Comments on: UA Student Convicted for Downloading Music & Movies

By: Tom Simpson

Tom Simpson — Wed, 09 Mar 2005 02:08:37 +0000

Here's a new story at Slate that explains how the value of the stolen property is actually figured.

By: murphyslaw

murphyslaw — Tue, 08 Mar 2005 23:32:28 +0000

1) the value of the films not yet on the retail market is much higher than a retail value of a film after release to DVD. 2) It will be interesting to see the spin that the Recording Industry Association of America puts on this case. You can already see the spin, it is right there in the headling with the term "downloading" I am not gfiving ethical or legal advice here, but this case has nothing whatsoever to do with downloading. the guy was uploading and charging fees. How many of th individuals sued bythe RIAA were soley "downlloading" ? Answer: none Dont get me wrong I am opposed to cipyright violation and even more so by people who rationalize their theft from "greedy" large corporations. But civil or criminal actions against downloading, as both lay and professionals use the term, is not practical, even for show cases.

By: cypherpunk

cypherpunk — Tue, 08 Mar 2005 19:56:11 +0000

It would take more than 3 or 4 350 GB drives. Assuming he had 1000 movies and 1,000,000 songs, the retail value would only be $1.030,000 or $30/movie and $.99/song. Disk space wise, that would be 2 TB for the movies and 5 TB for the songs, assuming a movie to be 2 GB and a song to be 5 MB. So how the heck did he get 350 TB in his dorm room. Or did (gasp) the FBI lie? This kid should have gotten an attorney who can do simple math. Business Week obviously can’t either. Ridiculous!.

By: Tom Simpson

Tom Simpson — Tue, 08 Mar 2005 05:50:56 +0000

I agree with you, Dave, but the story at Business Week says that the FBI found more than $50 Million in music and movies on his computer. The math on this just doesn't add up... Maybe 3 or 4 350Gb hard drives to hold it all? Try it, yourself. I couldn't make it work.