What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Do you believe the 2012 Mayan Prophecy? view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - The Mayan Calendar predicts the end of time: 2012. See the trailer for 2012, opening November 13.
522 Comments
- sophiaperennis, on 10/10/2007, -2/+348"$9,250 for each song."
These people are absolutely completely insane. - franklymister, on 10/11/2007, -5/+234"In proving liability, the industry did not have to demonstrate that the defendant's computer had a file-sharing program installed at the time that they inspected her hard drive. And the RIAA did not have to show that the defendant was at the keyboard when RIAA investigators accessed Thomas' share folder.
Thomas maintained that she was not the Kazaa user "Tereastarr," whose files were detected by RIAA's investigators. Her attorney speculated to jurors that she could have been the victim of a spoof, cracker, zombie, drone and other attacks."
So does this mean if I hop on someone's unsecured wireless network and start sharing songs, THEY could get sued for it instead of me? - tehWyman, on 08/19/2009, -12/+201*Clears throat* ***** THE RIAA.
- soomprimal, on 10/10/2007, -6/+138Guess what, RIAA? We still don't respect you or the overpaid "artists" you "represent." The RIAA has no idea what music is really about.
Protip: Not money. - chris9902, on 10/10/2007, -2/+123How did they come to $9,250 per song? There has to be some way of fighting that. They just pulled that number out their ass.
- SlackerCSB, on 10/10/2007, -5/+112This is not good. We can only pray that she'll win an appeal.
- Skunkhair, on 10/10/2007, -3/+79Hearing this just makes me want to go "buy" Radiohead's new pay-what-you-like cd for 50 bucks just to have that feeling that my money is NOT going to the RIAA and goes directly to the artist.
- Elohir, on 10/10/2007, -6/+78I haven't bought a CD in over ten years, and I never will. : )
**** the RIAA. - Carburetor, on 10/10/2007, -9/+78You realize this woman probably don't have the money to pay for it, and she'll be thrown to jail?
you realize this single mother will lose her kids, which, probably will be sent to a foster family?
What we had here?
1 single mother thrown to jail
2 kids sent to foster family
1 big greased capitalist company, that it's main goal was to get the money out of her, and it won't see a penny,
because the single mother probably don't have to money, and will convert it to jail.
that's lose-lose as i can see it.
(It won't reduce the piracy, and the violators will hate the Riaa more then before)
Seriously, i don't see the logic here, there's nothing here but revenge. - lsatkins, on 10/10/2007, -3/+69The sad part is that they have no ruined this womans life financially over a few songs. These people are millionaires and $222000 means nothing to them or their company. They are doing it just to hurt another individual.
- jokerthief, on 10/10/2007, -1/+64I suddenly feel the need to pirate some music.
- Mark0Pon, on 10/10/2007, -3/+61Simply stop buying anything from them, and they will fade away. Not too difficult: most music around today is crap, produced by non-artist created in a night by the same majors, just to be trashed away after some months.
Or, create a fund to help the victims of stupid ruling like this. Each voluntary contributor will send, say, 15$ clearly stating that those were $ spent for help instead on a CD.
Bye! - xXShadowstormXx, on 10/10/2007, -3/+59You can bet that no musician will see a penny from them. If I took a guess, I would say that all that money would probably go to finance more low-risk lawsuits so they can use their traditional scare tactics against people which in turn, will deter one from illegal downloading. Or so the RIAA hopes.
Personally, I refuse to finance a company that rips me off to invent new and more resourceful ways to rip me off. I refuse to buy artists' CD's that are signed under one of RIAA's labels. - DashingLeech, on 10/10/2007, -3/+57Ooh, I've had that happen while I was giving a speech. Very embarrassing.
- EBFoxbat, on 10/19/2007, -5/+53"This is what can happen if you don't settle," RIAA attorney Richard Gabriel told reporters outside the courthouse. "I think we have sent a message we are willing to go to trial." "
That ***** better not show his face around me. - coit, on 10/10/2007, -1/+47From an article here: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/10/riaa-rips ...
"During jury selection, panelists did not appear computer savvy.
Five of them said they have a digital music player. Only three knew where they got the music for it -- from iTunes. One juror, a construction foreman, said he had never been on the internet. A potential juror was excused from the pool when she said she had used a peer-to-peer site to download copyrighted music."
So, yeah, not the smartest tools in the shed. - Coffeedemon, on 10/19/2007, -0/+44Write a stern blog post about it probably.
- KhanneaSuntzu, on 10/10/2007, -4/+47Why doesn't the US "justice" system propose putting a dynamite stick in her ass and blown her up on a town square? I mean this destroys her life, period. All she can do is emigrate to a civilized country. Sweden?
