$616.57 Three Strikes Verdict Cost RIANZ $250,000

Dangerous_Minds writes "On Wednesday, we discussed news that RIANZ convicted its first file-sharer under the New Zealand three strikes law. While the fine totaled $616.57, a New Zealand Herald report points out that in order to get that fine, RIANZ had to spend $250,000. Freezenet makes an interesting point that HADOPI (France's version of the three strikes law) faced similar problems when the Socialist party commented that 12 million euros was a lot of money to pay 60 agents to send out 1 million e-mails. The question raised is whether or not this money pit trend will continue when the Copyright Alert System starts processing strike notices in the United States."

Like policians care

[crazyjj]

Citizens see the cost situation like this:

Cost to pursue and prosecute these cases -(is greater than)- The return in fines + the benefit to society.

Politicians see it like this:

Donations to my campaign from the media industries + Future support from my party -(is greater than)- Any backlash from voters about the cost

-1, Wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

eh? even the fucking summary says says "RIANZ [wikipedia.org] had to spend" not "the taxpayer had to spend" .. and if you rfta the first damn line:

The local body representing big record labels claims to have spent around $250,000 chasing alleged music pirates

then later:

Rianz says it has sent out around 6000 notices to alleged pirates, for which the music industry body must pay a $25 fee each for internet companies to send on to their customers.

that's $150k right there, plus $100k to employ people to hunt/send stuff and lawyers is hardly unreasonable .. how the hell is this "insightful" when it's contradicted by the summary