tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post8164680238206896963..comments2024-02-29T03:26:17.906-05:00Comments on Recording Industry vs The People: Capitol v. Thomas-Rasset Defense closing argumentsraybeckermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-48890719258423889472009-06-19T15:40:46.133-04:002009-06-19T15:40:46.133-04:00Sorry for getting slightly off topic, but "wh...Sorry for getting slightly off topic, but "why would the defendant steal music that she already owns?"<br /><br />The same reason I would download music I already own: in order to avoid the hassle of ripping it myself. Even those of us who are experienced with format-shifting of this sort often find it much more convenient to just download someone else's rip than to make our own, and we see nothing wrong with it. What's the difference? Either way, I wasn't going to pay for the music twice. It would be great to see this kind of copying clarified as Fair Use, or even just authorized by the RIAA, but of course at present, copier & supplier alike are "pirates" according to the record companies.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-8864892040476538442009-06-18T14:34:11.246-04:002009-06-18T14:34:11.246-04:00I think he was being metaphorical. If you had a la...I think he was being metaphorical. If you had a large money judgment against you, which bankrupted you, I'm sure you would feel like it was a "sentence". You would have been sentenced to poverty & insolvency.raybeckermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-12170754552036051902009-06-18T14:21:58.731-04:002009-06-18T14:21:58.731-04:00I should have said the current application of copy...I should have said the current application of copyright law by the rights holders, but it's true. $750-$30k, $150 if willful for 1 infringement?! A 3 year statute of limitations is also insane when dealing with home computers and non-savy defendants.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07719707203372377982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-83278080695631599322009-06-18T14:20:47.633-04:002009-06-18T14:20:47.633-04:00It seems like the defense is trying to argue a cri...It seems like the defense is trying to argue a criminal case. The references to "sentencing" Jammie, and finding her "guilty." Is this normal in a civil case?Terry Harthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12246811238845738386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-22976359343093852902009-06-18T13:41:33.182-04:002009-06-18T13:41:33.182-04:00I don't know that what you say is true of our ...I don't know that what you say is true of our copyright policy; it's true of the RIAA's misinterpretation of copyright law.raybeckermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-8813167256240014262009-06-18T13:23:20.409-04:002009-06-18T13:23:20.409-04:00Emotionally telling and true. Our copyright polic...Emotionally telling and true. Our copyright policy is designed to bankrupt anyone convicted of doing it no matter the reason or situation. It's worse because it's civil law and you need not prove beyond a reasonable doubt, just preponderance of evidence in order to ruin someone.<br /><br />The laws need to be changed. We need quick, cheap, and streamlined laws for dealing with this new medium. Something that can reasonably and fairly used against personal, non-commercial file sharing and the people that pay for the connection.<br /><br />Are you willing to bet your livelihood that someone using your computer has not downloaded something under copyright illegally?Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07719707203372377982noreply@blogger.com