Court Affirms $675K Penalty In Music-Downloading Case

WBurchnall said:
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.
Click to expand...

i have read you can't be jailed for debt.

now, if this kid can hide his assets well, he can probably avoid having to pay much of the penalty.

or he could just move to panama and live like a king
 
ounumen said:
But they will make his life hell and I support them for it. Enjoy a life time of debt collectors, harrasment calls and the stigma of all of it. Best of luck chump.
Click to expand...

Yeah right, because the RIAA is not doing the same thing :rolleyes:

The RIAA is making money they don't deserve, leeching off the artist. But hey, they are a large corporate, so they can do whatever they want.:rolleyes:
 
Lord Nassirbannipal said:
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.
Click to expand...

BBA said:
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?
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure his life is already in the shitter because of it. I know I don't have $675k to pay them if they decided to come after me, but it'd still be really fucking shit to have to pay all the legal fees and lose basically everything I have just for the sake of 31 songs. THAT'S the part that's supposed to scare people. Losing what little money you have and 5 years of your life.

ounumen said:
But they will make his life hell and I support them for it. Enjoy a life time of debt collectors, harrasment calls and the stigma of all of it. Best of luck chump.
Click to expand...

Are you serious or just trolling? The dude could have walked into a music shop, punched the artist in the face during an album signing, walked out with the album, stolen a car and STILL wouldn't come to owing $675k in fines and damages. But somehow downloading the music off the interwebs is a worse crime than actual physical theft of far more valuable items that will actually massively inconvenience people.

That's just crazy and shows how depressing the "justice" system really is. It feels like the start of some dystopian totalitarian future movie where they start by making completely unjust and unbalanced law systems to control people.:p
 
It is clear that the federal courts are for sale to the highest bidder. Further appeals are useless and a waste as the corporate controlled Supreme Court will simply rule in favor of the RIAA. The moral and proper thing to do at this time is to engage in active resistance by refusing to pay. When the government sends their jack-booted thugs to assault him, record them and expose to the world the corruption of the police of this country and the corporate interests that they serve.
 
If I go into a store, I could attempt to steal a CD. If I succeed, the recording industry isn't out any money, the store is.

If I get caught, however, and all I have is that CD, and it's my first offense, odds are the store will kick me out and ask me to never come back and not press charges because it costs more to do so than the cost of the CD. If they do press charges, it will be a misdemeanor for petty theft, possible public service time and/or a fine of a nominal amount.

Cruel and unusual punishment indeed. I see no difference between one offense and the other.

It reminds me of the FBI warning at the beginning of movies. WARNING! $250,000 fine for doing anything with this other than watching it!

Movies cost between $10-25. I could understand someone being charged 10x or maybe even 100x the cost of the movie to discourage copyright theft. That would mean a maximum fine of $2500 per offense, a crappy amount, but not enough to ruin a person's life. Somehow we have even 100x more than that amount as punishment + time in prison.

"What are you in here for?"
"Murder. You?"
"I made a copy of The Devil Wears Prada for my mom."
 
It's retarded how they can just make up these arbitrary numbers. I see a nice money making scheme out of this though. Make music, put it on pirate bay, sue people who download it. It works for the RIAA, and they don't even have to make the music themselves. :p
 
Basically, this man has been given an economic death penalty for sharing 31 songs.

We can barely punish hardcore criminals. But, commit a victimless crime...

(Yes, victimless. IP law constitutionally exists to promote creativity, not to protect imaginary natural ownership of information.)
 
Tudz said:
I'm pretty sure his life is already in the shitter because of it. I know I don't have $675k to pay them if they decided to come after me, but it'd still be really fucking shit to have to pay all the legal fees and lose basically everything I have just for the sake of 31 songs. THAT'S the part that's supposed to scare people. Losing what little money you have and 5 years of your life.
Click to expand...

He doesn't have to pay anything if he doesn't have the money.

They can sue, sue, sue and win, win, win all they want. It makes no difference if the guy doesn't have the means to pay it.
 
Lord Nassirbannipal said:
He doesn't have to pay anything if he doesn't have the money.

They can sue, sue, sue and win, win, win all they want. It makes no difference if the guy doesn't have the means to pay it.
Click to expand...

