Music Pirate Mom deserves new trial

[fusilierb]

Jul 10, 2009, 8:26pm, lboogie77 wrote:80k a song? That is insane. They wouldn't get that kind $$$ from any normal revenue streams for music use. My .02My point is that if she broke into a record store and actually stole 24 physical CD's (that just so happened to have one song a piece on them) the fines and penalties wouldn't be anywhere close to this comical. Even she took an axe to the check out counter. And threatened the President while she did it. WTF?B

[maceman]

I think everyone is quite peaceful here, so no worries....Taxi is a good place, and no need for any religious debate in my books. I am just showing some facts from another angle. All are welcome.@Jamie..... That last article tells more to the story. Thanx for posting. Seems to me that this woman is probably insulted that she has got caught and isn't owing up to her crime. In that case(and if that is the case), then I would agree that her decision to walk away from $3500 settlement is idiotic.In fact, I would go further and say that if this is the case, then perhaps the original outrageous $$$ amount is needed to shake her up. Wish we could interview her- that would be most helpful @Bryan- granted. However, the difference here is that not only has she broke into a record store so-to-speak, but after she was arrested and fined, she refused the fine. The record store owner requires retribution, and moreso the owners of the goods she has stolen...Again, I am not sure of the thinking behind why she is walking, but even a criminal who robs and is caught has opportunity to make recourse and if they walk, they go to jail.@southpaw again- My quote from exodus wasn't really far reaching was it? I mean, okay, our legal system is no longer based on the law of moses, but the example of demanding retribution (double in this case) I think is valid. Just because the Law is older doesn't mean it didn't or wouldn't work in times past.In fact, if she indeed is thomas rassat, and it can be proven that she posted 1700 songs, that too is stealing to me. Offering up the goods is just as bad and downloading the goods. 1700 X 2= HEY WHAT DO YOU KNOW Pretty close!!! Cheers all,Maceman

[chriscarter]

Jul 10, 2009, 9:33pm, fusilierb wrote:Jul 10, 2009, 8:26pm, lboogie77 wrote:80k a song? That is insane. They wouldn't get that kind $$$ from any normal revenue streams for music use. My .02My point is that if she broke into a record store and actually stole 24 physical CD's (that just so happened to have one song a piece on them) the fines and penalties wouldn't be anywhere close to this comical. Even she took an axe to the check out counter. And threatened the President while she did it. WTF?BThe fine wasn't for downloading the songs. The fine was for filesharing them thousands of times. So it's not akin to shoplifting 24 CDs. It's akin to shoplifting thousands and thousands of copies of the same 24 titles and then giving them all away to other people. This is why it's so hard to battle the piracy - because people (even music people in this case) have a hard time understanding what the actual damages are.

[sgs4u]

I have to laugh when I see people getting all indignant about file sharing being illegal. The time to have done something about it was 20 years ago, or maybe 15. That lawsuit is a joke. Have you heard the one about the kid who was busted by the RIAA for downloading and sharing Avril Lavigne tunes? Avril Lavigne's MANAGER paid the legal fees for the defense. Why would he do that? Because file sharing is impossible to stop. And because it works against the artist, record company and entire music business to try and bust people for sharing files. The RIAA is a very old organization of people with their heads still very firmly lodged where the sun don't shine. They are the useless unnecessary appendix of the music biz, and they're going to atrophy and cease to exist soon. They need a new mandate. We need a world celebrating the sharing of music, NOT trying to hoard it or suck all the money they possibly can.

[davekershaw]

Jul 11, 2009, 1:06am, aimusic wrote:(no1 reason for war guys, so let's keep the peace)No. that would be marriage Brad!Be warned!!

[sgs4u]

Matt & Chuck, This is not an ethics question. You guys also know me well enough that I am not recommending musicians not be paid for their work. Nothing could be further from the truth. The old system is irreparably broken. People are simply never going back to buying CD's from CD stores. It's time for a BIG change. The artists/musicians we all know and love, are not making any money anymore. I don't want them to be broke. I want them to be paid handsomely. AND you know I want that for them.Whether we choose to call it stealing or not, is moot. Even if it's deemed stealing in the eyes of the law, that definition is subject to change. BECAUSE, if it's not enforceable, you have a big problem. When laws can't be enforced, they're rewritten or thrown out. That's just the way it is. And what are you guys be arguing about? You don't write music for stealing... You write focused pieces of music for specific needs. And you're extremely good at it.

