Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 27 of 27
  1. #26
    Banned
    My Team
    Miami Heat
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Post Count
    7,516
    That's the way the law works, it allows for it. Besides, you ask for more knowing it may be decreased. Either way, the defendant could never pay that much, but it effectively shuts down such activity.
    Actually, there is legal precedent that says the opposite.


    from Wiki :

    The RIAA typically seeks $750 statutory damages per song file.

    In the Brooklyn lawsuit UMG v. Lindor, the defendant argued that the RIAA's damage theory was uncons utional, because it sought 1071 times the actual $0.70.

    In November, 2006, a Judge in a Brooklyn Federal Court upheld the legal theory behind this defense.

    UMG subsequently dropped the suit.

  2. #27
    Banned
    My Team
    Miami Heat
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Post Count
    7,516
    Also,

    the RIAA is now in hot water. Their constant stream of litigation has resulted in several judges labeling their activities as "Vexatious litigation".

    They (RIAA) have been accused of abusing the judicial system in an effort to intimidate other internet users from downloading songs. A few defendants even successfully counter-sued and accused the RIAA of malicious litigation, and a Judge reprimanded a bunch of RIAA lawyers for abuse of the judicial system.

    Basically, artists all over the world are going to have to change how they do their business.

    Which is good, because artists are supposed to be doing it "because we like making music" right?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •