Obama Supports $675,000 File Sharing Verdict

Re:Obama Supports $675,000 File Sharing Verdict by defen on Wednesday January 20, 2010 @03:21PM (#1065671)

> If someone physically stole CDs out of a publisher's warehouse over a long period of time, the marginal cost of those CDs is so low that the damage would be roughly equivalent to what a filesharer does. But nobody would be up in arms about a six-figure judgement.

Actually, I think a $150,000 judgment for stealing a single CD would be outrageous.

I can see where you're coming from, but it seems to me that you are justifying making an example of people via massive financial penalties for causing no actual harm, only theoretical harm. If I make an unauthorized copy of an MP3, what is the actual harm? In what sense can an unobservable event be said to have happened? At best you can argue that it's a quality of life crime - if everyone did it, there would be reduced incentive to create and hence a lower standard of living. But if that's the case, why aren't other quality of life crimes punished as harshly? Drunk driving or speeding in a residential zone massively increase the chances that you will kill someone, and yet the punishment is nowhere near as harsh.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Obama Supports $675,000 File Sharing Verdict by thwarted on Wednesday January 20, 2010 @05:38PM (#1065992)

if everyone did it, there would be reduced incentive to create and hence a lower standard of living.

Let's not assume this either. Maybe this would result in more people who actually want to create, rather than doing it for the money, entering the industry. It would also avoid the middlemen who just skim off the top and don't add a lot of value.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Obama Supports $675,000 File Sharing Verdict by stse on Wednesday January 20, 2010 @06:19PM (#1066070)

In industries where copying is accepted, like with cooking and fashion, the level of creativity is very high. You could argue that a high fashion brand "loses money" when a low price retailer, like H&M or Zara, produces more or less the same design, but very few do.

I recommend reading "The Pirate's Dilemma" which is available from $0.00 upwards at http://thepiratesdilemma.com/download-the-book

Edit: The difference between the high fashion brand and the low price retailer clothes are quality, perceived quality, recognition/brand, legitimacy and cost. Which is more or less the same difference as between a pirated copy and an original one.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Obama Supports $675,000 File Sharing Verdict by rbanffy on Wednesday January 20, 2010 @07:43PM (#1066272)

Cooking and fashion are much more labor intensive than copying files.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Obama Supports $675,000 File Sharing Verdict by stse on Wednesday January 20, 2010 @08:21PM (#1066343)

Not the infringement itself, and not for the consumer. My main point was that the relation between copying and copyright infringement is arbitrary(1). Someone who argues that people won't create things if there is widespread copying, needs to realize that copying already is widespread.

I do get your point though. fashion and files are not the exact same thing, but are more related than one thinks. There's also other effects of the consumer being the distributor. Even 10 years ago there where no scalable method to distribute out-of-copyright works in a non-profit way, and therefor a lifetime of copyright made more sense.

(1) Hopefully has the same meaning in English, what I mean is that it's constructed and not a prerequisite for the act of creating things. Copyright law is cultural, not 'natural', as demonstrated by the pressure of US companies and government on other nations regarding copyright law.

[ Parent | on HN ]