Comments on: IFPI Wins Danish File-Sharing Case

By: Užrašai iš skaitmeninio fronto #6 : nežinau.lt

Užrašai iš skaitmeninio fronto #6 : nežinau.lt — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 09:30:27 +0000

[...] siuntimas iš torrent? tebelaikomas nelegaliu, tol pagautam gali tekti už tai susimok?ti. Danijos teismas atsakovui, kurio kompiuteryje buvo aptikta 13 t?kstan?i? nelegaliai ?sigyt? k?…. Maždaug 2 dolerius už dain?. Verta ?sigyti legaliai, nes gausis dvigubai pigiau. Dan? teismo [...]

By: IFPI Wins Danish File-Sharing Case | CyberLaw Blog

IFPI Wins Danish File-Sharing Case | CyberLaw Blog — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 14:52:55 +0000

[...] IFPI Wins Danish File-Sharing Case: “ [...]

By: RandomGuy

RandomGuy — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:24:01 +0000

Well, I thought it would be around $250,000 but it was only $24,000. I mean, thats like half of a average yearly salary so he got it easy I tell ya’.

Thats like taking out a loan from the bank, paying the courts, then paying back to loan bit by bit.

I tell you again, he got it easy.

BIG TIME!! :D <3

By: Danish Man Fined For Sharing Music, But At Around $2/Song

Danish Man Fined For Sharing Music, But At Around $2/Song — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:02:55 +0000

[...] or simply made them available). Either way, what’s more interesting is that the court has fined him approximately ,400, or a bit less than per song. As the article notes, the court estimated actual losses from the file [...]

By: 23-10-2008 ● Pirateria, quando il risarcimento non basta - Climarsoft Forum

Thu, 23 Oct 2008 01:30:29 +0000

[...] corone, circa 80 centesimi di euro per ogni brano che ha scaricato e non acquistato. La Danimarca, osserva TorrentFreak, volge verso un futuro di proporzionalit? nel trattare i casi di sharing illegale [...]

By: h33t

h33t — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:19:14 +0000

it is taking the piss isnt it!

DC is direct downloads it is not filesharing as we know it p2p

DC is criminal piracy. rules for DC hubs are extreme, they are no better than topsites

and you title the article “filesharing” and not “piracy”?!

it is becoming very clear that torrentfreak is anti-p2p

torrentfreak is anti-p2p. stupid is as stupid does. you are not ignorant

http://www.h33t.com where legitimacy is earned

By: Dinamarquês obrigado a pagar 1,65 euros por cada música que partilhou | Remixtures

Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:10:22 +0000

[...] Como é óbvio, nenhum juiz acreditou nessa história. Para além disso, ficou bem claro que o indivíduo não podia ter usado uma ligação sem fios, um argumento que deu muito jeito em dois casos anteriores também ocorridos na Dinamarca. Não admira por isso que ele tenha sido condenado pelo tribunal distrital. Depois de apelar para um tribunal superior da Dinamarca, o Vestre Landsret, acabou por ser novamente condenado por esta instância judicial esta segunda-feira, de acordo com o site dinamarquês Comon.dk (Tradução Google Translator) citado pelo TorrentFreak. [...]

By: TPile » Blog Archive » Danish Man Fined For Sharing Music, But At Around $2/Song

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 19:50:56 +0000

[...] or simply made them available). Either way, what’s more interesting is that the court has fined him approximately $24,400, or a bit less than $2 per song. As the article notes, the court estimated actual losses from the [...]

By: Web News Site » Blog Archive » Danish Man Fined For Sharing Music, But At Around $2/Song

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 19:20:43 +0000

[...] files, or simply made them available). Either way, what’s more interesting is that the court has fined him approximately $24,400, or a bit less than $2 per song. As the article notes, the court estimated actual losses from the [...]

By: Tech Scoop - Hot Technology Gossip » Danish Man Fined For Sharing Music, But At Around $2/Song

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 19:07:49 +0000

By: Danish Man Fined For Sharing Music, But At Around $2/Song | bitbucket.kylewelsh.com

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 19:00:25 +0000

By: Danish Man Fined For Sharing Music, But At Around $2/Song | Technology Update News

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:58:04 +0000

By: Free Readings Online » Blog Archive » Danish Man Fined For Sharing Music, But At Around $2/Song

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:56:59 +0000

By: www.eZee.se

www.eZee.se — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:09:47 +0000

“a good one will set you back maybe 600kr,think of it as 300 songs”

My bad above, 600dkk translates to something like 90~100USD so take it at 47 songs not 300.

“why would anyone sharing such huge number of songs (13,000) ?”
I guess you dont use /have not used DC much, many people share a _lot more_ than that on DC ‘hubs’, esp the ones here in Sweden.
Speeds are VERY good as well, I have had… umm, (*caugh*) seen some people download a song in less than a second each and movies @ around 9-12mb a sec.

http://www.eZee.se

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:56:24 +0000

why would anyone sharing such huge number of songs (13,000) ? is this guy open business or something like charging membership .

By: King Of The Rainbow Tables

King Of The Rainbow Tables — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:54:41 +0000

That’s under $2 a song. So basically, they made him buy the songs twice from iTunes store. I know this is not true, but it’s just putting it in perspective.

By: The Dane

The Dane — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:51:08 +0000

I didn’t read all the comments, and i haven’t studied all of our laws in Denmark, but in the readings of prior threads on other danish filesharing sites, i think i once read that, evidence older than 1 year couldn’t be used in a case in court, because it was to old. I don’t know if this is true, if it is this case is really disturbing to me. Furthermore the fact that the APG as far as ive understood this case didn’t actually have to proof anything, which shouldn’t be able if you are innocent till the opposit have been proven.

I am confused xD

By: pew2

pew2 — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:00:43 +0000

wow then this “double up” thing seems like a really fair (if i wasn’t that subjective: too fair ) way to handle such cases. we got a similiar organisation here but usually it’s not them who sue individuals but rather lawyers who send out cease-and-desist letters on behalf of the recording companies.

is that “double up” system used in all cases or just this one?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:23:39 +0000

@ pew

It was a civil case.

You can buy the tracks individually (online).

All (99.9 according to their own stats) recorded music tracks are represented by the ifpi/koda here in Denmark, which is why they can claim damages for the whole thing, and not just the tracks from 1 record company. (If you think this smells like a cartel/monopoly, then you are probably right)

As it is a civil case, you are not innocent until proven guilty, the counterpart simply has to document that it is likely that you have done whatever they claim, and them you must in turn prove that it is unlikely if you want to go free.

By: pew

pew — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:15:10 +0000

“per infringement” = “per song” is just ridiculous. if you’re offering a single album how can that be 15 different infringements? it’s one friggin product, you couldn’t buy every song on it’s own anyways.

this was a penal case though right? otherwise the rights owners of every single file would have had to press charges and in a penal case things are way more rational than in civil law. dunno about the US but where i live at D.A.s don’t take any action unless you’re sharing at least ~ a thousand files (IP isn’t enough proof and search warrant unproportional) while you could be paying thousands for way less in a civil case.