US-Anwalt Andrew Bridges auf PandoDaily über den falschen Begriff Diebstahl bei Urheberrechtsverletzungen und die Verzerrung bei den Strafmaßen:
Copyright infringement statutory damages in civil litigation can be as high as $150,000 for infringement of a single work. Yes, a single work such as a single song with an iTunes download value of $1. A copyright holder can claim such statutory damages without needing to prove a single penny of damage or loss. Think such sky-high damages aren’t realistic? Think again. In the RIAA’s case against single mother Jammie Thomas, a jury awarded $1,500,000 for the download of 24 songs, with no proof that she had transmitted songs to others. The federal judge thought that was ridiculous and reduced the total award to $54,000 – and the RIAA and MPAA are now arguing strenuously on appeal that the jury verdict should return to the original figure, $62,500 per downloaded song.
If we take copyright law’s maximum-penalty-to-price ratio as applied to an illegal download, and apply that same penalty-to-price ratio to the New York subway, the maximum penalty for jumping that turnstile and avoiding the $2.50 fare would be $375,000 instead of $100. Copyright industries are on to a really good thing under current law. One could say it’s a steal.
(Hervorhebung von mir)
Auch in Deutschland steht die zu zahlende Strafe, in Form einer Einigung mit dem Kläger, praktisch nie in einem vertretbaren Verhältnis zum Verkaufswert der heruntergeladenen Datei.
Warum? Weil es eigentlich gar nicht um Diebstahl geht.