Reply to: Illegal file-share trial ends in acquittal

[NickFitz]

Oops. Surely he can now sue the FT for defamation?

"Illegal file-share trial ends in acquittal" - if he's been found not guilty, they shouldn't be reporting his site as illegal.

The file sharing was illegal, and this was never in dispute. However, he didn't actually share any files, nor did he provide any hosting for shared files. What he did was to provide a web site on which people could post links to places at which they were sharing files, mostly illegally.

[EternalOptimist]

Can you repeat this please, I am not sure everyone heard it...

heheh
very good

[gadgetman]

Would the model used by these guys work within the computing and media fields? I heard of a hairdressers operating on the same principles.

[AtW]

Yep. Right you are.

Can you repeat this please, I am not sure everyone heard it...

[RichardCranium]

No, it's fine (IANAL though) the trial was called ILLEGAL, but it ends in acquittal. It's the same as to say - "murder trial ended up in acquittal".

Yep. Right you are.

[AtW]

"Illegal file-share trial ends in acquittal" - if he's been found not guilty, they shouldn't be reporting his site as illegal.

No, it's fine (IANAL though) the trial was called ILLEGAL, but it ends in acquittal.

It's the same as to say - "murder trial ended up in acquittal".

HTH

[RichardCranium]

Oops. Surely he can now sue the FT for defamation?

"Illegal file-share trial ends in acquittal" - if he's been found not guilty, they shouldn't be reporting his site as illegal.

[TykeMerc]

Balls they wouldn't. It's a matter of principle to many people that they are 'entitled' to get free copies of any music/video. I can accept you might see some reduction in piracy if an album was $5 instead of $15, but I doubt it would be that substantial, unless anyone can show figures otherwise. If the actual 'production' cost is $3, they need to increase sales 6-fold to break even, that sounds unlikely.

I don't agree (obviously) as with less downloaders and less seeders it would be a pain in the nads to get the content. If it's cheap, synchronised release, quick and easy to get a top quality product a significant number will use the official service.

Obviously it wouldn't be an overnight conversion, but then neither was illegal file sharing of music and films.

[d000hg]

If people could get the product legit, fast, cheap and on demand then they wouldn't bother with finding a dodgy download.

Balls they wouldn't. It's a matter of principle to many people that they are 'entitled' to get free copies of any music/video. I can accept you might see some reduction in piracy if an album was $5 instead of $15, but I doubt it would be that substantial, unless anyone can show figures otherwise. If the actual 'production' cost is $3, they need to increase sales 6-fold to break even, that sounds unlikely.

[AtW]

You seem unwilling to accept that he was sent to trial and found not guilty.

I accepting this as a fact that he was on trial and was found not guilty.

What I am not accepting is that in principle such behavior should be acceptable (ie legal).

[Cliphead]

But that's your choice, as the owner of the work. Do you also encourage others to make money selling your work?

The argument that "that's too expensive therefore I'm justified in stealing it" is a pretty flimsy one. Is it really too expensive, or is it that you're looking for an excuse to not pay the price?

It's hard to see how this guy got away with it. Surely making money out of crime is a crime in itself?

Amazon make money selling my album and some others in the pipeline, no problem with that at all. I suspect price has nothing to do with it, people will grab something just because they can.

In my book making money out of crime is most definitely a crime. As I mentioned earlier I'm not so sure about the arguments trotted out by the record companies et al but breaking the law seems more clear cut, or should be which has failed in this case.

[VectraMan]

My new album is doing well, you can download most of the tracks from the website for free and I encourage copying. I'm still making money.

But that's your choice, as the owner of the work. Do you also encourage others to make money selling your work?

The argument that "that's too expensive therefore I'm justified in stealing it" is a pretty flimsy one. Is it really too expensive, or is it that you're looking for an excuse to not pay the price?

It's hard to see how this guy got away with it. Surely making money out of crime is a crime in itself?

[Cliphead]

I assume it's a case of the prosecution not having sufficient evidence to convince the court he engaged in activities prohibited by a law currently on the statute books.

Could be as simple as that. Perhaps clarification of current laws are required not sure.

I'm not so convinced that file sharing hurts artists but that's a different topic. In some cases file sharing has revived interest in a particular band / artist and thats a good thing.

[TykeMerc]

Yeah, I couldn't figure why he got off, maybe because he didn't physically hold any files on his server. Perhaps the law needs to catch up.

I assume it's a case of the prosecution not having sufficient evidence to convince the court he engaged in activities prohibited by a law currently on the statute books.

[TykeMerc]

My new album is doing well, you can download most of the tracks from the website for free and I encourage copying. I'm still making money.

The record company I ditched before setting up my own and people like them are making the most noise about illegal file sharing not the artists.

The business model makes sense, I'm glad you're making money from your efforts and that people get to enjoy your music.

Films wise; odds are I would buy quite a few downloads on spec, go to the cinema (none in Halifax which is rediculous so it's a trip tp Bradford or Huddersfield) to see the ones I liked rather than not bothering and the industry would make more money out of me. At the moment I tend to just wait for films to come on Sky unless they've really caught my eye, I believe my last cinema visit was in August...