List of SOPA Supporters

my point of view is simple

IF the penalty are ok to apply to pirates then they should be equally ok to apply to copyright holders who abuse the law

if pirates are not allowed to simply claim "oops that was i mistake my bad" then copyright holders should not have the right to that exemption either.

The principle of balance makes sure that the law is not drafted with ambiguity that can be abused.

Look at it this way if the process is so flawed that you could "accidentally" blacklist a totally innocent site imagine the damage that could be done if you "deliberately" tried to abuse the system.

Look at the universal vs mega upload problem with this bogus DMCA takedown of the mega upload song.

if the DMCA process required you to
1. verify that infringing content contained your content
2. specify the content that belongs to you that was illegally used withing the infringing content

in addition to the current steps

the only way that Universal would have been able to do what they did, was to deliberately lie.

And if breaking the process had a liability of losing your copyright i don't think universal would have done what they did.


They did what they did because they knew the current penalties are a joke (come over to the united states, spend millions in legal fees to only get back your provable hard losses only)

The only reason the court case is going forward is because mega upload is using it to prove that SOPA is fucked up. If they prove that the current penalty doesn't prevent abuse like universal did, then keeping the penalty the same especially when you raise the penalty so greatly is not only unfair but trade war anti competitive.

If SOPA doesn't put an abuse it and lose it type penalty , you can bet other countries will put a counter suit right on their books. Use SOPA against an innocent company from that country, and that wronged person will be able to void the copyright for his country, and every citizen of that country will be LEGALLY allowed to use the internet to sell your content to the world.

First off:
gideongallery
This message is hidden because gideongallery is on your ignore list.

Secondly: Anybody in this thread who is making broad statements and has no skin in the game is just an armchair quarterback.
And as Quentin said, it's all just speculation because the law hasn't passed yet.

But you can always tell when a law threatens a certain business model. For instance...the proposed condom law in CA. is a threat to the content producers and the porn industry. So it causes fear and consternation amongst those of us who are really in the business.

Now, this proposed SOPA law comes out and some people are just all-out opposed to it before they even know what the finished bill will look like. Why are they so afraid of something unless it's going to affect their pocketbook? Otherwise why not just ignore it until a finished bill is presented and THEN express your feelings?

At this point none of us know what the bill is going to end up being. But you better believe that ALL pirate sites and people who profit from piracy are going to be against it as long as it affects their ill-gotten gains.

And to those of you who think it will have no effect at all...then why the hell are you screaming so loud against it? If it's just a joke to the pirate sites and "won't change a thing"...then shouldn't you just stfu and not worry about it?

I guess we shall all see what happens. And then we can all:
ADAPT OR DIE!

P.S.: I'm going to guess that guys who create NOTHING like gideongallery will NOT be able to "adapt" when they can no longer steal on the internet.

Piracy was not a problem in the analogue age as the copy was always inferior to the master. You could copy from Vinyl onto tape but if it was to be hifi it was more expensive then buying the original.

It is quite possible that you are right that it not possible to stop the copying and distributing of digital material, after all thats is what computers and the Internet do.

If SOPA and laws to control copywrite fail then the only possibilities are

Destruction of the creative industries as DVD, newspapers , CDs sales continue to fall.
This case the creative industries are in the situation of selling bottled water when it is free from the tap. Possible but extremely difficult and getting harder when people wages are falling all over the world.

Consumption free at the point of use, but paid for by subscription to access the Internet. The Internet will have to pay for the creation of the content it distributes, Like the BBC or the UK National Heath service, free when you use it, but you pay through taxes or fees to receive the Internet.

What happens depends on which group of corporations have the most lobbyists.

The abuse it and lose it penalty I talked about would do absolutely nothing to protect a pirate site. Think about how the fuck would a pirate site ever prove they were innocent
by definition they can't because their a pirate site.

The 1st amendment issue is ALL i care about, the abuse of this law (because the process is wishy washy grey area that so fucking bad, it can "accidentally" be abused) is all i care about.

Why do i comment now, because that what a comment period is for dumb ass.



Just because it won't stop the pirates who will use dirty tricks to bypass the filters doesn't mean it will have no effect on the INNOCENT but WRONGFULLY accused sites that will be caught in the drag net.

Those innocent sites will suffer all the penalty but have no "solution" to get around the problem because again by DEFINITION they are innocent.

