Here is more legal information explainning the issues at hand.

http://www.law.stetson.edu/courses/mfkline.htm

I was in her shoes and I know how it feels but she was stupid enough not to pay the few thousands dollars I had no such choice.

^^^ dugg down for crazy pro riaa rant

Originally posted by MrGrimace:

---

On a side note. I was wondering if anyone knows the way the RIAA got their information. This is entirely a civil case. How did they get permission to search this woman's computer etc... Assuming the police obtained the information, why are the police executing search warrants for civil cases? Just a thought.

---

This is how they do it, first they hire a forensic consultant who in turn can monitor the P2P software for files in folders, sharing and files downloaded. It is the same software that the FBI uses, they then goy a court order but she tried to reformat the hard drive but she put the P2P software back on her system and what got her the judge said she had the download file on her system and to him that was enough proof. Innocent people don't reformat their hard drives!

Originally posted by plutonash:

---

^^^ dugg down for crazy pro riaa rant

---

I am not pro RIAA and I don't wave their banner for them. But when a company or person holds rights to items it is theirs. I have copyrights on my photos I use to have for my web site and if you took them and started to sell them I would come after you as well. If someone took money out of your bank account you would go after them as well. So don't say I am pro RIAA

A lot of people using this system really don't see the big picture here. They don't understand the legal side of the issue. All they see are I can be next for stealing software/videos/music and that sucks I don't want to pay for them I want them for free. Hit them were it hurts don't buy their music/videos/software that will hurt them in their pockets and by downloading them you are hurting them in their pockets. If I want a song I will go to a paid site and pay for it. I will not buy Microsoft Vista Operating system as I do not want to pay for headaches to a giant rich corporation who is trying to control the world. So why would I want that piece of crap on my system for free? The day of free lunches looks like they are at its end so all should be aware they are watching and searching you out. I had my daughter remove her P2P software over q year ago as I didn't want to have any problems and the smart users will do he same. The rebels won't do that they will keep doing what they have been doing until they get caught to their stupidity!

The next cases we are going to see is by Hollywood in reference for movies.

Hollywood had court papers served in the past to the people who wrote Decrypting software:

DVD Decrypter
DVD Shrink
RipIt4Me

They had to take down their sites and remove their software and now the only place you can get them are overseas. The author for DVD Decrypter lived in the UK and he was told if he continued to develope updates he would be sorry. The same went to the other authors.

For the past 2 years they have been monitoring the web for video downloads and they know everyone who posted and shares them. A friend who works for the FBI said lots of this info was provided by the operators of those Warez sites they arrested. So a list exists and how they plan on using who knows.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by plutonash:

---

^^^ dugg down for crazy pro riaa rant

---

I am not pro RIAA and I don't wave their banner for them. But when a company or person holds rights to items it is theirs. I have copyrights on my photos I use to have for my web site and if you took them and started to sell them I would come after you as well. If someone took money out of your bank account you would go after them as well. So don't say I am pro RIAA

---

This is slightly different. In this case the money is still there in the bank account. The person just has a counterfeit perfect copy of it. Chances are pretty good the people who are downloading these songs for free weren't going to buy them anyway. The whole issue gets into the fuzzy issue of potential income. I agree illegal file-sharing is wrong, but I think you could use a better metaphor.

You seem rather adamant about this whole thing and I think it is great to have a different opinion on a board like this one.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by plutonash:

---

^^^ dugg down for crazy pro riaa rant

---

I am not pro RIAA and I don't wave their banner for them. But when a company or person holds rights to items it is theirs. I have copyrights on my photos I use to have for my web site and if you took them and started to sell them I would come after you as well. If someone took money out of your bank account you would go after them as well. So don't say I am pro RIAA

---

This is slightly different. In this case the money is still there in the bank account. The person just has a counterfeit perfect copy of it. Chances are pretty good the people who are downloading these songs for free weren't going to buy them anyway. The whole issue gets into the fuzzy issue of potential income. I agree illegal file-sharing is wrong, but I think you could use a better metaphor.

You seem rather adamant about this whole thing and I think it is great to have a different opinion on a board like this one.

---

If people would stop buying it would hurt them where it counts in their bank accounts but music/software/movies are like electronic drugs there will always be a need for them by the junkies who crave them. As for me I refuse to buy MS Vista because of the strict copyright guards in place. Recently they had a bug disable 1000's of legal owners of their software causing them to hurry and get out a fix. This is bad PR for MS as usual but they are the only game in town so we are at their mercy. The sales for this version of their operating system is way behind and some PC makers are going back to XP for their customer systems. That tells you MS does it again they should be the ones to pay for their stupid bug ridden software , just stop buying it. Because of the slow sales this is slowing down their development on their next release.....

