This screenshot says it all:

Source

This screenshot says it all:

Source

Yep, pretty sad state of affairs but that is an accurate summation of the current value system that the current

crop of judges live by. :angry:

Yep, pretty sad state of affairs but that is an accurate summation of the current value system that the current

crop of judges live by.

Actually, it has little to do with the judges:

Under federal law, the recording companies are entitled to $750 to $30,000 per infringement but the law allows the jury to raise that to as much as $150,000 per track if it finds the infringements were willful. The jury decided on $80,000 per song.

While most people would probably agree that the RIAA is entitled to protect the interests of its artists, hitting (mainly) kids whith such extreme penalties seems exceptionally unfair and nonsensical.

At $80,000 I'd expect the band to come round my house and play.

At $80,000 I'd expect the band to come round my house and play.

At 80000$ i'd expect they gave me all their cd's and tickets to their concerts

Actually, it has little to do with the judges:

Under federal law, the recording companies are entitled to $750 to $30,000 per infringement but the law allows the jury to raise that to as much as $150,000 per track if it finds the infringements were willful. The jury decided on $80,000 per song.

While most people would probably agree that the RIAA is entitled to protect the interests of its artists, hitting (mainly) kids whith such extreme penalties seems exceptionally unfair and nonsensical.

At $80,000 I'd expect the band to come round my house and play.

At 80000$ i'd expect they gave me all their cd's and tickets to their concerts

I just gave thumbs up to all of your posts! :thumbup: