Woman fined $9,250 per illegal song...

[Flip]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071005/ap_ ... ding_music

Yikes... when i every so often grab something from limewire, i do not share. I believe that is the main issue here.

[Don]

Punitive damage is meant to punish, as opposed to reflecting the actual value. The woman who spilled hot coffee was awarded millions not because that much money was needed, but rather to punish McDonalds for violating safety concerns.

[Tessian]

She's been made to be an example. Will it work? maybe a little... but not really. How many freakin people has RIAA sued over the past 5 years that they actually won in court (not including their extortionist plea bargins)? 1.

At this rate illegal music sharing will be gone loooong after the RIAA kicks it.

[Julius Seeker]

It would perhaps be better if they had developers put up fake-illegal mp3 accounts with viruses in them to cause damage to a person's computer. This would be the best way to scare people away from illegally downloading mp3s. Fight crime with crime!

[SineSwiper]

Punitive damage is meant to punish, as opposed to reflecting the actual value. The woman who spilled hot coffee was awarded millions not because that much money was needed, but rather to punish McDonalds for violating safety concerns.

Wrong on so many counts! The woman was awarded $480K (not millions), because McDonalds coffee is fucking hot!

Hell, their coffee is STILL fucking hot. Have you had their coffee before? You have to let it sit for about 10-20 minutes before you can fucking drink it!

It would perhaps be better if they had developers put up fake-illegal mp3 accounts with viruses in them to cause damage to a person's computer. This would be the best way to scare people away from illegally downloading mp3s. Fight crime with crime!

You mean like MediaDefender? Doesn't work too well, and it's an easy way to get sued/jailed.

Yikes... when i every so often grab something from limewire, i do not share. I believe that is the main issue here.

Limewire sucks. Why are you using it?

[Don]

From the site you linked:

McFact No. 6: After careful deliberation, the jury found McDonald's was liable because the facts were overwhelmingly against the company. When it came to the punitive damages, the jury found that McDonald's had engaged in willful, reckless, malicious, or wanton conduct, and rendered a punitive damage award of 2.7 million dollars. (The equivalent of just two days of coffee sales, McDonalds Corporation generates revenues in excess of 1.3 million dollars daily from the sale of its coffee, selling 1 billion cups each year.)

McFact No. 7: On appeal, a judge lowered the award to $480,000, a fact not widely publicized in the media.

The exact amount isn't particularly important. It was punitive at $2.8 million and it's still punitive at $480K assuming that the medical bills wasn't $480K. The fact was that the punitive damages numbers was a cost much greater than the medical expenses involved because it's meant to be punitive. Obviously how much to punish by is up to debate.

Those who settled with RIAA still pay a lot of money to settle. In some sense you can say those people paid so you don't have to.