Posted on 03/04/2010 7:59:16 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
Why does everyone maintain that payola was a problem in the 1950s?
That myth (that it only went on then and not before or since) was cooked up by ASCAP who refused to publish country, R&B, and rock and roll songs and suddenly found themselves with nothing on the charts. They said the only way that “junk” could get there was by bribing DJs.
Tommy Shaw said that Styx songs like Lady became radio mainstays because the label was paying the progamming directors in coke. Called them penguins, lay out the white lines and the suits waddle up...
He got some prize, I don’t recall what.
If we still had the copyright laws of the first 150 year years of this country, that Johnny Cash song would be public domain today. It certainly does not benefit Johnny Cash these days.
PS, that Johnny Cash recording IS public domain in Europe and you can find countless low cost compilations of Johnny’s Sun recordings there (some have been imported into the US).
>>>How? The law is there for everyone to see. These people made a decision to steal the work of others, now they are paying. In this case, the girl shouldn’t have filed an appeal; she would have walked away with a much smaller fine. Not only was she an infringer, she was stupid.<<<
a) The law is not really quite “out there for everyone to see”. I don’t believe these penalties are widely known.
b) I don’t believe each track plays a copyright notice before the music starts. For all this girl knew the recordings could have been public domain. Every DVD I ever buy has a clear copyright notice and warnings of fines at the start, as I’m sure electronic copies do. Music files do not have these and should be required to, if they want to collect damages.
c) She did not “steal” the recordings since they copyright owners use of the material was in no way taken from them. I agree what she did was illegal and wrong, and she should pay a fine, but it is not actually “stealing”.
d) If she actally had stolen the songs on CDs at her local Walmart or Target store, she would not have faced fines anywhere near the tens of thousands of dollars.
e) The RIAA members have done a horrible job of developing technology to prevent their products from being illegally copied. Instead they have chose to use heavy handed tactics against a small number of people, who have personally caused them almost no economic loss, and to waste valuable court resources on these suits.
f) Historically copyright laws have mainly been used to fine those infringing on copyrights for profit.
g) I’m sure you don’t believe that the mere fact that a law exists means it must be a good law.
Bottom line, I have no problem with the girl being hit with a significant fine, but the amount (even the $7,400) is extremely excessive. This offense is being treated far more severely than many other far more serious offenses, due to the RIAA’s political clout.
I look forward to the day (and it is coming soon), where the recording insdustry more or less ceases to exist.
The point wasn’t that they were directly comparable, viz. that being charged $27k + interest (it was $750 per song, not $750 total) was the same as losing a hand.
The point was that we don’t chop hands (ala many Islamic countries) for stealing because it is too much.
We shouldn’t charge $40k for “stealing” 37 songs. It is too much.
You think being fined in excess of $40k is fair for stealing $46.25 worth of retail value? (assuming $1.25 per song, as in my post above).
Let’s break this down another way. Let us assume that a CD has 12 tracks (yes, it can vary; but the number seems pretty typical). 37 / 12 = 3.08. So, let us take the ceiling of that and go with 4. What if she shoplifted 4 CDs? Would you say that crime is worth $27k + interest?
Hint: there is no way that petty larceny would garner a fine that steep.
I stand corrected.
Another reason to loathe Congress.
If the retail total of the goods is around $40 and she “stole” them by writing a bad check, how much would the damages have been? Most places allow a bad check to be reimbursed with 2-3 times the face value. So why should her punishment be so much more severe than if she had written a bad check or actually shoplifted the recordings from a music store?
Because that is the way the law was wrote by Congress. She should thank her lucky stars that the fine was so low for what she did the fine for each violation could be the whole for all she was fined! Seriously copyright violations can be into the 100’s of thousands range.AFAIK Congress wants to write more stringent laws to protect intellectual property so the fines will go up if they go a head with that.
It’s basic probability:
Leave your front door unlocked by accident one night, and chances are nobody will notice.
Leave your front door unlocked on a regular basis, and there is a much higher chance that somebody will eventually wander inside.
Ummm, there’s still time...
It’s a voluntary association. I don’t think they’ll let you in if you’re not an attorney, and if you’re a mathematician, you’re too logical and honest to be an attorney.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.