Ignoring RIAA lawsuits cheaper than going to trial

The same federal judge who oversaw the Joel Tenenbaum file-sharing trial earlier this year passed out default judgments this week against other file-swappers who never bothered to show up—and they now owe far less than Tenenbaum.<BR><BR><a href='http://meincmagazine.com/tech-policy/news/2009/09/ignoring-riaa-lawsuits-cheaper-than-going-to-trial.ars'>Read the whole story</a>

 

[StarSeeker]

<blockquote class="ip-ubbcode-quote">
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div>
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Okay cool. So here is something else. Since their current model is continually losing revenue year after year, what do you think is way forward using your view of "selling the music" when artificial scarcity no longer exists? How do you foresee this view being viable? What I am looking to gauge is how you think labels can sell the music successfully in this era when file sharing is heavily used. How will they compete? </div>
</blockquote>
<br><br>It depends. I'm not sure exactly. If I had the answer to that I'd be selling my views for $499 a pop like the forrester group. <br><br>That said, I've gone into it more on the other thread, so instead of repeating myself we should probably continue this line there where it more fits into the topic. -- View image here: http://episteme.meincmagazine.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif --

 

[StarSeeker]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RedGhost:<BR><BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RDeVoe:<BR><BR>I think you misunderstood what you were reading.<BR><BR>From this thread...<BR><BR>The Album wasn't mastered until 2008.<BR><BR>This wasn't something that was done in 2000, as in 2008 we pretty much got several posts from her as it all came together. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Weird that was not in her discography from her website. But that only highlights more the lack of interest she has in actually promoting her art, and how little I think of her claims of it being expensive. Here is the quote directly:<BR><BR>"Discography: Orange EP recorded at Zippah in February, 2000. Engineered by Pete Weiss. Featuring Blake Girndt on guitar, James Apt on Bass and Matt Burke on Drums. "<BR><BR>That is all there is, I didn't misread. If she has more it would be nice to actually put it on her home page. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Well by misunderstanding I didn't mean just misreading. IE you may have had the understanding that the website had all of it. Or she may have a different website promoting the album. I think there was a thread later that she got her music on one of the for pay download sites but I'd have to go back and look.

 

[RedGhost]

<blockquote class="ip-ubbcode-quote">
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div>
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RDeVoe:<br><blockquote class="ip-ubbcode-quote">
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div>
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Okay cool. So here is something else. Since their current model is continually losing revenue year after year, what do you think is way forward using your view of "selling the music" when artificial scarcity no longer exists? How do you foresee this view being viable? What I am looking to gauge is how you think labels can sell the music successfully in this era when file sharing is heavily used. How will they compete? </div>
</blockquote>
<br><br>It depends. I'm not sure exactly. If I had the answer to that I'd be selling my views for $499 a pop like the forrester group. <br><br>That said, I've gone into it more on the other thread, so instead of repeating myself we should probably continue this line there where it more fits into the topic. -- View image here: http://episteme.meincmagazine.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif -- </div>
</blockquote>
<br><br>Ill read it and continue on there.

 

[RedGhost]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RDeVoe:<BR><BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RedGhost:<BR><BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RDeVoe:<BR><BR>I think you misunderstood what you were reading.<BR><BR>From this thread...<BR><BR>The Album wasn't mastered until 2008.<BR><BR>This wasn't something that was done in 2000, as in 2008 we pretty much got several posts from her as it all came together. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Weird that was not in her discography from her website. But that only highlights more the lack of interest she has in actually promoting her art, and how little I think of her claims of it being expensive. Here is the quote directly:<BR><BR>"Discography: Orange EP recorded at Zippah in February, 2000. Engineered by Pete Weiss. Featuring Blake Girndt on guitar, James Apt on Bass and Matt Burke on Drums. "<BR><BR>That is all there is, I didn't misread. If she has more it would be nice to actually put it on her home page. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Well by misunderstanding I didn't mean just misreading. IE you may have had the understanding that the website had all of it. Or she may have a different website promoting the album. I think there was a thread later that she got her music on one of the for pay download sites but I'd have to go back and look. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>I see, maybe her home page isn't updated anymore.

