http://www.prefixmag.com/news/seven-cri … han/32033/
That is so fucked up. If I had to pick one organization to destroy it would be the RIAA.
That is so fucked up. If I had to pick one organization to destroy it would be the RIAA.
Pages: 1
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Kidnapping and arson are lesser crimes than file sharing
Now I feel bad for whoever's wireless I'm using to download music right now.
That is a stupid article.
You burn someones house down, you just don't pay a fine. Get real.
You burn someones house down, you just don't pay a fine. Get real.
So i should start "Kidnapping" music now?
What world does this blogger live in? The maximum penalty for murder is far more than this.blog wrote:
Murder someone: The maximum penalty is only $25,000 and 15 years in jail,
An interesting premise for a rant, but it would be useful if the author would use facts in his comparison.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
I'm sure it is, but ignoring that, the fact is that 15 years in jail is much worse than paying a $2 million fine.FEOS wrote:
What world does this blogger live in? The maximum penalty for murder is far more than this.blog wrote:
Murder someone: The maximum penalty is only $25,000 and 15 years in jail,
An interesting premise for a rant, but it would be useful if the author would use facts in his comparison.
And if 15 years in jail were actually the max penalty for murder, the author would have a point. But it isn't--so by using that comparison, he's making a nonsensical argument.ghettoperson wrote:
I'm sure it is, but ignoring that, the fact is that 15 years in jail is much worse than paying a $2 million fine.FEOS wrote:
What world does this blogger live in? The maximum penalty for murder is far more than this.blog wrote:
Murder someone: The maximum penalty is only $25,000 and 15 years in jail,
An interesting premise for a rant, but it would be useful if the author would use facts in his comparison.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
You wouldn't download a car.
AussieReaper wrote:
You wouldn't download a car.
No clue why this came to mind
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Start downloading Burnout Paradise, Oh yes I would.AussieReaper wrote:
You wouldn't download a car.
Then again, 2 million dollar isn't something you can make fast, even lifetime in prison seems more harmless than that. This is just for 24 songs too, This guy might as well rob a bank then pay back the loan and sit in jail after that.
okay
Assault somebody and give them severe injuries, go to a 'juevnile treatment center' or perform community service
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/23/ba … er-jailed/
Rob a bank and get 7.5 years in prison
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loomis_Far … onvictions
Yes spending time in prison sucks, but being bankrupted by downloading music is also pretty fucking bad if you ask me. And $2 million is just for 24 songs. Imagine getting nailed for downloading a 100 or 500 songs. The punishment simply does not fit the crime. I mean christ, as it said in the article, stealing the actual CD would probably get me a smaller fine than downloading it and at worst some community service.
Assault somebody and give them severe injuries, go to a 'juevnile treatment center' or perform community service
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/23/ba … er-jailed/
Rob a bank and get 7.5 years in prison
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loomis_Far … onvictions
Yes spending time in prison sucks, but being bankrupted by downloading music is also pretty fucking bad if you ask me. And $2 million is just for 24 songs. Imagine getting nailed for downloading a 100 or 500 songs. The punishment simply does not fit the crime. I mean christ, as it said in the article, stealing the actual CD would probably get me a smaller fine than downloading it and at worst some community service.
24 song = 2 million.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
okay
Assault somebody and give them severe injuries, go to a 'juevnile treatment center' or perform community service
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/23/ba … er-jailed/
Rob a bank and get 7.5 years in prison
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loomis_Far … onvictions
Yes spending time in prison sucks, but being bankrupted by downloading music is also pretty fucking bad if you ask me. And $2 million is just for 24 songs. Imagine getting nailed for downloading a 100 or 500 songs. The punishment simply does not fit the crime. I mean christ, as it said in the article, stealing the actual CD would probably get me a smaller fine than downloading it and at worst some community service.
I would get a 1326000000 Million fine....damn now that sucks
I say they are retarded and not aiming their effort at the good cause, sure illegally downloading thing is bad and should lead to sentence...but fuck man,...24 song, that's what...1 album. Come one seriously!
The payment they said would go from 35000- 220,000 for each song, they went for max on a student. I say they just destroyed someones life.
It's sad, but they're trying to set an example. (imo) They know that they can't sue every single person who pirated a song so they're taking a random few and fucking them over just to try and show who's boss.Zukabazuka wrote:
The payment they said would go from 35000- 220,000 for each song, they went for max on a student. I say they just destroyed someones life.
I read about the OP on digg, and immediately closed it. I know the author is trying to make a point about the RIAA being a bunch of fascist assholes, but his arguments are pretty bad. Either that, or I never realized that you only get fined for arson and kidnapping. Also, based purely on money alone, you might be spending less for committing murder (though 15 years is most likely not the case, depending on the circumstances around the murder) losing 15 years of your life is pretty fucking significant and pricey on its own imo.
True that losing 15 years to murder is fucking bad but, I don't think music piracy could equate to an absolute destruction of one's ENTIRE life. Hell stealing a CD you wouldn't even get that much of a fine. The companies have absolutely no soul at all, they are blood sucking leeches. Just for downloading a few songs, would you want someone's entire financial future to be absolutely destroyed? Sure they could give him a slap on the wrist make him pay for a 200 dollar fine, but that should be about it.Smithereener wrote:
It's sad, but they're trying to set an example. (imo) They know that they can't sue every single person who pirated a song so they're taking a random few and fucking them over just to try and show who's boss.Zukabazuka wrote:
The payment they said would go from 35000- 220,000 for each song, they went for max on a student. I say they just destroyed someones life.
I read about the OP on digg, and immediately closed it. I know the author is trying to make a point about the RIAA being a bunch of fascist assholes, but his arguments are pretty bad. Either that, or I never realized that you only get fined for arson and kidnapping. Also, based purely on money alone, you might be spending less for committing murder (though 15 years is most likely not the case, depending on the circumstances around the murder) losing 15 years of your life is pretty fucking significant and pricey on its own imo.
i think they went to the wall to make an example. here we are, talking about how drastic it is - i think that's what they're shooting for. and, if it sticks, they set a precedent. That's the scary part about all this. The precedent's been set, so in future cases it can be referred back to.Cybargs wrote:
Just for downloading a few songs, would you want someone's entire financial future to be absolutely destroyed? Sure they could give him a slap on the wrist make him pay for a 200 dollar fine, but that should be about it.
That's the problem, they shouldn't make an example, they should judge depending on the case. Problem is a lot of people who has downloaded songs have been getting huge bill.burnzz wrote:
i think they went to the wall to make an example. here we are, talking about how drastic it is - i think that's what they're shooting for. and, if it sticks, they set a precedent. That's the scary part about all this. The precedent's been set, so in future cases it can be referred back to.Cybargs wrote:
Just for downloading a few songs, would you want someone's entire financial future to be absolutely destroyed? Sure they could give him a slap on the wrist make him pay for a 200 dollar fine, but that should be about it.
Before you jump on me just know as of this minute my laptop is at home downloading a collection of trance music. Now when somebody gets nailed like this, I can't draw any sympathy considering they knew what they were doing was illegal and they knew the risk.
Red Forman wrote:
That is a stupid article.
You burn someones house down, you just don't pay a fine. Get real.
close thread..or move to JDFEOS wrote:
What world does this blogger live in? The maximum penalty for murder is far more than this.blog wrote:
Murder someone: The maximum penalty is only $25,000 and 15 years in jail,
An interesting premise for a rant, but it would be useful if the author would use facts in his comparison.
Pages: 1
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Kidnapping and arson are lesser crimes than file sharing