blog.wired.com — Here's a unique defense to a Recording Industry Association of America file sharing lawsuit: admit liability and challenge the law under which you're being sued. That's what a Bronx woman did Monday in New York federal court. Denise Barker is accused of file-sharing eight songs on the Kazaa network in 2004.
Jul 28, 2008 View in Crawl 4
midtownerJul 29, 2008
I think this is a perfectly sound strategy. You may have recently heard about what the SCOTUS did in the Exxon Valdez case regarding their punitive damages. While the case is not really on point at all (it's federal common law of the maritime species), it does show a willingness of the Court to reconsider damage awards as being excessive and possibly not compatible with the Eighth Amendment.
Closed AccountJul 29, 2008
Wow, talk about putting yourself on a pedestal. Those guys got rich before P2P. If P2P were as wide spread as buying CDs, they would all be as broke as those no-name bands you mentioned. They may be able to make money from shows/tours. But I am sure music sales (and royalties from songs) contribute to a significant portion of their income.Complaining about a luxury such as music isn't very becoming.
dauntless1Jul 29, 2008
Actually, the making available argument has nothing to do with how many people got the song from her. It's just having the song where other people could get it.
f4nt0m4sJul 29, 2008
bury me down, i totally missed the reply button in my own little thread :(
sanosuke001Aug 19, 2008
you just said what i explained. the argument is that hundreds/thousands of people COULD get it because she made it available is reason for the penalty they're looking for."You had a song available. If even one person downloaded it from you, it could be then downloaded by more and more. If you hadn't made it available, that download tree is impossible."They forget that if she doesn't, someone else would and it doesn't matter...