CRIA Faces $60 Billion Lawsuit

jvillain writes "The Canadian Recording Industry Association faces a lawsuit for 60 billion dollars over willful infringement. These numbers may sound outrageous, yet they are based on the same rules that led the recording industry to claim a single file sharer is liable for millions in damages. Since these exact same companies are currently in the middle of trying to force the Canadian government to bring in a DMCA for Canada, it will be interesting to see how they try to spin this."

Comments

Irony

[girlintraining]

Irony, defined: The institution responsible for changing copyright law so individuals face millions in fines and years behind jail now has to argue against it to save its own ass.

Re:Irony

[KefabiMe]

Past evidence shows what is likely here. I know this doesn't have anything to do directly with music, but corporations have taken over the government. They insist on having the same rights as a human being, yet when it comes to punishments they know they can get away with murder.

If I had attempted to root kit even a small fraction of the PCs that Sony did, or commit copyright infringement on a much much smaller scale than what this story talks about, I would be ruined. I would lose all my possessions, probably be thrown in jail, unable to contribute to society, and disconnected from social ties. But we all know that these record companies won't be drastically hurt by this. Besides, the executives have already given themselves bonuses and spent the money on blow, or whatever else it is that these people spend millions on.

No one is going to jail over this. The industry will not be hurt. And no lessons will be learned.

Re:Irony

[erroneus]

This is shocking and awe inspiring to me. They have paid thousands if not millions to have these laws put into place. And here's the kicker -- it's not casual copying or sharing -- it's massive for-profit piracy. There should be criminal charges filed, prison time served and a massive reorganization of the companies charged.

They deserve what they get

[appleguru]

Every penny won by the artists in this lawsuit will be deserved. I hope the CRIA is found liable for every penny of the $60 billion and is put out of business once and for all.

I also hope similar infringements are found in the United States for both the RIAA and the MPAA. No company that treats their customers as poorly as these companies do deserves to be in business.

Time to cut out the middle man. The internet has opened huge new avenues for distribution; it's time the industry starts getting on board and the artists and content creators start getting more of what they are due.

Re:They deserve what they get

[VGPowerlord]

Actually... the lawsuit names four actual companies. Big companies. Companies that have parent companies who can, in turn, be held accountable.

To be specific, the companies are Warner Music Canada, Sony BMG Music Canada, EMI Music Canada, and Universal Music Canada.

Somehow, Capital Records of Canada managed to get missed.

Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour

[Maxwell]

This will be settled ASAP by CRIA. They simply can't risk this case coming anywhere close to a decision. If they 'win' they set a precedent that borrwing files is OK. If they lose, well, they lose big!

When they settle, they will have strong 'proof' that they 'represent the artists' and will use that to help their cause. This will be over in weeks, the actualy lawsuit is just a bargaining tactic.

Moving on...

Re:Will be resolved quickly...in CRIA favour

[MightyMartian]

Let's also remember this is Canada, and so far as I'm aware, there has been no infringement case where the value per song has been pegged. While rulings from other jurisdictions may, to one degree or another, inform a ruling, US precedent has no bearing. It's quite feasible that if this were to go to trial, the judge might decide each infringement is only $1000 or $10. Since this particular situation seems restricted to record company actions in Canada, and doesn't happen in the US, it's difficult to see how the complainants can possibly hope to maintain the value per song that they're asking for.

I think CRIA will settle ASAP, but mainly to assure that there is no low-ball price per song is put on the books. Imagine if they had to argue that they should only be paying pennies per song in civil awards. When the Canadian DCMA comes along and they start pursuing file sharers, the precedent is already there that each song is only worth, say, $1 per infraction. It would pretty much wipe out any chance of fear and extortion even for those found guilty of illegal file sharing.

justification

[kbob88]

Wait, so the majors have been selling CDs for over thirty years with songs they don't own the copyright on?? They've been charging consumers for something they didn't own?

And they wonder why consumers are downloading music...

In retrospect, I don't think we've been pirating music at all over the past decade or so. We're all just small record labels that have been creating (very limited run) compilation CDs and putting the songs on our own 'pending lists'. We fully intend to pay the rights holders, once we can locate them and negotiate rights. Brilliant idea, guys! Thanks!

I think the number is still low...

[Fallen Kell]

Seriously, I think the $60 Billion is still extremely low. At $20,000 per violation, that means only 3,000,000 violations, which I think is very light for the class of 300,000+ songs that are in the Payment Pending list. That is only estimating that 10 copies of each song were sold this way. The real numbers exist. They can find out EXACTLY how many copies of EACH unauthorized song were sold as all of that is accounted for each individual CD/Album/MP3 from the CRIA members. If we use the REAL number of songs and counts of infringement. I think we are talking easily more than 50 million violations here, not 3 million (which is only 10 sales per song, and we ALL know that a production run of CD's will be in the thousands each, and each COPY is a violation, not just each SALE, even broken CD's at the manufacturing site are unauthorized copies that took place (you know all that breakage cost part that they put into the contracts), they still count in terms of unauthorized/pirate copies). And remember, it is per song, so an album may have 15+ individual infringements in it, not a single infringement for the entire album.

Like GM?

[SydShamino]

I wonder if this will eventually turn out like GM and its dealings with the unions over the years. Bear with me...

GM corp. and shareholders spent decades working out deals with the unions, trying to minimize labor costs. They made deal after deal that would do things like promise better pensions, all to keep current costs down.

Then, when it all came crashing down, the net result was that the labor union ends up as a major (the major, after the government) shareholder in the company. All that effort goes to naught when it resulted in the "little people" gaining complete control of the company.

So I'm reminded of it here because the CRIA and RIAA and their kind have spent years creating the webs of copyright law that they now use to sue their customers. It would be fitting and just if those same laws lead to the "little people" - the artists - taking control of the industry.

