i didn't... it's legit... i wonder why they picked her...aren't there like millions of users using p2p firmware??
In my opinion, if the RIAA really wants to stop this, they have to stop making an example out of one person. They have to make it more widespread and a realistic fine like $50 per song. When word gets around that a lot more people are being caught, and the fines are actually being paid, that's when the fear starts setting in. Seeing this woman get fined $1.9 million, I know she won't pay it. This example out of one person means nothing to me.
There's also something protecting law breakers from this type of over the top sentence, the 8th Amendment. I would consider this punishment unusual and most definitely cruel. Yes, she broke the law but does the punishment really fit the crime? Obviously not.
The Record Industry are such a bunch of *****wads, it is not even funny. I'm not surprised by this news - good luck in actually getting your "money", turds. I was so glad that I was able to get around another stupid thing that the Recording Industry has done (but only on some labels) - the damn DualDisc **** that they make you buy when you get certain CDs. These evil discs will not play on all computers and CD players and are almost impossible to rip and place in iTunes. Luckily, a guy I know at work was able to get it to play through Windows Media and burned a copy for me. I then took the burned copy and ripped the wma files using real player. Itunes will convert wmas to mp3s and voila I got around the problem!
Because it's gonna suck when they firesale all of her belongings and then garnish her wages by the maximum extent allowable by law for the rest of her life. They don't just say, "Oh, you don't have that much money? Well, I guess you're off the hook!" But pragmatically, people are in an uproar because the verdict, in itself, is the antithesis of justice.
I'm not in favor of the "making available" argument, either. However, how is this the "antithesis" of justice? She wasn't sued for stealing the music she was sued for distributing the music. Now I do have a problem with the way they attempted to prove fault (in the first trial at least) but again the statutory damages here aren't for downloading they are for distributing.
We can start with the Eighth Amendment, or we can talk about how statutory damages for copyright infringements are a perversion of the Supreme Court's views on punitive damages. It's pretty evident to me that this verdict is going to be set aside. But if you have an argument on how an award of damages that is over 50,000 times actual damages is just, I'd love to hear it (while keeping in mind that PUNITIVE damage awards are found unjust FAR below that ratio).
What I want to know is, assuming it sticks, how is she going to pay for it? Are they going to set up an installment plan for 200 years and allow her great-grandchildren to pay back? Or are they going to just sell her off to slave labor or something? Also, the incompetence of jurors never cease to amaze me.
The London Times story seems to provide a little more context: purported downloading and uploading of 1,700 songs (but that they only decided to try and prove 24 were downloaded), previously offered settlements of $3,000 to $5,000. I'm not sure what moral or even strategic high ground this 32-year-old "mom of limited means" thought she was taking. http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article6534542.ece
This lawyer is one of the more prominent players/experts in this litigational whorehouse and he keeps a great blog. His post is up regarding the verdict from the OP. He pretty much demolishes every one of the RIAA's bull**** claims. But we live in a corporatocracy so the citizens lose.
I download music using Limewire, am i asking for trouble??? I do remove my music from my limewire library immediately after downloading...
I believe only those sharing music after they download it are the ones getting in trouble but I may be wrong.
Good times... I remember when I started on Morpheus, then went to Kazaa, then Limewire before retiring from it. (I couldn't kick a p*rn download obsession.)
random numeric hashes can't be copyrighted. pssshhh, whats next, the government gonna tell me that they can own and sell pieces of earth for profit......(oops.)
