Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Opposing Views)   You shared 30 songs online? That'll be $675K please   (opposingviews.com ) divider line 16
    More: Asinine, online, Copyright Act, Joel Tenenbaum, United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, Kazaa  
•       •       •

8445 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jun 2013 at 10:45 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-06-26 11:50:30 AM  
3 votes:

Jument: wruley: Jument: Now anyone can stream music from their computer for free.

Um, no, they can't. Not legally, anyways.

Heard of Pandora? It is 100% legal and free to me. They do play audio commercials about every 30 minutes, but I do not pay anything out of pocket for the service.

They pay for the music they stream and make the money back through ads. You may not be paying cash money but someone is. Next.


Don't be obtuse. If I can stream it to me with out costs, that's free to me and satisfies the intent of the article. You're intentionally missing the point. The examples provided of Spotify, Grooveshark (youtube, soundcloud, OC remix etc, on and on) are examples of 'free' streaming. You do not submit money to them to use the content. There is money exchanged, it is not between you and the party streaming you the music. Don't be obtuse.
2013-06-26 12:06:46 PM  
2 votes:
When are some of these artists going to stand up to the RIAA? The money they sue for that is supposedly taken from the artists......never makes it to the artists.
kab
2013-06-26 11:56:04 AM  
2 votes:

Jument: They pay for the music they stream and make the money back through ads. You may not be paying cash money but someone is. Next.


The wording here is what's causing the argument. Streaming music FROM your computer implies that you're acting as a server, which is afaik still illegal. Spotify youtube, etc let you stream TO your computer.

Your average artist won't make a dime from either scenario, so it really doesn't matter.
2013-06-26 11:45:41 AM  
2 votes:

Jument: wruley: Jument: Now anyone can stream music from their computer for free.

Um, no, they can't. Not legally, anyways.

Heard of Pandora? It is 100% legal and free to me. They do play audio commercials about every 30 minutes, but I do not pay anything out of pocket for the service.

They pay for the music they stream and make the money back through ads. You may not be paying cash money but someone is. Next.


OMG, your argument is pedantic and lame. Of course anything online will cost money for servers, etc. Dumb point. Next.
2013-06-26 10:48:00 AM  
2 votes:
RIAA DIAF
2013-06-27 08:17:27 AM  
1 vote:

kab: Both equate to acquisition of an item without monetary compensation.


. . . which has nothing to do with any of this.  Court fines aren't imposed for what someone has received, they're (supposedly) compensating for what the other party has lost, or as a punitive measure.
2013-06-26 02:41:00 PM  
1 vote:
www.piccer.nl

/Obligatory
2013-06-26 12:31:18 PM  
1 vote:

kab: Jument: They pay for the music they stream and make the money back through ads. You may not be paying cash money but someone is. Next.

The wording here is what's causing the argument. Streaming music FROM your computer implies that you're acting as a server, which is afaik still illegal. Spotify youtube, etc let you stream TO your computer.

Your average artist won't make a dime from either scenario, so it really doesn't matter.


The artists do get a minuscule amount of money per play on Pandora, Spotify, etc (usually fractions of a cent per play).  If you have a song that's being played millions of times, it can turn into real money, if not, it doesn't.  Of course, the label, managers, studio, etc, get their cut out of that as well.

However, both the legitimate streaming services and the P2P networks have been proven to increase real purchases.   P2P users in particular actually buy more music than non users.

The big problem with the RIAA and MPAA arguments about the problem of P2P and piracy is that they're built on the false premise that every download is a lost sale.  Most people downloading a ton of music would never have bought it in the first place, but there's a good chance that after downloading something they'll find a new band or style of music they enjoy, and then turn to traditional or legitimate digital music sources to buy more of that music.
2013-06-26 12:22:20 PM  
1 vote:

Petroleum Oligarch: I'm not sure I follow. If he stole a cd with 30 tracks, I doubt he would see much jail time, and he dfinitely wouldn't have to pay almost $700k.


In the UK at least it's pretty much a slap on the wrist, a caution from plod about being naughty and MAYBE a small punitive fine (like £50 or so) and perhaps you have to apologise to the store and actually give them money for the goods you tried to rip off.  For a first time offence obviously.   So the total fine, assuming he didn't end up in front of a magistrate and have to pay costs would be £70ish and perhaps £200 at most if he did have to go and see the magistrate due to the store being total dicks (which is their right and you did try ripping them off).