Again that why i want an abuse it and lose it clause in the law, so the innocent sites at least have a recovery option (they can sell the newly public domain content to recoup there losses) if the copyright holder tries to nickel and dime them on damages.

who's fault is that 6 spectrum color was known to be superior to 3 spectrum color since color film broadcast were invented

it was a cheap solution to a cost problem, we have had the technology to shoot movies in 6 spectrum color for 10 years now.

4 spectrum color appeared in tv BEFORE it appeared in theatres (it still doesn't exist BTW)

autoscopic 3d (3d without glasses) is coming to tv next year. (again before theatres)

theatres used to innovate (remember surround sound) they don't anymore




or maybe content producers will get off their fucking asses, and get back to innovating
introducing new technology that only cost effective at the theatre level so that the difference between the original and the copy will be great enough that people will WANT to see the movie in the theatres.

I was wondering the definition of an innocent pirate was.

This will pass, and though it won't end piracy, it will kick it in the balls really fucking hard and put a lot of people out of business.

Innocent pirates are the guys posting here making excuses, defending piracy, finding absurd reasons why this shouldn't pass, and mostly being ignored.

And you have proof of that, right?

I am fairly sure you can't accuse people of criminal activity here without proof...

Or has that rule changed?

LOL I notice those who support this bill also have serious trust issues with the US government. (DWB, etc)
You will end up being bitten hard. The government successfully bans pirate sites because of piracy? Next it will attack porn because of "brainwashing of children" or some other bullshit reason. Can't you see where things like this will lead?

This part seems to be the problem.

My reading of it, is the part I underlined.

It seems to me it says that the site has to be dedicated to theft of US property [and only covers Internet Service Providers.

As these are all businesses they can refuse to do business with who ever they choose.

Can someone point out where an accuser is granted immunity please. As if I'm wrong I would love someone to put me right.

seriously what about the following statement do you not understand.

the maximum damages you can get is so small, virtually no one gets tagged, it a virtual immunity.

when the penalty is real people like robbie complain that it unfair.

seriously morons what exactly about this statement do you not understand.

If states was not theocratic and hypocracy-cratic then they would ban only what's wrong and illegal for an open minded atheist. In the real world, they will ban all those stuff who they (the politicians) do in secret but condemn in public.

This statement?

This doesn't make sense. Because a pirate site, is a pirate site and therefore guilty of being a pirate site. So how do they prove themselves innocent, when they are guilty?

Still I see what you're saying. If I accuse someone of being a pirate site, when they are not, and send official letters to the ISPs and they act on that information. Then the penalty lies with the accuser. Big companies with lots to lose could face huge legal costs.

I think the loop hole for the accused to get settlement lies in this wording.

in the reasonable belief that--

(1) the Internet site is a foreign infringing site or is an Internet site dedicated to theft of U.S. property; and

(2) the action is consistent with the entity's terms of service or other contractual rights.

So if I accuse a US site, that's not a site dedicated to piracy. The ISP can ignore my letter?

Plus in the TOS it has to say that the site will not be dedicated to piracy. Now what is "dedicated"? A site with some pirated content, 90% pirated content or a site with 100% pirated content?

Yes all this needs to be cleaned up and until it passes you don't know what will happen. So if the wording is changed to something like "after the ISP reviews the site and in their opinion it's dedicated to the theft of U.S. property." That will satisfy you. Or do you want it to go to a court?

With the offending company bearing the costs? So the pirates need to come to court to defend themselves and the accuser or pirate faces a big bill if wrong.

Plus wording like "majority of the site is pirated content."? Or major part of the site is pirated content."?

You see just saying how does a pirate prove he's not a pirate. Is not very clever.

that the fucking point moron you can

which means the abuse it and lose it penalty only applies to NON pirates sites misrepresented as pirates sites.

the current DMCA has an even greater liablity because it doesn't have the reasonable condition

66% of all takedown requests are bogus according to independent research
that thousands of bogus takedowns

all with a penalty which is way stronger then the one in this bill


if the current penalty doesn't stop abuse

why the fuck do you believe that an even weaker one going to do a better job


only if they want to lose the immunity

but here is the totally fucked up part as you just pointed out, if it unreasonable to accept the liablity the host,not the copyright holder who made the bogus complaint is on the hook.

there is no clear penalty for the copyright holder who abuses the law.

