RIAA Wins Appeal, Music Downloader Owes $675,000

[Shadow-Phoenix]

Hurray! Another corporate victory over petty humans!

How the hell did they come up with that insane number? So he downloaded some music and he listened to it without permission. Is that really so bad to justify ruining someone's life? Just take away the music he downloaded or make him pay the amount those songs are actually worth. Punishing him that hard accomplishes nothing. He listened to music, he didn't kill anyone for crying out loud.

Technically by their standards of charging that insane amount of money he's already dead and since he can't possibly pay that off mostly in his lifetime they basically killed him since money is what makes your life function.

 

[Ranorak]

I'm ever so glad to live in a country where I can download songs legally, for personal use.

 

[draythefingerless]

Hurray! Another corporate victory over petty humans!

How the hell did they come up with that insane number? So he downloaded some music and he listened to it without permission. Is that really so bad to justify ruining someone's life? Just take away the music he downloaded or make him pay the amount those songs are actually worth. Punishing him that hard accomplishes nothing. He listened to music, he didn't kill anyone for crying out loud.

Technically by their standards of charging that insane amount of money he's already dead and since he can't possibly pay that off mostly in his lifetime they basically killed him since money is what makes your life function.

Step 1: Get sued for ridiculous money
Step 2: File for Bankruptcy.
Step 3: ????
Step 4: Profit.

 

[M920CAIN]

It would be cool to actually raise 675 000 dollars through donations or something & then burn it in front of RIAA building. Impractical yes... but it be cool.

 

[BlackStar42]

Dude downloads music over torrent:

30 songs = $675,000

Dude shoplifts 3 albums with songs from store:

30 songs = $100 fine + worth of the CDs

"Justice" my ass

Exactly. It makes me fucking sick to my stomach. Excuse me while I torrent "...And Justice For All". Thank God I live in the UK where AFAIK these bastards can't get me.

EDIT: I don't torrent, that was a joke.
EDIT2: The RIAA kills kittens.
EDIT3: That one wasn't a joke.

 

[conflictofinterests]

Good job, RIAA. Spend more money in legal fees to uphold a ruling that you're hardly going to see a cent of. Enjoy throwing hand fulls of water off the sinking ship that is your business model.

 

[Darks63]

Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein RIAA!

seriously though if this guy offs himself the family should file wrongful death on the RIAA I mean really this was just over the top.

 

[CthulhuMessiah]

2009 was a bad year for Joel Tenenbaum.\

Duuuuuuuude, was his mother's name Bridgette?

OT: Isn't that a little... excessive. Yeah, he was breaking the law, but that's like putting someone on death row for Jaywalking.

 

[Nurb]

The music industry has been "Dying" since the 70's.

Fuck these corporate suits. They don't deserve the money.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Hurray! Another corporate victory over petty humans!

How the hell did they come up with that insane number? So he downloaded some music and he listened to it without permission. Is that really so bad to justify ruining someone's life? Just take away the music he downloaded or make him pay the amount those songs are actually worth. Punishing him that hard accomplishes nothing. He listened to music, he didn't kill anyone for crying out loud.

It's because he shared them online. That's the reason he got the maximum fine.

It's like the thing with the PS3 and the rootkey. Noone really cares what you do personally, but the moment you start spreading it around to others, they will fuck you up.

 

[Braedan]

I have no experience with such matters, but couldn't someone just declare bankruptcy?
Then all they would have to do is rebuild their credit.

 

[QuantumT]

I have no experience with such matters, but couldn't someone just declare bankruptcy?
Then all they would have to do is rebuild their credit.

Which conveniently enough isn't even all that hard, because as a college student, he didn't have much to begin with.

I'm amazed at all the "I don't see the point, they'll never get the money" comments.

It's not about the money. It's about scaring the shit out of everyone else. Trust me, it's working.

Basically, every person who is making a post like that is showing how little it scares them.

 

[trooper6]

I have no experience with such matters, but couldn't someone just declare bankruptcy?
Then all they would have to do is rebuild their credit.

I believe the Republicans in the legislatures a few years ago under Bush made it more difficult for people who are not businesses to declare bankruptcy. So, there's that.

But, what does this suit mean? Off to the Supreme Court.

Also note...of that $675,000...how much is going to go to the artist in question? $0

Who are the biggest thieves? The RIAA.

 

[godfist88]

I don't see the purpose of this, so the RIAA crushes the life of one guy. Grats I guess? They do know there's not a snowball's chance in hell of them ever seeing all that money right? I mean ffs sake, I'm all for protecting copyrights and all that stuff but ruining someone's life over it? Who the hell gets that money anyway? It's sure not going to the artists who's songs the guy downloaded, that much I know.

They're making an example out of him. It sucks but they think that this will stop people from downloading music illegally.

Exactly how many people have they made examples of anyway?

 

[Kopikatsu]

I don't see the purpose of this, so the RIAA crushes the life of one guy. Grats I guess? They do know there's not a snowball's chance in hell of them ever seeing all that money right? I mean ffs sake, I'm all for protecting copyrights and all that stuff but ruining someone's life over it? Who the hell gets that money anyway? It's sure not going to the artists who's songs the guy downloaded, that much I know.

They're making an example out of him. It sucks but they think that this will stop people from downloading music illegally.

Exactly how many people have they made examples of anyway?

Not enough apparently, because people aren't stopping. And they're going to continue until it stops. But it won't.

So let's just say 'infinite'.

 

[poleboy]

The real problem here is that we have somehow been convinced that art = money. Until we can change this basic premise, a lot of bottom feeders are going to suck onto artists and try and squeeze as much money out of them as possible, widening the gulf between the artist and their audience in the process. And they in turn will spawn new bottom-feeding leeches like the RIAA, whose main purpose is to rage at bits of data being moved around.

I mean, does anyone actually believe that any of this money will go to artists, or even recording companies? How do you even define the fictional loss of money from a fictional sale, which is what the RIAA does all the time? You can't, which is why this money can only be used for three things: Hookers, blow and suing more people for moving bits of data around.

 

[Braedan]

I have no experience with such matters, but couldn't someone just declare bankruptcy?
Then all they would have to do is rebuild their credit.

I believe the Republicans in the legislatures a few years ago under Bush made it more difficult for people who are not businesses to declare bankruptcy. So, there's that.

But, what does this suit mean? Off to the Supreme Court.

Also note...of that $675,000...how much is going to go to the artist in question? $0

Who are the biggest thieves? The RIAA.

Ah, I see. I'm not from the land of the soaring eagle.

Honestly though, there should be something to protect people from getting sued for 20 times their yearly salary for crimes that did not significantly affect anyone. Sharing music is bad? sure, but really now, if they garnished someone's wages so they could do nothing but eat, sleep, and drive to work he probably couldn't pay this off for fifty years.

Time to move out of the USA for this guy?