A mother facing a £2,500 fine after her daughter shared music on the internet has decided not to contest the case.

story here
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/gloucestershire/4166784.stm

This is "Sylvia Price", *not* the "Patricia Santangelo" in the earlier story. Done confuse them.

Sylvia is notable only as one of the first example-cases in the UK.

I'm unsure if the law in the UK is slightly different to the way it works in the US. I'd be interested to know if there are any caveats either way. Would it be more difficult to stand up to the music industry in the UK than the US for instance? Would the penalties be any different to if you fought and lost? Is it more difficult to actually get it to court on either side of the ocean and any fairer? Costs being another factor of course.

Very curious but no idea how to find that info out

I don't live in the U,K., so i;m not sure either. I know U.S. law can be very different from U.K. law. One particular example that comes to mind is the libel law. In the U.K., if you sue for libel, you have the advantage because whoever you sue has to prove it wasn't libel.

She was wrong! What can they do to her? Sell her as slave?

We must show courage and never compromise! Kick the buts of the bullys. If every body do this the world will be a better place with more justice.

Stand for what is right. Stand for your country either in England in the US or anywhere in the world.

Stand for the right of the people world wide and Attack the rogue corporations and other bullys! There is ton of good companies arround that contribute to our societies. Why let the bad ones live?

It's just another example of how people are being scared off by these guys because they don't want to battle it out in court. If they lose, it will set a precedent and then others can use the same defense in another case.

Jazon,

"
Date: August 22, 2005 @ 10:06 PM
It's just another example of how people are being scared off by these guys because they don't want to battle it out in court. If they lose, it will set a precedent and then others can use the same defense in another case."

That's the thing. These people who decide to settle are realizing, Hey; I did break the law, they have caught me; If I fight and lose (and I most likely will lose) I'll have to pay alot more. They're making a financial loss decision.

It's quiet easy to post here and say that you'd fight them tooth and nail if you were caught sharing riaa music, but it's another thing to actually goto court and risk losing everything you own.

The lawsuits tv ads, dvd ads are all warnings, copying this or that is illegal by today's standards. Some of you seem to think downloaders should be left alone. Why restrict it to music downloaders only? Why not allow those individuals who enjoy trading .ISO images of current software; If it's not for profit, whats the harm in it right?

This makes no sense to me people. Most of you know very well it's illegal for you to download Office XP from kazaa. But you don't feel the music you didn't pay for should be treated the same way?

They're going for the technology that allows independents to share their music however they want. On top of that, scaring people like sheep to go to legal sites isn't fair. Main thing I have to complain about however, is that I wish I could be everywhere at once.

But you rarely know if you'll win or lose until you try. Sorry but trying to dishearten me from never listening to the likes of 50 Cent, Eminem, Mariah Carey, and other mainstreamers, who are already millionaires, isn't going to work.

Jc123,

"They're going for the technology that allows independents to share their music however they want. On top of that, scaring people like sheep to go to legal sites isn't fair."

Yea, thats it. They are so worried about the indies, that they are trying to close all the openings, starting with the consumers. Yep, and Elvis is still alive.

They simply want you to pay for the music they have the rights to. That's all. They aren't trying to screw you nearly as much as you seem to think. You and many others have been infringing copyrights for several years now, now it's time to pay for it.

I have no sympathy for a person who thinks they are on the right side of the law, when they are nearly right with us.. infringing copyrights.