Americans are insane. All the result of a century of rimming your corporation overlords. American numbnuts need to put into place a real multi-party democracy instead of the current crap-ass system. You will get royally screwed by corporate money as long as it lasts. - chriskzoo, on 10/10/2007, -11/+51Welcome to the world of punitive damages people. Jury awards are not just to repay what you "stole" - they are designed to be so strong that it prevents such future behavior. I find it funny that everyone says "***** the RIAA!" and yet continues to download their music. If you truly hate the RIAA, do not listen to ANY of the music they distribute. It's like saying "***** Japan!" and then hopping in your Prius.
- voetsjoeba, on 10/10/2007, -0/+39They probably pulled $222,000 out their ass first and then divided by 24.
- Eshestun, on 10/10/2007, -2/+40This is *****. Something needs to be changed.
- MerryMortician, on 10/10/2007, -3/+40THANK GOD. and to think.. this horrible criminal may have just walked away unscathed! I'm glad that I can count on a jury of my peers to understand all things internets related and make a logical decision when it comes to my terrorist torrent activity.
- LethalAmbition, on 10/10/2007, -19/+55"So does this mean if I hop on someone's unsecured wireless network and start sharing songs, THEY could get sued for it instead of me?"
Um, yes dude. It's like you leaving your car door unlocked and then someone crosses every toll in town without paying. Of course you're liable for that. - xtmno3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+37If the lady was smart she would start an online cry for help webpage. I would pay $2.22 to help her out, we would only need 99,999 others to do the same, hell I would probably give her $10. As much as it would suck to let the RIAA get that much money, I would still do it to keep this lady from having her life ruined over some bullsh*t fees for 24 songs.
- Sinudeity, on 10/10/2007, -5/+40Someone above me commented on overpriced 'artists'. The thing is, the artists see a FRACTION of the profits made.
Back on topic: Sad day... - insboswiz, on 10/10/2007, -3/+37Unfortunately in this particular case, the prosecution was able to show that this woman had used the screen name she used on Kazaa in other venues like email and IM for many years. The problem was that she was definitely doing what the RIAA said and like it or not, it was breaking the law. You have no reason to be angry at the cop who busts you for doing 90 in a 55 mile per hour zone - you took a chance breaking the law and got caught. What will be more interesting to watch will be the RIAA cases where the prosecution does not have such cut and dry evidence. Hopefully in these cases they will lose being the bloodsucking scumbags that they are.
- Matt2k, on 10/10/2007, -2/+35If someone steals your car and uses it to commit a daring day-time robbery. Then yes, you better have an alibi.
- lopla, on 10/10/2007, -0/+32Radiohead is releasing their own cd on the 10th DRM free and you choose how much to pay for it. Let's hope this is a new trend and the RIAA gets ripped a new one starting oct 10.
- yunus, on 10/10/2007, -2/+32Actually your wrong, if your car is stolen you are not liable for the tolls. Its why many toll roads have cameras that take pictures of the driver. To prove who was driving.
- claw84, on 10/10/2007, -2/+31I will never ever buy another album by an artist that is part of a record company that supports the RIAA. Said that a long time ago. Wish more people would do the same.
BTW, keep seeding people! Don't let those bastards win. - spudnic, on 10/10/2007, -2/+30Not sure how it works over there, but if she has the money to pay it and refuses she can be sent to jail, if she doesn't then the RIAA can file to have her made bankrupt, have all her possessions except essentials sold off and leave her with pretty much nothing, absolutely no chance of getting credit for a long time, and various other things that come with being declared bankrupt
- lsatkins, on 10/10/2007, -7/+35So you're saying if someone steals your car and commits crimes with it then you are responsible? I highly doubt that. Also what happens if the woman just refuses to pay the money?
- tehWyman, on 08/19/2009, -3/+30Someone's sarcasm meter is not working...
- SteelFrog, on 10/10/2007, -3/+29Is it just me, or is that completely retarded?
What if I'm a rookie and didn't know my Wifi was open? - bdbr, on 10/10/2007, -5/+30I'm thinking about going to Target and putting post-its on the CDs from these labels, saying:
THIS LABEL JUST SUED A SINGLE MOM FOR $222,000.
DO YOU REALLY WANT TO BUY THIS CD? - Baroja1898, on 10/10/2007, -3/+27Why is it that people cannot make frivolous lawsuits against companies, but companies can make frivolous lawsuits against people? America, where the people are subject to the corporation.
- Mockylock, on 10/10/2007, -3/+26Them being able to crack your PC to see what's in it, is no different than an average citizen breaking in to someone's house to see if they have anything you own. Whether you find anything or not, you're still going to have houses you broke in to for no reason. But, it's okay for them to do it.
At this point, you can walk into a store and steal a box of CD's... get caught, and pay less in fines than if you copied each of those CD's. Am I right? They're making rules that are above and beyond our own justice system, and it's simply "O.K."
