I'm afraid that if this parallel becomes common, it will backfire. An unlicensed public performance, which receives a penalty of 2x the license fee, represents the song being played one time, to a limited audience. If one extrapolates from there the number of potential hearers/hearings from a shared file....
Exactly, what bothers me is how they don't have to prove how many time the files were copied (from her computer to another, she didn't do the infringement when she first downloaded the song.) to make up that 1.92 million number. If we had a number say $10 per song shared (ridiculous number 10 times larger that the real number) then if they can prove she at least shared those file once, that's $240. But they can't prove that currently so... the damages are in my view totally in founded.
Copies of copies wouldn't count..... just direct infringements.. and why shouldn't the penalties be more in line with digital broadcasting without paying up? IT's almost the same thing.
