What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Private Online Shopping Clubs Work view!
howlifeworks.com - How to become a member and get discounts of up to 80% on must-have luxury goods
368 Comments
- Goracle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+29Good luck with that RIAA. I buy my music legally, and if I purchase a CD, you can expect it on the good ole iPod. The RIAA needs to learn that they aren't a group of music dictators. If I purchase a CD, I should have the legal rights to listen to it how I want.
- Giddygoon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24RIAA pretty much says listening to music on the CD is not fair use...
CDs are for our profit. Just buy them and imagine what the music sounds that (for now) - nullvector, on 10/12/2007, -6/+26Who cares...
People who are sick of the RIAA dont even buy theyre crap anyway. The sheep that go along with them and listen to their fad-pop will never stop buying no matter what the rules are. They'll gladly pay for each device they want it on, and gladly pay $50 to listen to one song on 3 devices.
Its been predicted that in coming years you'll have to pay for every instance or "listen" to a song. You'll tune in to a radio station and have to micropay electronically just for the right to listen to a certain "top" song.
Its no secret that the RIAA is trying to convert their tactics from object-based (CD's, Tapes, etc) to License/Instance based (DRM, buy copy for each device, etc). They want your money *each* time you listen, not just for each CD. It appears that they can't innovate their way into this market, so they might as well sue, harass, and have congress write laws to help them out (while stuffing money in congress' pockets).
In the end, you either love the RIAA or hate it. Either you'll obey them like sheep, or ignore them and their music, for the better. - senfo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Have copyright laws changed? I'm kind of ignorant on this subject, but I know for the longest time, it was totally legal to make a copy for backup purposes. Is this not legal anymore?
And if you copy the CD, write it to your iPod, then put the CD back in its case and stick it on the shelf, what's the big deal? If you're not listening to both of them at the same time, they should just keep their mouths shut.
It's this kind of idiotic bureaucracy that makes me want to support illegal use of P2P even more so than I would had they just kept their greedy mouths shut, in the first place. - yalskey, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16F the RIAA...
We should not be afraid of governments / big corporations...
They should be afraid of us!
I paid for it, and I'll do what I want with it! Eat a D! - joel2600, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14it's kind of like terrorism, there is no way around this
walking down the street = "Terrorism!!"
eating too much ice cream = "Terrorism!!"
Listening to the CD you buy with your own money "Terrorism!!... I mean Illegal!!"
A passenger in your car listening to a CD you bought = "Illegal"
It doesn't matter what you try and do, they are just going to attempt to control you. - 16x9, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10> TheNativeRaver asked: "Who listens to them anyway?"
Way too damned many lawmakers listen to them AND their money. And this is why we MUST vote out of office ANY and ALL politicians who support the RIAA, the MPAA and the DMCA!
The RIAA and the MPAA are evil, anti-consumer organizations and the DMCA is an evil anti-consumer package of laws. - dongiaconia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9@hammydude: They *don't* want us to pay for it anymore, they *want us* to steal it so they can sue us for $10k a shot. First off they get all your money at one time, instead of over a lifetime of purchases, and second it's free money for them becuase then they don't have to have any production costs to make the CDs. This is their solution to the digital revolution.
- Dgen_X, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9"And if you copy the CD, write it to your iPod, then put the CD back in its case and stick it on the shelf, what's the big deal?"
the big deal is...you're not carrying the CD around with you...using it...scratching it...and buying another copy - test5477, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I think this time they may be picking a fight with too many consumers. The amount of people who used their mp3 devices with ripped music is a huge number and its been perfectly legal, your going to piss off alot of very good people if they push this.
RIAA should go away but at the very least they should learn to pick the battles that won't make them look like idiots... - kc7gr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7If an organization, corporation, or even a government treats consumers as if they are criminals by default, it will encourage the very behavior that said org, corp, or gov believes to be criminal, and is trying to stamp out. People really don't like being told what they can or cannot do with material they've paid for.
If a corporation (in this case, the RIAA, MPAA, or other entertainment industry alphabet soup) rips off artists for most of the royalties that said artists deserve, then that corporation is no better than the "piracy" they claim to be fighting.
