Geeks With Blogs
Scott Kuhl Warning: I may have no idea what I am talking about!

What a bunch of CRAP!  Almost $10,000 per song.  And it could have been as much as $150,000.  This bullying by the music and movie industry has to stop.  But now that they have this win, I think it's going to get a lot worse.

24 illegal song downloads cost US woman 220,000 dollars  Link includes video.

Posted on Friday, October 5, 2007 3:01 AM Miscellaneous | Back to top

Comments on this post: Precedent Set - $10,000 per song fine

# re: Precedent Set - $10,000 per song fine
Requesting Gravatar...
I agree that is seeems totally over the top. Most people that download songs are not going to buy them anyway. Either they can't afford it or they just don't like the music enough. I do wonder thought if she had just downloaded the songs and not shared them back out, what it would have cost her or if they would have even gone after her. In every case I have read about, the person always was sharing the songs for others to download.

I do think that there are a lot of kids and adults have no idea that using these fileshare sites is illegal for downloading music and that they should not use them. Not everyone that uses a computer is knowledgeable about it. A lot of adults I know grew up sharing tapes so to them downloading songs is just like that but with the advent of digital quality music, you dont have any loss like you did with tapes.

I find it hard that the record industry is complaining so much about this when they are still making a ton of money between cd and concert ticket sales.

Finally, if the artist made better music, then people would want to purchase it but so much of the music today is crap.
Left by Justin on Oct 05, 2007 4:07 AM

# re: Precedent Set - $10,000 per song fine
Requesting Gravatar...
You know, if the recording industry would stop crying like little babies and start investing as much energy into coming up with creative distribution channels and marketing as they are going after people, they'd be doing all right. The simple fact is they're hanging on for dear life to an outdated business model that hasn't worked since the digital music revolution took root and isn't going to work from here out.

Wouldn't it be nice to see them figure out a way to deliver awesome enterntainment laced with value-added "goodies" that enhance the consumer's overall experience instead of going after a 30 year old woman working for an Indian tribe - all for a handful of songs? Great, they're getting a few dollars for their "stolen" material, but they can't seem to get the overall picture that they're going to be left in the dust to die a slow, painful death if they don't just get over it and move on.

It amazes me the complete inability to see the forest for all the trees. As a semi-professional musician myself, and somebody that definitely appreciates an artist's work, I hope to see the day when all the music corporations burn in hell. I like the conversation from "Almost Famous" where they discuss rock n roll and what the music industry and corporations turning it into a 'big business' had done to it, "It's just a shame you missed out on rock 'n' roll. - It's over. - Over? It's over. You got here just in time for the death rattle. Last gasp. Last grope."
Left by Jerod Crump on Oct 05, 2007 4:09 AM

# re: Precedent Set - $10,000 per song fine
Requesting Gravatar...
Not sure if you saw this or not, but Jammie Thomas, the lady you mention above that lost her court case, has started a blog site where you can donate to her appeal. It appears they're going to try to take the case all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary.

If nothing else, it's fun to read the comments from people vowing to boycott all bands and activities related to the RIAA.
Left by Jerod Crump on Oct 09, 2007 2:54 AM

Your comment:
 (will show your gravatar)

Copyright © Scott Kuhl | Powered by: