Quote:
Originally Posted by spellbanisher
The transit analogy is faulty. I'm not going to catch 10,000 free rides in a day just because the cost of getting caught is paying the ticket price. A person's transportation habits are fairly fixed, his demand for transit highly inelastic.
With digital goods, people download much, much more than they ever actually consume because it is free. Thus, an effective deterrent, provided there is a reasonable probability of getting caught, wouldn't have to make them pay for every digital good downloaded, but only more than they are willing and able to pay for digital goods. Something like a $2,500 dollar fine would be effective whether a person illegally downloaded $10 worth of goods or $10,000,000 worth of goods(again, provided there is a reasonable probability of getting caught).
|
Regardless of whether you ride once a week or once a day, paying exactly the same as if you paid when you should have is not a deterrent in any way. A $40 is a deterrent even if the risks are low of getting caught. And many if not most people would not do it because it is wrong. Stealing is for many a demeaning act that lowers their self respect. My analogy would be faulty if I suggested that transit offenders should pay $10,000 but I am pretty sure that nobody said that.
And I agree that a straight $2500 fine would be effective in many cases and $2,000,000 would not work for many.
I lean, as I said, towards something that almost anyone with an income amd a computer can realistically be able to pay, but would make them unhappy to have to. I would say $1,000 but $2,500 is in the same ballpark.
Charging someone $200,000 because they downloaded $20,000 of content might possibly make it through the courts on a case by case basis, but is anyone going to pay? Most couldn't pay and would declare bankruptcy damaging all of their creditors, or simply quit working and go on social assistance.
Helen