So, did the RIAA score a victory? Or lose another battle in the PR war?

[griffin8r]

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=15468

$1.9MM for "sharing" 24 songs?

They couldn't have found a better target than that? There were users on Kazaa and Limewire that had massive catalogs, terabytes worth of illicit music, and they picked on someone who had only 24 songs?

I mean, regardless of how you feel about piracy, this just can't do anything but galvanize the public against the RIAA, in my opinion.

[softball]

Two things....the most expensive thing you will ever buy is a cheap lawyer.
Secondly

The RIAA says it didn't have to come to this. States Cara Duckworth, an RIAA spokeswoman, "From day one, we’ve been willing to settle this case for somewhere between $3,000 and $5,000. We appreciate the jury's service and that they take this issue as seriously as we do. We are pleased that the jury agreed with the evidence and found the defendant liable."

They don't want the money, they want the judgment and for her to fight this case was just plain dumb.

The RIAA blames filesharers like Ms. Thomas-Rasset for the drop in music sales from 1999 highs of $14.6B USD, to the current level of $8.5B USD per year

While the porn business whines and whinges about tube sites etc. The RIAA as an organization representing an industry is doing something about it.

What if we pissed off all our customers by getting rid of all free and pirated product. I personally wouldn't shed a tear. I think there is no real defense for copyright violation. This just makes the little guy take notice. There are millions of little guys stealing music daily.

[RawAlex]

They hit someone who was blatant and open, and really an open and shut case. 1.9MM for distribution without a license, not sharing. Sharing would be something she did with her sister. Distribution is what you do when you make something widely available all over the internet.

[softball]

I agree with Rawalex

[griffin8r]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

They hit someone who was blatant and open, and really an open and shut case. 1.9MM for distribution without a license, not sharing. Sharing would be something she did with her sister. Distribution is what you do when you make something widely available all over the internet.

Sharing was the word they used.

I just think they'd get more sympathy from the general public if the defendant was someone with a couple hundred thousand songs on their drive, all out there and available.

I wonder if they picked this one in order to scare all the moms out there into staying on top of what their kids are downloading...

[DannyCox]

It just sets up a nice precedent for them that can be used in future cases. Many judges will defer to what has been ruled on previously.

[griffin8r]

Originally Posted by DannyCox

It just sets up a nice precedent for them that can be used in future cases. Many judges will defer to what has been ruled on previously.

Absolutely, from a legal perspective this is a huge victory for them.

But is it going to do anything to help their record sales?

[DannyCox]

Originally Posted by griffin8r

But is it going to do anything to help their record sales?

I think that by going after enough "little people" they will show they are serious and that will be enough to scare off loads of people. Those people will then go back to purchasing what they want (or just "sharing" it amongst friends like has been done since the advent of the cassette tape)

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by griffin8r

Absolutely, from a legal perspective this is a huge victory for them.

But is it going to do anything to help their record sales?

The problem right now is there there is an entire generation (under 25 or so) that thinks that music is free, period. They don't see that "sharing" music is any different than sending a text message at this point. That is a problem. File sharing has in fact removed the value of music from these people's minds, replaced by a mentality that they can always go online and get more.

It's the same process, for what it is worth, that torrent sites and "illegal" tubes sites do to porn. They remove the value.

When you get a judgement like this, and then turn around and start using it as a hammer, you scare the marginal people out of the game. They people who didn't realize they could get in trouble, the people who didn't think they could ever get caught etc. P2P is entirely dependant on having tons of people online to share. Drop below a certain level, and it gets very hard to find files. Removing the 50-80% of people file sharing only because they think they won't get caught would grandly change the game.

At some points, ISPs are going to start to feel the pinch of liablity as well, and aren't going to want to have to answer court order after court order for customer information, and will start to disconnect trouble clients.

Then things change.

[TheEnforcer]

I think the RIAA got a huge victory and a precedent to use to go after all sorts of people.

[griffin8r]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

The problem right now is there there is an entire generation (under 25 or so) that thinks that music is free, period. They don't see that "sharing" music is any different than sending a text message at this point. That is a problem. File sharing has in fact removed the value of music from these people's minds, replaced by a mentality that they can always go online and get more.

It's the same process, for what it is worth, that torrent sites and "illegal" tubes sites do to porn. They remove the value.

When you get a judgement like this, and then turn around and start using it as a hammer, you scare the marginal people out of the game. They people who didn't realize they could get in trouble, the people who didn't think they could ever get caught etc. P2P is entirely dependant on having tons of people online to share. Drop below a certain level, and it gets very hard to find files. Removing the 50-80% of people file sharing only because they think they won't get caught would grandly change the game.

At some points, ISPs are going to start to feel the pinch of liablity as well, and aren't going to want to have to answer court order after court order for customer information, and will start to disconnect trouble clients.

Then things change.

See, now this is the kind of reasoning I was looking for in the original question. How does the PR work in RIAA's favor?

So you believe the scare tactic will work on all the soccer moms out there with kids online all the time and make them start snooping on their kids computers to make sure they aren't the next ones being hauled into court...

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

It's the same process, for what it is worth, that torrent sites and "illegal" tubes sites do to porn. They remove the value.

.

All the more reason to license content for non-piratable situations.

[softball]

Originally Posted by griffin8r

See, now this is the kind of reasoning I was looking for in the original question. How does the PR work in RIAA's favor?

So you believe the scare tactic will work on all the soccer moms out there with kids online all the time and make them start snooping on their kids computers to make sure they aren't the next ones being hauled into court...

That would help.

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by griffin8r

See, now this is the kind of reasoning I was looking for in the original question. How does the PR work in RIAA's favor?

So you believe the scare tactic will work on all the soccer moms out there with kids online all the time and make them start snooping on their kids computers to make sure they aren't the next ones being hauled into court...

My feeling is that the current situation has most people thinking that downloading music is without risk - financial, legal, or moral. A judgement like this starts to create some financial risk, inplies legal risk, and might even hit a few people on the morals too.

Right now we have widespread fiel sharing because people think they won't get caught. It's sort of like a highway when everyone knows there are never any cops. Over time, the speeds keep going up, until everyone is running along at top speed. The first time someone seems a cop giving out tickets, they might slow down a bit. See a cop every day in the same spot, and you will slow down there every day, even after the cop is gone, just in case.

A few more people facing hefty fines, and suddenly the winds will shift.

[Krissy4 Porn]

They will make it all up + some more with one name....


Michael Jackson