I seem to recall a bunch of other cases where the RIAA and assorted record companies tried the same tactic (absurdly large fines for a ridiculously small amount of music), and they were all thrown out. The same is likely to happen here.

In a way its funny to watch an outdated business model try desperately to cling to relevancy- but its also a bit scary. I know businesses that entrenched won't go gracefully, but seeing the record companies, radio broadcasters, newspapers, American car companies etc being able to do so much damage through the courts and government has been a real eye opener for me.

This was one of the recent ones that jumped immediately into my head, but there have been lots of stories about a newspaper bailout, restricting the ability of foreign car companies to compete with the big 3, and other ridiculous lawsuits from music companies coming out over the last few years. So far they haven't been that successful, but all it takes is one successful one to open the floodgates.

Old story, but: http://cybernetnews.com/allofmp3com-...-165-trillion/

RIAA and that conglomerate are idiots. They catch one person and try to make an example out of them since they can't succeed at prosecuting--let alone charging-- all of them.

Man, if the RIAA saw Mac DC++, we could erase the debt in Africa.

Originally Posted by REPLEKIA/.

I'm not sure of how things work in america, but in canada the government and your isp cannot take a look at anything you download, but anything you upload is fair game. Being on a p2p network it is likely she was uploading music as well, the feds went to her house which they tracked down using her ip address and contacting her isp, took a look at her hard drive and BAM! Massive fine.

I read somewhere that they can't just slap a fine on anyone downloading a torrent. Something about entrapment.


I think it should be noted that in Canada, downloading music IS legal, but uploading music is illegal. Uploading and downloading of any other copyrighted material is illegal.

Once, I tried downloading a movie using torrents...and even though after about 30secs of downloading I realized the file was the wrong type for my computer and stopped it, we got a semi-threatening letter from Cogeco on behalf of Paramount Pictures warning us that it is illegal and not to do anything like that again, etc etc. So, I have my doubts about ISPs not being able to look at what you download...

Originally Posted by nerual

Once, I tried downloading a movie using torrents...and even though after about 30secs of downloading I realized the file was the wrong type for my computer and stopped it, we got a semi-threatening letter from Cogeco on behalf of Paramount Pictures warning us that it is illegal and not to do anything like that again, etc etc. So, I have my doubts about ISPs not being able to look at what you download...

Torrents are 2 way, upload and download so you probably uploaded a bit in that time. Also I'm fairly sure paramount would have been the one tracking the torrent if you got a letter on their behalf. In fact, Cogeco was my ISP at home and it says on their website they do not monitor anything downloaded. All uploads however they can have a look at. Rule of thumb though. Never download a movie over torrents in the first few weeks of its release, the movie's company will definitely be watching.

I have thousands of songs downloaded illegally, as does the majority of the world.

Originally Posted by nerual

Um, of course the penalty will be more than the face value of the songs ($1 x 24)!!! If I go and try to steal a $50 pair of jeans and get caught, I could get fined way more than $50. Of course, they might also let me off without a penalty. But then, if I were to keep stealing jeans or whatever from the store, they would definitely fine me, and those fines would increase dramatically if I ended up stealing repeatedly.
If she was willing to pay $24 for those songs, then she should have. Everybody is willing once they get caught. If the punishment is equal to whatever she would have spent on the songs, then there is no incentive to pay for them in the first place--take whatever 'free' stuff you can get until someone decides you should pay for them. The whole point of having these fines is to discourage people from stealing, not make it economically smart for them to continue to do so.

I like your points and I agree, but really: at this ratio, stealing a $50 pair of jeans means you have to pay approximately $3million. Really?

24 songs is like a couple of albums, or even 1.5x one album. And now this woman is being sued for all the money she's ever going to make in her lifetime.

I mean these songs play on the goddamn radio, it's the same as using a tape recorder or voice recorder on a laptop except the quality is better! Or a movie that comes on TV and we record it on VCR (well in the old days).

