Obama Sides With RIAA, Supports $150,000 Fine per Music Track
By David Kravets EmailMarch 23, 2009 | 1:12:29 PMCategories: RIAA Litigation
The Obama administration for the first time is weighing in on a Recording Industry Association of America file sharing lawsuit and is supporting hefty awards of as much as $150,000 per purloined music track.
The government said the damages range of $750 to $150,000 per violation of the Copyright Act was warranted.
"The remedy of statutory damages for copyright infringement has been the cornerstone of our federal copyright law since 1790, and Congress acted reasonably in crafting the current incarnation of the statutory damages provision," Michelle Bennett, a Department of Justice trial attorney wrote (.pdf) Sunday to a Massachusetts federal judge weighing challenge to the Copyright Act.
The position -- that the Copyright Act's monetary damages are not unconstitutionally excessive -- mirrors the one taken by the Bush administration and should come as no surprise.
Two top lawyers in President Barack Obama's Justice Department are former RIAA lawyers: Donald Verrilli Jr. is the associate deputy attorney general who brought down Grokster and fought to prevent a retrial in the Jammie Thomas case. Then there's the No. 2 in the DOJ, Tom Perrilli. As Verrilli's former boss, Perrilli argued in 2002 that internet service providers should release customer information to the RIAA even without a court subpoena.
Presidential administrations often intervene in lawsuits in which the constitutionality of a federal law is in question. This case concerns a former Boston University student challenging a peer-to-peer file sharing case.
Still, parts of the government's brief sounded as if it was taken from the RIAA's public relations playbook.
"Congress sought to account for both the difficulty of quantifying damages in the context of copyright infringement and the need to deter millions of users of new technology from infringing copyrighted work in an environment where many violators believe that their activities will go unnoticed," Bennett wrote.
The RIAA has sued more than 30,000 individuals for file sharing the last five years. It is winding down the campaign and is lobbying internet service providers to discontinue service to copyright scofflaws.
I think this is a big mistake on the whole "change" regime. I voted for Obama and I have supported him throughout his presidency, and I will continue to, but this upsets me greatly.
Amendment 8 of the US Constitution states:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
It seems like these days, the Constitution has been thrown out the window. $150,000 per song is an absolute joke. I can't believe this is still in place. His top 2 lawyers are former RIAA lawyers, so no surprise there.
Wow, it's almost as though Obama is just another politician rather than everybody's personal best friend, despite what his meticulously constructed image and campaign would love for everyone to believe...
___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Mar-24-2009 15:26
ziptnf
Programming your future
Registered: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
quote:
Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
Wow, it's almost as though Obama is just another politician rather than everybody's personal best friend, despite what his meticulously constructed image and campaign would love for everyone to believe...
He's also the media's favorite punching bag and lover. They literally either criticize every word he says, or praise every word he says. It would be tough to be Obama at this point in his life, taking care of the worst financial crisis in decades and restructuring America's foreign policy. I can imagine he will let his lawyers worry about who is downloading songs on the internet.
Although, he could come out and say "$150,000 is too excessive, but we will press charges if we catch you downloading illegal shit."
But why would he? I doubt his administration assesses much worth in catering to what is likely a whole group of non-voters [downloaderz, luls], so it's much easier to play it safe and side with lobbyists and that capricious notion we call "legality".
And really, who, besides the family and individuals themselves, gives a fuck about unabashed law-breakers? This is a legal front propogated by record industries that have infinitely more political leverage than any individual this could possibly threaten.
___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Mar-24-2009 18:30
Magnetonium
Dubstep = Douchestep
Registered: Sep 2001
Location: Port Burwell, Ontario, Canada
It's not too late to move to Canada ...
Obama obviously doesn't appreciate our love for music.
But no worries for people like me - I think I have enough downloaded.
And I actually buy a lot of music too - and download a bunch. So I am not scared if RIAA does the same for Canada. I have thousands of original (purchased) CDs.
And much of the stuff I download is so rare and out-of-print (and not new music), I doubt RIAA will be interested in a bum like me. I dont download Spritney Bears or 50 Cents.
___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture
Mar-24-2009 22:08
Krypton
83.798 g/6.022x10^23
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Texas
If you'r still using limewire or some other crap, you'r an idiot. If the virus's don't kill you, hopefully the RIAA will. Rip from internet radio you losers or just buy the song.
Mar-24-2009 23:02
ziptnf
Programming your future
Registered: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
If you'r still using limewire or some other crap, you'r an idiot. If the virus's don't kill you, hopefully the RIAA will. Rip from internet radio you losers or just buy the song.