Quote:

---

The issue isn't about money! It’s about principle of the issue

---

Actually it is about money, the money a single mother isn't going to have for her kids. How long would it take you to pay $220,000? the principal of the issue is the fact that by simply sharing songs an entire family's life is ruined. Is it illegal yes, does the punishment fit the crime? hell no!

Quote:

---

Your example about the medical expenses doesn't apply in this case it’s to bad she was stupid to go to trial and lost and she was very fortunate the amount was that low.

---

The medical expense analogy was pointing out a more dignified way to put someone in debt for life. maybe she was stupid, but the amount was defiantly not low.

Quote:

---

The RIAA didn't have a hand in the amount awarded as that is controlled by the courts/jury. Forget about ENRON that was criminal.

---

The lawyers paid by the riaa influence the court/jury and manipulate them. This ruling against this woman is criminal mainly because she is never going to be able to pull 220,000 dollars out of her a**. The riaa has certain similarities to Enron, like the extreme lack of oversight and the iron curtain that surrounds their ivory tower preventing anyone from seeing the methods behind their madness.

Quote:

---

Its like saying you work hard for your money and you have all of the hight toys you would want and then someday people walk into your house and pick and chose what they want and take them you would be mad as you had the rights to those items, the same thing applies to the songs she didn't have the rights to share them for free without cost.

---

First of all a song isn't a material object, its not like a chair or tv it has monetary value but it's only data. The "walking into people’s houses" is what happened to this woman. people accessed her computer and made copies of the songs in her shared folder. The question is did she know about this and if she did was she fully aware of the consequences?

Quote:

---

This is not a free society you pay for what you want and need. So the outcome of this trial was fair to both sides.

---

No this is a capitalist society soon to be a police state if cases like this continue to be taken seriously. Ok fair on both sides? the riaa lawyers and spokesmen are practically immune to individual attack and act as a whole to ruin one person’s life only to make an example out of them.

Quote:

---

This is going to make people who use P2P who downloads music, video, and copyright software take notice go get a job and pay for them if you need them!

---

People do pay for all of those things and no one needs them, it's a matter of knowing if you actually want them. Some would just like to sample them to make sure they're not buying a crappy movie or cd and never watch or listen to it again.

Even if she blatantly "stole" all of those songs how is a $220,000 fine justified? yes she did something stupid and she should in some way pay for it, but this isn't just about her it’s about her kids as well. The riaa are responsible for jeopardizing the future of a family. The riaa doesn't need all that money, that’s chump change to them. They're are plenty of other ways this case could of been handled with out bringing in the financial aspect. sadly when news like this comes out the only thing the majority of people pay attention to is the amount of money not the reasons why, it's shock value and nothing more.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The issue isn't about money! It’s about principle of the issue

---

Actually it is about money, the money a single mother isn't going to have for her kids. How long would it take you to pay $220,000? the principal of the issue is the fact that by simply sharing songs an entire family's life is ruined. Is it illegal yes, does the punishment fit the crime? hell no!

Quote:

---

Your example about the medical expenses doesn't apply in this case it’s to bad she was stupid to go to trial and lost and she was very fortunate the amount was that low.

---

The medical expense analogy was pointing out a more dignified way to put someone in debt for life. maybe she was stupid, but the amount was defiantly not low.

Quote:

---

The RIAA didn't have a hand in the amount awarded as that is controlled by the courts/jury. Forget about ENRON that was criminal.

---

The lawyers paid by the riaa influence the court/jury and manipulate them. This ruling against this woman is criminal mainly because she is never going to be able to pull 220,000 dollars out of her a**. The riaa has certain similarities to Enron, like the extreme lack of oversight and the iron curtain that surrounds their ivory tower preventing anyone from seeing the methods behind their madness.

Quote:

---

Its like saying you work hard for your money and you have all of the hight toys you would want and then someday people walk into your house and pick and chose what they want and take them you would be mad as you had the rights to those items, the same thing applies to the songs she didn't have the rights to share them for free without cost.

---

First of all a song isn't a material object, its not like a chair or tv it has monetary value but it's only data. The "walking into people’s houses" is what happened to this woman. people accessed her computer and made copies of the songs in her shared folder. The question is did she know about this and if she did was she fully aware of the consequences?

