Pay the RIAA? Nor not?
p2pnet news view P2P | RIAA:- The chart on the right accompanies an Ars Technica story which suggests RIAA victims might be better off if, rather than responding to extortion demands from Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music’s RIAA, they simply ignore them.
Federal judge Nancy Gertner, “issued four default judgments against accused P2P file-swappers who never bothered to respond to the charges against them,” says Ars, going on »»»
Their failure to appear meant an automatic loss, and though the judge does have some discretion in setting penalties, judges often pick the minimum awards in such cases.
That was true in all four cases, where Gertner accepted the record labels’ claims and awarded them the minimum statutory damages of $750 per song. The defendants were accused of downloading an average of ten songs, putting total awards in the $7,500 range, in addition to a few hundred more for court costs.
Having $7,500 in damages assessed against you by a federal court is no picnic, but it pales in comparison to the two twenty-somethings who actually showed up to court, got attorneys, went through a multiyear process, a nationally covered trial, and came out the other side owing far more money.
By way of example, Jammie is currently appealing an order for it to pay almost $2 million for allegedly downloading 24 songs, and Joel has been told to find $675,000 for 30 tunes — a far cry from $1.92 million, but still enough to bankrupt him.
Ars Technica – Ignoring RIAA lawsuits cheaper than going to trial, September 26, 2009
almost $2 million – Jamie Thomas-Rasset’s $1.92 million playlist, June 19, 2009
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
September 28th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Lol, **** the RIAA
7.5k is still too much for 10 ten songs fileshared.
Id fight the lawsuit and pay 2-5k for a lawyer
September 28th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Actually, i would fight the lawsuit, (Im the same commenter from above)
I’d be too scared. I would just accept the settlement. Much less hassle. But still FUCK the **AA
fEATHER AND TAR THERE chairmen and CEO
September 28th, 2009 at 11:41 am
Sorry typo, i was gonna say i wouldnt fight the lawsuit*
Sorry rough morning.
September 28th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
I would never give the entertainment corporation of parasites any dimes and would pay them only with bullets.
September 28th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
I once posted a simple way that you could appear completely innocent if you were ever sued by the RIAA/MPAA, but Jon deleted it…
September 28th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
i’d take the lily allen defence:
“i was young. i didn’t understand how the internet and the music/movie industries work.”
September 28th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
” I once posted a simple way that you could appear completely innocent if you were ever sued by the RIAA/MPAA, but Jon deleted it… ”
I’m Batman.
September 28th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
It IS cheaper to just pay the RIAA…because they designed it that way. That’s what extortion is all about, and they’re doing it quite nicely. Frustrating as all getout though.
September 28th, 2009 at 8:28 pm
I would use the chewbacca defense then as plan B Id run the OJ Simpson defense. If the glove somehow manages to fit, I would blame it on alcoholism and seek immediate rehabilitation.
On a more serious note my families business already pays a law firm. I would likely fight it or settle once they agreed to drop it for nothing+paying my court costs+lost time.
September 28th, 2009 at 8:37 pm
If you want to plan a defense beforehand, it would be fairly easy to set up your network/computer so that it doesn’t appear that your computer is the one accessing it. However that misses the larger point.
These miscarriages of justice shouldn’t be happening in our court system. Yes, it is wise to obfuscate if you’re planning to do anything that you don’t want to be traced back to you, but we shouldn’t have to obfuscate. Whistle blowers should automatically have protection if they access a site such as wikileaks. Journalists shouldn’t have to fear their respective governments, and noncommercial\not-for-profit file shares shouldn’t have to fear bankruptcy\ retribution from powerful corporations for their actions.
September 28th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
It’s better just to settle for $3500-$4500 instead of letting them have $7500.
September 28th, 2009 at 10:13 pm
@RadialSkid
No, most never go to trial. The graph doesn’t even show the majority who never made it into the court room.
Your best bet is to ignore it because it will probably never go to court. The next step is to not show up apparently.
September 28th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Don’t respond to the settlement offers (read terroristic threat). Don’t give any info about yourself. If you do not have a good defense, don’t even bother going to court.
:chuckles:
Your best bet is to ignore them to see if they go away.
September 29th, 2009 at 11:34 pm
If you receive a letter from the RIAA, treat it as though it contains Anthrax.
