Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Music' started by Lee Jamilkowski, Sep 18, 2003.
Because you disagree with it or because you honestly think that it will serve no purpose? Considering that they have almost 500,000 signatures, a large number of people clearly disagree with you.
I too think that this thread should be merged.
Even so I am bound to observe that I lost all respect for the petition because of it’s emotive use of a 12-year old, instead of relying on logic. I am sure that it will get a lot of signatures because of the nature of the appeal—but it will also make for a weaker case when examined dispassionately.
It is also amusing to read in the petition that she does not have the money to pay to settle the lawsuit. One then also assumes that she would not have had the money to pay for the legitimate use of the music in question, which we should all remember numbered in the hundreds, not in the ones and twos.
She knew what she was doing and got caught. Can we say personal responsibility somewhere along the line—if not for her, for her parents?
1. This sounds like "Well, in theory we may have broken the law, but only because the music industry didn't give us a way to pay them for downloaded music and because we didn't like the price of CDs. The punishment for breaking this law that we may have or have not broken isn't fair - we really shouldn't be punished for our supposed crime."
2. Turning the 12 year old school girl who pled ignorance as her defence into a martyr is just pitiful. Why don't they mention the rich college student that has taken full advantage of their high-speed connection...
Well if the price isn't fair, don't buy the product! And an unfair price is not justification for ripping off the product.
Brian, it isn't just 261 suits. That was just the first round. More are on the way, I'm afraid.
And once again, if the girl can't pay it, she should file for bankruptcy. In 7 years she'd only be 19. Hardly a bad hit, and her credit report would be clean then anyway.
Glenn, I suspect minors cannot file bankruptcy in about 50 of the 50 states.
Wheather one likes the wording of this thang, the music industry needs investigating and reform IMO. Asking for it can't be all bad, can it???
The part about this petition I don't like is the "while ensuring that artists are fairly compensated."
That's only half of it, the record companies should be paid for the product they provide. I don't see the petition addressing this.
On a further note (this is not meant to be a political statement) I would just as soon not have our government getting involved in the music business.
Let's just let the free market do it's thing.
This has nothing to do with free market. This is about the recent tactics of the RIAA and their possible violation of due process laws at stated in the U.S. Constitution.
Frankly, I'm very suspicious at the attempts to minimize this petition by the pro-RIAA people. All that the EFF is doing is trying to get in there to have their say in the name of "the public's interest" whatever that might turn out to be. I sincerely doubt that they would be stupid enough to defend a position like "Hey, file sharing is okay!"[/i] which would severely damage their credibility. Yes, they might be crossing ethical boundaries by making this girl a martyr, but there are a bunch of people who think that the RIAA crossed ethical (and legal) lines.
Just because the RIAA is trying to protect copyrights does NOT automatically give them carte blanche to take whatever actions they want. There are still laws and procedures that they have to follow. All that this hearing is about is whether or not they are within the law. For all we know, the committee might decide that the RIAA is correct. So, why shouldn't the EFF be involved?
Could you please explain how people are being denied due process.
John Berger, why are you "very suspicious"? And do you mean you are suspicious of me? I don't understand.
The RIAA is taking action against people (through the court system) who have stolen their product. I'm all for people and/or corporations protecting their property. What is very suspicious about this?
Could you please explain how people are POSSIBLY being denied due process.
(perhaps the better question to ask, is if the EFF understands what due process is.)
I took a look at the EFF's website. Their positions seem well thought out.
Yep, I know that a normal 12 year old can't file bankruptcy, but everything that I have heard about it states that the girl was given the suit, not her mother.
But, I think that even if her mother was actually served with it, her daughter's name would be implicated in it as the responsible party, and if she is that responsible, then why can't she file too?
Due process has not been done when a suit is served and they settle. True, you can argue that was their choice, so it is ok, but it should be challenged in court. Has anyone heard anything about any of the other suits that have been filed?