Quote:

---

This is not a free society you pay for what you want and need. So the outcome of this trial was fair to both sides.

---

No this is a capitalist society soon to be a police state if cases like this continue to be taken seriously. Ok fair on both sides? the riaa lawyers and spokesmen are practically immune to individual attack and act as a whole to ruin one person’s life only to make an example out of them.

Quote:

---

This is going to make people who use P2P who downloads music, video, and copyright software take notice go get a job and pay for them if you need them!

---

People do pay for all of those things and no one needs them, it's a matter of knowing if you actually want them. Some would just like to sample them to make sure they're not buying a crappy movie or cd and never watch or listen to it again.

Even if she blatantly "stole" all of those songs how is a $220,000 fine justified? yes she did something stupid and she should in some way pay for it, but this isn't just about her it’s about her kids as well. The riaa are responsible for jeopardizing the future of a family. The riaa doesn't need all that money, that’s chump change to them. They're are plenty of other ways this case could of been handled with out bringing in the financial aspect. sadly when news like this comes out the only thing the majority of people pay attention to is the amount of money not the reasons why, it's shock value and nothing more.

---

Again she was stupid to go to trial she could have gotten off with a fine of $2,000.00 she was given bad advise possibily a lawyer as that is who makes out on cases like this. Yes her life is ruin as she will never be able to own anything again, nor will she be able to get a checking account or savings as soon as the accounts are open the courts will seize them. If she owns a home she will have a judgement against it so yes you are right they ruined her life forever just her mistake to go to trial and a victory for the bad guys they got what they wanted a dumb shumck to take them on so they could prove this issue and now have a foundation to take on all commers.

Originally posted by duke8888:

---

The next cases we are going to see is by Hollywood in reference for movies.

Hollywood had court papers served in the past to the people who wrote Decrypting software:

DVD Decrypter
DVD Shrink
RipIt4Me

They had to take down their sites and remove their software and now the only place you can get them are overseas. The author for DVD Decrypter lived in the UK and he was told if he continued to develope updates he would be sorry. The same went to the other authors.

For the past 2 years they have been monitoring the web for video downloads and they know everyone who posted and shares them. A friend who works for the FBI said lots of this info was provided by the operators of those Warez sites they arrested. So a list exists and how they plan on using who knows.

---

A simple Google search will give you access to DVDdecrypter, shrink and many other dvd ripping and authoring programs, for free. That has nothing to do with downloaded videos. Warez sites? Until not too long ago all of those programs could be found here on AD, hardly a "Warez" site. Only because of changes to Finnish law did their availability here become an issue.

This just goes to show you that the RIAA has too much money and are willing to spend millions for these suits. Whether they have enough evidence or not they don't care. Cause enough chaos to scare people and that suits them just fine. They complain of no money but what of the money they use now?
I can't believe (but know it true) that this is the world today where corporations are given the right to destroy everyday people. Corporations today are becoming vicious and cruel just to maintain dominance. All hail the mighty $.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by duke8888:

---

The next cases we are going to see is by Hollywood in reference for movies.

Hollywood had court papers served in the past to the people who wrote Decrypting software:

DVD Decrypter
DVD Shrink
RipIt4Me

They had to take down their sites and remove their software and now the only place you can get them are overseas. The author for DVD Decrypter lived in the UK and he was told if he continued to develope updates he would be sorry. The same went to the other authors.

For the past 2 years they have been monitoring the web for video downloads and they know everyone who posted and shares them. A friend who works for the FBI said lots of this info was provided by the operators of those Warez sites they arrested. So a list exists and how they plan on using who knows.

---

A simple Google search will give you access to DVDdecrypter, shrink and many other dvd ripping and authoring programs, for free. That has nothing to do with downloaded videos. Warez sites? Until not too long ago all of those programs could be found here on AD, hardly a "Warez" site. Only because of changes to Finnish law did their availability here become an issue.

---

It does have to do with the issue we are talking about infrigment wherther they are downloaded as they had to be decrypted before being posted! I know two of the authors and they told me the whole story. You can download those programs but companies like Sony have copy guards that these programs are usless against! RipIt$Me took the prior two programs and urtilize it into his package but they came for him and he had to cease as he was smart and didn't want to be made an example of like Ms Thomas!

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by duke8888:

---

The next cases we are going to see is by Hollywood in reference for movies.