i have said what i want if you accuse an innocent site, you lose your copyright

that fixes the problem instantly because the legitimate copyright holders who fear that they will "accidentally" wipe an innocent site from the internet will make sure the procedures guarrentee that they can't make that mistake

look at the DMCA

if you added two conditions to the take down
1. undentify the copyright material that you own that is being infringed
2. document the start and end time of the infringing use

universal would not have had a valid takedown to the mega upload song

and if the penalty for knowingly filing an incomplete or bogus takedown notice was the right of the host or the accused to file a request to void the copyright (assuming the copyright holder refuses to settle)

then you can bet universal would not have done the shit they did

putting the penalty in place

make the legit copyright holder figuire out what process needs to be because they will do just enough to make sure that they don't lose their copyright and nothing more.

GFY is filled with pirates and I don't need proof to say it.

Of course I don't trust the US government, or any government for that matter. Only a fool would. But I don't fear SOPA. Why would I? Sure, it could be abused just like any other law could, but until that happens, you are all freaking out for the sake of fear. You should have freaked out about the Patriot Act, not a law that is created to shut down those who steal from others. Fat of the matter is, the government can do ANYTHING it wants, right now, with or without that law. Toss some child porn on your site and see what happens.

This was said about the internet kill switch too. We're still here. Said about 2257. We're still here. SOPA will work or it won't, and we'll "adapt or die." Hopefully, most operating illegally will die.

Don't steal, don't worry. Simple theory. You don't do it offline, so don't do it online. If you do and you get caught, sorry about your luck.

It's just a LAW guys. It's not the govt. "taking over" lol

I'm watching CNN right now and they just reported that in the year 2011 we had FORTY THOUSAND new laws enacted in the U.S. Out of those 39,999 are not needed and are just a way for politicians to get re-elected.

But SOPA? It's actually a law that IS needed. How can people do commerce successfully when their product is stolen?

That's my opinion both as a content producer, paysite owner, and affiliate of other paysites. All of my business will immediately benefit from all this stealing being kept down to a dull roar.

And in my opinion it ALL starts and ends with any site that is a pirate site having no ability to bill with Visa, Mastercard, AMEX, Paypal or any other billing system.

And the United States DOES have the power to make that happen.

so much for due process and innocent until proven guilty

Yeah..it's just not fair to sites like porn bb dot org
Or Filesonic

Those poor sites are being treated unfairly by this mean old law.

yeah univeral should have the right to take down mega uploads 3 million dollar video
even though copyright was actually owned completely by mega upload.

it does matter that the viral campaign was to announce a legit competitor to the music industry universal should have a right to destroy the competition with a completely bogus takedown.

What, don't you see it gives the register the right to shut down your website if they think you have stolen content. Do you have any idea how many companies don't know who they sold content to.

The bottom line is do we want to give registration companies the power to shutdown our websites and possibly confiscate our domain without any proof?

don't forget the fact that main stream products don't like being featured in porn videos

how many of you guys got a release for every single product, shown in the background

if you did an outdoor scene do you have a signed release by every owner of every car that drove by.

Well...I'm scared now.

Looks like we should hope that nothing happens and people can just keep stealing stuff. Look how well that's worked out for us so far!
Looks like gideongallery was right all along, and those of us who are actually creating stuff and working hard are just chumps being used.

1. if you think making monopoly protected content is hard you should try a real job. How many ditches do you think you would have to dig to make even 1/10th the money your making

2. If you understood anything about fair use you would know current laws are good enough to protect every penny of revenue your actually entitled too. It only when you try shit like forcing people to pay for things that are actually covered by fair use like backup that you run in to problems.

3. that exactly what the law was designed to do your entitled to a monopoly for the licencing of your content, your supposed to compete equally to everyone else for all things fair use.

gideongallery
This message is hidden because gideongallery is on your ignore list.


BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

I have no idea what this moron said. But I'll bet it's a bunch of goddamn double talk and gibberish that screws over the people who actually create something.

Happy New Year GFY! I hope that 2012 will finally see gideongallery get himself a job and move out of his parent's basement and stop trolling on this forum.

As for the rest of you guys...I'll see ya in Vegas for the show.

I'm Babaganoosh and I support sopa.

In this statement you show that you have no idea about copyright law.

If you film in a public area you can film everyone and everything there. There is no copyright to objects in films.