 

[StanGable]

<blockquote class="ip-ubbcode-quote">
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div>
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RedGhost:<br><blockquote class="ip-ubbcode-quote">
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div>
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RDeVoe:<br><blockquote class="ip-ubbcode-quote">
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div>
<div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Okay cool. So here is something else. Since their current model is continually losing revenue year after year, what do you think is way forward using your view of "selling the music" when artificial scarcity no longer exists? How do you foresee this view being viable? What I am looking to gauge is how you think labels can sell the music successfully in this era when file sharing is heavily used. How will they compete? </div>
</blockquote>
<br><br>It depends. I'm not sure exactly. If I had the answer to that I'd be selling my views for $499 a pop like the forrester group. <br><br>That said, I've gone into it more on the other thread, so instead of repeating myself we should probably continue this line there where it more fits into the topic. -- View image here: http://episteme.meincmagazine.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif -- </div>
</blockquote>
<br><br>Ill read it and continue on there. </div>
</blockquote>
<br><br>Where is this other thread? I'm interested in reading the exchange.

 

[hpsgrad]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rodbac:<BR><BR>Where is this other thread? I'm interested in reading the exchange. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> Music Biz Still in Need of Radical Overhaul...

 

[mookiemu]

Unfortunately the American justice system isn't too kind to those who want to fight. Back in the 80's my little brother got falsely accused of a crime. The pro bono lawyer told us that if we fight the case and lose, my brother would face a minimum of 12 years in prison, but if he plead guilty, he would get off in 16 months. Though my brother was completely innocent the pro bono lawyer encouraged my brother to take the plea and seeing how useless the pro bono lawyer was a person might have been encouraged to do so. Fortunately, I was doing really well at the time and was able to get a really good lawyer who able to prove my brothers innocence. <BR>I wonder how many people in this country, who are either innocent or may possibly have strong defense, are faced with this decision.

 

[StanGable]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hpsgrad:<BR><BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rodbac:<BR><BR>Where is this other thread? I'm interested in reading the exchange. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> Music Biz Still in Need of Radical Overhaul... </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Found it (should have looked before asking, but that wouldn't pad my postcount), but thank you.

 

[StanGable]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I wonder how many people in this country, who are either innocent or may possibly have strong defense, are faced with this decision. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>I'd bet it's almost zero. If someone is completely innocent, whether or not to fight the charges isn't typically much of a debate.<BR><BR>Someone who is "completely innocent" that feels the state has a pretty solid case against them is probably quite rare, wouldn't you agree?

 

[A41202813@GMAIL.COM]

Copyrights And Patents Should Cease After 5 Years.<BR><BR>There Is Plenty Of Good Music With More Than 5 Years Old.

 

[hpsgrad]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rodbac:<BR><BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I wonder how many people in this country, who are either innocent or may possibly have strong defense, are faced with this decision. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>I'd bet it's almost zero. If someone is completely innocent, whether or not to fight the charges isn't typically much of a debate.<BR> </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Sooooo, you think that mookiemu is lying, or is just a member of the 'atypical' group you imply exists?<BR><BR>If we take mookiemu at his/her word, then there are some cases where an innocent person decides not to take the risks and costs associated with standing up for a principal, and chooses an option that gets them on with their life more quickly.<BR><BR>If this happens in criminal cases, as the above example indicates that it does, then how much more often might it happen in <I>civil</I> cases, when (essentially) only money is at stake?<BR><BR>I'm really, honestly, glad that your gut tells you that almost nobody who settled with the RIAA did so because they decided to compromise their principles and get on with their life. Note also that the number of people who went to court and were found to be not infringing is still larger than the number of people who went to court and were found to be infringing. It's too bad that the number of people involved in both cases is too small for statistically-significant arguments.

