Who are you guys working for?

I agree that downloading music without paying for it is illegal. I get that, but explain to me please how illegally downloading a 99 cent song incurs damages of $750 to $150,000 for each such file downloaded. That’s the RIAA’s position, and it’s supported by Obama’s DOJ. The RIAA has been bugfuck nuts on this matter for years and my past assumptions as to why the DOJ supports it, despite case law to the contrary, is they are bought and paid for by the music industry. There appears to be a simpler explanation at least for Obama’s DOJ and that would the large number of DOJ employees’ connections to Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music's RIAA. Wouldn’t that constitute a conflict of interest? Just wondering.

H/T to Glenn