|
Joel Tenenbaum fined $675,000 over copyright infringement
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 1 August, 2009
After just three hours of deliberations, a jury has ruled that convicted pirate Joel Tenenbaum has willfully infringed on copyrights, and has awarded the RIAA and the media companies $675,000 USD, $22,500 for each of the 30 songs he admitted to sharing.
In some ways, Tenenbaum should be grateful, as the jury could have awarded up to $150,000 in penalties per track. In the recent ruling ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
1. August 2009 @ 20:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
Let me fix this for you:
"We are grateful for the jury?s service and their paid recognition of the impact of illegal Uploading on the music EMPIRE. We appreciate that Mr. Tenenbaum finally acknowledged that the EMPIRE and music vultures deserve to be paid for our thievery. From the beginning that?s what this mad slaughter has been about. We only wish he had received the full penalty, jury's are not cheap you know."
Thats better
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Senior Member
28 product reviews
|
1. August 2009 @ 20:10 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
...has awarded the RIAA and the media companies $675,000 USD
Quote:
...the jury awarded the RIAA $1.92 million USD
Another example of these greedy hypocrites (RIAA) at work again.
The RIAA says, Quote:
...artists and music companies deserve to be paid for their work
Yet look at who is really cashing in, and who isn't. I think we all know who the real robber is.
|
|
llongtheD
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
1. August 2009 @ 20:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yet another shining example of how large corporations and their lobbyists, can influence stupid and corrupt politicians into making these ridiculous laws. We would have to use the term laws loosely however, more like rules that benefit the dirtbags.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
1. August 2009 @ 20:30 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by llongtheD:
Yet another shining example of how large corporations and their lobbyists, can influence stupid and corrupt politicians into making these ridiculous laws. We would have to use the term laws loosely however, more like rules that benefit the dirtbags.
Until lobbying is a hanging offense, anarchy is a better option.
|
|
megwire
Newbie
|
1. August 2009 @ 20:38 |
Link to this message
|
This makes me sick to my stom. I hope the RIAA burns in hell. This is like Robin Hood in some pervert twist. Steal from the poor and give to the filthy rich. If the RIAA were a country, they would have death squads and be shooting people on sight. There's only one solution in my mind. Stop buying anything from the RIAA. Borrow CDs from your library or friends and burn them that way. Moby recently wrote about how the RIAA needs to be disbanded and I couldn't agree more.
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/18252.cfm
Since when is listening to music a crime. Shame on the jury for allowing such a heinous award! They should have awarded the RIAA $30 max. When are people going to finally revolt against all these madness. Why not just start burning people at the stake? That would have the same effect. This is just disgusting.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. August 2009 @ 21:45
|
|
wahwah1
Newbie
|
1. August 2009 @ 21:43 |
Link to this message
|
So lets see...it is OK to download music for free (aka Stealing)and burn to MP3/CD for personal use. But it is not ok to go to a concert where live music is being played and just walk in with out a ticket?
Hmmm...let me guess the morons...I mean posers here that are bitching about the jury award never bought a CD...or have worked as a musician.
But hey I guess it is ok to steal as long as everyone else does it.
Loser!
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
1. August 2009 @ 22:14 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by wahwah1:
So lets see...it is OK to download music for free (aka Stealing)and burn to MP3/CD for personal use. But it is not ok to go to a concert where live music is being played and just walk in with out a ticket?
Hmmm...let me guess the morons...I mean posers here that are bitching about the jury award never bought a CD...or have worked as a musician.
But hey I guess it is ok to steal as long as everyone else does it.
Loser!
Are you a musician Signed on by one of the RIAA Lables, was one of your tracks downloaded by this guy.
675,000 USD would take the average person 5 to 6 years to pay off. if every last penny went to pay towards the fine. a bank robber could get off better than that.
use logic before you rant please.
|
|
Icbar
Newbie
|
1. August 2009 @ 22:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
It would take the average person way longer than 5-6 years, since the average income is nowhere near 100,000$.. It would take around 25 years using the median income in the US (around 25K) assuming ALL income went to the payments. Not to mention this kid went to Harvard, so he's probably in a mountain of debt already..
|
|
jony218
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
1. August 2009 @ 22:43 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
675,000 USD would take the average person 5 to 6 years to pay off. if every last penny went to pay towards the fine. a bank robber could get off better than that.
In europe or canada it might take 5 or 6 years working at minimum wage. In the US we are talking 30/40 years to pay that off. But everyone seems to forget, if the dude had money to buy CD's to begin with he wouldn't have been downloading anything.
In the end its a happy ending, the RIAA doesn't get any money anyway. If they start to garnish his wages he will probably quit his job and go live under a overpass.
|
|
varnull
Suspended permanently
|
1. August 2009 @ 22:47 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
So lets see...it is OK to download music for free (aka Stealing)and burn to MP3/CD for personal use. But it is not ok to go to a concert where live music is being played and just walk in with out a ticket?
Hmmm...let me guess the morons...I mean posers here that are bitching about the jury award never bought a CD...or have worked as a musician.
But hey I guess it is ok to steal as long as everyone else does it.
Loser!
I am a musician not signed to an RIAA vultures company.. they owe me royalties they have collected illegally. They will not pay out unless I sign up to one of their cartel gangster thieving companies.
You can download my music for free on my profile.. hahahaha.. just take it.. it's mine to give away. If you hear it on the radio the RIAA scum (and in the UK the PRS) will have forcibly collected royalties on it even though I have waived them.
Before you go spouting your gob think who might be listening.....
|
|
windsong
Member
1 product review
|
1. August 2009 @ 23:31 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by wahwah1:
So lets see...it is OK to download music for free (aka Stealing)and burn to MP3/CD for personal use. But it is not ok to go to a concert where live music is being played and just walk in with out a ticket?
Hmmm...let me guess the morons...I mean posers here that are bitching about the jury award never bought a CD...or have worked as a musician.
But hey I guess it is ok to steal as long as everyone else does it.
Loser!
Sharp as an orange.
|
|
rockabout
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
2. August 2009 @ 00:10 |
Link to this message
|
the record companies are not the boy scouts.
if you bootleg and get cought,guido might show up at your door.
they take it to heart that you would steal from them.
copyright is your protection, provided by congress,for what you create,for someone to make copies of your work is stealing.if they make money from it you loose that money to someone who did nothing more than copy your work.
for an artist,no money,no art
the RIAA has gone too far. i guess they cant catch enough legit bootleggers so they have to scare the fans
dont buy their stuff or steal it. make your owne
johnny
|
|
llongtheD
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
2. August 2009 @ 00:11 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by llongtheD:
Yet another shining example of how large corporations and their lobbyists, can influence stupid and corrupt politicians into making these ridiculous laws. We would have to use the term laws loosely however, more like rules that benefit the dirtbags.
Until lobbying is a hanging offense, anarchy is a better option.
Agreed.
|
|
windsong
Member
1 product review
|
2. August 2009 @ 00:17 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
If they start to garnish his wages he will probably quit his job and go live under a overpass.
Or move to Canada.
|
|
big_poppa
Newbie
|
2. August 2009 @ 00:39 |
Link to this message
|
I love how everyone here is blaming the RIAA. How about the stupid lawsuit that was brought by HIS attorneys? The RIAA offered to settle this for a LOT lower price but homeboy thought he'd have his day in court. And then the stupid f**k admits to stealing the music and offering it for download to thousands of people in open court. If I was on the jury I would have voted him guilty too.
|
|
llongtheD
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
2. August 2009 @ 05:07 |
Link to this message
|
Hey big_poppa,
The RIAA needs to spend more time seeing that quality music gets made. If they didn't put out this "formula" music, where there is one good song on an album, and the rest is filler, there would be no need to sue someone for not buying it. People have had crap shoved in their faces for years. The music is based on market studies now. If you don't believe, look at american idol. I'm not saying there isn't any good music being made anymore, but more often than not, if it doesn't fit the "mold" it would be shoved aside. Because of their money and power, they are one of the few groups that can sue a poor person for these "hypothetical" damages and get away with it. Anyone who can't see this, needs to wake up and smell what they're shoveling.
