Conservopath

Jury penalises music file-sharer



A court in the US has ordered a woman to pay $222,000 (£109,000) in damages for illegally file-sharing music. The jury ordered Jammie Thomas, 32, from Minnesota, to pay for offering to share 24 specific songs online - a cost of $9,250 per song. Record companies said she had illegally shared a total of 1,702 songs. Ms Thomas, who denied the charges, was the first person accused of illegal file-sharing who decided to fight the case in court. Each year, millions of households illegally share music files, and the music industry takes it as a serious threat to its revenue. About 26,000 lawsuits have been filed against alleged file-sharers, but most defendants settle privately by paying damages amounting to a few thousand dollars.

Industry defiant

However, contesting the charge and losing will cost Jammie Thomas almost a quarter of a million dollars.
Her lawyer, Brian Toder, told the Associated Press that Ms Thomas was reduced to tears by the verdict. "This is a girl that lives from pay cheque to pay cheque, and now all of a sudden she could get a quarter of her pay cheque garnished for the rest of her life," he said. The US record industry said people would understand the verdict. Richard Gabriel, a lawyer for the music companies, said the verdict was important. "This does send a message, I hope, that downloading and distributing our recordings is not okay," he told AP. He said no decision had yet been made about what the record companies would do, if anything, to pursue collecting the money from Ms Thomas.

John Kennedy, chief executive of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industries, which represents record labels, said they were "reluctant litigators". "We do everything possible to persuade people not to leave themselves exposed to litigation. We educate, we warn, we even try and settle before a case gets to court." He said he hoped the fine would prove a deterrent to others.
"Our message is: we don't want to litigate - don't leave yourself exposed to litigation," he added.

END.

Conservopath

My two cent rant:


I am in most respects an honourable man and a respectable citizen. I generally play by the rules and have a strong sense of ethics and morals.

However, in the case of P2P? I am an unapologetic thief.

While downloading free music may raise ethical questions - for me, it speaks nothing on morality.

The record industry, and the corporate world in general, have been victimising the consumer & the musical Artist for years.
CD prices have been artificially inflated through a joint agreement between record companies since they became the standard portable music format -though mp3s have taken the lead in recent years.

Also, what percentage of the profits from record sales went to the Artists who actually created the content? 6 pennies per 25 dollar CD?
Yeah, I really feel guilty for plunging record sales and corporate profit margins.

Tower records is out of business? Good. They deserve to be for selling me that Roy Orbison best of collection for 48 dollars! Rot in chapter 14 hell you contemptible bastards!

As we all know, the Bands make their money from live performances and other ancillary activities.
Screw the record companies! The Artists are finding new ways to market their music directly to the consumer, cutting out the corporate marketers, and so, in the end, will reap a greater share of the rewards from their artistic endeavors.

Yeah, poor RCA and Columbia. Boo, hoo, hoo.
How fair were the record companies to such music pioneers as Little Richard when they stole his music publishing rights? And those of so many others?
Oh, yes, I'm wracked with an unshakable guilt for downloading the latest Maroon5 single -because some corporate CEO didn't get his cut. He'll have to find another way to pay for his 70 foot yacht. I'll assuage my shame when I take my Niece and Nephew to see them in concert, paying 200+ dollars in the process

I think the corporations rob us blind every day. look at those absolute criminals over at netzero who offer free trials that they bill for, and then refuse to allow the suckers they trick into giving them their banking info -to cancel their services.

yes, we consumers have sooooo much to feel guilty for.

I consider p2P a long overdue consumer rebate from the corporate world that has robbed us blind for years. The package of fig newtons gets smaller and smaller, but the price goes up and up.

I am now going to download the latest PINK single. Not because I am a fan, but because she publicly refers to file sharers as scumbags.
Oh, really? If she didn't have a financial stake in the music business, that skanky bitch would be the first one downloading free music.

Am I right?

C.

Izzibeth

Luckily, things look like they will be changing.

Recently, Prince gave away thousands of his records for free. He then sold out 21 live shows in a row (which was the point). Everyone criticized him at first... but then.. *gasp* he made a shitload of money selling tickets.

Radiohead, (my favorite band), last week released their CD on the internet. You could opt to pay (I did) or pay nothing. They are no longer signed so you can LEGALLY share their CD with anyone you want. The music companies are in a tizzy because they said "if Radiohead can do it......." Radiohead always sells out anyway, but they will get more exposure this way and perhaps they can book even more shows and make their money that way.

I heard of another group who is going to do the same thing and release their music online, free of charge (the name escapes me).

Times will change and bands will go back to making their music by playing live shows instead of selling CDs. It'll be a little while longer, but people will jump on the bandwagon and it will no longer be a big deal to download music online.

__________________

farside

I don't approve of Walmart's practices, but that does not permit me to shoplift from their stores.

The fact that you don't like what a person does with his property, or don't like the price he is charging for it, or don't like the names that he calls you, is not a license to steal from him.

It is up to the artist - not you - to choose how his product will be distributed. They don't have to go to the big recording companies. There are small independent studios and there is the internet and any artist who so chooses can market his music through alternative methods.

You can rationalize all you like about the big evil corporations, but none of these rationalizations justifies theft. You may think that the big evil corporations are ripping off the artists, but stealing their music is not going to help. If people steal instead of buying, the artist gets even less.

FRYandBENDER

This line made me laugh pretty hard.

__________________
Neither am I the means to any end others may wish to accomplish. I am not a tool for their use. I am not a servant of their needs. I am not a bandage for their wounds. I am not a sacrifice on their altars. ... I owe nothing to my brothers, nor do I gather debts from them. I ask no one to live for me, nor do I live for others. I covet no mans soul, nor is my soul theirs to covet.

Ayn Rand, Anthem.

Common insult examples and how to avoid them

farside

It is still the choice of the artist whether to distribute his songs through a small or large company, or whether to distribute it for a price on the internet, or whether to distribute it for free. Taking it without permission remains theft.

apawllo

Downloading music by artists on major labels on peer to peer programs is basically asking to get sued. The sad part is, a lot of the cases involve 13 year old girls downloading Hillary Duff or Fall Out Boy or something and getting their parents sued.

I don't know if this is the band you're talking about or not: the Pax Cecilia They've been offered record deals several times but turned them down. You can send them an e-mail with your address and they'll send you their album free of charge (shipping included). The cd case is pretty incredible too - it's made out of recycled paper bags. It took like a month to get my copy, but as soon as I did and listened to it a few times I paypaled them 20 bucks and begged them to come to Ohio.

Quirinalian

A contract is a mutual agreement of terms.