Court Affirms $675K Penalty In Music-Downloading Case

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Damn, I feel bad for this guy. Honestly, everyone agrees that artists need to be paid for their work and you shouldn't pirate music but $675,000 for 31 songs is absolutely ridiculous. :(

A federal court in Massachusetts today upheld a $675,000 damages award against Joel Tenenbaum, who was accused of illegally downloading 31 songs from a fire-sharing Web site and sued by the main recording companies in the U.S. "We are pleased with the District Court's decision," was the comment from the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), which is the industry trade group.
Click to expand...
 
This penalty is way too steep and shows the failure in our justice system. Example or not, it's not right.
 
And little or none of that will go to artists the RIAA claims were hurt by this. If I were a judge on cases like this, I'd require that the RIAA divide up a large percent of that among those artists they deemed hurt by the sharing of their content and give them a deadline to show proof that the artists received the money.
 
In my opinion, if the guy has a good laywer, he will arrange a post-verdict confidential settlement for way less money (a nominal amount) and then publicly repent. The RIAA really wants the big scary headline, not the money.
 
the bad news is he's paying for everyone else who download it. i mean seriously they are actually putting more efforts/wasting more money on finding people like this and than making it by taking the bigger cuts of settlement like this.
 
That's just fucking pathetic. Whether you think music piracy is right or wrong or whatever, that penalty is completely and utterly absurd, you could do so many worse things and never get anywhere near that penalty.
 
pgwalsh said:
This penalty is way too steep and shows the failure in our justice system. Example or not, it's not right.
Click to expand...
As sad as that sounds, you're totally right. Owing that kind of money for 30 songs is just a death sentence. Blowing them all to hell would be eye for an eye.

What would be ironic if this guy started a campaign for people to help donate to him. I could see a lot of people giving him money for this. I can see it now, help save man from RIAA assholes.
 
In 2007, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the trade group of the top four record companies, filed a copyright infringement suit against Tenenbaum, a then-college student from Boston who was accused of illegally downloading 31 songs from a file-sharing Web site.
Click to expand...

Wait .. he DOWNLOADED? Or Uploaded the music? If he downloaded the songs (worth about $31 dollars), why should his fine be so excessively high? Either way, it is excessive and I hope they never see a dime.
 
pcgeekesq said:
In my opinion, if the guy has a good laywer, he will arrange a post-verdict confidential settlement for way less money (a nominal amount) and then publicly repent. The RIAA really wants the big scary headline, not the money.
Click to expand...
there's no way

first of all he has a good lawyer...if you consider a Harvard Law Professor a good one.

secondly, he was ordered to pay this amount in 2007 at the conclusion of his trial.

the judge actually agreed with him that the jury amount was excessive and reduced the penalty.

the RIAA appealed the decision to this federal court judge who subsequently ruled in their favor and reversed the lower court's reversal of the penalty.

His attorney appealed to the US Supreme Court but was denied review.

so it's done and the RIAA wants their money *and* the headlines.
why wouldn't they?
 
Only music I've ever downloaded is music I have on vinyl or cd. Makes me wonder if that's legal or not. These draconian sentences are a pr nightmare for the record companies. They need to think of a new music distribution system. Mucisians need to self produce, promote and distribute. That way if I pay $$$ for an album (download or cd) I know it's going to the right people. Who wants to rippoff his favorite artist? I know I don't.
 
mope54 said:
there's no way

first of all he has a good lawyer...if you consider a Harvard Law Professor a good one.

secondly, he was ordered to pay this amount in 2007 at the conclusion of his trial.

the judge actually agreed with him that the jury amount was excessive and reduced the penalty.

the RIAA appealed the decision to this federal court judge who subsequently ruled in their favor and reversed the lower court's reversal of the penalty.

His attorney appealed to the US Supreme Court but was denied review.

so it's done and the RIAA wants their money *and* the headlines.
why wouldn't they?
Click to expand...

Isn't it amazing who the RIAA has in it's back pocket? Money buys "justice" in the United States and you'll notice I specified justice in quotes. Slowly and assuredly, the U.S. justice and legislature branches are being bought by big business to do it's dirty bidding.
 
It's been said before, but he would've owed less money if he had physically broken into a record store and stolen the CDs with the songs on them.
 
RIAA can go fuck themselves. I hope this guy pretty much gives them the middle finger and doesn't pay them a dime for life. He's already financially ruined, so not paying them doesn't really do anymore damage.
 
I tried to add to my my post but it won't do it for some reason. If I walked into a record store and walked out with 31 songs under my arm without paying what kind of punnishement could I expect? Make the punishement fit the crime or it will have no deterrent effect whatsoever. It just becomes an act of public disobedience. Like underage drinking or smoking pot. 90% Of the population does it at one point or another and nobody gives a damn exept out of touch lawenforcement. Give someone a $250 fine (like for littering) and pay for the songs and it suddenly makes a lot more sense.
 
