Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 21

Thread: Just buy the CDs

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    England
    Posts
    832
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked
    11 times in 10 posts
    • tinners's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Intel P35 Shuttle
      • CPU:
      • Intel Q6700 @ 3.2 GHz
      • Memory:
      • OCZ - 2Gb + Corsair TwinX 2Gb
      • Storage:
      • Raptor X 150Gb + 2TB Tranquil Windows Home Server
      • Graphics card(s):
      • XFX ATI 5770
      • PSU:
      • Shuttle PSU
      • Case:
      • Shuttle SP35P2
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Pro 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2407WFP (A04)
      • Internet:
      • Talk Talk, hovering around 1Mb

    Just buy the CDs

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7029229.stm

    A court in the US has ordered a woman to pay $222,000 (£109,000) in damages for illegally file-sharing music.The jury ordered Jammie Thomas, 32, from Minnesota, to pay for offering to share 24 specific songs online - a cost of $9,250 per song.
    $9,000 a song, that's harsh ! I hope she got some good tunes.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    234
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    8 times in 7 posts

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    Does the punishment fit the crime? I think not.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    England
    Posts
    832
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked
    11 times in 10 posts
    • tinners's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Intel P35 Shuttle
      • CPU:
      • Intel Q6700 @ 3.2 GHz
      • Memory:
      • OCZ - 2Gb + Corsair TwinX 2Gb
      • Storage:
      • Raptor X 150Gb + 2TB Tranquil Windows Home Server
      • Graphics card(s):
      • XFX ATI 5770
      • PSU:
      • Shuttle PSU
      • Case:
      • Shuttle SP35P2
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Pro 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2407WFP (A04)
      • Internet:
      • Talk Talk, hovering around 1Mb

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    24 songs ? If I put up my music collection of 800 CDs * 10 songs per CD = 8000 * $9,250 = £37,000,000
    Am I glad I didnt do that.......

  4. #4
    Admin (Ret'd)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    18,481
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    3,208 times in 2,281 posts

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    There's an old adage .... "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime".

    well, it's an analogy, since this was a civil lawsuit not a criminal case, but the same principle applies. And, of course, she could have done as many others have done and simply settled out of court. But no, she chose to fight and force a trial. Big mistake.

    But even then, it looks like she may well have got off lightly. She was accused of sharing more than 1700 files, but this award was based on just 24. Imagine the potential if all 1700+ had been taken into account. At that $9,250/song rate, that's >$15,725,000.

    And that's just for compensatory damages. The jury could have awarded punitive damages that, potentially, would have dwarfed the compensation. With the $150k per instance limit, that could have added $255 million to that award. Total potential exposure = approx $270 m.

    Makes $220,000 seem like a bargain, don't it?

    As for the damages, they're not based on what she gained by downloading 24 songs, but an assessment of what the music companies lost by her sharing them with others. So .... how many other people got them because she shared? If it's 1000, then it's $9.25 per share.

    Oh, and bear in mind that this award came from a jury. It's not the music companies that decided the amount, or the judge. It's a jury.

    She, of course, claims not to have done it. Well, maybe she didn't, but the jury didn't buy it.

    She claims to have had a (convenient) hard drive failure, but there were (apparently) inconsistent claims from her. That the jury found against her and made an award like this strongly suggests they thought she was lying.

    Does the punishment fit the crime? Well, it's compensation not a fine for a crime, and it's a jury's assessment of the losses incurred, so yeah, it would seem that it does. And the jury that sat through the trial and heard the evidence are better placed to judge if it fits or not than we are, without the benefit of the evidence.

    As I said, "if you can't do the 'time', don't do the 'crime'".

  5. #5
    JagerBomber Mossy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    0.0
    Posts
    2,618
    Thanks
    191
    Thanked
    173 times in 144 posts

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    There's an old adage .... "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime".

    She, of course, claims not to have done it. Well, maybe she didn't, but the jury didn't buy it.
    No they probably downloaded it aswell
    __________________
    Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.

    Error exists between Keyboard & Chair replace User and press Any Key!

    .... Where's the Any Key???


  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    234
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    8 times in 7 posts

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    "As for the damages, they're not based on what she gained by downloading 24 songs, but an assessment of what the music companies lost by her sharing them with others. So .... how many other people got them because she shared? If it's 1000, then it's $9.25 per share."