Originally Posted by nerual

Once, I tried downloading a movie using torrents...and even though after about 30secs of downloading I realized the file was the wrong type for my computer and stopped it, we got a semi-threatening letter from Cogeco on behalf of Paramount Pictures warning us that it is illegal and not to do anything like that again, etc etc. So, I have my doubts about ISPs not being able to look at what you download...

Cogeco is a piece of ****, they're my ISP too and yeah regardless of what they say they probably monitor your downloading.

However, it is Paramount and Sony which always track and catch people who download their movies. I wouldn't download movies anyway, I think those are worth buying because they actually took millions and millions of dollars to make.

But having an acoustic song that some guy sang with a guitar makes you owe them $62,500? Okay.

Originally Posted by Rakim

I have thousands of songs downloaded illegally, as does the majority of the world.

Downloading music is legal in canada. Only the upload of music is illegal. Canada is weird/awesome like that. Personally I'll still always buy music from my favourite artists though.

You know theres a problem with the law when you can steal CD after CD at 20 songs a disc from a walmart and only be charged a MAXIMUM of $2500 (usually after multiple instances) yet copying 24 mp3s of a network gets you a $2000000 court verdict. Seriously, the laws need to be reworked.

A german case similar to this one just finished and since the court actually tried to prove damages (i.e. how much is the mp3 worth, how many people was it uploaded to, etc) the case ended up charging only about $21/mp3 compared to the >$60000/mp3 that was charged in this case.

Originally Posted by Marlowe

I seem to recall a bunch of other cases where the RIAA and assorted record companies tried the same tactic (absurdly large fines for a ridiculously small amount of music), and they were all thrown out. The same is likely to happen here.

That judgement still worked out to $2250/mp3 which would be well over $50000 in this case for copying 24 songs.

Originally Posted by REPLEKIA/.

Downloading music is legal in canada. Only the upload of music is illegal. Canada is weird/awesome like that. Personally I'll still always buy music from my favourite artists though.

I also have hundreds of albums that ive bought, i love nothing more in this world than music.

Originally Posted by Alchemist11

I like your points and I agree, but really: at this ratio, stealing a $50 pair of jeans means you have to pay approximately $3million. Really?

24 songs is like a couple of albums, or even 1.5x one album. And now this woman is being sued for all the money she's ever going to make in her lifetime.

Actually, this is her 3rd time in court or something like that. The first time, she was fined much much less, but then appealed, got a new trial, and was fined more. She was also offered the opportunity to settle for something like $3500, but opted to fight it in court instead.

That seems to be the problem though, that there is no set amount that you can be fined per song downloaded.

Originally Posted by Alchemist11

Cogeco is a piece of ****, they're my ISP too and yeah regardless of what they say they probably monitor your downloading.

Cogeco itself doesn't monitor anything being downloaded, only uploaded. Aside from legal privacy reasons, it would take way too much manpower and therefore money for them to constantly monitor downloads. however if the owner of the copyright to material your downloading send them a message with proof, then yeah they get on your case.

this is a fake story its made to scare people

Originally Posted by Juve

this is a fake story its made to scare people

Do you have any proof to support this(that it's fake)? I agree with the 'made to scare people part' but these ludicrous cases of people getting fined for illegal downloads are actually quite frequent. In the end most of the charges are reduced to a more reasonable fine, but they are still very real cases. These cases are the internet equivalent of the stockades. Have someone who commited a crime punished in a public manner in an attempt to deter others from doing the same crime.

This is how I see. I will not buy a film I haven't seen because I don't want to waste my money. I trial it by downloading it..if its good I buy it and they get my money. If its bad, I wasn't going to buy it either way. Basically, the only reason I own any of the DVDs I own is because I downloaded them first. Downloading has caused me to spend on money I wouldn't have normally spent. I'd say that's good for them.

And I just don't bother with music. YouTube is my music player these days