If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Law.com)   Judge: "You want how much from LimeWire?" Records Execs: "75 trillion dollars." Judge: "You do know that's five times the national debt, right?" Record Execs: "Potato"   (law.com) divider line 288
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

36920 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Mar 2011 at 2:30 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



288 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-03-22 03:11:03 PM  
All the downloading is just payback for all the a$$raping of artists done by the "music industry".
 
2011-03-22 03:11:56 PM  
This is what, like decade 3 of suing napster?
 
2011-03-22 03:13:24 PM  

MurphyMurphy: DREW CURTIS I'M SUING YOU FOR 5 GAZILLION BAGILLION IALLIANOOGLEPLEX 10E^5ZILLION DOLLARS!

markb289: Came for Dr. Evil $100 Billion Dollars reference. Leaving disappointed.

RIAA= Dr. Evil but not as funny.

Any Lawyer who asks for $75 Trillion Dollars should be permanently disbarred for wasting the time of the Court and for being a complete and total asshat. shot on sight and have his head displayed on a pike outside the courthouse dipped in brown gravy and dropped into a closet with a pack of wolverines hopped up on angel dust.

ftfy

i'm feeling a bit medieval today


Me too.
 
2011-03-22 03:13:29 PM  

justoneznot: Treygreen13: Limewire is one of the finest virus delivery programs out there. If you can't get your hands on the newest version of Bonzi Buddy then it is your go-to source for all the keyloggers and autodialers you'll ever need.

lol Bonzi Buddy. My girlfriend at the time told me "I got this really cute thing on my computer, it's called Bonzi Buddy" I was like what?? You actually downloaded that and use it??? Delete that thing immediately!

And programs like limewire aren't necessary anymore, most albums are on sites like megaupload, mediafire, and rapidshare. I'm surprised they haven't been sued out the ass yet.


Just deleting it was never enough. I used to spend hours getting rid of that crap when my sister would download it over my dial up modem on my brand new Gateway computer, fresh out of the cow box.

Fortunately, scrubbing that crap off my computer taught me how to get rid of the even worse stuff that my friends inevitably get and bring to me.
 
2011-03-22 03:15:03 PM  

Tommy Moo: Serious question: Say Limewire agrees to settle for $50M. How much of that money will be awarded to the artists who lost income because of file sharing? How much will be dispersed among RIAA execs in the form of bonuses?



Ooh! Ooh! I know these.

1. None of it.
2. All of it.
 
gfs
2011-03-22 03:16:50 PM  
Judge: "You do know that's ONLY five times the national debt, right?"

FTFY
 
2011-03-22 03:17:01 PM  

Weaver95: who the hell still uses limewire!?


trillionaires, apparently.
 
2011-03-22 03:17:49 PM  
I used to feel 'guilty' about using peer-to-peer, but upon realizing that everything I was downloading was stuff I'd already paid for & I just wanted a version that'd play on my ipod. Even Adobe software allows you to install multiple copies of software for the same initial price (limits to 2X, but still.)

Granted, I'm a geezer, but there's no way I will spend a cent on something that I've already purchased on vinyl, cassette or CD.
 
2011-03-22 03:18:14 PM  

CleverGuy81: the only companies i can think of that would have that much money are umbrella corp and north central positronics.


But the Tet Corporation will ruin their plans, ruin them I say!
 
2011-03-22 03:19:51 PM  

thomps: i say the judge allows the award, requires the record companies to recognize the gain right away rather than if they ever actually collect, and then tax them on the income. then when they can't pay, we transfer our national debt to the record industry. ta-da, debt-free USA.


I would like to subscribe to your newsletter. Or at least download it illegally off the internet.
 
2011-03-22 03:19:56 PM  

ThunderChicken: MurphyMurphy: DREW CURTIS I'M SUING YOU FOR 5 GAZILLION BAGILLION IALLIANOOGLEPLEX 10E^5ZILLION DOLLARS!

markb289: Came for Dr. Evil $100 Billion Dollars reference. Leaving disappointed.

RIAA= Dr. Evil but not as funny.

Any Lawyer who asks for $75 Trillion Dollars should be permanently disbarred for wasting the time of the Court and for being a complete and total asshat. shot on sight and have his head displayed on a pike outside the courthouse dipped in brown gravy and dropped into a closet with a pack of wolverines hopped up on angel dust.

ftfy

i'm feeling a bit medieval today

Me too.


They are both good ideas.

/I am a lawyer and I can't stand these RIAA D-Bags and the D-Bags who represent them.
 
2011-03-22 03:20:05 PM  
img.photobucket.com
 
2011-03-22 03:20:43 PM  
Anyone here have their GED in Law?

I lost a 33 year record collection in a house fire. I had probably three thousand albums, everything from 8-tracks to vinyl to cassettes to CDs, and over five hundred singles, mostly vinyl 45s but some cassette singles. I had every album and single because I loved the music.

If I were to download music from a peer to peer site for free could I get in trouble? See I already purchased the music once, sometimes more than that if I had it on more than one different format. I need my music back it's the soundtrack to my life!

I've paid for it I just need it back.
 
2011-03-22 03:22:19 PM  
I remember seeing my brother's computer plastered with Bonzi Buddy. He got it from Limewire.

I used Frostwire for a while, ditched it for IRC and torrents, which I then ditched for usenet.
 
2011-03-22 03:23:31 PM  

elffster: Im on 2400 baud dial-up, so I am getting a kick out of these replies.......sssssllllllllllooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwllllllllllllyyyyyy


farm6.static.flickr.com
 
2011-03-22 03:24:02 PM  
1) A vast majority of people who download illegally would've never bought the crap in the first place.

2) Stop making crap and people would probably pay for it.

3)No record companies combined could make 75 trillion dollars with of products.

4) If record companies were really hurting for money, they wouldn't be able to afford their lawyers.
 
2011-03-22 03:24:40 PM  

OK So Amuse Me: Anyone here have their GED in Law?

I lost a 33 year record collection in a house fire. I had probably three thousand albums, everything from 8-tracks to vinyl to cassettes to CDs, and over five hundred singles, mostly vinyl 45s but some cassette singles. I had every album and single because I loved the music.

If I were to download music from a peer to peer site for free could I get in trouble? See I already purchased the music once, sometimes more than that if I had it on more than one different format. I need my music back it's the soundtrack to my life!

I've paid for it I just need it back.


Normally, I'd say yes, but the sheer volume of music that you'd be downloading would surely attract attention from the scum-sucking pigs at the RIAA.
 
2011-03-22 03:25:29 PM  

ZAZ: My understanding of U.S. copyright law says the plaintiff can always elect at least the statutory minimum per work copied, even if the evidence proves there was only one copy made at a fair market value of $1.

In reality lawsuits where there was really only one copy made are rare. The statutory award is designed to compensate for a pattern of violations.


Not really. They were designed to deal with physical copying of an item and it was pretty unlikely that millions or even billions of infringements could happen. The whole system is very outdated when dealing with digital copyright and is in need of a serious rewrite.
 
2011-03-22 03:26:09 PM  

OK So Amuse Me: Anyone here have their GED in Law?

I lost a 33 year record collection in a house fire. I had probably three thousand albums, everything from 8-tracks to vinyl to cassettes to CDs, and over five hundred singles, mostly vinyl 45s but some cassette singles. I had every album and single because I loved the music.

If I were to download music from a peer to peer site for free could I get in trouble? See I already purchased the music once, sometimes more than that if I had it on more than one different format. I need my music back it's the soundtrack to my life!

I've paid for it I just need it back.


would you feel comfortable going to a record store and just taking new copies of your old collection? if not, then i'd say you probably shouldn't expect to not get in trouble for torrenting your old collection. you should also probably get homeowners/renters insurance.
 
2011-03-22 03:28:40 PM  

Theaetetus: Actually, it's a reasonable issue, believe it or not...

The statute is 15 USC 504(c)(1):
"... the copyright owner may elect...to recover, instead of actual damages and profits, an award of statutory damages for all infringements involved in the action, with respect to any one work, for which any one infringer is liable individually, or for which any two or more infringers are liable jointly and severally, in a sum of not less than $750 or more than $30,000 as the court considers just."

The statute allows for statutory damages of between $750-$30k (or up to $150k for willful infringement in 504(c)(2)) per work, "for all infringements involved in the action."
The RIAA's position is that Limewire-UserA is one infringement, Limewire-UserB is another infringement, Limewire-UserC is another infringement, etc. Limewire's position is that if all of those copies are with respect to one work, that they should all be aggregated.

Here, I think the judge is right - it's aggregated by work, which was an explicit change from the old "per page copied" standard back in the mid 1800s.

Now, this doesn't actually help Limewire much. There are over 10,000 works alleged to be infringed here, so they're still looking at between $7.5m and $1.5b in statutory damages.



The check's in the mail.
 