Despite the naysayers, I would venture the idea that people do indeed know right from wrong, and that they are essentially 'good' at their core. Example: I have all the hardware and software I need to make perfect copies of any DVD, CD, or floppy that I wish. If I chose to, I could build our movie collection at minimal cost, simply by copying rental discs.
I choose NOT to do that. If I or my wife like a movie or TV show, (I'll usually rent it first), we'll bloody well go out and buy a copy. If one or both of us happens to be traveling, I'll make a backup copy to take with us, so as not to risk damage to an original disc that could be hard to replace once the title goes out of print.
I'm sure the pigopolists would rather we buy two copies. Screw that. If I pay for a legitimate copy of music or a movie, I'm bloody well going to take whatever steps I think necessary, under my Fair Use rights, to make sure that it is playable for the rest of my life.
Outside of defying Hollywood's greed, tell me what I'm doing wrong.
If the music industry were to offer its merchandise at a fair price (I'm talking about $10 or less per CD), AND treat artists fairly, AND stop sticking rootkits on consumer computers (are you listening, Sony/BMG?), they would probably find themselves in much better condition than they currently are. Not ONCE have they ever admitted to the possibility that the main reason CD sales are suffering is because of (a) overpricing, and (b), the fact that the material they're pushing is largely homogenized pop-crap, with alleged "music" that was probably generated entirely by computer and voice "talent" that is not far removed from a speech synthesizer.
When Fair Use is outlawed, only outlaws will have Fair Use. I, for one, embrace my (possible) future as an outlaw.
And I don't even own an iPod. ;-) - SmeRndmGy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7The RIAA is getting more and more irrelevant and ridiculous every single day. The end for them is near.
- neurokaotix, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I hear a lot of people saying things like "listening to the RIAA." Last time I checked it's a group of record companies, not a government entity. You don't have to listen to them; they're a bunch of CEOs circle-jerking each other in a cloud 9 dream of ignorance and intolerance. I will pirate music until the day I die, just to spite them.
- 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I fully support the RIAA's right to protect what is righfully theirs...even if it is the crap they call music these days. I do not believe, however, that their assertion with respect to fair use is even anywhere NEAR accurate. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever that someone should be charged for the SAME music (aka crap), simply because the format has been altered so that it can be used on a different device. This shows nothing but contempt for the people that, for whatever reason, continue to shovel pocket-loads of money into the RIAA's war chest.
As I've said before - the easiest and surest way to end this garbage is to let them have their music. Let them keep it. It's worthless if nobody is interested in buying (or copying) it. The company execs can listen to it on their iPods while standing in line to collect their unemployment checks. - dongiaconia, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7So is it just me or are they saying: Stop buying CD's. We don't want you as customers, we want you as legal canon fodder for lawsuits.
- herrin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Stories like this are the reason people turn to cannibalism.
- fordistumley, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Does anyone really take these guys seriously in the first place?
- ziffel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Once again, off to good ol' usenet ... in RIAA's honor.
- SuperSloth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Ten years ago I prolly bought 25 CDs a year.
Five years ago, prolly about 6.
In the past three years, I've bought two CDs from just the artists I really like.
I'm not downloading CDs either. The music RIAA produces just sucks. Their politics are worse. I feel bad for the artists stuck in the system, because it completely screws them. - stealthboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"Hmmmm...i think they might actually just want us to listen to nothing and give the artists money."
You mean give them (RIAA) money. They really don't care about the artists. - macross9321, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Thank you RIAA for making me feel warm and fuzzy inside for not buying a music CD in the last 7 yrs
- joel2600, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4when pay per download music services came out, i was ready and willing to adopt them even though I still feel they are 'overpriced' the prices still were comparable to what CDs still cost.
