RIAA Asks Famed Pirate To Join Anti-Piracy Campaign

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Good, I'm glad to see she's sticking up for her principals and in her position I would have given the biggest f-you possible , the music producing industry has had it too good for too long and I sense there's a storm coming.

Also wow, 24 songs, woooo, I know people with 10k+ , there's a reason 64 gig iPod's exist and it isn't just movies.

"Famed pirate" after 24 songs downloaded... I bet any money 90% of RIAA own staff have a track record ten fold of her size, and their kids a hundred fold more.

Zachary Amaranth:

Micalas:

I'm guessing ridiculousness like this has happened to you?

Yup. Had a threatening letter or two back shortly after the shutdown of Napster. My band used P2P to share material with one another and friends. We weren't worried about piracy in part because they were demos and in part because we weren't doing anything professionally at the time, so there was no money to take. Which sort of puzzles me as to how they came across us, but considering they lay claim to THOUSANDS of acts they (the companies they represent) had no rights to during the Napster fiasco, I imagine they intentionally cast their nets wide. And I would be super surprised if I was the only one who was threatened in similar circumstances.

...I'd also be surprised if anyone DID want to pirate us, as the stuff we did was very rough and of debatable quality. But that's another story. I'm really glad this was pre-three strikes policies, because my internet options are really limited and they could have basically shut me down.

Edit: We used P2P servers because it was easier than a lot of the alternatives, too. I still defend this as a valid use of peer-to-peer sharing clients. Granted, these days I could probably e-mail an MP3 if I wanted to. I just haven't had much need.

Im guessing you turned around and sued them for trying to claim copyright on your work? That'd be lovely to hear happen to them :-)

Andy Chalk:
"We continue to try to resolve this case in a reasonable way."

Yet they refuse to drop the case. So reasonable.

Unless they're going to wipe the slate completely clean, she has no reason to even consider this offer. Look at it this way: Even if the RIAA reduces the fine by 90 percent, she still owes $22,000 for 24 songs. It's obscenely disproportional. I may no secret of the fact that I don't like piracy, but this kind of response is absolutely unconscionable, and it's actions like this on the part of agencies like the RIAA that make it so difficult to have a reasoned, rational conversation about the causes and costs of piracy.

Andy Chalk:
Unless they're going to wipe the slate completely clean, she has no reason to even consider this offer. Look at it this way: Even if the RIAA reduces the fine by 90 percent, she still owes $22,000 for 24 songs. It's obscenely disproportional. I may no secret of the fact that I don't like piracy, but this kind of response is absolutely unconscionable, and it's actions like this on the part of agencies like the RIAA that make it so difficult to have a reasoned, rational conversation about the causes and costs of piracy.

Hell, a 99.9% reduction is still too much. The only fair way out of this is if they make her buy the CD for every song she downloaded. Actually, that could end up costing more than .1% of the fine, but at least it wouldn't be an arbitrary number, and the RIAA could "profit" from selling to her.

Corven:
Granted $222,000 is a stupid amount of money to fine someone over 24 songs that may or may not have been downloaded thousands of times, we all know it was a scare tactic to dissuade anyone else from pirating music (Which didn't work) But she's still a pirate, her trying to weasel out of any type of repayment shouldn't be supported.

What shouldn't be supported is record companies destroying someone financially for downloading 24 songs. You speak as though filing for bankruptcy is some magic get out of jail free card, when the reality is that she's basically going to be financially ruined for years. Over 24 songs.

Let's not even pretend that she's the bigger bad guy here.

Good on her for sticking to her guns.

I........What? How is this a thing?

You'd be laughed out of court if you tried to sue someone for such a ludicrous amount of cash for this crime in the Netherlands. Maybe 50 euro and a slap on the wrist, this is just insane.

So not only do they charge her an obscene amount to make an example of her, they try to humiliate her to give an undisclosed (probably small) amount of reduction to her fee? That is so cartoonishly ridiculous it hurts my brain. Seriously, holy shit. You're screwed either way, so you might as well take the route that's less humiliating. Glad to see she's doing that. Also, let's put this in perspective here: $220,000 is roughly enough money to buy one of these:

image

A Rolls Royce Ghost. Or four of these:

image

Four Cadillac Escalades. Think about that for a second. Four factory-new Escalades. My entire family doesn't even make that much in several years' time, and I doubt she makes much more than any of us.

Corven:
Granted $222,000 is a stupid amount of money to fine someone over 24 songs that may or may not have been downloaded thousands of times, we all know it was a scare tactic to dissuade anyone else from pirating music (Which didn't work) But she's still a pirate, her trying to weasel out of any type of repayment shouldn't be supported.

Make her buy the songs on iTune. Here, I fixed the reality.

Oh no, some woman who knowingly and willingly broke the law purely for her own benefit is being forced to face the consequences of her own actions. The fine is more than a little bit excessive, but I can't really bring myself to feel sorry for this woman - she knew exactly what she was doing when she pirated that music, and should have been prepared to pay the price for it going in.

Avalanche91:
I........What? How is this a thing?

You'd be laughed out of court if you tried to sue someone for such a ludicrous amount of cash for this crime in the Netherlands. Maybe 50 euro and a slap on the wrist, this is just insane.

Nope, not even that.

Downloading would be legal here if I'm not mistaken. It's the uploading that gets you into 50 euros and a slap on the wrist territory. Which is altogether a lot more reasonable I'd say.

Baby Tea:
I think we should get people together to raise the money to pay this fine.
But not pay it in a check or wired deposit. No.

Pay it in truckloads of coins. Pennies. Nickles. Dimes. Massive amounts of coins. Just dump it on their front-lawn.
Stinkin' RIAA.

All for this. Can we shoot the coins to the building using a pressure gun?

Atmos Duality:
Well, at least they're being open about their attempted blackmail this time.
Still, just another day for the ruthless RIAA.

As for why Thomas didn't take the deal: I guess the real value in saying 'no' is not being made a further example of.

Zachary Amaranth:

Now, I'm not saying you should pirate (you shouldn't). I'm just saying that suing for thousands of dollars over a couple dozen songs is probably the LEAST ridiculous thing they do.

What's the penalty to retail value ratio again? Something like 400: 1?

Assuming each song is 99 cents, 222222: 1

Nothing new. big money will always be more important than betterment of humanity. after all we pretty much banned library content by extending copyright time just because mickey mouse current owner managed to cinvince them (read: bribe) that he isnt rich enough of something his grandfather made.

Also, did you knew that RIAA issues legally powerful (as in gets you fined for not complying) cease and dessist orders for a lot of blogs that write negative reviews, thus essentialy removing them from google index (google is forbidden to show it as a result, because copyright law ftw right). kinda fun when you write a review and suddenly google starts sending you mail that "your blacklisted".....

Hagi:

Avalanche91:
I........What? How is this a thing?

You'd be laughed out of court if you tried to sue someone for such a ludicrous amount of cash for this crime in the Netherlands. Maybe 50 euro and a slap on the wrist, this is just insane.

Nope, not even that.

Downloading would be legal here if I'm not mistaken. It's the uploading that gets you into 50 euros and a slap on the wrist territory. Which is altogether a lot more reasonable I'd say.

well this woman uplaoded, so fits the case.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here