digi-wrong wrong wrongs

Filesharing mum ordered to pay nearly $2m

Errrr. What? A $2 million fine? How is this is anywhere close to justice? Was Jammie a music pirate with her own website selling MPGs - or selling CDs earning herself millions and millions of dollars? Was she going around to music artists homes and stealing bags of money off them at gunpoint? Was any money at any time exchanged? So where did this figure come from? What would she have got as a fine if she's shoplifted a few CDs? I doubt it would have been in the millions. She wouldn't have got that for kidnap and murder.

So what message does this send out? 'OOOOoooh we shouldn't ever download music we haven't paid for because the music industry will get us"?

No. It sends the message that the RIAA is out of control (and don't think for a moment that a single artist is going to see a single cent of that money - ever since the RIAA have been suing people - a single penny hasn't gone to any artist. But a big chunk as been going to pay already plump lawyers and into their own pockets... [All of which is a good excuse to not buy CDs from the major labels - since it's obvious they funnel far too much money in order to hire their lawyers to attack music fans rather than -you know, pay artists.])

Nice to see this:

Lawyers plan class-action to reclaim "$100M+" RIAA "stole"

Because the RIAA seriously needs to be held to account.

Moby: The RIAA Needs to be Disbanded.

PC World: Has the RIAA's Fight Against File Sharing Gone Too Far?

No comments: