They don't prove their case, they intimidate the defendant to be into settling.
The RIAA is wrong on so many levels. They claim if you trade once, you've traded 10 times or more, costing them $2500, which make sit a Federal Crime. Now, I don't know about you, but for me, making up crap isn't supposed to be allowed as evidence. This, of course,f rom the people who wnated the right to hack into your computer to delete illegal music.
Next, the RIAA says they have to (as oppsoed to wnat to) sue so they cna discourage others from illegally downloading. Yeah, how that working for you guys? Good? I think we can alla gree, RIAA's lawsuits have failed to do such a thing. in fact,w ehn they started, people purposely downloaded more just to spite them. Either RIAA is lying or they're insane.
And of course, their biggest flaw is believeing msot people would ratehr get the songs for free than buy them. In fact, most people either try before they buy, or would never have bought th CD in the first place.
RIAA overcharged consumers for years, and now we're fighting back. RIAA has not lsot nay signifigant amount sof money. Thye just got their money earlier through high prices. It's not our fault they mismanaged their money,
VHS spooked hollywood, claims of piracy ruinin them, and VHS gave them a new sourc eof revenue. DVD's were the same. Hollywood even tried DIVX of all crap. Apart form throwaway discs, they were full of snot. DVD's only increased their revenue, taking voer for VHS and thensome. Yet RIAA is right in downlaodable music destroying them? NO chance Vidoe history will repeat for Audio? Well, if RIAA is so right, why do they have to lie? Why make up downlaoaded numbers? Why insist they're trying to scare people away when all their lawsuits do is encourage more? Death throws ain't pretty people. And now with MYSpace, musicans don't even need a label. The RIAA is going extinct, and they have only thermselves to blame.
That's actually going in my paper.