    But does downloading a song/album constitute a lost sale? Were these people going to buy the songs otherwise? Who knows? Have people bought the songs/albums after illegaly downloading them?

  7. #7
    Admin (Ret'd)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    18,481
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    3,208 times in 2,281 posts

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    Quote Originally Posted by clearlyolly View Post
    But does downloading a song/album constitute a lost sale? Were these people going to buy the songs otherwise? Who knows? Have people bought the songs/albums after illegaly downloading them?
    That's for the jury to assess, though. And, it seems, they did.

  8. #8
    Senior Member SilentDeath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,745
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked
    16 times in 11 posts

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    I think its compleatly wrong they they can ruin peoples lives over something that a large percent of the population will do and is imo not a morally wrong thing... people pirate becuase prices are far too high and the product is not good value.
    If people buy music at those prices it also puts a huge limit on the size of your collection - which imo also limits creativity and is partially why %^*%%$% mass produced bands exist.

    I also think you cannot put a value on the theft of a non physical item such as this. Microsoft made a very good example of what i mean why they said they are loosing some random number, in billions, from piracy in africa... yep like anyone in fammine is going to pass on what is probably a months worth of food so they can buy vista.

    Oh, and bear in mind that this award came from a jury. It's not the music companies that decided the amount, or the judge. It's a jury.
    stupid americans....


    Quote Originally Posted by tinners View Post
    24 songs ? If I put up my music collection of 800 CDs * 10 songs per CD = 8000 * $9,250 = £37,000,000
    Am I glad I didnt do that.......
    well 800 * the typical price of £13? (long time since i bought anything..) .. = £10,400... not THAT much less than £37,000,000....
    Last edited by SilentDeath; 05-10-2007 at 03:48 PM.

  9. #9
    Admin (Ret'd)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    18,481
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    3,208 times in 2,281 posts

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentDeath View Post
    I think its compleatly wrong they they can ruin peoples lives over something that a large percent of the population will do and is imo not a morally wrong thing... people pirate becuase prices are far too high and the product is not good value.
    If people buy music at those prices it also puts a huge limit on the size of your collection - which imo also limits creativity and is partially why %^*%%$% mass produced bands exist.
    That you think the price is too high gives you the absolute right to refuse to buy. Price is determined in large part by supply and demand and if enough people agreed with you, prices would fall. But your belief that the price is too high does not give you any right, moral or legal, to pirate it, any more than the price of a Mercedes being too high gives you the right to go into a showroom and just take one.

    And how does pirating encourage creativity? If anyone produces a piece of music and expects to get zero return from it, they can choose to make it public domain and give it away. There's ample opportunity for unrestrained creativity there. Bands are not forced to sign record company deals at gunpoint. The fact that they sign them demonstrates that they want a return and they think that's the best way of getting it. Of course, they can also bypass record companies and direct market themselves if they wish. If enough people prefer to do that, record companies will have to change strategy.

    But at the moment, people sign up with record companies because by far the best chance of making it real big is to have the marketing and promotional muscle of record companies behind them. That is the artist's choice. So, how is creativity limited? There's nothing stopping you, or any band, avoiding record companies altogether and doing their own thing, at their own price (or free) if they choose.


    As for ruining people's lives, people should take responsibility for their own actions, and for the consequences. This woman chose to share music illegally, and then chose to fight the court case rather than settle out of court. All she had to do to avoid that was to not fileshare.

    Like it or not, it's illegal. The fact that a large percentage of the population does it simply suggests that they believe the chances of getting caught and/or held to account are small. But by that logic, we should all go out and rob a bank with a shotgun if we think we can get away with it without being caught.

