Well - it seems that there's a judge out there willing to question bozo damage claims from the RIAA:

A US COURT is forcing the Recording Industry of America to explain why it charges people it catches pirating $750 a single rather than the 70 cents they flog them to retailers for.

Sounds right to me. If the label sells the good for $X, then the presumed damage would be $X. Anything beyond that is into the punitive realm. The RIAA doesn't much like this:

The RIAA fought to prevent the amendment to Ms Lindor's case, claiming it was not up to her to decide damages. They said that her complaint about the level of damages was without merit and if the amendment went ahead it would prejudice them.

Cry me a river. My sympathy for the labels dried up and blew away a long, long time ago. Which reminds me - David Geffen is justifying the "Zune Tax" this way:

David Geffen, the media omniboss, is quoted: 'Each of these devices is used to store unpaid-for material...' The new business rationale is that stolen music should be paid for by profit sharing of newly sold Zune music players.

The raw stupidity of the labels continues to amaze me. Hey Geffen: you can take the Zune, and this "all my customers are criminals" attitude and stick it. As for MS: I won't be buying a Zune, and I'll be advising other people not to as well. When MS wants to take a "our customers aren't crooks" stand, perhaps one of the Zune guys could make an announcement on that.

Technorati Tags: RIAA, copyright