2011-03-22 03:28:41 PM  

Kazrath: They were designed to deal with physical copying of an item and it was pretty unlikely that millions or even billions of infringements could happen. The whole system is very outdated when dealing with digital copyright and is in need of a serious rewrite.


Not so. Congress addressed it just about a decade ago, and made explicit references to digital copies. You may have heard about it: the act was called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
 
2011-03-22 03:29:07 PM  

zleviticus: #bi-winning


Hot?
 
2011-03-22 03:29:45 PM  

Farker T: The check's in the mail.


Heh. Since my amicus brief in Tenenbaum, neither side likes me much. :D
 
2011-03-22 03:31:30 PM  

CrazyCracka420: ne2d: Theaetetus: Blame Congress

This is Fark. We don't blame the government for anything it does. It's all the corporations' fault.

I'm as liberal as it comes for social issues. I've never once blamed a corporation for doing whatever it can for it's bottom line. They're in the business of making money, not pleasing me. Anyone who says otherwise is delusional. I blame the government for letting corporations get away with what they do, and for basically allowing corporations to run our government. This was my argument before we allowed companies to finance elections openly. Now that Wal-Mart can finance their own candidate for president (out in the open), we're all completely farked. Our government is broken, and until we fix 2 fundamental issues, we will continue to be farked more and more. Gotta reform the election process, and also gotta make it so that only one issue is on one bill.


I kinda prefer it be out in the open, since I know they are going to do it anyway. What I would like is that it be even MORE in the open. I'd like to see the logos of the major donors on all campaign signage, memos, press releases, websites and on the representative's clothes. Like race car drivers and bicycle racers.
 
2011-03-22 03:32:19 PM  

OK So Amuse Me: Anyone here have their GED in Law?

I lost a 33 year record collection in a house fire. I had probably three thousand albums, everything from 8-tracks to vinyl to cassettes to CDs, and over five hundred singles, mostly vinyl 45s but some cassette singles. I had every album and single because I loved the music.

If I were to download music from a peer to peer site for free could I get in trouble? See I already purchased the music once, sometimes more than that if I had it on more than one different format. I need my music back it's the soundtrack to my life!

I've paid for it I just need it back.


The RIAA believes that you are paying not for the music itself, but the right to listen to the music, on the specific medium it was purchased for. You cannot download a copy of music you already have on CD, because you only have the right to listen to that song on CD. You would have to purchase all your music again. The RIAA really wants you to pay every single time you listen to the track, but haven't figured out how to manage that yet.

My advice is to look for a program called soulseek, and tell the RIAA to go fark itself.
 
2011-03-22 03:32:24 PM  

thomps: would you feel comfortable going to a record store and just taking new copies of your old collection?


What if you could do that without actually removing the copies the record store had?
 
2011-03-22 03:33:33 PM  
CSB


I got a DMCA for a youtube video I created that I simultaneously posted on another website. What's weird is the company that issued the DMCA is the company I had uploaded the video to after uploading it to youtube.
 
2011-03-22 03:35:55 PM  

phedex: Golden years of music piracy, in order of importance:

1.Napster
2.Scour
3.Kazaa
4.Everything else

I mean, I never used limewire back in the day.


Scour? Kazaa? Napster? Seriously? What a joke.

Try bearshare, DC++, and WinMX or whatever it was called.
 
2011-03-22 03:36:14 PM  

Theaetetus: Congress addressed it just about a decade ago, and made explicit references to digital copies. You may have heard about it: the act was called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.


bought and paid for
 
2011-03-22 03:36:37 PM  

OK So Amuse Me: If I were to download music from a peer to peer site for free could I get in trouble? See I already purchased the music once, sometimes more than that if I had it on more than one different format. I need my music back it's the soundtrack to my life!


I'm willing to bet you that if you wrote your story and sent it individually to the various artists that were in your collection, you would get a lot of cool free swag and probably even a few free performances out of it.
 
2011-03-22 03:36:45 PM  
Isn't suing Lime Wire like suing "BitTorrent" for all the copyright violations that its users do? Lime Wire wasn't (isn't?) a "site" where people download stuff.
 
2011-03-22 03:37:03 PM  
There isn't even that much US currency floating around. Rough estimates of total US currency is $8.3 trillion.

The GDP of the entire world is only $61 trillion. These lawyers are saying that they were damaged in the amount greater than the entire world (including themselves) puts out.
 
2011-03-22 03:37:31 PM  

untaken_name: thomps: would you feel comfortable going to a record store and just taking new copies of your old collection?