It's why I'm always quick to point out that Copyright Infringement isn't theft and falls under a wholly different set of laws.  If it WAS theft you wouldn't get insane fines like this.

kab: Your average artist won't make a dime from either scenario, so it really doesn't matter.


shiats given: 0.
Should a, could a, would a.  BUT YOU DIDN'T.  Most certainly applies in this situation, artists were well aware that the world was changing and that there were better deals to be had (that may of included more ball ache management or the need to hire staff sure) but instead they passively stood by whilst the RIAA butfarked both THEM and their AUDIENCE!   So now if some artist says "I don't see a dime from YouTube or Spotiffy" I point, laugh and hit "play" on the client.

Could a, Should a, Would a.
2013-06-26 12:17:32 PM  
1 vote:

waterrockets: AUAIOMRN: waterrockets: Yeah, there are penalties for stealing shiat and helping people steal shiat. Deal with it.

Some thieves are such pussies.

Do you believe the punishment fits the crime?

That's tough to say. I don't think it's an order of magnitude unreasonable. $22K per song, to intentionally provide someone's owned material for millions of people to steal. It's high, but it doesn't raise an eyebrow. I didn't participate in Kazaa/Napster/whatever for just this reason, as at the time, I believed the penalties for any prosecuted cases would be extremely high. I'll speed a little every so often on open roads b/c I'm not all that concerned about $200 and safe driving course. Theft at an Internet scale is an entirely different ball game.


The ruling just shows how out of date our copyright laws are. The fines were created to deter commercial piracy, the intent was never to punish non-commercial minor infringers. The record labels would have never thought about going after someone making a mix tape for a friend, or burning a couple CDs and handing them out. The ability to track P2P users doesn't mean that sharing music in that fashion is any more nefarious than making a mix tape or copying a friend's CD.

The argument that his seeding of the sounds created thousands of copies is flawed - he didn't put anything out there that wasn't already loose in the wild. If he hadn't been available to seed from, the same songs would have been downloaded from somewhere else.
Some minor penalty would have been appropriate - the cost of the songs he downloaded plus a fine of a couple hundred dollars to discourage him from doing it again.
2013-06-26 11:45:11 AM  
1 vote:

waterrockets: SovietCanuckistan: Jument: SovietCanuckistan: Jument: Now anyone can stream music from their computer for free.

Um, no, they can't. Not legally, anyways.

Youtube? You might have heard about it, it's kind of a big deal.

They are aggressive about not leaving copyrighted content up.

True, but I have listened to Thrift Shop about a 1000 times and Macklemore has never gotten a penny from me.

Yeah, but advertisers have gotten your eyeballs, and/or your ears, so they pay for it. Time is money. You paid.


Yes but the positive thing is that he learned that he does not need to buy expensive T-shirts, instead he can go to a thrift shop, so the music pays for itself. It's a win-win.
2013-06-26 11:19:54 AM  
1 vote:

KrispyKritter: if he was stealing items from a store at the rate TFA reads he stole online he'd be in a cell. as is he'll have to own cash business(es) to have some income to show and some income to hide. still beats being locked up.


I'm not sure I follow. If he stole a cd with 30 tracks, I doubt he would see much jail time, and he dfinitely wouldn't have to pay almost $700k.
2013-06-26 11:12:52 AM  
1 vote:
At this point he should just share millions of songs, video, etc.
2013-06-26 11:12:39 AM  
1 vote:

waterrockets: Yeah, there are penalties for stealing shiat and helping people steal shiat. Deal with it.

Some thieves are such pussies.


Do you believe the punishment fits the crime?
2013-06-26 10:54:49 AM  
1 vote:

Jument: Now anyone can stream music from their computer for free.

Um, no, they can't. Not legally, anyways.


Youtube? You might have heard about it, it's kind of a big deal.
2013-06-26 10:50:40 AM  
1 vote:

Jument: Now anyone can stream music from their computer for free.

Um, no, they can't. Not legally, anyways.


Spotify is illegal?
 
Displayed 16 of 16 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report