 

[mookiemu]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rodbac:<BR><BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I wonder how many people in this country, who are either innocent or may possibly have strong defense, are faced with this decision. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>I'd bet it's almost zero. If someone is completely innocent, whether or not to fight the charges isn't typically much of a debate.<BR><BR>Someone who is "completely innocent" that feels the state has a pretty solid case against them is probably quite rare, wouldn't you agree? </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR>Completely innocent with a solid case against them, happens all the time. A prosecutor's job is to prove guilt and suppress any information that may prove otherwise.<BR> <BR>Here is a list of people who fought capital punishment because they were innocent only to be found innocent. Many thanks to the advancement of DNA evidence. <BR>http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.or...hose-freed-death-row<BR>That's a lot! <BR><BR>Many remember the Central Park jogger case where 5 innocent African American teenagers were convicted of murdering a white jogger in Central Park. They served 13 years before the real culprit came forward. I remember the case well because the kids lived in a project near me and I had seen some of them before. They decided to fight because they were innocent and they lost and would still be in jail if the real murderer hadn't been caught. Funny thing is that at one point, a few of them had the option to plea bargain. Had they accepted the plea, they would have only served 3 years!<BR>http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/...law/features/n_7836/<BR><BR>Then there is "The Thin Blue Line". Remember that? A hitch-hiker gets convicted of murder in Texas, though he was innocent. He fought it and spent two decades in prison 12 on death row until it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was innocent thanks to the uproar that the documentary caused. It's ridiculous because it was so obvious that he was innocent. They even had the real confessed murderer on Death Row as well. The guy spent 8 more years in prison even though the real murderer had confessed! He would still be there if someone hadn't seen the absurdity of this and filmed a documentary! Had the innocent guy plea bargained, I'm sure he would gotten something like 12 years instead of coming 72 hours away from being put to death!<BR>http://www.errolmorris.com/film/tbl.html<BR><BR>I could go on and on with these stories for pages because there are hundreds of them. <BR>People who think that innocent people never get convicted, have either never lived in the inner city, or have never known anyone who has had to deal with or known someone who has had to deal with the American Justice System and overzealous prosecutors whose sole reason for being is to prove guilt at all costs, not look for innocence.. <BR><BR>Believe me when I tell you and I have first hand knowledge of this; it's pretty scary when you are charged with a crime by an overly zealous prosecutor and you are faced with a plea like: plea guilty and get 2 years in jail or plead innocent. But if you lose you will face a minimum of 12 years to life. And then you are appointed a lawyer who is not making money on this because he is working pro-bono and as a result just wants to get the case over with as soon as possible and is telling you they have a strong case against you and is suggesting you make a deal. No matter how innocent you are every case looks like an open and shut case from the prosecutor's perspective.<BR><BR>In my brother's case, we got rid of the pro-bono lawyer and $40,000 dollars later, the new lawyer knew enough to know that the cellphone that was instrumental in the prosecution's case, has a mac address, and that usage could be tracked no matter how many carriers you've had. As a result he was able to prove his innocence. If our lawyer had been less tech savvy, my brother would still be in jail! <BR><BR>So please, don't give me that garbage about there being no people who are completely innocent with what looks like an open and shut case against them. I know for a fact that there are.

 

[StarSeeker]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">So please, don't give me that garbage about there being no people who are completely innocent with what looks like an open and shut case against them. I know for a fact that there are. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR>It's true that the raw number is not 0, however compared to the volume of cases, it's such a tiny fraction as be near 0. If that makes sense.<BR><BR>Does that make it ok? No. However, as long as the justice system is run by humans you'll never get a perfect record. It doesn't mean you don't try, but there are checks and balances to help those wrongly convicted.

 

[hpsgrad]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RDeVoe:<BR><BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">So please, don't give me that garbage about there being no people who are completely innocent with what looks like an open and shut case against them. I know for a fact that there are. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><BR>It's true that the raw number is not 0, however compared to the volume of cases, it's such a tiny fraction as be near 0. If that makes sense. </div></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR>Do you have any evidence for this belief?<BR><BR>In any case, at what point should we step back and ask ourselves whether allowing this sort of thing to continue is a benefit to society? I'm in favor of copyright laws. I firmly believe that they benefit society greatly. I'm not at all clear about how specific aspects of our current copyright system benefit anyone other than those with large numbers of copyrights that they wish to extract maximum value from (mostly corporations with big catalogs of music, books, & film). I take it to be clear that the purpose of US copyright law is not to provide maximum economic benefit to copyright holders.