View Single Post
Old 01-11-2011, 03:46 AM   #93
pdurrant
The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠
pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.pdurrant ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
pdurrant's Avatar
 
Posts: 73,763
Karma: 315126578
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Norfolk, England
Device: Kindle Oasis
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barcey View Post
Resurrecting an old thread for an update. Not surprisingly they settled for $45 million and didn't admit any wrongdoing. A little under the potential $6 billion.

http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/a.../10/c9214.html

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/blogsection/0/125/
So systematic, deliberate, unauthorised commercial release results in a settlement of $150/song from the record companies to the singers and songwriters, but for accidentally making songs available over a peer-to-peer network, a judge ordered a payment of $2,250 per song, the same companies wanted a minimum of $1000/song (so long as the judge's award was voided, so as not to set a precedent), and a jury awarded $62,500 per song....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_v._Thomas

Something is very wrong here.
pdurrant is offline   Reply With Quote