What if you could do that without actually removing the copies the record store had?


then you would probably only be liable to copyright holders, rather than the record store. copyrights exist to create a layer of protection for intangible (and therefore infinite) property.
 
2011-03-22 03:39:09 PM  
I lost a 33 year record collection in a house fire. I had probably three thousand albums, everything from 8-tracks to vinyl to cassettes to CDs, and over five hundred singles, mostly vinyl 45s but some cassette singles.

Oh man. I am so sorry (srsly)... that HAD to hurt. I still have 300 +/- LPs, assorted 45s and hundreds of cassettes from my record store days. I've told both my kids that, should there be a fire, I'm rescuing my autographed SRV, Springsteen, Costello, white vinyl copy of the White Album and brown vinyl copy of Captain Fantastic before coming back for them.
 
2011-03-22 03:40:15 PM  

Marine1: OK So Amuse Me: Anyone here have their GED in Law?

I lost a 33 year record collection in a house fire. I had probably three thousand albums, everything from 8-tracks to vinyl to cassettes to CDs, and over five hundred singles, mostly vinyl 45s but some cassette singles. I had every album and single because I loved the music.

If I were to download music from a peer to peer site for free could I get in trouble? See I already purchased the music once, sometimes more than that if I had it on more than one different format. I need my music back it's the soundtrack to my life!

I've paid for it I just need it back.

Normally, I'd say yes, but the sheer volume of music that you'd be downloading would surely attract attention from the scum-sucking pigs at the RIAA.


Not necessarily... If you're not uploading, then the only entities that can detect you downloading are the uploader, and an intermediary. Detecting copyrighted files passing through an intermediary via deep scanning is difficult, if not futile. Accordingly, you're probably only going to be found out if the uploader is the RIAA themselves, and in such a case, you can make a good argument that since they were the ones distributing it, there was no infringement.
The RIAA typically only goes after uploaders. It's much easier to show illegal distribution, the fair use arguments don't exist, and for damages, they can point to the cost of a distribution license.

But this isn't legal advice, just my random musings, and should not be relied upon for any reason whatsoever.
 
2011-03-22 03:40:52 PM  
Eleventy-billion? At what point does somebody say no to the RIAA?
Soon they will be allowed to hunt and kill elderly pensioners and schoolchildren whom they suspect may have copied songs.
 
2011-03-22 03:40:53 PM  

horsepocket: The GDP of the entire world is only $61 trillion. These lawyers are saying that they were damaged in the amount greater than the entire world (including themselves) puts out.


What's even more absurd is the RIAA lawyers saying the entire world's GDP would be 136 trillion has it not been for the people using limewire.
 
2011-03-22 03:41:07 PM  

thomps: untaken_name: thomps: would you feel comfortable going to a record store and just taking new copies of your old collection?

What if you could do that without actually removing the copies the record store had?

then you would probably only be liable to copyright holders, rather than the record store. copyrights exist to create a layer of protection for intangible (and therefore infinite) property.


What was removed from the copyright holders? Don't you only need protection from an infringement upon your rights?
 
2011-03-22 03:41:24 PM  
who uses Limewire? eMule/eDonkey ftw.
 
2011-03-22 03:42:01 PM  

Noobian Noob: Weaver95: who the hell still uses limewire!?

trillionaires, apparently.


lol
 
2011-03-22 03:42:14 PM  

OK So Amuse Me: Anyone here have their GED in Law?

I lost a 33 year record collection in a house fire. I had probably three thousand albums, everything from 8-tracks to vinyl to cassettes to CDs, and over five hundred singles, mostly vinyl 45s but some cassette singles. I had every album and single because I loved the music.

If I were to download music from a peer to peer site for free could I get in trouble? See I already purchased the music once, sometimes more than that if I had it on more than one different format. I need my music back it's the soundtrack to my life!

I've paid for it I just need it back.


According to the laws in the USA, each of those were a license to retain a copy of that music on that particular medium. You didn't own the music since the copyright holder owns it. All that you paid for was a license represented by a physical medium.

Now here's where we have to speculate: It could be argued that since the physical licenses were destroyed in a fire, you no longer own those licenses. If you had a good lawyer, receipts for everything documenting purchasing the licenses, and didn't upload/distribute what you downloaded, you might be able to win a suit against you.

Not trying to pour salt in the wound, however this is what insurance is for. You have my sympathy for your loss and especially if you aren't able to recoup those losses.
 
2011-03-22 03:42:21 PM  

CrazyCracka420: Genju: Andrew Wiggin: yogaFLAME: Weaver95: who the hell still uses limewire!?

I know, right? *fires up kazaa*

you both suck

/opens napster

pffft

/connect irc.undernet.org
/j #mp3passion
@find *my*song*
/ctcp fserv_bot_name my_song

Might want to also use: //mode $me +x

You're welcome

/fires up thepiratebay.org


HAI GUISE!

I MAKEDED U A MIX TAPE!

This is an old (new window) strategy.
 
2011-03-22 03:42:40 PM  

Detinwolf: I remember seeing my brother's computer plastered with Bonzi Buddy. He got it from Limewire.

I used Frostwire for a while, ditched it for IRC and torrents, which I then ditched for usenet.


and the circle is complete
 
2011-03-22 03:43:49 PM  
i've never listened to any music that was ever worth buying
 
2011-03-22 03:43:50 PM  

untaken_name: thomps: untaken_name: thomps: would you feel comfortable going to a record store and just taking new copies of your old collection?

What if you could do that without actually removing the copies the record store had?

then you would probably only be liable to copyright holders, rather than the record store. copyrights exist to create a layer of protection for intangible (and therefore infinite) property.

What was removed from the copyright holders? Don't you only need protection from an infringement upon your rights?


The right to exclude others from their property.
If you trespass across my lawn, you haven't taken my lawn, but I can still kick you off and collect damages.

And this is even better, since there are an infinite number of "lawns", and you can make new ones by being creative. So there's really no reason for you to trespass. Get your own lawn, hippie.
 
2011-03-22 03:44:23 PM  

Injuneer: Eleventy-billion? At what point does somebody say no to the RIAA?
Soon they will be allowed to hunt and kill elderly pensioners and schoolchildren whom they suspect may have copied songs.


Politicians will say no to the RIAA as soon as the RIAA and members of the content cartels have no more money to bribe politicians.

This is why I promote Piracy as a means of revolution. Once we knock down the content cartels then we can talk about equitable methods of paying artists. As long as the content cartels exist though, no artist has any hope of getting a fair deal.
 
2011-03-22 03:45:06 PM  

untaken_name: thomps: untaken_name: thomps: would you feel comfortable going to a record store and just taking new copies of your old collection?

What if you could do that without actually removing the copies the record store had?

then you would probably only be liable to copyright holders, rather than the record store. copyrights exist to create a layer of protection for intangible (and therefore infinite) property.

What was removed from the copyright holders? Don't you only need protection from an infringement upon your rights?


the right to control distribution? i understand that free music is awesome. i understand that the industry is fundamentally different than 15 years ago, but that doesn't mean you can carve out one type of medium from copyright protection.
 
2011-03-22 03:46:46 PM  

fluffy2097: Injuneer: Eleventy-billion? At what point does somebody say no to the RIAA?
Soon they will be allowed to hunt and kill elderly pensioners and schoolchildren whom they suspect may have copied songs.

Politicians will say no to the RIAA as soon as the RIAA and members of the content cartels have no more money to bribe politicians.

This is why I promote Piracy as a means of revolution. Once we knock down the content cartels then we can talk about equitable methods of paying artists. As long as the content cartels exist though, no artist has any hope of getting a fair deal.


That sure is a personally-convenient form of activism... You're not just grabbing stuff for your own enjoyment without paying for it, you're engaging in a political protest! Yeah, that's the ticket!
 
2011-03-22 03:48:22 PM  

Theaetetus: untaken_name: thomps: untaken_name: thomps: would you feel comfortable going to a record store and just taking new copies of your old collection?

What if you could do that without actually removing the copies the record store had?

then you would probably only be liable to copyright holders, rather than the record store. copyrights exist to create a layer of protection for intangible (and therefore infinite) property.

What was removed from the copyright holders? Don't you only need protection from an infringement upon your rights?

The right to exclude others from their property.
If you trespass across my lawn, you haven't taken my lawn, but I can still kick you off and collect damages.

And this is even better, since there are an infinite number of "lawns", and you can make new ones by being creative. So there's really no reason for you to trespass. Get your own lawn, hippie.


And these damages are about equal to the fine you would get for trespassing.
 
2011-03-22 03:48:41 PM  

SphericalTime: See, if people just bought their music legally, record companies would be tens of trillions of dollars richer. These are reasonable damages that are calculated from the actual destructive effect of downloading of music.

Music pirates are the greatest threat to America that has ever been conceived of.

/potato


I don't understand why LimeWire just doesn't write them a check.
Virtual money for the virtual theft. Seems fair to me.
 
Displayed 50 of 288 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report