Originally posted by Gh0stFT
Fishu, if i understand you right, people doing illegal
things is a good for the economy ?
Whereas people who actually pay for the same stuff are
bad for the economy?
Did I say it is good for the economy? no.
However I claimed that the lawsuits by the RIAA are actually counter productive and unhelpful for the cause, when compared to dropping down to the sane level of pirate hunt (go after big known pirates, instead of dropping lawsuits at random on people whos assumed to share files) and going into the internet market instead.
1. I assume most of the lawsuits drops to rather young people, like the students and rather fresh graduates.
2. I doubt they have the money to pay off the large debts caused by the lawsuit, which of many will be "solved" before going to the court, never getting the justice due to fear of even bigger debts in a case which they maybe could've won.
3. Causing huge debts for several young people for laughful reasons might hurt the economy as lowered working power and on the extreme side may even cause more crimes and other negative things.
A young person whos got a large debt, what do you think they might do? Some of them will break.
4. The music industry could create more sales through the active internet sales and not destroy the will of people to buy their products.
Increased sales are known to affect the economy.
I see it more beneficial to drop these insane john doe lawsuits, which serves NO purpose at all and hardly affects the piracy.
I'm surprised if these people won't continue pirating their music after the lawsuit, because with what money are they going to buy a crap anymore?
Thanks to the totally exagerrated fees from the lawsuits directed at the john does!
Mini D,
You are ignoring the simple facts too.
These john doe lawsuits really doesn't serve any purpose, on the contrary.
Copyrights existed before and copyrights were violated before.
Every time someone in the past recorded something off the radio, he was breaking the copyright, but nobody gave a shat.
Every time someone was copying this record to his bud, the copyright was violated, but hardly anyone gave a shat.
The records still sold and nobody gave shat, they only bothered if someone was selling copies.
I'm surprised if you haven't broke copyrights during your life time on multiple occasion.
Even quoting an article without the source could be classified as violation of the copyright.
But how many lawsuits you've seen?
Only in the cases where someone has gone to sell the copied articles.