Hollywood had court papers served in the past to the people who wrote Decrypting software:

DVD Decrypter
DVD Shrink
RipIt4Me

They had to take down their sites and remove their software and now the only place you can get them are overseas. The author for DVD Decrypter lived in the UK and he was told if he continued to develope updates he would be sorry. The same went to the other authors.

For the past 2 years they have been monitoring the web for video downloads and they know everyone who posted and shares them. A friend who works for the FBI said lots of this info was provided by the operators of those Warez sites they arrested. So a list exists and how they plan on using who knows.

---

A simple Google search will give you access to DVDdecrypter, shrink and many other dvd ripping and authoring programs, for free. That has nothing to do with downloaded videos. Warez sites? Until not too long ago all of those programs could be found here on AD, hardly a "Warez" site. Only because of changes to Finnish law did their availability here become an issue.

---

It does have to do with the issue we are talking about infrigment wherther they are downloaded as they had to be decrypted before being posted! I know two of the authors and they told me the whole story. You can download those programs but companies like Sony have copy guards that these programs are usless against! RipIt$Me took the prior two programs and urtilize it into his package but they came for him and he had to cease as he was smart and didn't want to be made an example of like Ms Thomas!

---

Sorry, what I meant was downloaded videos have nothing to do with the DVD programs. Sony ARccOS protecftion is easily circumvented with other programs, as DVD decrypter has not been in development for sometime. Even so there are still ways to use DVD decrypter to rip DVDs with recently updated copy protection. There are several guides here on AD.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by duke8888:

---

The next cases we are going to see is by Hollywood in reference for movies.

Hollywood had court papers served in the past to the people who wrote Decrypting software:

DVD Decrypter
DVD Shrink
RipIt4Me

They had to take down their sites and remove their software and now the only place you can get them are overseas. The author for DVD Decrypter lived in the UK and he was told if he continued to develope updates he would be sorry. The same went to the other authors.

For the past 2 years they have been monitoring the web for video downloads and they know everyone who posted and shares them. A friend who works for the FBI said lots of this info was provided by the operators of those Warez sites they arrested. So a list exists and how they plan on using who knows.

---

A simple Google search will give you access to DVDdecrypter, shrink and many other dvd ripping and authoring programs, for free. That has nothing to do with downloaded videos. Warez sites? Until not too long ago all of those programs could be found here on AD, hardly a "Warez" site. Only because of changes to Finnish law did their availability here become an issue.

---

It does have to do with the issue we are talking about infrigment wherther they are downloaded as they had to be decrypted before being posted! I know two of the authors and they told me the whole story. You can download those programs but companies like Sony have copy guards that these programs are usless against! RipIt$Me took the prior two programs and urtilize it into his package but they came for him and he had to cease as he was smart and didn't want to be made an example of like Ms Thomas!

---

Sorry, what I meant was downloaded videos have nothing to do with the DVD programs. Sony ARccOS protecftion is easily circumvented with other programs, as DVD decrypter has not been in development for sometime. Even so there are still ways to use DVD decrypter to rip DVDs with recently updated copy protection. There are several guides here on AD.

---

Yes there is but it requires several programs to do many steps that the program did in one. I use DVDFab HD Decrypter it is the best and easiest to use why clutter up your system with all of those programs. I can't understand why Sony does the changes so often there are fixes for it in hours a waste of their time and they aren't fooling anybody.

I agree, DVDFab HD Decrypter is one of the best and easiest to use all in one programs, with an excellent free version as well. As I mentioned, the ARccOS protection is easily circumvented, DVDFab is updated every 1-2 weeks.

So, are you saying that you make backups of your legally owned DVD collection? Considering your previous experience with similiar matters...once bitten, twice shy, as they say :].

can she declare bankruptcy & give Hollywood the Middle Finger? LOL!

9,250 bucks for 3 minute .WAV file that's plain obscene.

Originally posted by Leningrad:

---

9,250 bucks for 3 minute .WAV file that's plain obscene.

---

.WAV? Dude WTF is wrong with that jury! There .WAV files for God sake! Where are the .MP3? Or .AAC? Anything but .WAV, except for that other one that starts with a .F...

If I was put in that situation, I would say,"Screw ya'll," and pay a maximum of all those song's CDs in total. It's only fair.

