How The RIAA Took My Vintage Mustang

tumblr_l91uyiJmzy1qzxot2o1_500.jpg

Totaly reminded me of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALZZx1xmAzg :D
 
AHAHAHAHAHA


I guess this kid learned things the hard way. I feel sad that he had to lose his Mustang without even having a chance to drive it, but he stole music and had to pay the consequences.
 
I don't wanna here this whiny propagandist bullshit.

The court would have put him on a payment plan if he didn't have money in hand, so the whiny little whore didn't have to sell his car.

I still don't see how he could have afforded gas or upkeep on it anyway, and anyway, if the kid was 16 would it not be his parents responisbility?
 
And meanwhile over here in the Netherlands what he did (downloading copyrighted music) would have been 100% legal.

Justice, right?
 
Criminal Infringement. —
(1) In general. — Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed —

(A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;

(B) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000; or

(C) by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution."

"distribution" "commercial advantage or private financial gain" are the main focus of the offense

the gray area is the simple "reproduction " - Which IS protected by other laws.

If they guy did anything BUT simply use them himself he should be nailed by this.
But if he did just use them personally . . it goes gray, and the "people" that he got the copies from Should be the ones in the spotlight and not the end user. (since it is almost impossible to track the end user becomes the target - not fully inline with the intent of the law but not outside it either)

It gets even grayer with hard media . .
YES you can copy a tape or CD for backup or personal use (protected - though RIAA does not like this either)
Copying from Tape or CD of a friend/other for personal use (Gray area - normally ignored till now)
Making recordings of radio, or other public events for personal use (regardless if copyrighted content exists in them) IS protected.
And so on, the laws have president BOTH ways because of ambiguous terms and hot a few laws conflict and only really have made news because of the VOLUME of sharing.

on the black market side.
In the end RIAA is only harming things by being seen as a oppressor, Fix the system and the "problem" of copying would diminish. Lower the prices - go volume, get rid of most/all the middle men allow the artists a real cut.
Normal people then would feel like they are not getting ripped off buying the media and take less risk using other channels, people making profit off copies would loose the margin and clients that keeps them going etc . . classic black market remedy (as the market exists because the "normal" channels are too greedy and forcing there existance)
 
i dont get it, ive seen people sued, they ignored everything, didnt show up to court, and nothing ever happened to them

That's what I don't get. This guy could have pissed on those papers and called it a day, what a total tool.
 
i dont get it, ive seen people sued, they ignored everything, didnt show up to court, and nothing ever happened to them

I've heard that unless the paperwork arrives registered, this is basically what you do. They tangle with the people that respond. Supposedly they send out so many, they don't bother with the paperwork that doesn't reach the intended person.

Don't sit around uploading 2000 tracks of music in the open.
 
And this thread goes to show that the propaganda machine is alive and well.

Let's just stand back and watch it do it's thing.
 
I would still like to know how a song is worth up to 750$ each when they retail for what a 1$ or so?
yeah, if you stole a $3 energy drink from a convenience store (which is an actual real product that cannot be reproduced infinitely at zero cost), there's no way a court would fine you for $2,250.
 
yeah, if you stole a $3 energy drink from a convenience store (which is an actual real product that cannot be reproduced infinitely at zero cost), there's no way a court would fine you for $2,250.
I hope you were being facetious because a $2K fine for shoplifting a dollar item is not only realistic, but should be the least of one's concerns.
 
yeah, if you stole a $3 energy drink from a convenience store (which is an actual real product that cannot be reproduced infinitely at zero cost), there's no way a court would fine you for $2,250.

They would charge you more than $3

Not sure where the number $750 comes from, but the point is to make you not want to do it. Not so that you think well if i get caught i'll only be charged $2.

Although hell, at $750 that is a lot cheaper than a movie. For years the FBI warning at the start clearly states $250,000 fine and / or 3 - 5 years in jail
 
If only we could do these sorts of severe things for those that pirate PC games. We have the MPAA and RIAA but nothing for against PC software piracy.

I'm tired of the rampant piracy on the PC and how it harms the platform so greatly in developers then favoring consoles. :mad:
 
^No proof of that what so ever, and the only devs crying about piracy are the ones who make shit games that don't sell well.

If the game is good it sells well.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/

Valve send us the news that their digital download service has proven rather popular.
During the past 12 months the platform had year-over-year new user growth of 178%, pushing the total number of active accounts to over 30 million, with over 1,200 games now offered. Peak simultaneous player numbers were also up to over three million, with over six million unique gamers accessing Steam each day.


In addition to new user growth, Steam sales during the trailing 12 months increased by more than 200%, putting it on track for a sixth straight year of realizing over 100% year-over-year growth in unit sales. To meet this demand, the Steam infrastructure has been increased and now has ability to run at 400Gps, enough bandwidth to ship a digitized version of the Oxford English Dictionary 92.6 times per second.

Six million unique users each day being the crucial fact there, fact fans. If you’re one of those companies that says there’s no market for PC games, well, the chances you were just doing something wrong.
__________________

When your product is shit, you get shit results. Sorry
 
You know the old saying:

"Don't do the crime if you aren't prepaired to do the time."

He did something illegal. He paid for it. Lesson learned.

I still hate the RIAA however.

That would be great, if corporations had to pay the same exact price when they commit a crime... Then again, I'm not even sure if corporations are bound by criminal law anymore.

If a person rips off the RIAA, they pay more money than they'll most likely see their whole life.. The RIAA breaks a law, they'll pay with some pocket change they pull out of their couch. Yeah, that's fair.

Next time they engage in some price fixing, lets see them pay consumers $750 per song!

The saying should be "Don't do the crime, if you're not rich enough to laugh at them!"
 
Before going to trial he should have sold the car to a family member for $1.00.

if i am not mistaken he sold the car to get money for the settlement the riaa goons didn't buy it ... this guy was a dumbass you get cough you have to pay but truthfully he is 16 they can sue him into the ground they will get nothing from him since all he owned was that car that he sold to get money for the debt
 
And this thread goes to show that the propaganda machine is alive and well.

Let's just stand back and watch it do it's thing.
There's a really easy way to not get sued by the RIAA - that's to not illegally download or distribute music on the internet.

If you can't scrounge up $1 a song for the music you like, you might look into getting a radio - I hear they play songs for free all day long
 
I don't wanna here this whiny propagandist bullshit.

The court would have put him on a payment plan if he didn't have money in hand, so the whiny little whore didn't have to sell his car.

I still don't see how he could have afforded gas or upkeep on it anyway, and anyway, if the kid was 16 would it not be his parents responisbility?
The case didn't go to court. Again, nobody reads articles anymore.
 
There's a really easy way to not get sued by the RIAA - that's to not illegally download or distribute music on the internet.

I get that point, but you are accepting, hand in mouth, this "legal enforcement" of copyright violations with nothing more than a bullshit unregistered letter arriving to your house saying "We're effen big brother, and we know your a dirty little pirate!" There's more wrong right there for me than sharing a song.

Something else, what's the deal about recordings? For example, on YouTube, a fairly high quality video and and audio of Deftones Diamond Eyes is sitting out there endorsed for watching. So if I simply recored that audio and then put it in my MP3 player, what then? As the WHOPPER might say "What's the difference?"
 
How bad would this suck?
Hmm, either one of these might fit:

Naziism
You have two cows. The Government shoots you and takes the cows.

Fascism
You have two cows. The government takes both, hires you to take care of them, and sells you the milk.

http://stuffucanuse.com/all_jokes/jokes%20cows.htm
 
File sharing is one of those victimless crimes (IMO). Nobody get's hurt, yet the fines punishment is on par or worse than drug charges or assault charges.

You deprive the rich RIAA of their hard earned money, and when the rich feel deprived, they will rain fury upon our peon heads.
 
OH for the love of fucking god why does it always have to be written like this. He got sued for SHARING the fucking music, not for downloading it. UGH.

They wouldn't dare force a legal suit for downloading only, for instance what if you owned the damn music on CD. Then having a copy of it digitally is totally legal whether you ripped it or whatever.... they SUE for shit you have shared. I don't even think they have to prove you uploaded it anymore, it simply has to be made available. He could have easily owned every song and ripped them himself from his CDs which for now is legal, but sharing them is instantly illegal and he would be in the same situation.

I don't condone illegal downloading, but sharing what you downloaded or LEGALLY own is fucking mentally retarded.
 
Poor guy. I can't believe this is still happening to people. Either settle with us for a a few thousand dollars, or spend hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting us? That's completely unfair.

Haha, that is true, people would.
 
what an idiot, i would have sold the mustang to a friend, hid the $ or spent it, let them sue me and then go bankrupt. especially at 16....god damn
 
what an idiot, i would have sold the mustang to a friend, hid the $ or spent it, let them sue me and then go bankrupt. especially at 16....god damn

Bankruptcy doesn't discharge legal judgments (among other things). If you lose a lawsuit the plaintiff will get his due from you one way or another eventually. Garnished wages, property, etc. Also since he's 16 and still presumably a dependent of his parents (and likely did this with their internet) the parents could possibly be held responsible anyway. It all depends on the particular details and what can be proven.
 
i dont get it, ive seen people sued, they ignored everything, didnt show up to court, and nothing ever happened to them

I wouldn't go that far. It will most likely (at the very least) show up on their credit report.
 
For those here that have the reading comprehension of a 3rd grader (directly from the article):

The minimum damages under the law is $750 for each copyrighted recording that has been infringed ("shared"). If a court determines you acted "willfully," the maximum damage award can be substantially more.

1.RIAA is suing him for sharing.
2. The kid is an idiot
3. The kid is also lucky
4. You guys that are arguing that he didn't do anything wrong are just as stupid.
 
Willful infringement can net you trebel damages as well as attorney's fees.
 
4. You guys that are arguing that he didn't do anything wrong are just as stupid.

This is the most peculiar thing about this discussion thread. You guys are tech enthusiasts, not lawyers or SC justices. And listening to you guys trying to argue that it's not illegal and not wrong is utterly perplexing to me.

The only thing wrong about this entire story is that NO 16yr-old male should be allowed to drive something that hot. Every first car should be a hand-me down POC- it's a rite of passage in this country dammit! :)
 
you know why this guy owed the RIAA money ? because he is stupid. Do you know why he no longer has his Mustang ? Want to venture a guess why this guy will be living in his parents basement, eating ramen noodles until his heart explodes ? Its not the RIAA.
 
yadayada, he got busted, they sued, happens hundreds of times a day now.

What I thought was more interesting is the guy that bought his car off E-Bay was a total DOUCHE for calling him and saying the motor was a stroker worth $8K alone. Might as well have called the kid and told him there was a winning lotto ticket in the door, thx! Someone smash his head with a hammer plz, thx...
 
Back
Top