Agreed that you're dumb if you are still using Limewire, but most people just use torrents. I don't think the RIAA can track torrents unless your ISP reports you.
...And with the RIAA now threatening to sue ISPs, themselves, for providing service to people who download, I doubt ISPs are going to protect your information in the least.
It is probably now cheaper to rape another human being than it is to download a song.
___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Mar-24-2009 23:31
Magnetonium
Dubstep = Douchestep
Registered: Sep 2001
Location: Port Burwell, Ontario, Canada
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
If you'r still using limewire or some other crap, you'r an idiot. If the virus's don't kill you, hopefully the RIAA will. Rip from internet radio you losers or just buy the song.
Who uses Limewire anyway? It always had a bad reputation, not even worth trying it out, period. People who do use it should be ashamed of themselves - most of them are probably just leechers anyway. There are better programs out there - I'd rather not mention publicly the one that I use (the only one that I used in the last 5-6 years).
Personally, I NEVER used LimeWire or any torrents and I dont even listen to online radio ... why should I listen to radio when I have a music collection to listen through?
Been busy gathering some vinyl lately
Thats the thing about filesharing - I noticed that over 90% of people out there are just plain leechers who dont give a shit about anyone or anything other than themselves. They dont share, and when they do, its pretty dam clear they are not by looking at the shit in their "shared" files. Too many people who are ignorant, who want free music and dont care or understand how others have put their time, effort and money in getting it - even when shared.
And the ones who do share are typically the people who actually buy a lot of music and are knowledgable.
Personally for me - if it wasnt for filesharing I wouldn't have found out about 90% of the musicians that I do know now about, and subsequently I would have never bought the massive amount of their music later. Thanks to Discogs, I was able to learn even more and truly enhance my electronic music knowledge.
Also, music sharing is the least of concerns - there are huge piracy issues with movies, games and software out there. Piracy is truly a big problem. I may download some music, but I buy ALL my movies, games and software. I understand that there are people who depend on a source of income making these items for us to enjoy, and if noone would buy their creativity and download instead, it would cause problems. Already I see a decline in the quality of music due to less and less CDs being bought, less money generated by the artists through music production - so they have to resort to other means of it (touring). Talented musicians dont have the time to spend making quality music, and with a need for income they resort to part-time music production (people have bills to pay!!!) or often go for a "quick fix", sample + mash type of thing.
Electronic music today, as a result, is only a fraction of the quality and brilliance that it was between 1980-2000.
___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture
Mar-25-2009 00:24
Magnetonium
Dubstep = Douchestep
Registered: Sep 2001
Location: Port Burwell, Ontario, Canada
Hah ... all the talk about artists getting ripped off and lack of talent ... the REAL talented music has long ago been done, around 2000, and today much of music has been ripped off or sampled from someone else. Much of the "Nu House" today is nothing but a retro/italo-disco/electro rebirth with a different beat and some clever sampling / looping.
Random example - here's a 1969 soul-jazz song that has since been sampled by HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of artists, songs, etc. and gave birth to numerous genres of music, like breaks, drum 'n bass, hip-hop, breakbeat ...
Listen to the part at about 1:44! You'll understand EXACTLY what I mean. The drum beat has been sampled, slowed down/sped up, cut/modified since then. Since 1969 - after a quiet 70's period when this track was largely left out - in the 80s the track was revived ...
___________________
Whenever you go and buy something, you are affecting someone somewhere, be it environment, a person, or a community - you're making a statement with what you buy. So make it a smart choice ... Its a big picture
Mar-25-2009 00:35
Lebezniatnikov
Stupidity Annoys Me
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: DC
quote:
Originally posted by Magnetonium
Also, music sharing is the least of concerns - there are huge piracy issues with movies, games and software out there. Piracy is truly a big problem. I may download some music, but I buy ALL my movies, games and software. I understand that there are people who depend on a source of income making these items for us to enjoy, and if noone would buy their creativity and download instead, it would cause problems. Already I see a decline in the quality of music due to less and less CDs being bought, less money generated by the artists through music production - so they have to resort to other means of it (touring). Talented musicians dont have the time to spend making quality music, and with a need for income they resort to part-time music production (people have bills to pay!!!) or often go for a "quick fix", sample + mash type of thing.
That's a fairly good argument for legal steps taken against people who illegally download music.
Just buy the album. Makes you wonder how some people survived before Napster.