Wow this is some scary shit you guys got going on over in the USA. Comparing you justice system to ones of the past could be done, I won't.
 
I say he owes $31 dollars for 31 songs + legal fees and court costs at most.
 
The justice system in this country is so fucked it's pretty pathetic.

Real criminals are released with a slap on a wrist while people who download music get ass raped.
 
Jury fails at math.

$675000 is like 67500 albums. 31 tracks is like 2 albums.

So jury is assuming he uploaded 67k albums. Such bullshit. They are charging him for the damage that others will cause when they upload the upload of this guy's upload.

since he was just in college in 2007, he likely has no money and can just declare bankruptcy or something. "here, take my (lack of) assets". There should be some way he doesn't have to pay a cent.
 
Maybe those in charge of the US justice system have watched/read too many dystopian future movies/novels and are trying to put it into practice.
 
He's not going to pay a red cent.

$675,000? You can't squeeze Mountain Dew out of a pineapple. The RIAA just wants to scare people. It's not going to work, but try telling them that.
 
Unless the guy has a super high paying job, the money will never be paid. Of course his pay will be garnished, but who said he needs a real job anyway?
 
dr.kevin said:
Jury fails at math.

$675000 is like 67500 albums. 31 tracks is like 2 albums.

So jury is assuming he uploaded 67k albums. Such bullshit. They are charging him for the damage that others will cause when they upload the upload of this guy's upload.

since he was just in college in 2007, he likely has no money and can just declare bankruptcy or something. "here, take my (lack of) assets". There should be some way he doesn't have to pay a cent.
Click to expand...

That's the sick part. You can't bankrupt default this kind of debt. He is stuck with that debt for the rest of his life or until the debt is paid. If the debt is not paid, he risks additional fines, penalties or jailtime. So they've currently taken his Liberty and soon they'll take his Freedom. I can't see how the Supreme Court Justice refused to review this case considering its a travesty of justice.
 
You know...wonder if the guy has considered a countersuit? I am sure there is some reason that would be good enough.
 
So I actually went to school with this guy (he was my TA) and heard a lot about this when it first went down. It's kind of bullshit that the courts are upholding the fine, but he's going to keep fighting it, just the kind of guy he is.
 
He should go to the RIAA headquarters to make the first payment and accidentally trip on something, then sue for damages. $675k worth.
 
pgwalsh said:
This penalty is way too steep and shows the failure in our justice system. Example or not, it's not right.
Click to expand...

+1 This guy is forever in debt because of those retards. Approx 22k per song is fucken stupid. They can be bought for $0.99c on Amazon or iTunes. Much like shoplifting, make the guy pay a $50 fine and pay $0.99c per song and call it a day but that would be to easy I guess. I am not saying the guy was in the right but I feel sorry for the guy at the same time.
 
"There was further evidence about the scope and scale of Tenenbaum's infringement activities. His illegal conduct lasted for at least eight years, from 1999 to 2007...During that time, he not only downloaded but also distributed thousands of copyrighted works to users of peer-to-peer file-sharing networks...He personally received multiple warnings from various sources."
 
PrkChpXprss said:
"There was further evidence about the scope and scale of Tenenbaum's infringement activities. His illegal conduct lasted for at least eight years, from 1999 to 2007...During that time, he not only downloaded but also distributed thousands of copyrighted works to users of peer-to-peer file-sharing networks...He personally received multiple warnings from various sources."
Click to expand...

:D and :eek:
 
He willfully and arrogantly stole and distributed someone else's work? Then, despite repeated warnings, continued to do it? I say fu-k his sh-t up. Every penny of that $675K should go to the 31 artists.
 
Bigc208 said:
Only music I've ever downloaded is music I have on vinyl or cd. Makes me wonder if that's legal or not. These draconian sentences are a pr nightmare for the record companies. They need to think of a new music distribution system. Mucisians need to self produce, promote and distribute. That way if I pay $$$ for an album (download or cd) I know it's going to the right people. Who wants to rippoff his favorite artist? I know I don't.
Click to expand...

A guy I've known since I was a kid is working on an indy music/art social media ecommerce site that works just like that, it's called Artazaar but I don't know if the site is fully functional yet. He's been working on it for like 2 years.
 
PrkChpXprss said:
He willfully and arrogantly stole and distributed someone else's work? Then, despite repeated warnings, continued to do it? I say fu-k his sh-t up. Every penny of that $675K should go to the 31 artists.
Click to expand...

They probably wont see a dime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top