Illegal Downloading.

Equaliser123

Never quite understood the rationale for the claims. £300+ for downloading a CD? Their loss equates to less than a couple of quid - i.e. the royalties which have been lost by the download.

Lewie

Equaliser123 wrote: »

Never quite understood the rationale for the claims. £300+ for downloading a CD? Their loss equates to less than a couple of quid - i.e. the royalties which have been lost by the download.

They list how the fee is made up, downloaded material, uploaded material, cost of getting the courts to order the isp to release details etc etc etc.
Still a con and it needs stopping.

unholyangel

Equaliser123 wrote: »

Never quite understood the rationale for the claims. £300+ for downloading a CD? Their loss equates to less than a couple of quid - i.e. the royalties which have been lost by the download.

Maybe for costs incurred/time spent? **EDIT** Lewie beat me to it lol

Some of them have started using the internet to their advantage but they've yet to realise exactly how the internet could help them.

Look at paranormal activity. It cost something silly like £10,000 to make and has grossed $193770453. Orignally they were only going to release in California i think but put up a thing online where people signed up with their closest cinema to see if there was a demand for it. There was and it ended up going worldwide.

Good film too IMO.

custardy

Lewie wrote: »

Spot on custardy.
In the past I have bought games that cost a fortune and claim to be fantastic only to find they are rubbish and unlike a watch that doesn't keep time or a toaster that doesn't brown your bread you can't take it back.
Many people download games, try them out and if they are good they buy them, if they are junk they delete them.
Seems fair to me, how come they can rip us off but then bleat when it happens to them?
GREED.

you see as much as folks hate M$
their integration of the live experience,gamer profiles and the 360 is quite clever
as shown by the folks who 'suffered' by getting their consoles bricked
they would still play the games but thats it
now if they made live free and had cheaper games it would be even better
I remember when i had my xbox1 that could play copy games(i used it mainly as a media player) I found the whole experience a bit numb
it just wasnt the same as buying/owning a game. i still bought games
yes i had less than the guys with copys,but i played them to completion whereas the guys with 00's tended to flit between games

Equaliser123

Lewie wrote: »

They list how the fee is made up, downloaded material, uploaded material, cost of getting the courts to order the isp to release details etc etc etc.
Still a con and it needs stopping.

Yeah but the costs thing doesn't wash as it is small claims.

Lewie

Equaliser123 wrote: »

Yeah but the costs thing doesn't wash as it is small claims.

Don't know what you mean there eq??
What is 'small claims' ?

unholyangel

Equaliser123 wrote: »

Yeah but the costs thing doesn't wash as it is small claims.

Getting the ISP to release details of the account holder would be small claims too? Plus i'm pretty sure big corps would charge for their time/lawyers time.

In fact i'm pretty sure they would charge thousands for a copyright breach if they thought people would pay up. But people who can afford to pay those types of "offers" right away probably arent the people downloading the first place. Higher the amount they ask for, more chance of people not paying their offer and having it taken to court.

I've never been to small claims but i thought they usually only take into account actual loss?

System

It needs a court order for the ISP to release details. This is just a phishing expedition

http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/ministry-of-sound-chases-thousands-of-file-sharing-brits-703966

unholyangel

I thought the way they have it set up now is that the companies inform your ISP and your ISP send you a warning?

TBH i dont keep up to date on things like this. There are loads of sites that allow you to download legally for a fraction of the cost

Equaliser123

unholyangel wrote: »

Getting the ISP to release details of the account holder would be small claims too? Plus i'm pretty sure big corps would charge for their time/lawyers time.

In fact i'm pretty sure they would charge thousands for a copyright breach if they thought people would pay up. But people who can afford to pay those types of "offers" right away probably arent the people downloading the first place. Higher the amount they ask for, more chance of people not paying their offer and having it taken to court.

I've never been to small claims but i thought they usually only take into account actual loss?

On a small claims matter, they will take into account inter parte (between parties) costs. I can't see that "other" court action to which the (now) defendant wasn't party is relevant. If there was a costs award at the time then that stands. But it cannot be converted to an ongoing claim.