Every TV program has been cleared for copyright. It is not difficult. It is done everyday.

moron I have not been talking about whar your allowed to do under copyright law

we are talking about what you can abuse under a law with no clear penalties/weak ass for abuse

universal didn't own a second of copyright to the mega upload song.

yet the still took it down

oh and btw your wrong because sopa deals with conterfeiting and misappropriating of trademarks.

and that section is wide enough/grey enough that what i am talking about could be argued too.

No, but you didn't say that. Did you?

You accused about 3 people in this thread of being pirates. So, where's your proof of that?

So a non pirate site, will have to prove it's anon pirate site and sue the company or person making the accusation.

Because the current penalty isn't enforced. No unenforced law is worth squat, if this new law isn't enforced. Then it's all meaningless.


And you know this as a lawyer?

Making libelous accusations, which they would be, carry very stiff penalties.

So stand for congress and get this passed. What you want is pretty well meaningless.

DMCA is for individual copyright holders to police other peoples sites and remove only the content they own. 24 hours later, it magically reappears. DMCA even the way you describe it is useless. The onus should be on the site owner to police his site, his business, his content. By hitting the whole site with a 100% take down notice, the owners will be far more cautious about what they allow on their site.

If they can't afford to police "user uploads" the simple measure is to not allow them.
If the site is 90% pirated. What's wrong with taking down the whole site?

But as I said, you have no chance of effecting how the law is written. If it contravenes the Constitution. You will have no say in getting it changed, taking it to court, maybe to the Supreme Court.

You're a sheet hanging on the washing line, being blown by the wind. You can't change it. You can hope it will get changed, hope it will not pass or hope it will not be enforced. But when it's passed you will be blown along by it, best thing you can do is change to use the wind. Turn yourself into a windmill.

At the moment this is you.



And the wall isn't taking any notice.

As online porn takes no measures to stop children accessing porn online. They might do that. It's a legitimate reason. Then what happens?

Maybe we go back to pre Internet days of people having to actually buy porn. So the porn business won't die. It will get a new rebirth and rise like a phoenix.



Or are you saying they will take it back to pre 1950s era?

Of course some traffic pushers will be screwed. Pornographers will party.

In reality it won't wever happen. But like you I can dream. And yes you're dreaming.

The Government is all you have to put your trust into. Unless you know of a better organisation they are it.

2257 hurt a lot of people, made them have to look at their content in a different way. And a lot of the other changes hurt a lot of people. The 1% CB rule hurt some, then Visa and cross selling and more things.

A lot of people here I think benefit financially by not having to police their content, make money from piracy or just enjoy getting things for free. What do you expect them to say?

This guy loves the idea of not having to check if you own the music you're playing in a movie. Loves the idea of grabbing something for nothing. Always been pro piracy.

Wants to change the law and has no clue what the law is. Unless he's a qualified lawyer.

I never said take away the copyrighted content, no property rights are lost by revoking the copyright

Only the monopoly control to prevent other people from selling your stuff too.

You really need to read the constitution old man, government granted monopolies are not protected by the constitution.

This is not going to take traffic away from tubes as long as there are things like adultcentro, hostedtube, and other legal tubes, stop dreaming lol.

Just about every torrent search engine lists pirated content no? Is this going to destroy torrents or torrent sites? Of course not, they will either adapt or find another loophole, most likely a loophole. It all sounds great but this will not stop piracy, maybe put them on their toes for a minute until someone finds a way to continue it and then everyone else just copies that idea.

I'm kind of neutral on this, so I could care whichever way it goes. Will be interesting to see what happens if it does pass. But don't think it's going to make tube sites vanish or redirect traffic to your non-tube sites.

You're not taking into consideration all those sites losing their ability to bill. Once the money is gone...THEY are gone.

Which sites are you talking about? Torrents? I don't know of any torrent sites that bill. Surely there are illegal tubes that bill, and if this passes they will either find a loophole or convert to a legal tube so they can keep their traffic and income. Which is all good (IF they go legal), I'm just saying it's not going to be the demise of tubes in the least bit lol. But I guess it's can't hurt.. hopefully. We will have to see what loopholes come out of it because it's not going to be this easy to stop piracy. There are PLEENNTTYY of people who will pirate shit for free and don't care about making money from it.