Just think if they could relax their white knuckle grip on the dollar, and just leave the making of music to the artists again. Call me crazy but I think their profits would spike, and there would be no need for these ridiculous lawsuits. Everyone would benefit.
No one even questions the rights of privacy, or how these corporations obtain the information, to bring these suits. No search warrant, no court order in most cases, and they are able to look at whats on your machine. To me thats an invasion of privacy, but I guess in america our rights are eroding so quickly it probably doesn't matter.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. August 2009 @ 05:16
|
|
EricCarr
Member
|
2. August 2009 @ 05:36 |
Link to this message
|
|
I think there should be a list of artist he downloaded and those artist should get their cut of this $$$$.
|
|
wahwah1
Newbie
|
2. August 2009 @ 09:52 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by llongtheD:
Hey big_poppa,
The RIAA needs to spend more time seeing that quality music gets made. If they didn't put out this "formula" music, where there is one good song on an album, and the rest is filler, there would be no need to sue someone for not buying it. People have had crap shoved in their faces for years. The music is based on market studies now. If you don't believe, look at american idol. I'm not saying there isn't any good music being made anymore, but more often than not, if it doesn't fit the "mold" it would be shoved aside. Because of their money and power, they are one of the few groups that can sue a poor person for these "hypothetical" damages and get away with it. Anyone who can't see this, needs to wake up and smell what they're shoveling.
Just think if they could relax their white knuckle grip on the dollar, and just leave the making of music to the artists again. Call me crazy but I think their profits would spike, and there would be no need for these ridiculous lawsuits. Everyone would benefit.
No one even questions the rights of privacy, or how these corporations obtain the information, to bring these suits. No search warrant, no court order in most cases, and they are able to look at whats on your machine. To me thats an invasion of privacy, but I guess in america our rights are eroding so quickly it probably doesn't matter.
Interesting that the quality of music is not controlled by the RIAA. It is controlled by those who choose to steal music only for one song.
The fact is real simple...if you like it buy it...and if you steal it...you are a thief. Plain and simple.
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
2. August 2009 @ 11:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
Just another pointlessly vicious act on the road to the present copyright system falling to pieces.
A minor battle won by the RIAA/MPAA gang against one individual in the teeth of billions (12 billion downloads las year apparantly).
I just hope that one day we get to compensate those abused in this unjust and cruel way - and go after those who were responsible for this spiteful idiocy.
|
|
Mysttic
Senior Member
|
2. August 2009 @ 13:47 |
Link to this message
|
Guilty or no, could have gotten a lesser fine or no; the fact remains as long as this continues and fines are set to outrageous unconstitutional dollars, then eventually depending on how far this gets out of hand, will result in every loser to these types of crime filing for bankruptcy because they can't or never will be able to afford the millions or even hundred of thousands the RIAA claims it causes in damages. They don't even take into account that maybe the down-loaders that are getting the music from the uploader already *GASP* own the album. But that doesn't matter because they are allowed to fixate any amount they see fit for damages up to a maximum of whatever outrageous amount. So as they keep going after individuals who most of them will be between welfare and lower tax bracket working citizens *maybe the odd middle class*; more and more people will like I said file bankruptcy, and if they thought the economy was shit before, they government obviously can't forsee how bad this outcome could really get; or how ugly.
|
|
windsong
Member
1 product review
|
2. August 2009 @ 14:19 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by llongtheD:
Hey big_poppa,
The RIAA needs to spend more time seeing that quality music gets made. If they didn't put out this "formula" music, where there is one good song on an album, and the rest is filler, there would be no need to sue someone for not buying it. People have had crap shoved in their faces for years. The music is based on market studies now. If you don't believe, look at american idol. I'm not saying there isn't any good music being made anymore, but more often than not, if it doesn't fit the "mold" it would be shoved aside. Because of their money and power, they are one of the few groups that can sue a poor person for these "hypothetical" damages and get away with it. Anyone who can't see this, needs to wake up and smell what they're shoveling.
Just think if they could relax their white knuckle grip on the dollar, and just leave the making of music to the artists again. Call me crazy but I think their profits would spike, and there would be no need for these ridiculous lawsuits. Everyone would benefit.
No one even questions the rights of privacy, or how these corporations obtain the information, to bring these suits. No search warrant, no court order in most cases, and they are able to look at whats on your machine. To me thats an invasion of privacy, but I guess in america our rights are eroding so quickly it probably doesn't matter.
Interesting that the quality of music is not controlled by the RIAA. It is controlled by those who choose to steal music only for one song.
The fact is real simple...if you like it buy it...and if you steal it...you are a thief. Plain and simple.
A corporate RIAA shill if there ever was one.
|
Senior Member
|
2. August 2009 @ 14:57 |
Link to this message
|
lol at afterdawns main page it has this article
[Joel Tenenbaum fined $675,000 over copyright infringement]
Then right under it is a
Software update for: LimeWire Basic v5.2.13
I find that funny.
(sharing is not a crime!)
|
|
rockabout
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
2. August 2009 @ 22:02 |
Link to this message
|
i think you guys are missing the point.
the constitution of the united states protects intellectual property.
you cant just go copy and sell something you did not create.
if you do you can go to jail,pay fines.things like that.
write it and you can sell all you can.assign it to somebody to sell for you, whatever.
just because it costs too much or the rest of the music sucks doesnt change the facts.
if i remember correctly they sell singles.
most riaa members dont mind a little sharing
but never allow any resale,ever. none, dont even think about it.
bootlegging of any amount is a big deal.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. August 2009 @ 22:20
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
2. August 2009 @ 22:17 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by rockabout:
i think you guys are missing the point.
the constitution of the united states protects intelectual property.
you cant just go copy and sell something you did not create.
if you do you can go to jail,pay fines.things like that.
write it and you can sell all you can.assign it to somebody to sell for you, whatever.
just because it costs too much or the rest of the music sucks doesnt change tha facts.
if i remember correctly they sell singles.
most riaa members dont mind a little shareing
but never allow any resale,ever. none dont even think about it.
bootlegging of any amount is a big deal.
Yes but, selling for profit and shearing are 2 separate issues, of such amendments(fair use/first sale,ect) have been made to the rules to allow for shearing,even abstract profit(sale of used software/media).Tho through lobbying efforts our individual rights have taken a back step to corporate rights yet again.
I do nto contest the profit stream remaining exclusive to the CP/IP owners however if its shared in non profit settings it should not be illegal.
The modern age has something no other age before it had,even the 70/80s with taping was just a snow flake on a iceberg. We now have electronic/digital communication almost on a scale of mass telepathy(IE trading of thought) that makes the old media houses antiquated and out moded. Its not that they can not change to meet the times and stay relevant rather they buy laws to not have to change and ensure their monopolies conglomerate and become bigger with the cowmen citizen becomes smaller and smaller through more rules that turn them into renters for life.
This is why "mere distribution" should not be a crime of any kind, focus on the profit dirvied from distribution, because that will reduce free sharing far more than steeping beyond bounds and limits to create an artificial absolute rule that's used not for the good of the public or the worlds people but used to as an anal probe to keep them dumb,complacent and fearing..
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
3. August 2009 @ 14:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
The jury was ordered to find him guilty.
What else do you need to know?
One of the most wealthy and profitable businesses on the planet has 'justice' all bought and paid for.
|