September 30th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
The one thing wrong with all of this is even when they sue the wrong person, they willing accept the money knowing the person was innocent.
Directv sued 35000 people and admit 10% were innocent. But they collected from them none the less.
I have created a web site here:
http://theft-by-satellite-company.com/index.html
Innocent people should not have to be made to hand over thousands just to settle a false claim. I is less expensive to hand over $5000 rather
than spend 25000 to go to trial. Where is the court in all of this knowing defendants who are innocent are being made to pay money as there only choice.
Who has 25000 dollar to go to trial and are also innocent.
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:48 am
ABSOLUTELY DO NOT PAY RIAA ANYTHING BUT HELL! THEY OWE US A BOTTOMLESS PIT FULL OF THEIR PI-RIAA-TE LOOT! SINK THEM!
Home taping didn’t kill the RIAA Yet, but it IS LEGAL, AHRA LAW PERMITS RECORDING AND PROHIBITS CHARGING INDIVIDUALS
WITH INFRINGEMENT. AHRA law permits manufacture, distribution, and use of Analog or Digital recording devices, aka Home Taping.
DMCA meant you couldn’t hack copy protection… until we found out copy protection was VIRUSES that damage computers.
THAT NEEDED SOME SERIOUS HACKING TO FIX, AND SONY AND BMG GOT SUED FOR SPREADING VIRUSES ON MUSIC CDs.
You can tape radio, tapes,CDs, DVDs to tapes, CDs, DVDs, MP3, OGG, whatever ITS LEGAL and thats what recorders do.
If you have a good recorder, you don’t need RIAA, they only rob you.
If you go to church CCLI will try to rob you for singing and taping hymns! ITS A SCAM, ALWAYS A SCAM, Just like invention services.
In the 1980’s “Home Taping Kills the Recording Industry” and a parody added “You can help!”.
Piracy is a Corporate Crime only, requiring industrial scale COPYING. CC is original and simple.
RIAA’s lawsuits and DRM viruses were the worst acts of Music Piracy in history.
MP3 is AHRA LEGAL Home Taping. Nobody ever used it to “steal CDs from a store”. RIAA lies like the devil.
RIAA is dangerous terrorism. They hack Windows with viruses on their CDs,
and just a few days ago the BSoDs at airports got so bad that flights had to be cancelled for half a day.
RIAA and Microsoft really messed each other up with their VISTA/Mohave/Win7 trash. (TRUTH)
Now if RIAA is using Michael Jackson’s money to overthrow the gov, we better act fast to Nuke the RIAA
before everyone pays $2000 or $2000000 for a song! It’s not like they are making anything better than
the dead musicians played in the 1900s to justify that price. $2000 buys some instruments. RIAA has no
business existing and robbing and terrorizing people anymore. A decade of drug parties and suing for non-copies
that NAPSTER NEVER STOLE FROM A STORE is too long overdue.
Obviously Microsoft and RIAA have dangerous power. Not even Al Quadea can commit treason against a
free country like they are doing, THEY ARE THE PIRATES. THEY CONTRACT TO BREAK LAWS. If you
click a EULA, EULA lose your legal rights to sue, and subject to fines higher than the $25 commercial
maximum just for listening to music via LEGAL HOME TAPING! Windows in Asia is free and doesn’t get sick.
Individual legal copy rights include going to the library and putting books in the xerox machines,
and building a patented invention to learn how it works (but not for commercial uses),
and using a VCR, CD recorder, DVD recorder, and even making a new kind, like MP3 or OGG.
If you buy or make a recording, you DON’T have to watch it alone.
FIRST AMENDMENT! You CAN sing anything in public just because you feel like it, unless the RIAA never publish songs
so nobody will hear them in their heads, nor anywhere else, nor learn to sing them. JUST LIKE THE BIRDS.
You CAN listen to the radio at work, the lie to the contrary is absurd, especially for truck drivers and such.
RIAA reminds me of Columbine. Homocidal Suicidal Maniacs. Self-Destructive in public, like an atomic suicide bomber.
RIAA is an enemy of the United States of America.
RIAA owes compensation for infringement, data loss, hacking crimes, has not paid court ordered penalties.
PAYMENT IN FULL DUE IMMEDIATELY.
RIAA HAS PERFORMED AN ILLEGAL OPERATION AND MUST BE SHUT DOWN.