|
|
 Rank: Senior Student Groups: Member
Joined: 4/27/2009 Posts: 83
|
"A Minneapolis jury ruled on Thursday that a 32-year-old woman must pay $1.92 million to six record companies for illegally downloading songs released by those labels from the Internet, Agence France-Presse reported. The woman, Jammie Thomas-Rasset, a single mother of four from Brainerd, Minn., was found liable for violating the copyrights of major labels including Sony BMG, Warner Brothers and Universal by downloading 24 songs from Kazaa, a peer-to-peer file-sharing service." SourceYes, it's illegal, depending on the country and whatnot, but is this really about artists? Do you buy the album you like after having downloaded it for free? Should it be this big of a deal? Should it even be a deal at all? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_sharing_in_Canada: "Piracy for personal use is no longer targeted," Noël St-Hilaire, head of copyright theft investigations of the RCMP, said in an interview with Le Devoir. "It is too easy to copy these days and we do not know how to stop it," he added. St-Hilaire explained that they would rather focus on crimes that actually hurt consumers such as copyright violations related to medicine and electrical appliances, as well as ones that affect organized crime.Also: "The two million dollar fine handed out to Jammie Thomas by a Minnesota jury this week hasn’t done the music industry’s image much good. While lawyers and high level managers at the major labels cracked open the Champagne, artists such as Moby and Radiohead shook their heads in shame at what the music world has become." Source
|
|
 Rank: Senior Student Groups: Member
Joined: 8/27/2008 Posts: 76 Location: Edmonton
|
that's bullsh*t. imo music becomes some sort of public domain when it is released, and should be accesible to anyone. if you like something and want to buy it then you can and if you just are curious and want to hear it you should be able to try it out for free. and how do 24 songs become worth 1.92 million? this is just being greedy. shame.
|
|
 Rank: Student Body President Groups: Member
Joined: 3/7/2008 Posts: 1,543 Location: Newmarket
|
No matter how much copy protection you put on something it will be illegally downloaded. It really shouldn't be a deal at all. Those fuking record companies just ruined someone's life
|
|
 Rank: Senior Student Groups: Member
Joined: 4/27/2009 Posts: 83
|
billy_mcboo wrote:that's bullsh*t. imo music becomes some sort of public domain when it is released, and should be accesible to anyone. if you like something and want to buy it then you can and if you just are curious and want to hear it you should be able to try it out for free. and how do 24 songs become worth 1.92 million? this is just being greedy. shame. http://digg.com/d1uMceI know!
|
|
Rank: Student Body President Groups: Member
Joined: 3/5/2008 Posts: 3,942 Location: Kingston and Toronto
|
Hahahaha, the most they should ever have to pay is $0.99 a song like they cost on iTunes (well between something like $0.79 and $1.29 now).
I'd have to pay like $2000 if they sued me, but that is better than millions.
Queen's '10 Ryerson '11
|
|
 Rank: Posteur Intermédiaire Groups: Member
Joined: 5/2/2009 Posts: 629 Location: Ottawa
|
sure its illegal, but how the f*ck did they come up with the fine of 2million for downloading 24 songs?
Carleton Chemistry 2013 Toronto Pharmacy 2014
|
|
Rank: Student Body President Groups: Member
Joined: 3/5/2008 Posts: 3,942 Location: Kingston and Toronto
|
My boss/prof told me it is not illegal to download music in Ontario...
As long as you don't try and sell it.
Queen's '10 Ryerson '11
|
|
 Rank: Senior Student Groups: Member
Joined: 4/27/2009 Posts: 83
|
Ooosh wrote:My boss/prof told me it is not illegal to download music in Ontario...
As long as you don't try and sell it. Yeah, in Canada I think it's kinda neutral – sharing is not encouraged, but will be tolerated if used for personal use only.
|
|
 Rank: Senior Student Groups: Member
Joined: 4/27/2009 Posts: 83
|
CheeseCake wrote:sure its illegal, but how the f*ck did they come up with the fine of 2million for downloading 24 songs? Apparently, the U.S. copyright law outlines that the penalty for illegally downloading a song can be anywhere between $750 and $150,000. The woman's lawyer asked Sony's lawyer Gary Leak if, by his logic, the $150,000 fine per song would be appropriate. Leak replied, "Certainly!" (Source) Gotta love them.
|
|
 Rank: Student Council Groups: Member
Joined: 4/21/2009 Posts: 373 Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
do they just get people at random? i mean 24 songs isnt a lot at all and theres probably millions downloading more. 1.2 million is ridiculous. we have to shape our laws as society evolves. its all to common for people to be downloading them, or hearing them off websites. they cant possible fine everyone. the government has to meet us half way. plus i have bought albums even though i have downloaded their songs but thats because there are a few songs.
2013
|
|
 Rank: Senior Student Groups: Member
Joined: 4/27/2009 Posts: 83
|
- "The RIAA sued only people who shared at least 1,000 songs." - "The RIAA sued only those who made their own files available to others, not those who only downloaded them." - "According to CNet's News.com, the RIAA, in doing investigations for its round of lawsuits, used automated tools that scanned file sharers' folders for a short list of music files, and when it found one of those files, it targeted that user for further investigation. If you share popular music, you're more likely to be a target." (Source)Only p2p programs like Limewire and Kazaa, too, not really torrents. And, being in Canada, we're pretty safe. Why this woman? "The prosecution said the 24 copyrighted files were made availabe to "millions" of users and logic dictates that many of them downloaded the songs." (Source)
|
|
Rank: Président du conseil étudiant Groups: Member
Joined: 4/24/2009 Posts: 1,081
|
Can she appeal this? This is plainly retarded. A single mother of four used as a scapegoat? Fuck off.
|
|
 Rank: Student Body President Groups: Member
Joined: 3/6/2008 Posts: 4,384 Location: Ottawa, ON.
|
Gorges26 wrote:Can she appeal this? This is plainly retarded. A single mother of four used as a scapegoat? Fuck off.
You can appeal any court decision. Why should she? Carleton University Bachelor of Arts in Law
|
|
 Rank: Student Body President Groups: Member
Joined: 3/7/2008 Posts: 1,543 Location: Newmarket
|
Goes to show all the lawyers and judges have no souls. They can't afford to if they want that kind of job. Only Phoenix Wright has a soul
|
|
 Rank: Senior Student Groups: Member
Joined: 1/31/2009 Posts: 254 Location: Northern Ontario
|
|
|
Rank: Président du conseil étudiant Groups: Member
Joined: 4/24/2009 Posts: 1,081
|
ARMY101 wrote:Gorges26 wrote:Can she appeal this? This is plainly retarded. A single mother of four used as a scapegoat? Fuck off.
You can appeal any court decision. Why should she? Why shouldn't she? Or is paying $1.92 million for downloading 24 songs justice to you, Mr. Third Reich?
|
|
Rank: Student Body President Groups: Member
Joined: 3/5/2008 Posts: 3,942 Location: Kingston and Toronto
|
Army downloads music.
Queen's '10 Ryerson '11
|
|
 Rank: Posteur Intermédiaire Groups: Member
Joined: 2/17/2009 Posts: 569 Location: Ontario
|
Pretty much. Music piracy has basically f ucked over an entire industry, but people won't stop, and they see the RIAA as the bad guys. Just goes to show how much ethics count for when people are pretty much guaranteed to get away with something and it doesn't carry a significant negative social stigma. Any of you guys PC gamers? If so, then you should know what kind of affect that software piracy can have on an industry. McGill Engineering 2014
|
|
 Rank: Senior Student Groups: Member
Joined: 8/27/2008 Posts: 76 Location: Edmonton
|
piracy has probably helped as well as hurt the industry. it opens product up to a wider market and encourages artists to offer more material-wise to get you to buy it. many artists thank illegal downloading for bringing their music to fans who in turn buy concert tickets, etc.
|
|
 Rank: Student Council Groups: Member
Joined: 6/27/2008 Posts: 439
|
oort cloud wrote:"A Minneapolis jury ruled on Thursday that a 32-year-old woman must pay $1.92 million to six record companies for illegally downloading songs released by those labels from the Internet, Agence France-Presse reported. The woman, Jammie Thomas-Rasset, a single mother of four from Brainerd, Minn., was found liable for violating the copyrights of major labels including Sony BMG, Warner Brothers and Universal by downloading 24 songs from Kazaa, a peer-to-peer file-sharing service." SourceYes, it's illegal, depending on the country and whatnot, but is this really about artists? Do you buy the album you like after having downloaded it for free? Should it be this big of a deal? Should it even be a deal at all? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_sharing_in_Canada: "Piracy for personal use is no longer targeted," Noël St-Hilaire, head of copyright theft investigations of the RCMP, said in an interview with Le Devoir. "It is too easy to copy these days and we do not know how to stop it," he added. St-Hilaire explained that they would rather focus on crimes that actually hurt consumers such as copyright violations related to medicine and electrical appliances, as well as ones that affect organized crime.Also: "The two million dollar fine handed out to Jammie Thomas by a Minnesota jury this week hasn’t done the music industry’s image much good. While lawyers and high level managers at the major labels cracked open the Champagne, artists such as Moby and Radiohead shook their heads in shame at what the music world has become." Source It should be illegal. However, it's too difficult to enforce. It's the same as jay-walking, sure it's illegal but no police force would spend its time monitoring people for jay-walking when there are far worse crimes. Why file sharing is illegal? It hurts the economy. There's no incentive for people to produce music if people don't buy it. Yes, music might be overpriced due to barrier to entries and inefficient markets, but the efficient price is still above 0.
|
|