AVS Forum banner

What do you think about the RIAA sueing people?

  • They deserve to be sued and the RIAA should collect as much as possible.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • They deserve to be sued but should have a maximum fine to impose.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • They should make them pay for the retail value of the music.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • They should not sue at all.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
1 - 20 of 242 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
With the recent decision to make Joel Tennenbaum pay $675,000 in damages to the RIAA for downloading music on the file sharing program Kazaa, I thought it would be good to start a thread discussing whether the punishment fits the crime.


Do you think this is excessive or do you think this amount is justified?



Just some background:


I was sued in 2003 for file sharing and settled out of court for $4,250. I was sixteen at the time. I admit that what I was doing was illegal (although I did not realize what the punishment was) and that I was responsible for my actions. The original amount I was sued for however, I deem to be excessive. I was sued for 1.7 Million dollars for the
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
282 Posts
They're trying to make an example of someone is what it seems like to me. I feel like paying the retail value of the music or even double that would be sufficient. Give the artist half and the riaa half. Not excessive and still a substantial fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
According to the article the artists will not be getting any of the money from the defendant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,941 Posts
It's ridiculous - but, it's newsworthy and makes people think twice about what they are doing. It's just too bad for the people that they are making examples out of. They aren't going to get this money from anyone. Most people will claim bankruptcy and not have to pay it.


It's a form of advertisement for them - at the expense of a handful of the millions that have done this.


Now you said you were sued, I'd be curious to hear your story about the process and how it came about. Did you receive initial notifications that you violated the copyright law, and then continue to violate?


There are 5 levels of copyright infringement notifications. The first couple levels are warnings. Did you not receive these? Or is this just a new practice that was put into place after 2003 when you were sued?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,372 Posts
I'm curious if the people voting for "pay the value of what you steal if you get caught" understand the concepts of punishement and deterant.


Seems to me the OP stole 1000 song, helped a lot of other people steal them too, and only paid a $4,250. That's getting off darn cheap. I'd be darn greatful, not whining about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,941 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salmoneous /forum/post/16959890


I'm curious if the people voting for "pay the value of what you steal if you get caught" understand the concepts of punishement and deterant.


Seems to me the OP stole 1000 song, helped a lot of other people steal them too, and only paid a $4,250. That's getting off darn cheap. I'd be darn greatful, not whining about it.

Unfortunately, the poll doesn't have a choice in between retail value and getting your ass handed to you.


$22k per song is ridiculous, and he apparently got off somewhat easy compared to $150k per song.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ballen420 /forum/post/16959831


It's ridiculous - but, it's newsworthy and makes people think twice about what they are doing. It's just too bad for the people that they are making examples out of. They aren't going to get this money from anyone. Most people will claim bankruptcy and not have to pay it.


It's a form of advertisement for them - at the expense of a handful of the millions that have done this.


Now you said you were sued, I'd be curious to hear your story about the process and how it came about. Did you receive initial notifications that you violated the copyright law, and then continue to violate?


There are 5 levels of copyright infringement notifications. The first couple levels are warnings. Did you not receive these? Or is this just a new practice that was put into place after 2003 when you were sued?

Well we first received a phone call from Cox Cable employee (one that I am sure wears a suit to work), giving us a heads up that our information had been subpoenaed by the RIAA.


I would say it was a good 6 months before we heard anything else. We got a very large packet delivered to us by a courier. In it was hundreds of pages listing everything I had in my shared folder or anything related to that folder. It had not only songs listed but documents, media and anything in there.


The documents spelled out the the cost of everything, how many songs I had, the record companies that were involved, etc.


We consulted a lawyer who advised that we settle out of court and take any judgement under $5000.


They have a 1-800 # you call to settle your case. You give them your case # and they pretty much throw out a number. In my case it was $4250. They wanted immediate payment. I told them I was 16 and did not have that much money and they asked my parents if they would pay it. They said they did not have that much money available. The representative asked us if we would put it on CC's. After a little back and forth they gave me 6 months to come up with it. I do not come from a well off family so, I worked my ass off for the next six months saved what money I made, sold my car and sent them a cashiers check for $4250.


I also had to sign something saying that I would destroy any copies of the music I had made.