Quote:

---

The issue isn't about money! Its about principle of the issue. For years people have been getting free songs without having to pay for them. Your example about the medical expenses doesn't apply in this case its to bad she was stupid to go to trial and lost and she was very fortunate the amount was that low. The RIAA didn't have a hand in the amount awarded as that is controlled by the courts/jury. Forget about ENRON that was criminal. Its like saying you work hard for your money and you have all of the hight toys you would want and then someday people walk into your house and pick and chose what they want and take them you would be mad as you had the rights to those items, the same thing applies to the songs she didn't have the rights to share them for free without cost. This is not a free society you pay for what you want and need. So the outcome of this trial was fair to both sides. This is going to make people who use P2P who downloads music, video, and copyright software take notice go get a job and pay for them if you need them!

---

Your excuse is very poor at best, it doesn't follow the law at all.

This person has said they didn't have the sogs nor the P2P program installed the RIAA exp[ert also confirmed this.

The problem with your example is that the people have the stuff on them, you keep forgetting this for some reason.

This is the example you should have used:
You go and buy music
then you blame someone else for stealing your music then sue them
they can prove that they don't have the music etc
yet your still paid out

becuase the law has it that if your sued for stealing then your up for paying what ever the fine that is given.

You keep th8inking that these people have the stuff on them and get found out having it, but even the RIAA experts don't find anything to prove they have the stuff on them.

This isn't the same case as what you got busted for becuase you had the photos, this person had nothing yet still got fined.

I don't live in Amercia... (thank god for that I think) yet I would assume this to go against the core laws in the USA.

Originally posted by duke8888:

---

For the past 2 years they have been monitoring the web for video downloads and they know everyone who posted and shares them. A friend who works for the FBI said lots of this info was provided by the operators of those Warez sites they arrested. So a list exists and how they plan on using who knows.

---

There's a big big differance between wearz and scene mate.

Scene don't sit in the public.

As for DVD decrytor the code as a program isn't allowed on a computer but if you have it writen your allowed to have it by law in the USA.

You can buy the T-Shirts with the code on it.

The funny thing is it was the MPAA that released the code, they left papers on a desk and they got photographed by the media who then put the code up all over the net and news papers etc.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by duke8888:

---

For the past 2 years they have been monitoring the web for video downloads and they know everyone who posted and shares them. A friend who works for the FBI said lots of this info was provided by the operators of those Warez sites they arrested. So a list exists and how they plan on using who knows.

---

There's a big big differance between wearz and scene mate.

Scene don't sit in the public.

As for DVD decrytor the code as a program isn't allowed on a computer but if you have it writen your allowed to have it by law in the USA.

You can buy the T-Shirts with the code on it.

The funny thing is it was the MPAA that released the code, they left papers on a desk and they got photographed by the media who then put the code up all over the net and news papers etc.

---

Yes they were very unsecure in their info they have noboby but themseleves for that one LOL>

Originally posted by xhardc0re:

---

can she declare bankruptcy & give Hollywood the Middle Finger? LOL!

---

Banlruptcy will not dismiss a judgement handed down by the courts OJ tried that with no luck every penny he gets go to the familys of the decease.... She is screwed for life thats what happens when you take advise from scum sucking lawyers she should have paid the 2 grand and end of story.

Another case of where only the slime ball lawyers win. This issue would be mute if music was affordable to buy. I will say hell no to buying a 15 year old CD for 15.99, who in there right mind would pay that much.

Thankfully there are wonderful Russian sites where I can buy my classics at a reasonable price.

PS. duke8888 I do buy Cd's but I refuse to pay more then 9.99 for a CD. That is why download services are so attractive to the average person, you can buy that one good song off an album for .99 and give the rest of the album the bird. You can tell that to your guerrilla marketing bosses.

Quote:

---

This is how they do it, first they hire a forensic consultant who in turn can monitor the P2P software for files in folders, sharing and files downloaded. It is the same software that the FBI uses, they then goy a court order but she tried to reformat the hard drive but she put the P2P software back on her system and what got her the judge said she had the download file on her system and to him that was enough proof. Innocent people don't reformat their hard drives!

---

This is stupid. A lot of Linux distributions are available for free download by way only of P2P. Quite a lot of them cannot afford the bandwidth charge that hundreds of thousands of downloads would entail.

Although I have not much interest in most of the music available on P2P I do have uTorrent that I use for my Linux work.

I do format my hard disk frequently. May be the RIAA should now go after all the possible P2P client hosting sites & get the info on all those who downloaded the software. With a judge taking such a view they can't lose!

Well i wonder what she does if she can afford to pay this herself.