge record labels and movie/software billionaires) and encourages continued innovation. Why can't you help us spread this truth.
GeorgeR | |
| | | | |
GeorgeR
@comcast.net
| Re: Statutory changes in PRO IP bill Thanks, Dez_nutz
You are probably right. Perhaps I should have used the example of an employee of a jewelry store I know. The problem with piracy of digital works is that 1 million perfect copies can be made and distributed in just a few minutes. Again (unfortunately), this is exactly what happened to us. There is no way we will ever be properly compensated for these losses. Existing laws or the new PRO IP bill considered.
Thanks for your critique ... I think you made a lot of sense.
George | |
| | |
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| said by dez_nutz :You buy a cd and whether or not you have a clue how p2p works you can get sued by the RIAA and settle out for $3000-$4000 dollars for ripping it to your drive. You could always risk going to trial and losing, maybe have a $220,000 verdict thrown at you for 24 songs. If this gets passed maybe a mil... I am all about people not taking your designs but not at that price. That is excessive... I think you got it right there. Fact is that just ripping the disc to your HDD for your own use (i.e. no sharing) is accepted as totally legal today. It is fair use no question.
The trouble again is distribution. If you send that sucker up to some P2P network then you've distributed the work for which you have no rights to do so.
My concern is that the media industry is starting to make arguments which makes the simple ripping of the disc for your own use a questionable legal position. That's what they did in the P2P case that everyone jumped on a few weeks ago.
I don't believe we need a yearly ratcheting up of the penalties. They don't quit.
GeorgeR,
I see your point and as someone who creates content as well, I feel your pain on having your stuff used improperly. It pisses you off to no end.
However, I have to tell you that this thing isn't about us small guys. This IS all about the RIAA/MPAA "big media" and that's it. They couldn't care less about the artists they claim to be helping, nor anyone else. It is business after all.
I fully support copyright protections as I use them myself, BUT I also look to have some balance in the system. This type of action they're seeking is completely counter to the purpose of copyright. It is full on abuse of that system, and that's why I do not support this bill, no matter the rhetoric. | |
| | | | |
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Sorry, GeorgeR, but the punishments are RIDICULOUS.
Millions of dollars in fines. Whatever. | |
| old_wiz_60
join:2005-06-03
Bedford, MA | Turn the tables? How about a law that would fine the xxAA $ 1 million every time they charged someone without proof? | |
|
Aair
@cox.net |  RIIA is competing to be terrorist #1 in US
| |
| | | |
|
|
RIAA Seeks More Excessive Fines under PRO-IP Act
·
·
·
Sorry man the stealing pens and FBI showing up at someones house for it really made me laugh... Call out the SWAT that same guy just got another box... lol...