Never heard anything from them again.


I don't negate the fact that what I did was illegal or that I should have to pay. I was just young, didn't weigh the consequences and ate shi* for it in the end.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salmoneous /forum/post/16959890


I'm curious if the people voting for "pay the value of what you steal if you get caught" understand the concepts of punishement and deterant.


Seems to me the OP stole 1000 song, helped a lot of other people steal them too, and only paid a $4,250. That's getting off darn cheap. I'd be darn greatful, not whining about it.

I am not whining about it. I accepted what I had to pay and admit wrong doing. I am asking other peoples opinions on the settlements the companies make and whether it should be regulated.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,032 Posts
If you get caught, I think a $5k fine is quite reasonable for somewhere around 1000 files. However, it may cost more than that to find, gather the evidence and prosecute - don't know. Being in a business that produces "soft" product, I have no sympathy for people who get caught that were doing the file sharing for years on a large scale. However, I have co-workers who think nothing of it. It's free and the odds are getting caught are low.


The huge fines aren't fitting, but as others said it does raise awareness.


larry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Not making excuses for myself. But, I originally set up kazaa not to share files. I had to reinstall the software at one point and when I did it reset the settings and began sharing my music. Granted it was still stealing for personal use, which was wrong, but I did not intend to share it to the masses.


I forgot to add that they got the information from a server confiscated in Georgia. The court case I had said John Does 1-127 VS. Georgia District Court 13 (i think...).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,573 Posts
The RIAA have been ripping off consumers and the artists forever why would they ever change? And they never will, not with the kind of lobby money they pay out.



"RIAA spokesman Jonathan Lamy says the $675,000 in damages won't go to any of the artists, but will be "re-invested into our ongoing education and anti-piracy programs," according to TorrentFreak".


Double talk for this money will be used to be a big player in Washington
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,941 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by michanecash /forum/post/16960051


Well we first received a phone call from Cox Cable employee (one that I am sure wears a suit to work), giving us a heads up that our information had been subpoenaed by the RIAA....

Ouch, sounds like lesson learned though, and it sounds like you got off cheap.


A friend of mine just got a level 1 notice, which is why I asked. We Googled it and it seems there are a few different levels of offense, with the level 1 being more of a warning then something they will act upon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ballen420 /forum/post/16960193


Ouch, sounds like lesson learned though, and it sounds like you got off cheap.


A friend of mine just got a level 1 notice, which is why I asked. We Googled it and it seems there are a few different levels of offense, with the level 1 being more of a warning then something they will act upon.

I don't think mine had a level associated with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,399 Posts
I think they should go after the providers, and not the end D/L'r. If it's not available, it can't be downloaded.


On a different note, I'm of the opinion that people sharing music on the internet is GOOD for the music industry. I believe that I saw that overall retail CD sales dropped significantly right after they shut Napster down. Which tells me that the Napster sharing actually introduced people to more music to buy, that they otherwise would know nothing about.


BTW, I don't D/L stuff from the net, because I think the quality stinks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,399 Posts
So Michancash, out of curiousity. Was all of this through one of the music web-sites? FTP? Or from the Usenet (newsgroups)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar /forum/post/16960493


So Michancash, out of curiousity. Was all of this through one of the music web-sites? FTP? Or from the Usenet (newsgroups)?

Back then everyone was using Kazaa or Limewire to download.


I think the majority of people now use Torrent files.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,797 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutgar /forum/post/16960307


I think they should go after the providers, and not the end D/L'r. If it's not available, it can't be downloaded.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salmoneous /forum/post/16960360


Both the OP and Joel Tennenbaum were providers, not just downloaders.


Agreed, that's how a peer-to-peer network works. I download a couple songs a year now (mainly because I'm trying to find a song I heard somewhere), but I NEVER allow people to download anything from me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by yamahaSHO /forum/post/16960635


Agreed, that's how a peer-to-peer network works. I download a couple songs a year now (mainly because I'm trying to find a song I heard somewhere), but I NEVER allow people to download anything from me.

Just so you know, most of the newer software for peer to peer sharing does not have an option to turn of sharing.
 
1 - 20 of 242 Posts
Top