In order to fill a 30gig iPod meaning that usually MP3 files rages about 4.5megs per file. 1gig is consist of 1000megs, so 30gigs would be 30,000megs. Now divide this by 4.5megs and you will get 6666.66 repeating, meaning you can put up to 6,666 songs on this freaken iPod and I seen that many before on numerious iPods. Just go on any search engine and seach up iPod Music List and you will see what I mean. So in theory you can fit about 15 songs per CD if you were to go and buy a Music CD at the stores it would cost about $19.99 per Music CD and has about 15 songs. So if you divide the 6,666 songs by 15 for per CD you would have 444.4 Music CD’s bought in-order to fill the iPod. So now in conclusion if you take the 444.4 and times it by $19.99 for the cost of 1 Music CD. It would cost $8,875.56 to fill that Portable player and this is not even including taxes. Let alone that one of these Portable players cost close to $300, I mean do you believe that everyone who has one of these Portable players has exactly a little over $9,000 to fill one?

Now this is just the 30gig version, think of those that are 120gig version! GOD DAMN! It will cost you $35,502.24 just to fill and also no taxes included.

An average american does not even make that much in a year!

These companies that makes these Portable players makes more people to want to go and download these music. Seriously, do you have that kinda of money to blow?

This goes to show how the RIAA is being run, I mean they might as well just let me run the RIAA. I mean with me being the CEO of RIAA, it would not really makes a diffrence, cause it can’t get any worst then it is already being is. LOL

Has anyone heard of a defense fund for Ms. Santangelo?

How about a new copyright infringement category: Set as Wallpaper.

It was invented by an unknown programmer that addded a right mouse or menu option when when using a www browser :”Set as wallpaper” or “Add as wallpaper”. The idea being that when the cursor hovers over an image, you can set the image as your wallpaper. Of course, the image’s copyright status is unknown but it is likely that the image has a copyright that does not belong to you. Very few images on the web are in the public domain, so you are now almost surely an infringer, because the image is stored somewhere in the vowels of you hard disk.

Microsoft adopted the “Set as wallpaper” option on Internet Explorer, thereby becoming the greatest inducer to copyright infringement ever, when Internet Explorer became the predominant browser. The Kazaa inducemnt theory developed by the Supreme Court would certainly have been different if the Judges knew about Microsoft’s inducement. The money politics would have been different.

Mind you, when you use the “Set as wallpaper” option you are not warned that the image you will be using may have a copyright owners and that if the owner finds out you installed the image, he can sue you for $150,000.

There is no FBI warning on Internet images and no image in the Internet comes out clean and says “Iam in the public domain”. Well, actually It can’t, because only an owner could certify that an image is in the public domain and if there is an owner, there is no public doamin. A copyright paradox.

The paradox aside, this type of infringement is worse than if you shared a song, because frequently the infringed image is seen in corporate offices whenever a computer is turned on, and that is a second type of infringement, a violation of the exclusive public performance right that authors allegedly have.

Also this makes Microsoft the biggest, by far, inducer of copyright infringement.

I only regret that I did not invent and patent the “Set as wallpaper” option. I could then ask $1.00 to Microsof for each Internet Explorer installed, for using my patent. I would then be an instant billionaire, thanks to the incredible law that allows software patents.

This is no spoof.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

or to conceal the true intentions or a secretet deal already made.

that is what you get when judges are selected by mostly corrupt politicians and come from large law firms that operate in the world center of corruption. the mafia, wall street, labor gangster control new york. there if you are not corrupt, you do not get named as a judge.

result is no can get a fair trial in new york.

Millions of dyslexic’s every day!!!!

Some times I’m so funny I make my self laugh.

Only if torture of the victim is a good thing and the legal expenses are not paid by the victim and there is certainty that the judge will not make more mistakes and goes against the victim.

A good thing for RIAA and their very expensive lawyers who will make a bundle in the case. Now even if plaintiffs loose the case, plaintiffs won because the RIAA lawsuit spree get additional (albeit artificial respiration) life. Now we will see delay after delay on the case so that there is more of the good thing.

