Post by trog @ 12:14pm 19/06/09 | 43 Comments
Initially offered settlement at "just" USD$9,250 per song, the jury went away and decided that's not enough and bumped it up to USD$80,000 per song.
Ars have a good article and Slashdot is worth a read, particularly for the comments of user 'NewYorkCountryLawyer', a lawyer running a campaign against the tactics of the RIAA and MPAA. His blog is a good read, and points out that this will probably go to a third trial:
Well I guess there is going to be a third trial. I hope that during the next trial the technical evidence will be challenged, that the issue of recoverability of statutory damages will be tested, and that the plaintiffs will be required to prove (a) dissemination of copies (b) to the public, (c) by a sale or other transfer of ownership, or by lease, rental, or lending, before being deemed to have shown an infringement of the distribution right. The nonsensical exorbitancy of the verdict actually enhances the constitutionality argument, demonstrating how open ended the statute is if the RIAA's wild eyed interpretation of it is allowed to survive.
Latest Comments
43 Comments
Show
Follow Us
Advertisement
Log In
Posted 12:21pm 19/6/09
Posted 12:21pm 19/6/09
damn music industry, everyone hates the RIAA/MPAA and they -are- the music industry.
it's all just a front so that we keep buying music but we also have someone to hate on, meanwhile the (non mpaa/riaa side of the) music industry looks all shiny and "innocent"
paging faceman
Posted 12:43pm 19/6/09
Posted 12:44pm 19/6/09
Posted 12:45pm 19/6/09
Pays the lawyers to sue another 10 :)
Posted 12:49pm 19/6/09
Posted 12:49pm 19/6/09
From what I've seen those sort of punitive measures tend to apply when you distribute content, not just obtain it.
Posted 01:09pm 19/6/09
Posted 01:25pm 19/6/09
Posted 01:43pm 19/6/09
[13:38:46] (+demon) I owe the RIAA US$1,313,280,000 of which they will never see a cent. (16,416 mp3s @ US$80000 per breach of struggling artist's copyright.)
heh. even though... in reality the mp3s i have aren't the sort the riaa would be interested in, nor did i download them using p2p.
Posted 01:44pm 19/6/09
Posted 01:53pm 19/6/09
Hahahaha.
During the verdict the Jury was quoted as saying, "American Pie - Madonna!? The defendant MUST pay a hefty price for distributing that s***!"
Posted 01:57pm 19/6/09
Posted 02:30pm 19/6/09
I have my suspicions that the big ChildPorn raids over the last 12 months are actually a plot conceived by the RIAA to spread fear and disgust at P2P and lead to the Banning of P2P software.
Posted 02:40pm 19/6/09
Posted 03:28pm 19/6/09
Makes me wish for the revenge of Napster.......
Posted 03:44pm 19/6/09
Posted 03:46pm 19/6/09
Mouse me
Posted 03:46pm 19/6/09
haaha, i would have rated my top 10 at round $150k per song fyi
Posted 03:48pm 19/6/09
Posted 03:53pm 19/6/09
RIAA must be praying for a settlement at this stage.
Posted 03:57pm 19/6/09
Posted 03:58pm 19/6/09
Posted 04:03pm 19/6/09
The days of making a song and being paid forever are over.
And that goes ditto for Music Companies.
I was reading somewhere that record companies are now taking a slice off the top from Live performances of bands. They must be getting a nice little earn out of Pink. 10 concerts in Brisbane ?
last edited by FaceMan at 16:03:40 19/Jun/09
Posted 04:25pm 19/6/09
Posted 04:28pm 19/6/09
Pink also does some aerobatics, so it's like two shows in one. Double the value.
Posted 05:42pm 19/6/09
maybe if they are on a development deal or being funded for tour by the label, but not for a "big" name. Pink for example would not be having slices taken from live performance, and if she is, she has a s*** manager. I'm a big fan of bands like NiN and even aussie guys like Silverchair who are doing their own labels so they are free from greedy contracts of big companys.
At the end of the day 90% record labels are pure scum, dont give a f*** about the artist and will screw them as long and hard as they can to make 5 bucks.
Posted 07:31pm 19/6/09
MPAA is in exactly the same boat that the RIAA were in years ago. Trouble for them is that they are stuck on the idea that Movies have to be distributed at the Cinema, then DVD, then Pay-TV then Free TV. If only they would wake the f*** up and realise that unless they do away with this model and offer movies on the net at the same time as Cinema releases they are going to pwned by John Q Citizen the same way the RIAA has been.
It would be interesting if they actually did this, we might see cinema prices actually come down and they might have to offer some real service to get patrons back.
Posted 08:28pm 19/6/09
This isn't the first time she's been sued for this, so now they're watching her.
Posted 11:24pm 19/6/09
This is a great idea - let's find out the songs, then "encourage" people to "get" the music themselves, so the WWW smashes those songs to teach the record industry a lesson.
Posted 07:04am 20/6/09
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2007/10/trial-of-the-ce/
Posted 07:08am 20/6/09
Posted 07:56am 20/6/09
Posted 08:43am 20/6/09
Posted 10:47am 20/6/09
I completely appreciate your point, but I'd hate for movies to stop being shown at the cinema altogether. What I could imagine happening is that cinema venues only show blockbusters or award winners (which usually means the movie gets to the cinema about 6months after it's release), and neglect indies and less guaranteed money makers.
Don't get me wrong, I only go to the cinema about 10 times a year and only because I get really cheap student rates. The majority of movies I watch I rent from Video Ezy, but the shelves there are so full ofutter garbage I've been going less and less. I look out for DVDs that the store only has 1 copy of - they are usually better than the rest. Most of the time I borrow movies that I've already seen and enjoyed, because the alternatives are s***.
Point of the rant: if movies become available online at the same time as cinema release, cinemas will become really selective about what they screen, which is bad. For the few times a year when a decent movie comes out I'd rather see it at th cinema.
Posted 10:48am 20/6/09
Ahahahaahahaha!
Posted 11:00am 20/6/09
lol :D
perhaps. or perhaps with attendance numbers falling off cinemas will have to start branching out & offering extra incentives for people to attend like indie movies, double-features, dusk-till-dawns, live plays... or something~! :P
Posted 02:19pm 20/6/09
Posted 02:36pm 20/6/09
I dont know what the margins are for Cinemas but considering how much they overcharge for munchies Id say they make very little on the movies themself.
Why dont they move to other types of Viewing. For instance TV shows or even sport.
Posted 02:46pm 20/6/09
Posted 03:50pm 20/6/09
Posted 04:29pm 20/6/09
Now when I watch the latest DVD or pirated beer coaster at home I can pause and rewind the bits that get drowned out by the noise or simply put the subtitles on.
Quantum of Solace was a prime exmple.
Posted 07:14pm 20/6/09