Record Labels To Pay For Copyright Infringement 235
innocent_white_lamb writes "Sony Music Entertainment Canada Inc., EMI Music Canada Inc., Universal Music Canada Inc. and Warner Music Canada Co. have agreed to pay songwriters and music publishers $47.5 million in damages for copyright infringement and overdue royalties to settle a class action lawsuit. 'The 2008 class action alleges that the record companies "exploited" music owners by reproducing and selling in excess of 300,000 song titles without securing licenses from the copyright owners and/or without paying the associated royalty payments. The record companies knowingly did so and kept a so-called "pending list" of unlicensed reproductions, setting aside $50 million for the issue, if it ever arose, court filings suggest.'"
Let me get this straight ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Let me get this straight ... (Score:4, Insightful)
"let's try this illegal thing! Maybe we won't get caught and we can keep the 50 million. if we do, what harm?"
So you can keep yourself out of prison and do whatever you want if you're a millionaire. I am shocked.
Re:Let me get this straight ... (Score:5, Insightful)
In light of the RIAA's own standards on this, as well as the position of power that the record labels have, this should have been punished far more harshly than this.
Re:Let me get this straight ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Lesson learned (Score:5, Insightful)
When you infringe copyright, do it for profit. It's cheaper that way.
Re:Let me get this straight ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well I could argue that strictly speaking I don't buy any music illegaly...
Those that Make the Rules... (Score:4, Insightful)
Those that make the rules do not have to follow the rules.
Those that write the laws do not have to follow the law.
Re:Reality Check Please (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm pretty sure they made more than 2.5 million profit...
You see if you steal songs and hold 50 million in reserve, then you're expecting to make more profits than those 50 million, otherwise what's the point of stealing the songs?
Re:Let me get this straight ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Let me get this straight ... (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm not sure why
Sony Music Entertainment Canada Inc
EMI Music Canada Inc
Universal Music Canada Inc.
Warner Music Canada Co
Paid less than the penalty for copyright infringment in the USA. May have to do with the C word though.
Re:Let me get this straight ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yep. If they budgeted for this they must have made more than that from doing it, ergo they'll do it again if they get half a chance.
Logic says they should be fined several times this as a punitive measure.
Re:Let me get this straight ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually in RIAA Math...
300,000 Songs * $150,000 (per song infringed) = $45,000,000,000 (that's 45 BILLION)
You could easily make a case for $150,000 per song because they willingly and knowingly used songs for which they did not procure the rights for. Willful and Systemic infringement rather than casual infringement. The only way to make it not happen again is to make it so they have a huge loss over it.
Re:Net loss, still not a profit (Score:4, Insightful)
$50m earning interest will still be a loss once paid. Unless they found a ridiculously awesome interest rate, or left it sitting for long enough to more than double. I don't see evidence of either, so overall it would be a loss.
Not really - they had already set aside that $50 million, "just in case". (And it turns out that they overbudgeted by 2.5 mil, so someone's getting a bonus for being under budget this year!). The difference is that rather than actually *pay* that money, they stuck it in the bank and collected interest. All that interest is profit for them (i.e. money they otherwise wouldn't have earned).
What bothers me about it is that there appears to be no punitive damages at all. It's like not putting payments down on your house but stashing the money aside, and when they finally come track you down, handing over the stash and saying "no harm no foul, right?"