Torrents get paid advertising. SOPA passes and that ends. AFF won't be able to pay them for their traffic. Of course that traffic is gonna be even more useless anyway as the largest porn market in the world (the USA) will be cut off.

i rarely see so many stupid arguments against a law. It wont stop pirates...it will be used to censor porn...it will be used to close down sites with no due process. I guess we should just stop having laws in the world because people will break or abuse them. idiots.

Go read what I said in the part you quoted.

Just to remind you.

You don't have a say in this debate, except on GFY and no one who does have a say on how this bill is shaped reads GFY.

Adapt or die.

I agree, it will waste more money and hurt innocent website owners. The big pirates will always find a way around laws.

There are so many false hopes and fears about this law, or the one that will be passed, that we need to look at it logically without blinkers.

1. The Internet needs regulating. Self regulating clearly hasn't worked and the Internet has become a place people are worried about using their CC, getting their information sold or stolen. AND a haven for scammers and thieves.

2. Pornography needs regulating. With no regulation CP, real rape movies and even snuff videos of people being sexually abused and then murdered are legal to publish. Generating profit for someone and it will result in more child abuse, rape and murder. There are people who will do this just for profit.

If the Government was serious about regulating online porn, there are far easier and better ways to do it.

3. It's only the Government who can pass these laws and regulate. There simply isn't anyone else.

4. We don't have a say. We adapt to the changes or we die. I adapted and even though I moan a lot. I still don't see the clock turning back and never ever in my wildest dreams thought I could effect any law.

Fears.

So will this bring about the complete demise of piracy? No but it will deal a huge blow to the profits from pirating. Piracy isn't about sharing, back up or any other excuse. For a few, it's about making money. For many it's about getting someone else to pay so they can get it for free or at a very reduced price.

Yes if you download stuff for free, expect things to change. You will have to decide if you want it enough to pay for it. It might even lead to the demise of iTunes. Without piracy, the market might change.

Will it bring down the Internet? Only the fools believe that. Will it give the Government control over the Internet? Might do, but seeing as they have control over everything else in our lives and we don't seem to suffer too much. Where's the harm? Assuming you're not doing something the Government disapprove of. If that's benefiting from piracy or fake drugs the law might hurt you.

Will innocent sites be caught up? This is something we need to wait and see. I see ways for someone who is innocent to get damages and his sites back if wrongly harmed. It will take a court case. Look closely at the wording of the law. It's about sites dedicated to piracy. And in the reasonable belief that;

(1) the Internet site is a foreign infringing site or is an Internet site dedicated to theft of U.S. property; and

(2) the action is consistent with the entity's terms of service or other contractual rights.

So an email or anonymous letter isn't going to cut it with an ISP. He will want proof to safe guard himself from getting sued. Immunity isn't carte blanche. If an ISP screws up, he's not immune. I expect them to want some real proof and take a look before bringing a site down.

Pirates will not be able to prove they are not pirates GG. So suck it up.

For most of us, life will go on and we will continue to make a living and enjoy the Internet.

Hopes.

Will the millions downloading free pirated porn flood back to buying? No, you can't change peoples culture, beliefs and attitudes that easily. Today people expect porn to be free the odds on them being forced to buy are longer than the odds of turning 1-1,000 Tube surfers into a paying customer.

So the traffic that enjoys free porn from Filesonic, will continue to get it from Pornhub. Just 2 examples for this graph.



How many people on Filesonic are downloading just porn? Not 100% for sure. 100% of the traffic on Pornhub is there for the free porn.

Expect Tubes traffic to soar. So how will they pay for the BW? We know the answer to that one. It doesn't cost enough to make a real difference.

How will they pay to make sure the content on Pornhub is mostly legal? They will buy, get more submitted for partners, submit more of their content. They have to keep up the free stuff to keep up the traffic. If they drop the free updates, the surfers go elsewhere.

How will they pay for it? Less pirates sites to get free porn on and less pirate sites to advertise on. Means one thing. More revenue for free Tubes.

So maybe a trickle of traffic will go to truly unique sites with "must have" content. The rest, they won't see a significant jump in ratios. They will be thankful for what ever they do get.

The only thing that will bring back the glory days of of ratios from the days when it was only Newsgroups and link lists. Is if the only free porn is Newsgroups and Link Lists. That will never happen, so the majority of the traffic will migrate to other free sites. They will profit. But no where near the ratios of the TGPs or the earliest days.

