Comments on: Defendant to RIAA: 428,571 Times Actual Damages is Unconstitutional http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9665/defendant_to_riaa_428571_times_actual_damages_is_unconstitutional/ Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:13:16 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: TheRealMcCoy http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9665/defendant_to_riaa_428571_times_actual_damages_is_unconstitutional/#comment-179791 TheRealMcCoy Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000 #comment-179791 so this is a good thing? it's going to be harder for the IRAA to sue what ever they want with all those ridiculous arbitrary fines which makes it even less worth there while to fight it court? ha! i knew it! every passage in the constitution contradicts another passage somewhere in the constitution...loop wholes yah just gotta love them = D so this is a good thing? it’s going to be harder for the IRAA to sue what ever they want with all those ridiculous arbitrary fines which makes it even less worth there while to fight it court? ha! i knew it! every passage in the constitution contradicts another passage somewhere in the constitution…loop wholes yah just gotta love them = D

]]> By: soulxtc http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9665/defendant_to_riaa_428571_times_actual_damages_is_unconstitutional/#comment-179792 soulxtc Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000 #comment-179792 @The Real McCoy Well it's not a matter where "every passage in the constitution contradicts another passage somewhere in the constitution." it'sjust that when Congress passed the law determining copyright infringemnt damages it arguably contradicted the 14th amendment and hasn't been challenge until now. @The Real McCoy
Well it’s not a matter where “every passage in the constitution contradicts another passage somewhere in the constitution.” it’sjust that when Congress passed the law determining copyright infringemnt damages it arguably contradicted the 14th amendment and hasn’t been challenge until now.

]]> By: DrewWilson http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9665/defendant_to_riaa_428571_times_actual_damages_is_unconstitutional/#comment-179793 DrewWilson Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000 #comment-179793 Though I'm sure if things don't pan out for the RIAA they'll lobby congress to strip out that right as well. Near as I can tell they are already stripping out the 1st and 4th already. ./cynical. Though I’m sure if things don’t pan out for the RIAA they’ll lobby congress to strip out that right as well. Near as I can tell they are already stripping out the 1st and 4th already.

./cynical.

]]> By: TheRealMcCoy http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9665/defendant_to_riaa_428571_times_actual_damages_is_unconstitutional/#comment-179794 TheRealMcCoy Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000 #comment-179794 @ Soulxtc Ok so it's not merry Christmas for us yet then... there still continuing to futilely attack the online file sharing community and the amendments that protect it. But at least it dose sort of put another wall in front of the IRAA... why sue when it's going to cost them more money for the case than there actually going to get back from it...am i right? I don't' see what makes the entertainment industry think it's any different from any other business the facts are simple... If the market changes and the demand is there you have two choices; ether change with it or get swallowed up by it it's always been that way but don't think you are the one controlling the consumers because we are the ones with the money... taking in account all the evidence I've read the only reason i can think the IRAA have been so relentless at this whole file sharing dibocle is simply because their shitting a brick and they don't actually want to change remodel or assimilate and utilize file sharing in their business structurer and there loosing control of the consumers why are they complaining by saying Oink case: "The first charge allegedly pertains to the site's donations mechanism in which users contributed to the site to pay for server costs hosting fees etc.. UK authorities insist that the site was a money making scheme that was "extremely lucrative." "extremely lucrative" Uhhh...well if that is the case it should tell you something about that market...it's a bloody good market to be in = s @ Soulxtc

Ok so it’s not merry Christmas for us yet then… there still continuing to futilely attack the online file sharing community and the amendments that protect it. But at least it dose sort of put another wall in front of the IRAA… why sue when it’s going to cost them more money for the case than there actually going to get back from it…am i right?

