RIAA reaches new low?

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: Leros

Originally posted by: God Mode
You dont escape the law by being in the hospital. I dont give a shit if she lost her puppies and had to get both legs amputated. If shes guilty of the charges and ignored the lawsuit then she deserves whatever comes from it.

I'm not disagreeing with you.

But what if that money is the difference between getting the medical procedures she needs. Lets pretend that if she doesn't have that money, she won't be able to afford to live.

if you don't have the money to keep yourself healthy, then don't do illiegal activities that could get you fined

 

[Xavier434]

$8000 in fines for sharing 10 songs online is the real ludicrous part.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
$8000 in fines for sharing 10 songs online is the real ludicrous part.

this is the only part i find sickening. No way should the RIaa be able to go after people for such insane sums of money and it seems 90% of the time with little or no proof.

As for the OP's story. i have no sympathy for the girl. sh ewas shareing songs and ignored the lawsuit. sure they RIAA needs to be destroyed but this is not the type of case to get upset over them for. to bad the girl is not healthy but really what does that have to do with it?

 

[spacejamz]

wonder if there is a connection here between the people who hate the RIAA and people who pirate music and then justify themselves by saying the RIAA is overcharging for music...They just can't seem to understand that if you disagree with the industry pricing policies, then don't listen to the music. Instead, they pirate it for free and wonder why the world is the way it is today...It's like they like the music, but they just don't want to pay for it.

 

[darkxshade]

Originally posted by: spacejamz
wonder if there is a connection here between the people who hate the RIAA and people who pirate music and then justify themselves by saying the RIAA is overcharging for music...They just can't seem to understand that if you disagree with the industry pricing policies, then don't listen to the music. Instead, they pirate it for free and wonder why the world is the way it is today...It's like they like the music, but they just don't want to pay for it.

What music is there to like these days?

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: BlackTigers

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: RedSquirrel
But 10 songs? Bit whoopie do. Give me a break.

RIAA: Bring it on bitches. I'm healthy, I have some money, I know multiple lawyers. Stop picking on people who can't defend themselves.

No different than going into a store and stealing a CD.

Jacking a CD from a store would result in a few hours of community service, maybe a few hundred dollar fine and an apology to the store owner. Not an $8k fine for ten songs.

I've never understood how the RIAA works. 10 songs equals $8k how? If they're adding in the number of times it was downloaded from her, it's not her fault that other people double clicked the song in Limewire to downlaod it.

um, she put it there to share it...did she think no one would click on it?

 

[XxPrOdiGyxX]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269
Don't want to pay? Don't freaking pirate shit.

That's actually the definition of why people pirate.

 

[spacejamz]

Originally posted by: darkxshade

Originally posted by: spacejamz
wonder if there is a connection here between the people who hate the RIAA and people who pirate music and then justify themselves by saying the RIAA is overcharging for music...They just can't seem to understand that if you disagree with the industry pricing policies, then don't listen to the music. Instead, they pirate it for free and wonder why the world is the way it is today...It's like they like the music, but they just don't want to pay for it.

What music is there to like these days?

i would be willing to bet that new song releases have the heaviest pirate traffic...i wonder why that is if new music sucks so bad...

 

[jonks]

Fuck the RIAA, but if someone breaks the law I don't really give a shit if they have cancer.

 

[spacejamz]

Originally posted by: jonks
Fuck people who pirate music, I don't really give a shit if they have cancer.

Fixed...

 

[KMFJD]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: BlackTigers

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: RedSquirrel
But 10 songs? Bit whoopie do. Give me a break.

RIAA: Bring it on bitches. I'm healthy, I have some money, I know multiple lawyers. Stop picking on people who can't defend themselves.

No different than going into a store and stealing a CD.

Jacking a CD from a store would result in a few hours of community service, maybe a few hundred dollar fine and an apology to the store owner. Not an $8k fine for ten songs.

I've never understood how the RIAA works. 10 songs equals $8k how? If they're adding in the number of times it was downloaded from her, it's not her fault that other people double clicked the song in Limewire to downlaod it.

um, she put it there to share it...did she think no one would click on it?

Wouldn't you need to prove how many people grabbed the mp3?

 

[Vehemence]

Originally posted by: RichardE
I hope they fry her. Break the law, pay the price.

:laugh::thumbsup:

 

[GoPackGo]

maybe she has some good organs the RIAA can harvest and sell to pay the debt.

you only need 1 lung, eye and kidney.

 

[Marinski]

f**k the RIAA and f**k all the hypocritical ass wipes who act like they've never pirated and are above it.

 

[manlymatt83]

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Maybe I missed something, she was never proven to have downloaded any music. Merely being accused does not make one guilty after all. Somehow, I think a frivolous lawsuit from an antiquated organization would rank pretty low if I was in the hospital on a weekly basis. Did she totally ignore the court summons? There wasn't some sort of postpone-ment paperwork that she could have filed to delay a trial until she was healthy?

Right, because thinking in the back of your mind that you're getting sued is really going to help you get better.

 

[spacejamz]

Originally posted by: Marinski
f**k the RIAA and f**k all the hypocritical ass wipes who act like they've never pirated and are above it.

you forgot to f**k the actual pirates there (or at least the non-hypocritical ass wipes)...or are they above it as well???

 

[AstroManLuca]

To everyone who responded to this thread saying she deserves it:

I want you to take a step back, and LITERALLY FUCK YOURSELF IN THE FACE!!!

 

[SirStev0]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: Leros

Originally posted by: God Mode
You dont escape the law by being in the hospital. I dont give a shit if she lost her puppies and had to get both legs amputated. If shes guilty of the charges and ignored the lawsuit then she deserves whatever comes from it.

I'm not disagreeing with you.

But what if that money is the difference between getting the medical procedures she needs. Lets pretend that if she doesn't have that money, she won't be able to afford to live.

if you don't have the money to keep yourself healthy, then don't do illiegal activities that could get you fined

If you don't read the article, then don't make comments that could make you look like an idiot.

She claims she never downloaded any songs. She had no way to defend herself and was most likely unable to go to court.

This is all over 10 songs.

 

[sourceninja]

Well if she is that bad off, she could just not pay. What are they going to do, garnish her welfare check?

 

[darkxshade]

Originally posted by: spacejamz

Originally posted by: darkxshade

Originally posted by: spacejamz
wonder if there is a connection here between the people who hate the RIAA and people who pirate music and then justify themselves by saying the RIAA is overcharging for music...They just can't seem to understand that if you disagree with the industry pricing policies, then don't listen to the music. Instead, they pirate it for free and wonder why the world is the way it is today...It's like they like the music, but they just don't want to pay for it.

What music is there to like these days?

i would be willing to bet that new song releases have the heaviest pirate traffic...i wonder why that is if new music sucks so bad...

That's simple. To answer your question, people want to hear an album(in its entirety) now to see if it's any good before they plop down money to buy it than to buy it, hear it and regret it because so much of music is crap these days. Not that I'm justifying what they're doing but how else could you sample an entire album? 30 sec clips just ain't enough.

 

[Vehemence]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
I want you to take a step back, and LITERALLY FUCK YOURSELF IN THE FACE!!!

Dude...if I could...........

 

[Modelworks]

It probably cost tax payers $8k to process the case through the courts.

 

[Brainonska511]

So where did it say she was guilty? All these people making blind assumptions. All I see in the article is that it was a default judgement because she has been a bit busy, you know, with the hospital weekly.

Also, I fail to see the "crime" that took place. It was merely a civil infraction (if any took place). Crime is prosecutable only by the State and must meet a standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" for the State to administer punishment on the defendant. Civil actions are held to a much lower standard (where you just need more than half a jury to agree) and can be brought up by any entity against another.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Also, I fail to see the "crime" that took place. It was merely a civil infraction (if any took place). Crime is prosecutable only by the State and must meet a standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" for the State to administer punishment on the defendant. Civil actions are held to a much lower standard (where you just need more than half a jury to agree) and can be brought up by any entity against another.

Its the standard logic they use for piracy when it involves software/music/movies.
You let 10 people get a copy so those 10 people must have been people that would have bought it if you didn't let them copy it.

To them anyone who copies = lost revenue , regardless if they would have bought it anyway.

If it continues I expect the RIAA/MPAA to start lawsuits because someone bought a single DVD and showed it to their family. The DVD will probably sell with licenses for how many people you intend to let watch it.

 

[xcript]

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1

Originally posted by: xcript
She knew the risks. :roll:

All the RIAA employees know they are part of a very unpopular organisation. Which means that there should be no punishment for killing them, they know the risks

:thumbsup: