Limewire sued for.......$75 Trillion dollars :)

[ozleicester]

The music industry wants LimeWire to pay up to $75 trillion in damages after losing a copyright infringement claim. That’s right . . . $75 trillion. Manhattan federal Judge Kimba Wood has labeled this request “absurd.â€

You’re telling me. To put that number into perspective (I bet a lot of you didn’t even know “trillion†was a real number), the U.S. GDP is around 14 trillion – less than one fifth of what the music industry is requesting. Heck, the GDP of the entire world is between 59 and 62 trillion. That’s right, the music industry wants LimeWire to pay more money than exists in the entire world.

http://www.uber-fact...or-75-trillion/

[SOCCERROO FOX]

Phube will be happy

[jonthefox]

How many zero's is that?.

[Alexikokopops]

How many zero's is that?.

12 on the short scale which tends to be used everywhere nowadays (6 million, 9 billion). On the long scale 12 is a billion (I think) so I think a trillion would be 18. I'd imagine they're talking about the short scale

[MikeyT]

Pocket change

[Zingari]

You're always best to start with a high figure and be prepared to haggle.

It works just as well with 75 trillion dollar copyright infringement as it does with 25 shekel false beards.

[foxfanazer]

If all the money in world was collected in now and redistributed evenly between everyone in the world how much would everybody have?

Go on estimated figures of course

[MooseBreath]

If all the money in world was collected in now and redistributed evenly between everyone in the world how much would everybody have?

Go on estimated figures of course

We'd all be living in mansions according to the lefties.

In reality about £8,000 I believe

[foxfanazer]

That'll do for me

[birdwith2beaksandnofriends]

£8,000?

Thats just a decent family holiday?

Thank god for capitalism.

[Harry - LCFC]

If all the money in world was collected in now and redistributed evenly between everyone in the world how much would everybody have?

Go on estimated figures of course

The World Bank estimates that global GDP is $80trn so divide that by the total population (7 billion) equals about $11,150 per person per year. Converting that to sterling gives us about £7,600 per person. In many countries, that amount of money would be considered very desirable and there'd be a lot of happy people out there if that's what everyone earned.

[MooseBreath]

The World Bank estimates that global GDP is $80trn so divide that by the total population (7 billion) equals about $11,150 per person per year. Converting that to sterling gives us about £7,600 per person. In many countries, that amount of money would be considered very desirable and there'd be a lot of happy people out there if that's what everyone earned.

Inflation would soon take care of that.

You can't have winners without losers.

[Harry - LCFC]

Inflation would soon take care of that.

You can't have winners without losers.

Do you mean to say that prices would go up rapidly if everyone had that amount of money? Sorry, I'm not quite sure what you meant by that first bit.

And it's PPP adjusted so Americans would have more dollars than Kenyans but they'd be worth less. Everyone would have exactly the same amount of value in their wealth if that's what you were referring to when you mentioned inflation.

[MooseBreath]

Do you mean to say that prices would go up rapidly if everyone had that amount of money? Sorry, I'm not quite sure what you meant by that first bit.

And it's PPP adjusted so Americans would have more dollars than Kenyans but they'd be worth less. Everyone would have exactly the same amount of value in their wealth if that's what you were referring to when you mentioned inflation.

Then third world brothers wouldn't be so happy afterall. £8k isn't even enough to buy a parking space. If the value is somehow the same across the world then nobody can afford to buy a parking space. I can't see too many people being particularly happy.

[Harry - LCFC]

Then third world brothers wouldn't be so happy afterall. £8k isn't even enough to buy a parking space. If the value is somehow the same across the world then nobody can afford to buy a parking space. I can't see too many people being particularly happy.

Don't buy a parking space then. A lot of people in poverty around the world really don't want much, I can't imagine a luxury item like a parking space is particularly high on their wish list. They'd be happy with food, water, electricity and a place to send their children to school. These people are so poor that it really wouldn't take much to make them happy. Unlike us in the west who expect much, much more.

[Captain...]

Then third world brothers wouldn't be so happy afterall. £8k isn't even enough to buy a parking space. If the value is somehow the same across the world then nobody can afford to buy a parking space. I can't see too many people being particularly happy.

You do realise that price of goods is dictated by wealth, if everyone only earned 8k a year, then nobody would sell a parking space for 8k, as nobody would buy it, unless the thought a years worth of work was worth a parking space.

[Uncle Albert]

I reckon divide all the money up and give everyone their £8,000, the first person to their £8,000 into a million is the King.

[MooseBreath]

You do realise that price of goods is dictated by wealth, if everyone only earned 8k a year, then nobody would sell a parking space for 8k, as nobody would buy it, unless the thought a years worth of work was worth a parking space.

Well of course. This hypothetical scenario has not exactly been well detailed. The only point I'm making is that the worlds wealth distributed evenly among the population amounts to sfa for each of us.

[Captain...]

Well of course. This hypothetical scenario has not exactly been well detailed. The only point I'm making is that the worlds wealth distributed evenly among the population amounts to sfa for each of us.

But if the real value of goods is amended accordingly then there will be no problems.

[Webbo]

Why should money be divided equally? Why should a slacker be as well off as a hard worker? Why would anyone train for years to achieve a qualification, a doctor, a lawyer, a teacher if they are going to be no better off than some slob?

[birdwith2beaksandnofriends]

Why should money be divided equally? Why should a slacker be as well off as a hard worker? Why would anyone train for years to achieve a qualification, a doctor, a lawyer, a teacher if they are going to be no better off than some slob?

Because to summarise a view perpetually repeated on here - 'it's really hard just not working and being paid money to do nothing and you workers just wouldn't believe how hard it is!'

So cut them some slack. Its not easy signing on now and then and sending off applications to jobs you're not suited to, you know!

[Darkon84]

'The music industry' wants $75 trillion dollars....WHO exactly IS that then? Every musician? Producer? Label from big to small? Distributor? Lacky who fetches coffee for a video director...??

Very loose term indeed.

EDIT: Ok, so I've decided to read the article and it's 13 record labels.

[MooseBreath]

But if the real value of goods is amended accordingly then there will be no problems.

Until everyone stops making goods, sure.

[Captain...]

Why should money be divided equally? Why should a slacker be as well off as a hard worker? Why would anyone train for years to achieve a qualification, a doctor, a lawyer, a teacher if they are going to be no better off than some slob?

Nobody is saying that it should happen, just speculating over what it would mean.

[Rincewind]

After the lawyers have taken their cut they may be left with a couple of grand.

How did working and unemployed get on this thread? BTW the majority of people claiming benefits are LOW PAID WORKERS. A bigger percentage than the unemployed.