I don’t’ see what makes the entertainment industry think it’s any different from any other business the facts are simple… If the market changes and the demand is there you have two choices; ether change with it or get swallowed up by it it’s always been that way but don’t think you are the one controlling the consumers because we are the ones with the money… taking in account all the evidence I’ve read the only reason i can think the IRAA have been so relentless at this whole file sharing dibocle is simply because their shitting a brick and they don’t actually want to change remodel or assimilate and utilize file sharing in their business structurer and there loosing control of the consumers

why are they complaining by saying Oink case:

“The first charge allegedly pertains to the site’s donations mechanism in which users contributed to the site to pay for server costs hosting fees etc.. UK authorities insist that the site was a money making scheme that was “extremely lucrative.”

“extremely lucrative” Uhhh…well if that is the case it should tell you something about that market…it’s a bloody good market to be in = s

]]> By: soulxtc http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9665/defendant_to_riaa_428571_times_actual_damages_is_unconstitutional/#comment-179795 soulxtc Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000 #comment-179795 @The Real McCoy Exactly on both arguments.... :) @The Real McCoy

Exactly on both arguments…. :)

]]> By: icebox http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9665/defendant_to_riaa_428571_times_actual_damages_is_unconstitutional/#comment-179796 icebox Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000 #comment-179796 The weak point in Beckerman's argument is the amount of actual damages. He's assuming that the only damage is the copy of the song on the defendant's computer. But the problem here is that if the defendant was distributing the song they've cost the artist much more than 35 cents. The RIAA can reasonably make the argument that the total damage caused is not easily calculable and thus the statutory damage is an acceptable substitute. Beckerman's argument here though is clever otherwise as this due process standard for damage ratios is a relatively new standard the Supreme Court has come up with recently to protect corporations from huge damage awards. Using it against corporate USA is a nice comeupance The weak point in Beckerman’s argument is the amount of actual damages. He’s assuming that the only damage is the copy of the song on the defendant’s computer. But the problem here is that if the defendant was distributing the song they’ve cost the artist much more than 35 cents. The RIAA can reasonably make the argument that the total damage caused is not easily calculable and thus the statutory damage is an acceptable substitute. Beckerman’s argument here though is clever otherwise as this due process standard for damage ratios is a relatively new standard the Supreme Court has come up with recently to protect corporations from huge damage awards. Using it against corporate USA is a nice comeupance

]]> By: hqconverter http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9665/defendant_to_riaa_428571_times_actual_damages_is_unconstitutional/#comment-179797 hqconverter Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000 #comment-179797 Share Dvd tools with Mac users! Here is the result I want to share with Mac users: 1) Cost/Performance: Everybody wants to gain more with less money. 2) Speed: Nobody wants to waste too much time waiting. 3) Profile: Of course we want our software can convert all kinds of video formats. 4) Personal Demands: For example someone just wants to convert part of the DVD video or others want the special output video format like PSP compliant forms and etc. 5) Easy to use: we want to make things easy. http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/ http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/dvd_burner_for_mac.htm http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/dvd_copy_for_mac.htm http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/dvd_ripper_for_mac.htm http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/avi_to_dvd_for_mac.htm http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/divx_to_dvd_converter_for_mac.htm http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/dvd_decryption_for_mac.htm http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/dvd_decryption_for_mac.htm http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/clone_dvd_mac.htm http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/vob_converter_for_mac.htm Share Dvd tools with Mac users!
Here is the result I want to share with Mac users:
1) Cost/Performance: Everybody wants to gain more with less money.
2) Speed: Nobody wants to waste too much time waiting.
3) Profile: Of course we want our software can convert all kinds of video formats.
4) Personal Demands: For example someone just wants to convert part of the DVD video or others want the special output video format like PSP compliant forms and etc.
5) Easy to use: we want to make things easy.
http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/
http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/dvd_burner_for_mac.htm
http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/dvd_copy_for_mac.htm
http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/dvd_ripper_for_mac.htm
http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/avi_to_dvd_for_mac.htm
http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/divx_to_dvd_converter_for_mac.htm
http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/dvd_decryption_for_mac.htm
http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/dvd_decryption_for_mac.htm
http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/clone_dvd_mac.htm
http://www.dvdcreatormac.com/vob_converter_for_mac.htm

]]>