But if they win, isn’t he forced by the law to sell off everything to find a way to make the money? He may not be able to pay it all but they will continue to take any money he does manage to make after selling his house and everything he owns. Their point of view basically is, if he can afford to not live on the street, then that money should be going to them.

The RIAA is one of the most evil companies ever for doing nothing but screwing everyone over, from artists to music fans. Any other company that would have a business model with the sole purpose of screwing people over would be shut down by the government, but because they basically buy into the government, they get away with it. It's sad really.
 
Tudz said:
I'm pretty sure his life is already in the shitter because of it. I know I don't have $675k to pay them if they decided to come after me, but it'd still be really fucking shit to have to pay all the legal fees and lose basically everything I have just for the sake of 31 songs. THAT'S the part that's supposed to scare people. Losing what little money you have and 5 years of your life.



Are you serious or just trolling? The dude could have walked into a music shop, punched the artist in the face during an album signing, walked out with the album, stolen a car and STILL wouldn't come to owing $675k in fines and damages. But somehow downloading the music off the interwebs is a worse crime than actual physical theft of far more valuable items that will actually massively inconvenience people.

That's just crazy and shows how depressing the "justice" system really is. It feels like the start of some dystopian totalitarian future movie where they start by making completely unjust and unbalanced law systems to control people.:p
Click to expand...

Not trolling I have no tollerance for thieves.....oops copy right infringment I forgot tool bags like to hide behide that one. Boo hooo. I am enjoying the hell out of it and hope they get more of people like him or you.
 
ounumen said:
Not trolling I have no tollerance for thieves.....oops copy right infringment I forgot tool bags like to hide behide that one. Boo hooo. I am enjoying the hell out of it and hope they get more of people like him or you.
Click to expand...

So if someone stole $100 (generous amount of what 31 songs is worth) you would want them to be charged almost a million dollars? Get real here. Even if it was thieft, the penalty is completely ridiculous.
 
ounumen said:
Not trolling I have no tollerance for thieves.....oops copy right infringment I forgot tool bags like to hide behide that one. Boo hooo. I am enjoying the hell out of it and hope they get more of people like him or you.
Click to expand...

Watch this guy be a rapist. He has no tolerance for thieves, doesn't mean he has tolerance for something else!

I hope people like you, which is apparently like the RIAA, burn in a fire. Survive, then burned again.
 
Serpent said:
Watch this guy be a rapist. He has no tolerance for thieves, doesn't mean he has tolerance for something else!

I hope people like you, which is apparently like the RIAA, burn in a fire. Survive, then burned again.
Click to expand...

Why thank you! Enjoy it while you can lol. Glad you show your own true colors. I must be a rapist niw because I dont agree with you. Please be more imaganitive that is a pathetic insult really.
 
Red Squirrel said:
But if they win, isn’t he forced by the law to sell off everything to find a way to make the money? He may not be able to pay it all but they will continue to take any money he does manage to make after selling his house and everything he owns. Their point of view basically is, if he can afford to not live on the street, then that money should be going to them.

The RIAA is one of the most evil companies
Click to expand...

Yes, the RIAA is evil, and Congress created huge penalties for song sharing.

I believe: The court will order this man's assets seized and he's likely to have to turn over future income to the court. He'll be allowed a few assets, such as car and the house he currently lives in (if it's modest). And, he'll be allowed to keep some money to live on.

The result will be that he'll become a bum, never willing to do much hard because the money will just be taken from him. So, not only does he lose, but society loses a productive member. Maybe he'll get married, and live in a nice house, but the assets will be his wife's. So, he could still have a comfortable life. He'll just spend more time posting in this forum and playing video games, instead of working.
 
I wonder if he moved to another country, if he'd still have to pay them. Or would they not let him move out till it's paid?
 
ounumen said:
But they will make his life hell and I support them for it. Enjoy a life time of debt collectors, harrasment calls and the stigma of all of it. Best of luck chump.
Click to expand...

You last few people posting are being a bit harsh. I think we all agree he was in the wrong, but at no point, even with warnings, does he deserve a 675k fine. This is basic larceny, which, in most cases, gets fined for much less. The end is not justified here.
 
I should reply in edit, that no, its not really larceny, because in true definition he certainly wasn't depriving anyone of the end product, but that even larceny fines are less than this. He only had a copy, not even the original product.
 
Cruel and unusual doesn't begin to cut it.

Are there any advocate groups who will stand up to these swine?
 
ounumen said:
Why thank you! Enjoy it while you can lol. Glad you show your own true colors. I must be a rapist niw because I dont agree with you. Please be more imaganitive that is a pathetic insult really.
Click to expand...

Yes, please put words into someone's mouth. I never called you a rapist. But if you want to admit to it, feel free.

Please learn to comprehend. Being able to sound out the words don't quite make it readin.
 
ounumen said:
Why thank you! Enjoy it while you can lol. Glad you show your own true colors. I must be a rapist niw because I dont agree with you. Please be more imaganitive that is a pathetic insult really.
Click to expand...

While I'm at it, why not.

I didn't have false colors on trying to hide anything. But thanks for showing your awesome superiority, by equating downloading a song to something so utterly horrendous that the person's life deserves something close to a person's entire life's salary.

I wish I had that picture that had a guy murdering 3 people and being fined 80k, and a downloader being fined 600k. You'd probably think it's just cause too, though, so I guess it wouldn't help me in my argument.
 
Sovnade said:
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.
Click to expand...

This is 100% true. For a first offense, he would have been charged with a misdemeanor and sent home with a slap on the wrist. THIS is what is truly scandalous about it. If he did it, who cares, but make the punishment fit the crime.
 
freeloader1969 said:
Maybe the man should enter the RIAA headquarters with an AK47 and set a different kind of example if you know what I mean. Totally absurd judgement.
Click to expand...

As barbaric and unright as that is, you could somewhat justify/see why someone would do that.
 
Cyraxx said:
As barbaric and unright as that is, you could somewhat justify/see why someone would do that.
Click to expand...

Right or wrong, one day they will pick on someone who is unstable enough and feels this sort of fine is a death sentence.
 
I thought the point of suing some party was because they had the $ to actually pay. What's the point suing 1 individual, who likely doesn't even have a fraction of the judgement amount, and instead attempt to sue the source that allows people to upload?
 
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...

If this is true, why wasn't he charged for these additional crimes? $675k for thousands of songs is a much better penalty then $675k for 31 songs.

If he was charged $675k for ONLY 31 of the songs he downloaded, and the additional crimes were not brought into the case, then this whole case is a joke.
 
one way out of such damage fines is to be a witness for some case that requires that you be put into witness protection. Criminal records will follow you, but not civil cases.
 
baldrik said:
Right or wrong, one day they will pick on someone who is unstable enough and feels this sort of fine is a death sentence.
Click to expand...

If they garnish my wages (I don't know how shit like this works, I've heard of people that have had their wages garnished, and I've heard people who haven't paid a dime?). But if my wages were garnished for the rest of my life, I wouldn't see the point of living anymore. I would either do the same thing, or pack up my shit and move to another country. That is just plain barbaric and insane.
 
Drop off the radar, change your name, move to a different country and start a new life.
There's no other way unless you're rich.

Retarded amount of money, max should be 1000 or 2000, it's low enough that anyone can pay it and high enough to make you think twice about what you did.
 
GreenMonkey said:
Chapter 7 Bankruptcy probably applies for something like this anyway:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10269251-93.html

Maybe.

Still, not a fun process.
Click to expand...

The courts have been bought out by the corporations. Very few federal judges know anything about the law anymore or, if they do, they simply do not care and actively ignore it in favor of ruling by judicial fiat (e.g. declaring that a corporation is a person).

The Founding Fathers made a huge mistake in going with a common law legal system because it allows the robed tyrants to turn their jurisdictions into personal fiefdoms.
 
Whatever happened to the guidelines that punitive damages should not exceed compensatory damages by a ratio of more than 4:1?

There was one case a bunch of years back in which a 10:1 ratio was found unconstitutional based on the 8th amendment to the constitution...

Considering those 31 songs each cost $0.99 on iTunes, a reasonable fine should be $153.45

$30.69 for compensatory damages and $122.76 for punitive damages.

And that's assuming that he would have bought all 31 of those songs, had he not been able to pirate them, which is a stretch in many cases.

The fine he has been given represents a 22,000:1 punitive to compensatory damages ratio, and can't possibly be constitutional, if 10:1 has been deemed not to be...
 
"No way am I going to give the greedy RIAA $3000."

LOL

Nice fail, bro.
 
He should request the bank info of all affected artists so he can cut out the middle man and directly deposit their share. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top