Putting the Lie To RIAA Claims

[Bob Schroeck]

This wonderful graphic over at Cracked.com takes RIAA claims about losses from piracy -- and the Pirate Bay in particular -- and subjects them to some fairly devastating, if elementary, arithmetic.  Put in these terms, it's a wonder anyone even believes the RIAA's estimates.
-- Bob
---------
Then the horns kicked in...
...and my shoes began to squeak.

[Sweno]

while amusing, that info graphic seems to be confusing statutory and punitive damages.

Grossly oversimplifying:

Statutory damages are damages awarded based on the value of the object/good in question ($1 per song)

Punitive damages are damages awarded to act as a deterrent against abuse ($300,000 per song)

All this is ignoring the fact that the RIAA seems to equate 1 stolen song = 1 lost sale. This broken logic has been disproven multiple times by people much more savvy in the industry than me.
-Terry
-----
"so listen up boy, or pornography starring your mother will be the second worst thing to happen to you today"
TF2: Spy

[Black Aeronaut]

Now if only we can get more judges on board with this to setup a counter-precedent...

[LynnInDenver]

I'm just waiting for a judge to ask them to actually anty up evidence... not just studies... that every download is equal to one lost sale. Or at least greater than 10%. I'll bet they can't do it.
--

"You know how parents tell you everything's going to fine, but you know they're lying to make you feel better? Everything's going to be fine." - The Doctor

[Ayiekie]

They could point over at the most populated country on earth, which is much stronger evidence than I have ever heard for any "downloads don't equal less sales" position.

Not that I think anyone actually believes that each download is equivalent to a lost sale, but each download is still illegal, and more to the point, arguing it isn't a 1-to-1 ratio (thereby "admitting" that some downloads are harmless) probably wouldn't be a good legal tack for them to take.

[robkelk]

while amusing, that info graphic seems to be confusing statutory and punitive damages.
Grossly oversimplifying:
Statutory damages are damages awarded based on the value of the object/good in question ($1 per song)
Punitive damages are damages awarded to act as a deterrent against abuse ($300,000 per song)

Those punitive damages are extremely excessive.

Look at BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore (1996), where punitive damages of 1000 times the compensatory damages were originally awarded but reduced to 500 times the compensatory damages on appeal - the appeals court ruled that the high punitive damages violated Due Process.

Then there's State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell (2003), where the United States Supreme Court limited punitive damages to less than ten times the compensatory damages. Under that ruling, the RIAA should be requesting $10 per song in punitive damages. Even if the ratio set in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore still holds, the RIAA's request should be limited to $500 per song in punitive damages.

The RIAA asking for $300,000 per song is ridiculous - if they were to get it, that would be a travesty of justice.
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[Ayiekie]

I'd agree with that; $500 per song seems more reasonable.