The Magic Caf
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Food for thought » » Buying DVDs by Mistake (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5
Bill Hallahan
View Profile
Inner circle
New Hampshire
3223 Posts

Profile of Bill Hallahan
I already pointed out, it's difficult to legally prove the theft of a single song. It requires a number of conditions are proven that will not occur in most cases. It is easier to prove that someone who has a very large number of songs has committed theft. It is costly to lose suits, so risky cases shouldn’t be pursued. All of this is written above.

Quote:
And if you can’t start at one then why not 50 or a 100? Surely people are not making the same mistake 50 or a 100 times, as I have written before the reason they are not doing this and the reason for the arbitrary (cough, cough) number THEY came up with, is because, the RIAA is trying to save a buck just like the very people they are suing.

If you can’t distinguish the difference between these two different methods of saving a buck, then further debate is pointless.
Humans make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to create boredom. Quite astonishing.
- The character of ‘Death’ in the movie "Hogswatch"
kihei kid
View Profile
Inner circle
Dog House
1039 Posts

Profile of kihei kid
Quote:
On 2005-10-11 23:57, Bill Hallahan wrote:
I already pointed out, it's difficult to legally prove the theft of a single song.

And as I have pointed out, who’s going to fight them? Out of the some 13,500 lawsuits NOT ONE has ever gone to court. Nobody, but nobody has the time, money or resources to fight someone with the deep pockets of the big business shark machine.

And if you feel you can not go after folks with a single song why not 50 or a 100? Surely people are not making the same mistake 50 or a 100 times. The answer is simple the RIAA came up with their random (cough, cough) number so they can work things in their favor.
Quote:
It requires a number of conditions are proven that will not occur in most cases. It is easier to prove that someone who has a very large number of songs has committed theft. It is costly to lose suits, so risky cases shouldn’t be pursued.

Doing the right thing is almost always going to be more expensive and more painful.
Quote:
If you can’t distinguish the difference between these two different methods of saving a buck

Tisk-Tisk. Nice trick (pun intended) and a clever choice of words but this is the second time now that you have quoted me from one part of my post but failed to cite my reasons from another, and just in case you missed it here’s were it happened before…
Quote:
On 2005-08-30 14:28, kihei kid wrote:
You quoted me from one post but failed to cite my other reasons from another. On top of that please re-read what you back quoted me on. Their suing old people and children and leaving people in their own backyard ALONE. Is this how you define justice? If it is you and I have different outlook on justice.

Here are just SOME of the other REASONS I cited previously as to why I feel this whole thing is a sham…

First, is it O.K. they are mowing over the innocent along with the “guilty?” THEY have already acknowledged THEMSELVES mistakes have been made, how many mistakes have been missed?

How many innocent people have paid because they can’t afford to fight, what this means is the RIAA has taken money (stole) from the innocent in their effort to save a buck themselves, just like the vary people they are suing.

I’ll repeat myself again, When presented with the option of just sucking it up and paying $3,000 to $10,000 and going on with your life, or spending time in court, paying lawyers' fees and risking huge fines nearing a million dollars, the prudent choice for many is to simply take the deal.

It's almost a form of LEGALIZED EXTORTION. Out of the thousands of lawsuits it’s highly likely that at least one and much, much more likely many more person(s) may have been innocent but never got their just do in court because they can’t afford to fight.

They came up with an arbitrary (cough, cough) number in order to save a buck and ended up running over the innocent along with the “guilty,” they could care less about who and how this effects other people and their lives and I’ll back quote myself here…
Quote:
ONE case in point was in September of 03, in the RIAA's subpoena-and-sue strategy it was blatantly obvious that they had been a bit hasty (to say the least). They openly admitted that one of the lawsuits they filed was a mistake (ooops, sorry about that) and there's no evidence the woman in question shared any music files.

They therefore dropped the lawsuit against the 66-year-old woman who doesn't even seem sure what file sharing software is - and is highly unlikely (to say the least, again) to have been sharing hardcore rap songs, as the RIAA contended in the lawsuit they filed against her.

As incredible as this story may seem and as further evidence that their lawsuits are a sick real life scenario and even more proof that what they are doing is wrong, the despicable RIAA's lawyers were not apologetic about their mistake, saying: "Please note, however, that we will continue our review of the issues you raised and we reserve the right to re-file the complaint against Mrs. Ward if and when circumstances warrant."

Second, are all these lawsuits they are filing frivolous in the first place? While an internet account may be in one persons name, the burden should be on the RIAA to prove who did the actual sharing -- not who owns the account. I’ll say it again, To my knowledge none of the estimated 13,500 ordinary Americans have been found “guilty” of anything because not one of them has ever appeared before a judge.

It's clearly impossible for an ordinary person with ordinary resources to take on the multi-billion-dollar industry with its bottomless pockets and legions of highly paid lawyers.

Not that this stops RIAA spinsters from implying thousands of people have been found “guilty” of the crime of sharing music with each other, an assertion faithfully repeated by the mainstream media as though it comes from credible sources. And the time-honored maxim “Innocent until proven Guilty” goes by the board.

Third, is file sharing really stealing as the RIAA contends? I‘m not so sure that it is and many others feel the same as I. This bears repeating, I don't think mere file sharing is a copyright violation. If someone can share a copyrighted C.D. without violating the copyright laws, why couldn't they share a digital song without violating the copyright laws?

Fourth, is it O.K. that out of some 13,500 people, that nobody has had their day in court?

Fifth, was the RIAA losing money in the first place? There are numerous indications that they were not.
Quote:
further debate is pointless.

No sweat, however I did raise some very valid points and some of them it seems have gotten lost in the written word. To surmise, the RIAA feels as though file sharing is theft and was given the green light by the courts to go after file sharers, so what did they do?

THEY came up with an arbitrary (cough, cough) number, sued whomever they felt like suing in order to save a buck even if that meant taking money from the innocent along with the “guilty.”

You will never convince me that the big business shark machine was not cognizant of the fact that this is exactly what would happen all along, I don’t believe for one second that they are dumb. In the end they took money (and continue to do so) from people who supposedly were taking money from them, that my friend is a clear cut case of hypocrisy.
In loving memory of Hughie Thomasson 1952-2007.

You brought something beautiful to this world, you touched my heart, my soul and my life. You will be greatly missed.

Until we meet again “my old friend”.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Food for thought » » Buying DVDs by Mistake (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2023 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.04 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL