[PCWorld]

Post your comments for 'Hurt Locker' Sue 2,514 Over Copyright Infringement here

[Murkalael]

They never sue people that have more than 5 years of internet use, because the surelly fail to achieve what they want. As for people that barelly know how to turn on and off a computer, that might be a rich source of money for them. It's time to people know that, if is on internet is public property.

[sickpup]

I don't understand how copyright infringement damages are so high. It is perfectly legal to have a digital copy of a DVD you already own. Therefore, the penalty for downloading a movie and getting caught should be to purchase the DVD. Somehow the cost is $3000 or more. CRAZY

[BadBob]

Who would want to download the movie? Watching it once was more than enough.

[RNR19952]

1) did not know they could track a torrent download, thought that was the point to it?
2) The movie was not that good at all, I have no idea why it won any awards, waste of netflix queue

[Yargs]

The level of damages does seem rather fanciful. According to IMDb, the movie opened in the United States in June 2009 and ran through mid-November of that year; the DVD came out in North America on January 12, 2010.

Within six months of that date, I bought a used copy of The Hurt Locker from Silver Screen Video in El Cerrito, California, for $6 plus tax, as part of the store's standing "$10 for one title, or any four titles for $24" offer for extra copies of DVDs whose first wave of popularity has died down.

So by July 2010, the value of a clean used copy of the movie from a DVD rental store anywhere in the United States was probably somewhere between $6.75 and $20. Treble the damages for downloader naughtiness, and you still end up with a claim for damages in the vicinity of $30 to $60.

I must say that I don't understand the legal theory under which courts agree to back studios in their effort to make an example of a select number of defendants by, in effect, forcing them to pay for the criminal activity of thousands of other illegal downloaders who are not charged.

The closest analogy I can think of would be Safeway suing a shoplifter for $3000 in damages for swiping a $15 DVD, and explaining that the damages claim was so high because lots of people shoplift but don't get caught. It's an odd area of law.

[courageandtruth]

It is simple, you have a license to own and view for personal use. You do not have a license to distribute or use for commercial purposes. Learn to live with the rules of law for intellectual property.

[Evildave]

Someone WANTED 'Hurt Locker'???