[hummingbird]

Jul 11, 2009, 1:06pm, sgs4u wrote:We need a world celebrating the sharing of music, NOT trying to hoard it or suck all the money they possibly can. I'm all for that. As long as my rent, food, transportation, instruments, education & training is also free. Then I can just give free voice lessons inbetween free coffee in my free house, have free medical & dental care, and never pay taxes again.

[allends]

Brian, I want to congratulate you on the size of your big heart! Your attitude about this issue is so admirable I find myself agreeing with you 100%. But turn the page and there’s a whole other 100% of the story, and that side of the story involves lawyers. Lawyers argue these cases and lawyers win or lose them. If the penalty appears to be disproportionate to the crime, it was lawyers who put the accused in this situation. This case was brought to this nasty conclusion because of legal maneuvering by professional people with attitudes. A case that drags on & on like this one is bound to become battleground of ill-wills rather than become a process through which justice will be served. BTW: I can’t agree with those who characterize the defendant as “stupid”. Her lawyers crafted her defense so there’s no telling what her motivations were by merely looking at the case from a distance. I admit that I haven’t paid much attention to this case because I’m too jaded to believe that I will learn anything truly meaningful by reading about it. Done Rambling,AllenJul 15, 2009, 5:15pm, fusilierb wrote:I told myself I was gonna stay out of this one, but...I never disputed the fact that she broke the law or that she shouldn't pay some sort of penalty. Everyone of us wants to compensated for what we do and none of us wants our intellectual property stolen. What shocks me about this case is the SIZE of the penalty and the unbelievable amount of time and energy and money spent dealing with this case in the courts over five years. These proceedings are a joke.If we're really just trying to make an example out of he so that we can "teach" our young a lesson about stealing, maybe we should just publicly execute her? Better yet, force her children to watch. Burn the witch! That ought to teach everyone a good lesson.

[fusilierb]

Jul 16, 2009, 1:29pm, allends wrote:Brian, I want to congratulate you on the size of your big heart! Your attitude about this issue is so admirable I find myself agreeing with you 100%. But turn the page and there’s a whole other 100% of the story, and that side of the story involves lawyers. Lawyers argue these cases and lawyers win or lose them. If the penalty appears to be disproportionate to the crime, it was lawyers who put the accused in this situation. This case was brought to this nasty conclusion because of legal maneuvering by professional people with attitudes. A case that drags on & on like this one is bound to become battleground of ill-wills rather than become a process through which justice will be served. BTW: I can’t agree with those who characterize the defendant as “stupid”. Her lawyers crafted her defense so there’s no telling what her motivations were by merely looking at the case from a distance. I admit that I haven’t paid much attention to this case because I’m too jaded to believe that I will learn anything truly meaningful by reading about it. Done Rambling,AllenJul 15, 2009, 5:15pm, fusilierb wrote:I told myself I was gonna stay out of this one, but...I never disputed the fact that she broke the law or that she shouldn't pay some sort of penalty. Everyone of us wants to compensated for what we do and none of us wants our intellectual property stolen. What shocks me about this case is the SIZE of the penalty and the unbelievable amount of time and energy and money spent dealing with this case in the courts over five years. These proceedings are a joke.If we're really just trying to make an example out of he so that we can "teach" our young a lesson about stealing, maybe we should just publicly execute her? Better yet, force her children to watch. Burn the witch! That ought to teach everyone a good lesson.Allen, I'm glad you brought this up. I was going to go into my lawyer rant, but decided to drop it. But I completely agree! There has been lots of judgement about this ladies sanity or mental capabilities thrown around in response to this thread, but the fact of the matter is that it was her lawyers that, in doing their job, have driven this ladies actions. How in the world is she supposed to know what to do in this situation? As many of you have pointed out, she's just an "idiot" right? She's doing what everyone else does when faced with a criminal charge, hires a lawyer who tells her what to do. I would have done the same in her situation. And if they told me not to settle and push on, I wouldn't have settled and would have pushed on. Why not, its been five years now and we're just going BACK to trial?Again, does this really seem like the best approach to solving this problem? If there are any lawyers on these boards, I'm not knocking you down. I have lots of good lawyer friends and in todays whacked out system of justice, we need em. But this is crazy!B