Debate, and discuss, just dont Bore me.
Published on November 2, 2005 By Dr Guy In Current Events

The MPAA is suing a man because of what his grandson did.  Not because of what he did.  Apparently, a year ago, the grandson downloaded 4 movies from one of the file sharing services.  As the story is told, he then deleted them.  He was curious.

Now the MPAA, after trying to blackmail the man, is suing him for $600,000 in damages!  For 4 copies of movies never viewed, and that no longer exist!  This is so stupid as to be ludicrous!  First off, while I don't object to them going after pirates, unless they can produce some evidence that they actually suffered anywhere that amount of money in damages, I think they should be charged with Fraud!

Even given that the grandson did the deed, how does that make the man liable?  Last I checked, at most he is an accessory.  But they are not throwing people in jail for the murders their children commit!

This whole thing, like their RIAA counterpart just reeks of gestapo like tactics.  Where you are no longer innocent until proven guilty, rather you are guilty until they can extort money out of you!

If this man had downloaded the movies, burned them to DVD and then proceeded to sell said copies, I can see a lawsuit, and depending upon the number of copies sold, perhaps a 6 figure one.  But as they have no evidence to suggest that the movies were ever used, viewed or copied once downloaded, their extortion is just plain outrageous.

Fine, the boy downloaded 4 movies.  Nail him for the cost of 4 movies (about $100 in First run Mint condition).  That is all they are entitled to, and all they should be suing him for.  But they figure they can blackmail him into paying 40 times that by the weight of their financial power behind them.  Something most people cannot afford.

I don't pirate movies or songs.  And I am going to be damned if I am going to support a gestapo outfit that uses extortion and blackmail to terrorize people.  I think we need to Chuck out the DCMA and rewrite it.  And pull the teeth out of these hell hounds.


Comments
on Nov 02, 2005
There is a crime if they can prove the kid shared the files back onto the network. And unless he specifically disabled uploading, while he was downloading he was doing just that. It goes from a relatively harmless crime of personal infringement and blossoms out into contributory infringement. They're probably claiming those damages by saying he helped DISTRIBUTE the titles.
on Nov 02, 2005

They're probably claiming those damages by saying he helped DISTRIBUTE the titles.

Then the burden should be on them to prove it.  The amount is excessive, period.  Even the buy out was excessive.

Given the facts of the case, I doubt very seriously if they can prove anything other than the download.

on Nov 02, 2005
They're going that high in the cost they're suing for because they want to make an example of the parent. It's stupid really especially since there is not proof of it. They're just hoping the judge will be sympathetic to them I guess and let them win! Pirating is bad for the industry and bad for the people employed by it, but doing it this way doesn't stop peple from doign what they do at all. They should find another way. And pretty soon they're going to really have to.
on Nov 02, 2005

They're going that high in the cost they're suing for because they want to make an example of the parent.

it is basically a SLAP suit.  And it disgusts me.  That is why they should be charged with Fraud for even insinuating such a loss.