Of course, an additional good thing is that the record companies can ask for astronomical legal expenses just to scare Santangelo and others like her into submission and into not appealing if she looses the case, a possibility because of how incompetent the judicial system is and its biased tendency to favor money over reason.

It is also a good thing if you are pro foreigners who own the big record companies that push mostly musical crap to their American through radio and press payola, install spyware on your computers and record songs without licenses so as not to pay royalties to songwriters, as Santangelo case plaintiff Sony Sony has done with the music owned by my family on at least 16 records, while, to our knowledge making one record with a licensed song owned by my family. These 16 records should have generated over one million dollars in royalties (at present worth) and not one cent has been paid. That is big time infringement, by RIAA leader and Santangelo case plaintiff, Sony. The details can be read on our web page.

It is also a good thing if you do mind being a sitting duck for arbitrary and senseless copyright infringement (and the other types that will be promoted by the senseless Santangelo ruling) lawsuits. After all, the copyright law/judicial system has turned everyone into a copyright infringer (and thief/criminal as RIAA portrays file sharers), whether you know it or not because the Internet does not filter out the copyright protected works embodied in sound, image, software and text files. After all, a program you own may copy files to your computer without you realizing that it has made you a “criminal”.

The war in Iraq is also a good thing, if you are a right wing religious zealot, your son is not a soldier, if you want to protect Arab royalty more than the American people, you are a military contractor and Vietnam never happened and want to play-policeman-of the-world. A really good thing.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

Jurisprudence: The lazy person’s way of editing, clarifying, confusing and making new laws.

The decision, the Patricia Santangelo ruling, is wrong because under the premises of the judge and the jurisprudence she chose and the way she interpreted the jurisprudence, anyone can sue anyone without any proof of wrongdoing under the theory that the proof can be presented later on. This of course creates an social imbalance, because the if the plaintiff has the money (thus POWER) to file with temerity a trivial lawsuit, it can do so because there is a benefit. The benefit is that the POWER to file a trivial lawsuit and take the case to trial can be used to EXTORT because trials are very expensive for the selected target. And the target will always be selected will be one who may come up with $5,000 to settle, but has no chance of financing a lawsuit that reaches a trial phase. Justice, as everyone should know, is only for the rich.

It is incredible that the judge did not see that her decision will promote future EXTORTIONS on a massive scale, directed to selected economically disadvantaged persons. All because the judge’s decision gives the power and the incentive to EXTORT.

To avoid the EXTORTION of the type that this decision will promote in cases of non commercial minor infringement (minor meaning that no copies were sold for profit) some guidelines for record companies to follow will be required in cases where the is good evidence of minor infringement: a. The record company can bill the copier for the actual costs of the copies. b. If the bill is not paid, a small claims court claim can be made to enforce the payment. c. Threats of lawsuits shall be prohibited, as threats constitute EXTORTION.

It is also predictable that other industries and individuals will see a great opportunity in the judge’s decision, as if America was not already the most litigious country in the world.

Now surelt someobe will set up a “Settlement Center of America for Victims of Slippery Floors”, who will EXTORT with letters like these to selected business owners:

Dear Store owner:

Our customer slipped in one of your stores and fell down. As a result she suffered immensely. If you pay us $5,000 now, our customer will not sue you for damages that may be as high as $1,000,000. For now we will not give details about the fall, such as date, time and store address, or damages suffered, so please do not ask for that information. Judge Colleen McMahon has decided that you have no right to know the facts until trial time, well after the lawsuit has been filed and you have spent many time the amount of money we are now asking for. At lawsuit time, you will find out who our customer is, because the name is on the lawsuit. You have 30 days to mail your check. Once you make the payment, our customer will waive the right to sue you for the past fall. Newer falls are not covered by your payment.

Sincerely
Settlement Center of America for Victims of Slippery Floors

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com