LimeWire Sued for $75 Trillion

Rukus. said:
Yes, but the legality and copyright information of the files shared is the responsibility and liability of the user that downloads and uploads them. Not the proprietor of the program used to do so.
Click to expand...

This is technically right. As long as the P2P service clearly states that it does not condone pirating and that it is illegal...then they cannot be not liable for copyright infringement.

Though this doesn't appear to be the case any more. The RIAA is using the legal principle of "Secondary Liability" as the standing for their case against Limewire. It'll be interesting to see how this case will play out and more importantly whether or not Mark Cuban will come to the rescue.
 
C-WHiT said:
they've already solved that issue. record companies now allow you to buy a single song or multiple songs without buying the entire album. Have you ever heard of itunes?
Click to expand...

iTunes can be a little annoying when I get a new iPod and/or an upgrade to my computer and tries to stop me from using my songs that I bought on iTunes.
 
The Grokster case basically screws anyone trying to sue LW because the Supreme Court ruled that they could have been sued for infringement if the previous ruling hadn't been decided in their favor, and concluded that if future companies wanted to avoid this they would have 2 clearly discourage copyright infringement. Something that LW did through its "this file does not have copyright information, continue?" warnings.
 
hahaha. i've used limewire, and the only reason i used it, is because music is too costly for no reason. Music is supposed to be free in the world. back in the 1700's or so, (medieval ages) all music was free -.- y'know why? because music is an extension of the soul, it's our human minds coming up with ways to express our feelings. thats my opinion, and honestly, paying to listen to someones feelings is rediculous, but i have no choice and do anyway, so i try to get songs through limewire. I hate this world... (most of the time).
 
Ducttape said:
'We're not making money? Let's blame everyone but ourselves.'
Click to expand...

Bull. The record companies make more in a month than I could make in 12. Who cares if people download certain music for free? As someone stated before, why would you have to pay $25 for a CD just for that one song you want on it?

I just hate how they make it sound like them losing money is so important. They have enough as is, and shouldn't complain when people get tired of metephorically handing them their wallets.

As a side note, I can only hope this goes on Judge Judy.
 
Last edited:
In today's society, and as unfortunate as it is, sues are happening for the most bizarre reasons, and that's simply because people want money. I understand that LimeWire was a significant asset in the downloading of hundreds of millions of songs illegally, but as a few others have said, and as Justice Wood commented, targeting one company is not going to stop the pirating whatsoever.
 
Last edited:
That's ridiculous. No one could pay that much. I wonder what they were tying to accomplish, because they couldn't think that it would actually get payed.
 
They waste more money trying to fight piracy than they lose from pirating. Mostly only the computer savvy download illegally, so it, to me, is an exaggerated problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top