    She broke the law and got caught. A jury assessed what others had suffered and awarded damages accordingly. All she had to do to avoid that was not fileshare.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    England
    Posts
    832
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked
    11 times in 10 posts
    • tinners's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Intel P35 Shuttle
      • CPU:
      • Intel Q6700 @ 3.2 GHz
      • Memory:
      • OCZ - 2Gb + Corsair TwinX 2Gb
      • Storage:
      • Raptor X 150Gb + 2TB Tranquil Windows Home Server
      • Graphics card(s):
      • XFX ATI 5770
      • PSU:
      • Shuttle PSU
      • Case:
      • Shuttle SP35P2
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Pro 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2407WFP (A04)
      • Internet:
      • Talk Talk, hovering around 1Mb

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    Quote Originally Posted by SilentDeath View Post
    well 800 * the typical price of £13? (long time since i bought anything..) .. = £10,400... not THAT much less than £37,000,000....
    theyre only £8 from the itunes store, and a load of them are cheap offer HMV 3 for a fiver etc. so not quite £10,000

  11. #11
    Splash
    Guest

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    She claims to have had a (convenient) hard drive failure, but there were (apparently) inconsistent claims from her. That the jury found against her and made an award like this strongly suggests they thought she was lying.
    Just wanted to pick you up on this one - I've been keeping an eye loosely on this case for a while. As far as I'm aware the hard drive was replaced BEFORE she was informed of the action. Does this change the case? Not really in my eyes, but given the fact that the drive has been replaced has been used to imply guilt I thought this an important fact.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,585
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    246 times in 208 posts

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    Personally, I think there are moral grey areas when it comes to copyright law that the law do not fully take into account (abandonware, certain part of emulation, perhaps even fansubbing in some circumstances), but this really is not one of them. If you are caught filesharing then you can only really expect a guilty verdict. However, I do not fully agree with the punishment delivered.. or so called 'compensatory damage'. People should be responsible for their actions, but the punishment/compensation must be fitting of the crime. Otherwise, you might as well start handing out the death penalty/unlimited fine for every little thing. Could be effective population control.. just humanly questionable (even for the later).

    Well, I recently sat my theory test (about time), so I've got my highway code on my table. Apart from causing death, or driving dangerously, all the fines I see on the able at limited to £5000 (including driving while unfit through drink or drugs). Somehow, I find that far more serious than the sharing of one song. The music industry might disagree, but seriously.. if $9250 per song is not punitive, I do not know what is.

    Those who downloaded from her got away free, and she picked up the bills. I do not think that's particularly fair. It's probably easier than to chase after everyone who download, but I actually think that it is more appropriate that they slap 50x $5000 fines, than 1x $222,000 fines.

  13. #13
    Pseudo-Mad Scientist Whiternoise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    4,274
    Thanks
    166
    Thanked
    386 times in 233 posts
    • Whiternoise's system
      • Motherboard:
      • DFI LANPARTY JR P45-T2RS
      • CPU:
      • Q6600
      • Memory:
      • 8GB DDR2
      • Storage:
      • 5.6TB Total
      • Graphics card(s):
      • HD4780
      • PSU:
      • 425W Modu82+ Enermax
      • Case:
      • Silverstone TJ08b
      • Operating System:
      • Win7 64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 23" IPS
      • Internet:
      • 1Gbps Fibre Line

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    I would have thought that something like a timed ban from being able to have a home internet connection is a fitting punishment (proportional to the extent of the sharing)?

    $222k takes the proverbial **** to be perfectly honest. Fine, you stole music so you should be punished, but this is reminiscent of the time when the RIAA had the balls to ask allofmp3 for more than Russia's GDP because they were sharing music. http://www.zeropaid.com/news/8175/RIAA+sues+AllofMP3+for+$1.65+trillion and surely if you were fined that much, would it not just be fairer to take a 3-6 month jail sentence - especially if the poor sod who gets fined is obviously going to be screwed for life for listening to music?
    Last edited by Whiternoise; 05-10-2007 at 05:21 PM.

  14. #14
    Admin (Ret'd)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    18,481
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    3,208 times in 2,281 posts

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    Quote Originally Posted by Splash View Post
    Just wanted to pick you up on this one - I've been keeping an eye loosely on this case for a while. As far as I'm aware the hard drive was replaced BEFORE she was informed of the action. Does this change the case? Not really in my eyes, but given the fact that the drive has been replaced has been used to imply guilt I thought this an important fact.
    Well, according to the reports I read, the drive was swapped after she received the pre-action RIAA warning letter. But it has also been reported that her story about exactly when the drive was replaced changed between her initial claims in her deposition and her testimony at the trial. That's one of the "inconsistencies" I referred to. And both are formal, sworn legal procedures .... yet the story changed. That, I suspect, won't have helped her credibility with a jury.

