Have you ever illegally downloaded a song file?

Have you ever illegally downloaded a song file?

  • yes

    Votes: 21 67.7%
  • no

    Votes: 10 32.3%

  • Total voters
    31

Mem

Sexy Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Posts
7,912
Media
0
Likes
54
Points
183
Location
FL
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Anonymous poll.

MINNEAPOLIS – A replay of the nation's only file-sharing case to go to trial has ended with the same result — a Minnesota woman was found to have violated music copyrights and must pay huge damages to the recording industry.

A federal jury ruled Thursday that Jammie Thomas-Rasset willfully violated the copyrights on 24 songs, and awarded recording companies $1.92 million, or $80,000 per song.







 
Last edited:

got_lost

Sexy Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Posts
2,006
Media
0
Likes
40
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
Bloody good job too!

No I haven't and never will.
I know and respect too many musicians and would rather purchase their records and support them than steal from them, thank you!

Let's hope this result will put a lot of others off doing it too!
 

Incocknito

Sexy Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2009
Posts
2,480
Media
0
Likes
67
Points
133
Location
La monde
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Bloody good job too!

No I haven't and never will.
I know and respect too many musicians and would rather purchase their records and support them than steal from them, thank you!

Let's hope this result will put a lot of others off doing it too!

Musicians actually get a very small cut of actual album/CD sales. Musicians make most of their money from live shows and concerts. So if you want to give the artists money and not the company executives then you'd be better off going to live shows.

If you get caught downloading music then you are stupid and should be punished. Stupidity is its own punishment. $1.92M is a laughable scare tactic.
 

got_lost

Sexy Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Posts
2,006
Media
0
Likes
40
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
Musicians actually get a very small cut of actual album/CD sales. Musicians make most of their money from live shows and concerts. So if you want to give the artists money and not the company executives then you'd be better off going to live shows.


Oh, believe me.
I go to a LOT of live shows! :biggrin1:
 

Northland

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Posts
5,924
Media
0
Likes
39
Points
123
Sexuality
No Response
I never have done this myself but I have accepted CDs from people who have and I see very little wrong with it considering the gouging the industry has done in pricing, regardless of who gets the money.
 

DiscoBoy

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Posts
2,633
Media
0
Likes
101
Points
208
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
It's not illegal in Canada; BMG Canada Inc. v. John Doe: Federal Courts Reports
Copyright -- Infringement -- Internet users allegedly infringing appellants' copyright by downloading copyrighted songs onto home computers, providing access thereto thereby reproducing, distributing songs to other Internet users -- Appellants unable to determine name, address, telephone number of Internet users in question, brought motion to identify said individuals -- Motion dismissed by Federal Court -- Court justified in declining to order disclosure of user's identity where plaintiffs failed to limit acquisition of information to copyright infringement issues -- Conclusions as to what would constitute infringement of copyright should not be made in preliminary stages of action.
Privacy -- Appellants, music producers, concerned about copyright infringement in musical works resulting in loss of millions of dollars in sales due to unauthorized downloading of files -- Internet service providers (ISPs) citing privacy concerns in refusing to provide names of Internet users downloading files of recording industry, without court order -- Whether identity of persons alleged to infringe musical copyright can be revealed despite fact right to privacy may be violated--Public interest in favour of disclosure must outweigh legitimate privacy concerns of person sought to be identified if disclosure order made -- Under Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, ISPs not entitled to "voluntarily" disclose personal information such as identities requested except with customer's consent, pursuant to court order -- Privacy concerns must yield to public concerns for protection of intellectual property rights where infringement threatens to erode those rights.
Equitable Bill of Discovery Requirements
(a) the applicant must establish a prima facie case against the unknown alleged wrongdoer;
(b) the person from whom discovery is sought must be in some way involved in the matter under dispute, he must be more than an innocent bystander;
(c) the person from whom discovery is sought must be the only practical source of information available to the applicants;
(d) the person from whom discovery is sought must be reasonably compensated for his expenses arising out of compliance with the discovery order in addition to his legal costs;
(e) the public interests in favour of disclosure must outweigh the legitimate privacy concerns.
(f) With respect to criterion (a) of the equitable bill of discovery requirements, the motions Judge found that the affidavits were also deficient in that they did not establish a prima facie case of infringement of copyright. In this connection the motions Judge embarked upon a consideration of whether there had been an infringement of copyright. He said inter alia, at paragraphs 25-29:
Thus, downloading a song for personal use does not amount to infringement. See Copyright Board's Private Copying 2003-2004 Decision, 12 December, 2003, at page 20.
No evidence was presented that the alleged infringers either distributed or authorized the reproduction of sound recordings. They merely placed personal copies into their shared directories which were accessible by other computer users via a P2P service.
As far as authorization is concerned, the case of CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 339, established that setting up the facilities that allow copying does not amount to authorizing infringement. I cannot see a real difference between a library that places a photocopy machine in a room full of copyrighted material and a computer user that places a personal copy on a shared directory linked to a P2P service. In either case the preconditions to copying and infringement are set up but the element of authorization is missing.
. . .
The mere fact of placing a copy on a shared directory in a computer where that copy can be accessed via a P2P service does not amount to distribution. Before it constitutes distribution, there must be a positive act by the owner of the shared directory, such as sending or the copies or advertising that they are available for copying. No such evidence was presented by the plaintiffs in this case. They merely presented evidence that the alleged infringers made copies available on their shared drives. The exclusive right to make available is included in the World Intellectual Property Organization: WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty, Geneva, December 20, 1996, however that treaty has not yet been implemented in Canada and therefore does not form part of Canadian copyright law.
Lastly, while the plaintiffs allege that there was secondary infringement contrary to s. 27(2) [as am. by S.C. 1997, c. 24, s. 15] of the Copyright Act, they presented no evidence of knowledge on the part of the infringer. Such evidence of knowledge is a necessary condition for establishing infringement under that section.
(g) The motions Judge found that the plaintiffs met the requirements of criterion (b) of the equitable bill of discovery principles relating to the involvement of the ISPs.
(h) With respect to criterion (c), the motions Judge found that he was not satisfied that the information could not have been obtained from the operators of the Web sites named (i.e. KaZaA, et al.).
(i) With respect to criterion (d), the respondents would have to be compensated for their expenses if an order were granted.
(j) Finally, with respect to criterion (e), because of the age of the data and its consequent unreliability, the privacy interests of the 29 persons outweighed the public interest concern in favour of disclosure.
 

got_lost

Sexy Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Posts
2,006
Media
0
Likes
40
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
Yes Kate we are aware of your addiction to live shows. Just how is that 12 step program working dear? :chairfall:


Hahahah!!!

Well.... I was going to drive 5 hours back and forth for one last week but didn't!!!
That's progress!
Or was it laziness?!!? :rolleyes:
Or was it cos I thought I was too old to go listen to them on my own? :redface:
 

Ed69

Legendary Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Posts
2,890
Media
0
Likes
1,276
Points
258
Location
Oregon (United States)
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
We gave up buying cd's long ago,If not our house would be wall to wall covered in them!iTunes is where we get most of our music since all four of us have iphones or ipodsAny and all other sources are legal and paid for.
 

camper joe

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Posts
2,744
Media
0
Likes
457
Points
193
Location
North Carolina
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Hahahah!!!

Well.... I was going to drive 5 hours back and forth for one last week but didn't!!!
That's progress!
Or was it laziness?!!? :rolleyes:
Or was it cos I thought I was too old to go listen to them on my own? :redface:


I vote laziness cause the way you drive you could have made it in 3 hours. :drive: