Comment Re:Copyright needs reform (Score 1) 93
The big problem is that copyright fines were set when the major copyright violators were commercial in nature. Sure, people would make mix tapes and distribute them, but they were small-time operators compared to the CD presser who could make a hundred copies of the latest CD, sell them for a couple of bucks each, and make a major profit. The fines were set to bankrupt such operations so they couldn't just spring up elsewhere.
Nowadays, though, anyone can become an unauthorized distributor in a matter of minutes (depending on connection speed and how fast you can install software). There is also no profit motive - installing BitTorrent and sharing out your music library isn't done because it rakes in cash - and there is no way to really know how many songs were distributed. This should definitely carry a penalty, but the current penalties outweigh the impact. Fining someone $75 million for sharing 500 songs does nothing but put that person into bankruptcy permanently.
Actually, it does do something else. It allows the copyright holder to force the person into a deal. If you are facing a long trial with a possibly life-ruining fine at the end, the copyright holder's $3,000 settlement agreement sounds great. Even if you are innocent (the IPs "matched" but don't actually belong to you for one reason or another), fighting a huge battle with horrible potential consequences at the end is not something many people can afford. In essence, the copyright holder comes to the fight with a tank and the alleged infringer comes with a slingshot.
Making a "non-commercial" copyright infringement tier would level the playing field a bit. It would still let copyright owners smack down infringers, but it wouldn't allow for the abuse of "settle on our terms or face a $75 million fine!"