In fact, each one of us could snort a line of coke while drunk driving and smoking pot... get CAUGHT doing it while speeding, and pay LESS in fines OVER THE ***** PHONE, than we would for a SINGLE song that RIAA is fining for. Not only that, but it would be less than a quarter of what RIAA is charging for a single song. - AndrewJC, on 10/10/2007, -0/+22Sorry, but this woman was guilty. How much coincidence does there have to be for a woman to use a specific username for her email, IM, etc. and to find a user on KaZaA with her IP address and username...? If I were on the jury, I would've had to find her guilty, too.
Mainly because the judge instructed the jury that the "making available" argument was to be used. Had he held to his original instructions that they could only find her liable if there was actual proof that there were songs transferred, there would've been no way that they could have found her guilty.
And that's what pisses me off the most. If there is no infringement (i.e. there has been no actual COPY done) then logically, there can be absolutely no crime. Period, end of story. The argument that "making available" a song for download is infringement is one of the biggest loads of legal ***** I've ever heard in my life, ever. - NSMike, on 10/10/2007, -2/+23Along with her massive collection of music CDs. All over 25 songs that they can't even be sure anyone downloaded from her. Seriously, this strategy does NOTHING for their business.
- ronaldinho, on 10/10/2007, -2/+22To all artists: please do what Radiohead is doing. We will gladly pay for good music that goes straight to the musicians
- tao52nyc, on 10/10/2007, -1/+21It's insane - if you WANT to serve as a juror on a case such as this, and you ARE computer savvy and up to speed on all the issues pro/con, you are "disqualified". The RIAA wants it that way because an ignorant jury can be manipulated more easily. That poor woman's defense team sucked - they should have been more on the ball with jury selection. Shameful - if you want to get on a case like that, you basically have to lie, to feign ignorance, to get empaneled.
- Prelude76, on 10/10/2007, -2/+22thank god i live in Canada
oh wait, our douchebag prime minister Harper is trying to crack down on p2p downloads, as well as canada's lax drug laws. - DashingLeech, on 10/10/2007, -1/+20I think what people are missing here is that in a civil case is the "preponderance of the evidence" that matters, meaning they are more swayed by the plaintiff's arguments than the defendant's. It's not a criminal trial where they have to believe beyond a reasonable doubt. But even in that case, apparently this woman had an email address with the same name as the KaZaa username, so I think it would meet even reasonable doubt. What it means in real terms then is that if you want to argue that your system was not secure and lots of people could have had access, you'd better have good evidence that it was somebody else or some other alibi. Absolute proof is not required in either civil or criminal trials.
- crossmr, on 10/10/2007, -2/+21Then you understood wrong, and in my groggy state I actually dugg you up. MAC addresses change at every router and there is a minimum of 3 routers between her and the RIAA. The ISP stated that only a single MAC address was interacting with the cable modem that night. There could have been 1000 computers behind a router that was then plugged in to the cable modem and it would still only report a single MAC Address. Have a read on MAC addresses, routing and ethernet frame headers.
- kickinazz, on 10/10/2007, -16/+34Good work? Are you ***** nuts? There is no way this woman can possibly pay this off. $222K is just ridiculous.
- sponeil, on 10/10/2007, -1/+19"Personally, I refuse to finance a company that rips me off to invent new and more resourceful ways to rip me off."
I take it that you have no phone or Internet access of any kind? I've never seen a provider for those services that didn't try to do that. - Carburetor, on 10/10/2007, -2/+19Yeah, and besides - Radiohead Rocks.
- gjmacd, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17The thing you have to remember about a verdict like this is that the point is to set a precedence, not so much to win the money.
The RIAA is looking to win any battle they can and show that they are 100% right in their conviction.
They must of felt that they had a great chance of winning this case in court ad probably WANTED this to to to court. The sad part is the woman, who clearly stole music, had a really bad legal representation. I'd love to read the transcripts, but how on God's green earth does her lawyer let this get to court and NOT settle out?
Seriously, if you think about this for a moment and put yourself in this woman's shoes. Do you actually WANT to go to court with a potential 3M pentalty around our neck knowing that yes, you did steal music? If they (RIAA) won the case on $222K, I'm fairly sure the settlement was non-monetary and probably more of a "penalty" and a slap on the wrist.
I can honestly say, this is probably one of the worst defended court cases I've seen in recent memory.
The comment that kills me is "this is what happens when you don't settle.". Well, isn't that comment alone indication that the RIAA set this up perfectly for a great PR move?
But alas, the music industry is a lot like the Roman empire in its last days. Scratching, clawing and grasping at anything that will give them a final gasp of air to sustain life. - SpicyViper, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16the last CD i bought was 'big willie style' by will smith. needless to say, my decision to give up CDs had nothing to do with the RIAA
- WarpFox, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15bankruptcy does not discharge court ordered debt.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 525 discussions
Catch all of your favorite Digg shows in one place, including Digg Dialogg, Diggnation, The Digg Reel and More!
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is