$3.6 Billion
Recovered from the Internet Archive. This page comes from a ListenSmart.com capture saved by the Wayback Machine on December 14, 2000. The original text is preserved where it survives; links and layout have been adapted for this restoration. Historical account, search, posting, voting, playback and download features are inactive; their labels remain as plain text. Images that were never archived are marked as such. Audio files were not recovered for this archive.
Source: Wayback Machine capture of ubb.listensmart.com:80/ubb/Forum12/HTML/002244.html.
Removal requests: email seanfenlon@yahoo.com with the page address.
Email This Page to Someone! |
 Artist Only Boards [all categories]
 Artist Area
 $3.6 Billion
Post New Topic |
| next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: $3.6 Billion |
| #1
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1046 |
posted 09-06-2000 04:41 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee  Edit/Delete Message 
Yep. That's right. 3.6 Billion Dollars. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20000906/tc/mp3_lawsuit_6.html
quote: ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #2
ben_fenlon Administrator Posts: 299 |
posted 09-06-2000 04:46 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for ben_fenlon Edit/Delete Message
More info... http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20000906/ts/mp3_lawsuit_7.html MP3.com Loses Copyright Case
U.S. District Judge Jed S. Rakoff said it was necessary to send a message to the Internet community to deter copyright infringement. Rakoff said he could have awarded as much as $150,000 per CD but chose a considerably smaller amount, in part because MP3.com had acted more responsibly than other Internet startups. Universal Music Group, the world's largest record company, had urged a stiff penalty in the closely watched case. ``Music is a media and the next infringement may be very different,'' said Universal lawyer Hadrian Katz. ``It may be video or it may be film or it may be books or it may be something very different.'' Katz had urged the judge to award the record company up to $450 million because MP3.com had copied 5,000 to 10,000 of the company's CDs. The lawyer said such a penalty would cost MP3.com as much as $3.6 billion once the company was forced to pay all the other companies whose copyrights it had violated when it created an online catalog of 80,000 CDs. Shares of MP3.com were halted before the decision; the most recent trade was at $7.88 per share, down 68.8 cents on the Nasdaq Stock Market. Universal's record companies were the lone plaintiffs at the trial. The nation's four other major record companies settled with MP3.com after Rakoff found earlier this year that MP3.com had violated copyrights. The amount of the settlements were not disclosed but the company set aside $150 million recently to cover its legal costs, including the deals. Michael Rhodes, MP3.com's lawyer, pleaded with the judge not to impose a penalty ``in the Draconian range of $400 million, an award that could never be satisfied and would end up being the largest paper award in history.'' He said Universal did not deserve what he described as a windfall. ``There's not one iota of evidence that they even lost a penny,'' he said. MP3.com chief executive Michael Robertson testified that the company went to great lengths to develop software that would require customers to prove they already own CDs before they were permitted to hear their favorite tunes over the Internet. MP3.com caused a stir in early January when it began the MyMP3.com listening service, which allows customers to hear CDs from anywhere once they prove they own them by inserting them into a computer CD slot. MP3.com, Rhodes said, voluntarily suspended the illegal aspects of the service as soon as the judge ruled and sought to negotiate business deals with the record companies. Despite the settlements, as many as half of the CDs in MP3.com's collection may not be covered by the deals, meaning that a large ruling for Universal could prompt a wave of fresh lawsuits against MP3.com, he said. He noted that music publishers also had not reached deals with MP3.com. Rhodes suggested the company not be penalized any more than $500 for each of what MP3.com estimates is 4,700 CDs in the Universal collection that would be subject to a court order. But Katz said a $2.4 million award against MP3.com would send the wrong message to other entrepreneurs who might want to test copyright laws. ``Massive copyright infringement is the kind of innovation that needs to be deterred,'' he said. ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #3
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1046 |
posted 09-06-2000 05:48 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
Ah! Ben is back! Got to stay on top of the fast breaking news, ben.  And, hey, while this is real bad for mp3.com as we know it. It seems like it might be good for listensmart.com. For two reasons. 1) After this, no website will ever want to touch RIAA music again. It's not profitable when you have to pay the RIAA. And this ruling means you HAVE to pay the RIAA. Future rulings may mean you have to pay just to mention the RIAA, or link to the RIAA, or show search results for the RIAA. 2) All publishers have more clout now. Even independent artists may want a publisher now.
------------------ IP: Logged |
| #4
Andrew Hickey Guru Posts: 394 |
posted 09-07-2000 12:30 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for Andrew Hickey Edit/Delete Message
YES!!! ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #5
RagtimeLady Newbie Posts: 85 |
posted 09-08-2000 07:54 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for RagtimeLady Edit/Delete Message
quote: The lawyer was wrong. MP3.com has a "most favored nations" clause in it's settlement agreements with the other labels, ensuring that no one label would get a better licensing agreement than any other. This isn't a licensing agreement - it's a legal penalty. Apples to oranges, it seems to me. And I think this statement was made long before the other plaintiffs settled. Since they DID settle, they are probably not entitled to damages. As it stands now, MP3.com's maximum penalty payable to Universal only is $25,000 per CD - and they're talking somewhere between 4,700 and 10,000 CDs, or $250 million max. Most media has failed to grasp the most basic concepts in this case, including the fact that MP3.com never offered major label music for download or swapping. To me, this lawyer's assessment is just another example of the media missing the mark. RAGards, RTL ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #6
DoctorOakroot Guru Posts: 516 |
posted 09-11-2000 03:16 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for DoctorOakroot Edit/Delete Message
It's really amazing that the media, who are publishers and copyright holders afterall, can't even come close to accurately reporting a copyright case... Dr O ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #7
KennyLee Guru Posts: 1046 |
posted 09-11-2000 04:13 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for KennyLee Edit/Delete Message
quote: Hmmm. You start out saying "was wrong". and end up with "I think" and "probably not". Not wanting to rag the Rag lady, but you don't seem to be to sure of yourself on this topic. Whereas, Kenny Lee is sure that there is some legal scenario in this mess where mp3.com could be found liable for 3.6 Billion dollars. Which is all the lawyer was saying. "Potential Damages". ------------------ IP: Logged |
| #8
dond Guru Posts: 127 |
posted 09-11-2000 04:17 PM
Click Here to See the Profile for dond Edit/Delete Message
Thanks RTL, My understanding was that "most favored nation" status only applied to new downloads too. I thought the new, court settlement didn't add to MP3's financial headaches. Thanks for clarifieing that 3.6 billion dollar discrepancy! Wednesday is stock buy day for me..I think they still have a shot at the brass ring! ------------------ IP: Logged |
All times are ET (US) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
Post New Topic  |
Hop to: Go |
Contact Us | ListenSmart.com
Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.41a
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 1999.