Were I an artist in this case, I'd readily accept a major stake in the company in lieu of the settlement, especially if it was likely that the settlement would force them into bankruptcy and I'd never see my money anyway. Enough suits like this, and we could stroll in and fire the board and all the executives, and turn it into something that serves the artists and consumers.

Do as I say...

[gzearfoss]

I predict that the CRIA will have a sudden change in heart about copyright violation enforcement - that will last as long as it takes to get this case dropped or settled. Then, it'll be back to business as usual.

The question is, where did the money for the royalties from these CDs end up?

Re:my bet

[Anonymous Coward]

They'll put it on their "Fines Pending" list.

CRIA will never get nailed for this

[Phrogman]

Because here in Canada we have been following the same evolution of Capitalism that the US has adopted: companies (or groups of them) are superior to individuals and are held to a different standard. By all rights they should be forced to pay the billions in damages that they have earned by violating the laws they use as justification to get music downloaders to pay in court. They should get bit in the ass by the same principles they have been applying.
I am far too cynical to believe this will happen though, as I am sure many of you are. The right bribes will be paid to the right Canadian politicians and they will pay a few million in damages and that will be that. I don't trust Harper's government further than I can puke (and I almost do everytime I remember that we elected him. I am ashamed my country could possibly do so), and I expect them to suck up to the big music industry corporations and settle things quietly in their favour.
I sincerely hope I am wrong but I am far too cynical to think it will happen. We have government by corporation these days and they determine the laws and penalties.

Re:We need to get rid of the industry middle men

[Zak3056]

Indeed, they are showing their true colors here. They don't care about the artists income, they care about lining their own pockets. You think when they sue consumers for copyright infringement they divvy up that money among the artists whose copyrights were violated? Nope.

Actually, the money does go to the people who own the copyrights.

That's how bad the music industry is--the typical recording contract involves a record company giving a loan to the artist (an "advance") who then finances the recording (including advertising.) The loan is paid back from owed royalties before the artist sees a dime, and when all is said and done, the record companies come out owning the copyrights to the finished product. It's like getting a mortgage, paying on it for 30 years, and at the end of the term, instead of gaining clear title, the bank says, "Thanks for the house!"

To add insult to injury, the record companies do whatever they can to screw the artist out of whatever small percentage they're due (breakage fees for 78RPM vinyl records, for example. No, I'm not kidding.)

I would like to point out:

[NoYob]

notes in his affidavit that "the record labels have devoted insufficient resources for identifying and paying the owners of musical works on the pending lists." The CRIA members now face the prospect of far greater liability.

I'm assuming that the CRIA is basically the Canadian branch of the RIAA, or at least affiliated with it?

So, let me get this straight, those people can track down some college kid over the whole internet, what was probably using some dynamically assigned IP address, who may have moved a few times, etc.. and the CRIA can't find Bruce Springstein or even some lesser known artist because they haven't allocated enough resources?

Riiiiiiigggght.

Worldwide practice

[XSforMe]

The big labels have been pulling this stunt world wide during years. Recently in Mexico, Police raided the major offices of Sony after it decided to tell Alejandro Fernandez (a Mexican folk country singer) they were going to publish some of his tunes with or without his permission. After the smoke had settled, the Police seiged over 6K pirated CDs from the same offices of those who can't keep their mouth shut when it comes to bashing pirates.

Re:We need to get rid of the industry middle men

[TapeCutter]

If an artist signs away their work without understanding the fine print then it's poor judgement on their part. If a record company routinely fails to honour contracts by witholding royalties then they are a criminal organisation.

CRIA? same as RIAA: they're WESU !

[KWTm]

I had previously suggested that RIAA was just a disguise, a mask used by the Big4 companies behind RIAA, and suggested that we actually refer to them by name: Warner, EMI, Sony, and Universal. Together they form the acronym WESU, as in "We sue! Yes, we do!"

Now this CRIA organization is suing. Hmm... let's see who the big members are. From TFA:
"The defendants in the case are Warner Music Canada, EMI Music Canada, Sony BMG Music Canada, and Universal Music Canada, the four primary members of the Canadian Recording Industry Association."

Sound familiar???? Good thing we unmasked the Big4 companies as WESU!

Re:We need to get rid of the industry middle men

[realityimpaired]

They are criminal organizations, but who can successfully sue them? Plus, if they can write the laws through "campaign contributions" then they are no longer "criminals" even if their activities are highly immoral and exploitive.

Buying laws through "campaign contributions" is significantly more difficult for them to do in Canada... up here, it is illegal for a corporation (either privately owned, publicly owned, or foreign owned) to give *any* campaign contributions, or other contributions, to a political party, candidate, or electoral district association. There is also a maximum on an individual's personal contributions: they cannot exceed about $1100/year (it gets adjusted every year for inflation/deflation, and is currently just over $1100). Additionally, any contributions exceeding $20 are a matter of public record. They can't get around it by donating goods/services in liew of cash, either, as the equivalent cash value of the goods/services donated are counted against that $1100.

Breaking those rules is Election Fraud, and the bare minimum penalty for a politician being found guilty of Election Fraud would be that they lose their position in parliament and are barred from ever voting or running for office again. They could, potentially, go to jail. And if it were a party that's guilty of it, they could be de-listed as an official party and lose their access to public funding for their campaigns.

References:
Relevant section of the Canada Elections Act
Online financial reports for contributions, searchable by the general public. As a matter of public record, you can also request older records by calling the phone number provided on that page.

Obligatory disclaimer:
I no longer work for that department, but I used to work for Elections Canada, and it was my job to know the Elections Act inside and out in order to be able to answer questions like this.