    But, clearly, I wasn't in court listening to the evidence. That's why I said that the jury (who were in court and presumably listening to the evidence) are better placed to judge than we are, based on a very brief and possible inaccurate media account of what the evidence was.

    But ... regardless of when the drive was changed, the fluctuating account is suggestive, but no more than suggestive. I haven't said whether I thought she was guilty (in fact, rather than in law) or not, precisely because I won't judge her based on media accounts. My point was that the jury didn't believe her.

  15. #15
    Admin (Ret'd)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    18,481
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    3,208 times in 2,281 posts

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    Quote Originally Posted by TooNice View Post
    Personally, I think there are moral grey areas when it comes to copyright law that the law do not fully take into account (abandonware, certain part of emulation, perhaps even fansubbing in some circumstances), but this really is not one of them. If you are caught filesharing then you can only really expect a guilty verdict. However, I do not fully agree with the punishment delivered.. or so called 'compensatory damage'. People should be responsible for their actions, but the punishment/compensation must be fitting of the crime. Otherwise, you might as well start handing out the death penalty/unlimited fine for every little thing. Could be effective population control.. just humanly questionable (even for the later).

    Well, I recently sat my theory test (about time), so I've got my highway code on my table. Apart from causing death, or driving dangerously, all the fines I see on the able at limited to £5000 (including driving while unfit through drink or drugs). Somehow, I find that far more serious than the sharing of one song. The music industry might disagree, but seriously.. if $9250 per song is not punitive, I do not know what is.

    Those who downloaded from her got away free, and she picked up the bills. I do not think that's particularly fair. It's probably easier than to chase after everyone who download, but I actually think that it is more appropriate that they slap 50x $5000 fines, than 1x $222,000 fines.
    I hear where you're coming from, but the comparison with criminal fines isn't appropriate. Criminal fines are meant as a punishment. Civil compensatory damages are intended as compensation for someone's loss incurred as a result of your actions.

    Suppose you're a successful author. Your last three books made £1m each. I then "pirate" the manuscript for your latest book three months before publication and release it onto the internet. As a result, when the book is published, you only make £200k. Is it a plausible assumption that my actions reduced the revenue you could reasonably expect to have made by £800k? If so, what figure would you want to compensate for that 'theft'? Note, "compensate". Not punish, but to compensate for the loss.

    Sure, the analogy has weaknesses, but it suggests broad comparison. As for exactly how the $9250 per song was arrived at, ask the jury. Presumably, some sort of accounting analysis was done. I'm not suggesting that the reduced income technique in my book example is how this jury did it. But it illustrates how compensation for losses caused can be FAR in excess of any likely criminal penalties.

    And if the damages are designed purely to compensate for loss incurred, then they aren't punitive, because that relates to an additional sum, on top of losses incurred, designed explicitly to send a message about the jury's view of the wrongness of the infringement.

  16. #16
    780 nanometres redlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    East Herts
    Posts
    859
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked
    26 times in 19 posts
    • redlight's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Abit QuadGT
      • CPU:
      • Core 2 Quad 6600@3.1
      • Memory:
      • 4GB Geil PC6400
      • Storage:
      • 2x250GB Samsung 400GB Seagate
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Leadtek 8800GTS 640MB
      • PSU:
      • Tagan 580w
      • Case:
      • Gigabyte Aurora
      • Monitor(s):
      • Fujitsu Siemens 22" + 42" plasma
      • Internet:
      • 2MB Tiscali

    Re: Just buy the CDs

    I would think it would be down to the highly paid expert lawyers manipulating the jury.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Why did you buy the car that you drive?
    By XTR in forum Automotive
    Replies: 161
    Last Post: 08-02-2014, 05:35 PM
  2. Windows Vista retail doomed unless Microsoft cuts prices?
    By Bob Crabtree in forum HEXUS News
    Replies: 132
    Last Post: 02-04-2007, 01:05 PM
  3. ADSL router modem 48 + del group buy anyone?
    By prehensile in forum Retail Therapy and Bargains
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 13-05-2004, 09:00 PM
  4. the best place to buy cd's
    By Jimmy Little in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 27-07-2003, 06:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •