bwalker wrote:
> " No, I
> don't think the kid got off easy and I don't think your info of "tens of
> thousands per song" has any credibility (Come on, you download 1 LP and
you
> have to pay $100,000? Even the RIAA isn't that much of thief).
That kid wasn't downloading, she was providing content on the web for
others to
download. The figure I'm quoting comes from the Boston Globe article I
read
and mentioned figures as high as $150,000 per song -- I was actually
underestimating. We're not talking about some guy downloading an mp3,
we're
talking about people who make illicit copies of artists' work and make it
available on the web for others to download, sometimes even charging a
fee.
I'm not saying everyone who does this is automatically going to get fined
the
maximum amount, I'm sure it will be pretty much case by case. But I'm
also
sure that the intent is to reduce the ridiculous amount of theft and make
it
quite clear, even to people like you who can't seem to figure it out from
your
own moral training, that theft is wrong and punishable. And not to put
too
fine a point on it, but I'm not the one you have to convince.
|