What ever, time will tell. This I know for sure. We adapt to this law or we don't and get screwed.

Then you don't understand SOPA.

"Nose thumbing" is the current status quo, where "offshore" folks enjoy relative immunity from U.S. law. SOPA puts an end to that nonsense, when U.S. banks, processors, servers, hosting companies, ad networks, affiliate programs, etc. etc. are used...

no just make the penalty for abusing the law strong enough that people will at least have a distinctive to break it.

if you think losing the copyright is to harsh then how about statutory damages of 25k for each person who is DENIED access to the legit content.

That the same penalty your entitled too.

And if the copyright holder doesn't have the money then all their assets (including their copyright are seized).

yeah, good idea. just like when a person falsely accuses me of stealing their ferrari, they should lose their ferrari. That punishment certainly fits the crime.

.

This bill will pass. I'll reserve further comment until I get more info.

Sponsors of SOPA Act Pulled in 4 Times as Much in Contributions from Hollywood as from Silicon Valley

The debate over the bill's language has pitted the entertainment capital, Los Angeles, against the tech incubator, Silicon Valley. The measure is supported by entertainment producers such as Comcast, Disney, Sony, and the RIAA. It is opposed by tech companies such as Facebook, Google, Mozilla, and Yahoo!

Since the beginning of the 2010 election cycle, the 32 sponsors of the bill have received almost 4 times as much in campaign contributions from the movie, music, and TV entertainment industries ($1,983,596), which support the bill, as they have received from the software and Internet industries ($524,977), which believe the language goes too far.

http://maplight.org/content/72896

What part of this don't you understand?

NO ONE WILL ASK YOU WHAT YOU WANT THE PENALTY TO BE.

You might as well say the person who wrongly accuses should be hung drawn and quartered in public and on Youtube. Or should be given the house of the person he wrongly accuses, for all the difference it makes.

You're nothing, no one, a nobody and have absolutely no say in this law.

When someone wrongly accuses another of running a site dedicated to piracy, not pirating a few items. The ISPs are only immune with this protection.

If they just act on an email from an accuser. They will find immunity isn't there and they will pay dearly. The minimum safeguards I would expect an ISP to take are to investigate the site. Just cutting the site off, will get them into a lot of trouble.

What confuses you about this?

Damian
Just read the ask question section...Its where they come from wsj, iqsixtynine, and other boards to figure out how to play legit...Hell, i've seen half a dozen nicks from here on wsj....and only visited once in the last year...appears to be same peeps.

We support SOPA....

Funny I was just reading on aki ba the lengths people are going to avoid SOPA...and the result is the same as the xxx scam...Herding the pirates onto usenets and other things that are already being heavily monitored...LOL. Key word, herding.... lol, more keywords, heavily monitored...

Wake up pirates, FEDS are counting pennies now and you are busting their tax bank...They no likey you now...

gideongallery
This message is hidden because gideongallery is on your ignore list.



Either you're trolling me or you honestly don't have any idea about what is going on in the business and who runs what.


Yea, myself. I've done more for myself than my government ever has. In fact, they have done NOTHING for me, other than take my taxes and try to tell me how to live my life. I don't want anything from them, never have, never will. Trust them is the last thing I would ever do.

you don't understand the concept of free speech do you old man

i don't have to be asked, i have a right to say what i want

and when i and other free speech advocates ask you how many totally innocent sites do have thr right to destroy before you face the same consequences as the pirates how are actually damaging you.

and you say as many as i want.

People realize how unfair the law is and it won't pass.

if it does pass then the effected foriegn countries which need to protect their INNOCENT will add the penalty to their own laws.

What the US going to do close it borders to the world for every good and service. Say we won't buy oil from canada until you give us the right to destroy as many INNOCENT canadian companies as we want.



so if they respond to every email, they get sued by the "falsely accused" pirates when they make a mistake

and if they don't they have to go to court to prove that the copyright holders request is unreasonable.

And because the process is not absolutely clear, they got to hope that a judge doesn't get suckered by a fast talking lawyer.

And even if they do win, all the copyright holder is on the hook for is what the wronged isp can prove ABSOLUTELY is the damages they suffered, which is basically only court fees, no lost profits, no pain and suffering, no statutory damages.

This is the bullshit your trying to argue is fair.