With all of this though I've made the decision to going back to pirating music because getting it legally is just not worth the hassle. I still love to buy full CDs of music that I enjoy for artists that I love to support, but I believe the RIAA is putting me in a position to screw everyone else because I don't like the way they're trying to screw me. - SniperGX1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Hasn't the anti terrorist laws allowed us to kill everyone that works for the RIAA yet? I need to know ahead of time so I can call work and get a week off.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4anyone arguing piracy is boycotting is retarded.
if you want to boycott a taxi company, do you go on a carjacking spree?
no cause you will get arrested - alok0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Soon they will try and charge royalties...
force Apple to make iPods log music played and report it back. So every time you listen to the music you get charged. - jasqwerty, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The problem with this is the basic idea behind IP, and that some sort of 'license' exists. That somehow the product is not really yours, you're just allowed to use it; this also extends to EULAs. I don't see why this silly idea was ever accepted when it was first introduced, or why it has been allowed to fester this long. Companies have gotten along just fine for decades with people actually owning what they've bought. Now, don't misread this. I'm actually all for the protection of a business to be able to profit from its creations, but for me the infringements of that privilege are very clear. If I copy it for someone else, free or not, whether they intend to ever purchase it themselves or not, I've infringed that privilege. See, that's where I disagree with the P2P people, just because you can't afford it, or whatever nonsense, doesn't mean you have some right to have it on your own terms. But anything I do with it for my own use should be just that, MY OWN USE OF IT.
Also, STOP ***** STEALING THEIR MUSIC/MOVIES/SOFTWARE/ETC.
I can guarantee they point to threads like this to show just how much more 'protection' they need because all of you ***** idiots think you're sticking it to 'da man' or just too poor to afford it but 'need' to see/have it, but are just screwing us all over in the process. I never did take such a naive stance on P2P so as to defend it as being legitimate. The amount of theft was so clear, I approved of the RIAA and others going after people. But this, this is just stupid. - Burmask, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Your words do not hurt them and buying CDs helps them. Make your words loud and clear. Do not buy CDs and show them a real lesson.
- Sirocco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well of course they're going to make that argument. The more they can control where the music goes, the more control they have over how much it will cost to get to your ears.
As usual, ***** the RIAA: rip webcast streams, buy from Singapore/Malaysia, or buy direct from the artists you (still) love. - jbus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Artist now have choices over RIAA like Tunecore.com
"You keep all your rights.
You own your recordings.
You get all the money.
No contracts."
From this point forward, it's the Artists that are at fault for the RIAA's actions. They are the ones that continue to empower the RIAA in exchange for quick money advances. Instead of earning their money the good old fashioned way like the rest of us. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3why isn't there an anti-trust case against the riaa, I mean, aren't they a monopoly, maybe there should be other music governign bodies
- LittleOni, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I say we all just burn copies of the music we have. Then mass mail (anonymously of course) it to their main office with a note that says, "All my friends have copies, too. So I figured you should as well."
- lemon404, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Here in Canada, it is now illegal to copy your own CD on ANY fixed storage :
- Rip on a fixed Hard Drive = ILLEGAL
- Rip directly on a USB drive = OK
- Rip directly to a Blank CD (packet writting) = OK
- Rip to fixed HD and than write to a blank CD = ILLEGAL
- Rip to HD then write on an iPod = ILLEGAL
Funny hey ?! That tell us how these lawyers / judges understand these technologies !!!
Anyway, who knows that ? Who respect these laws ? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2hey I don't download music, I don't buy music, I listen to music on the radio if that's a crime come get me. Way back when CD's first came out they talked about how it only costs 2 cents to press a CD.
Were as it cost 50 cents to make a tape. The price was going to go down to 3.99 for a CD. Remember
when Cd's first came out all the old stuff was remastered to CD, why because the bands got zero because their contracts did not include Cd's. They had to go back and fight for their money from CD sales. - ziffel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"I hate the RIAA as much as the next guy but did ANY of you bother to read this article? It contradicts the title. The RIAA states that ripping a CD to your iPod is LEGAL. I hate the RIAA but I also hate people that shout their opinion before they hear the facts. (phuker)"
Errm, I think you should re-read it yourself. The quote about RIAA saying it was legal was from a prior hearing. The point of this article is the NEW filing, and the apparent mind-change of RIAA, that it is in fact, no longer legal (according to them). - robertgoodwin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The RIAA is in danger of losing what little credibility it has left. If I purchase the CD, I will use the music for my own personal use in whatever manner I wish, in whatever format I wish. If I am forced to buy electronically from the internet to put on my ipod, I would much rather buy directly from the artist, leaving the record labels and distribution companies out of the equation. Artists, do you hear what I'm saying? You could cut out the middle man and save all the profits for yourselves! Understand?!
- NewEvolution, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Here's the scoop:
The RIAA is saying that copying CDs to mp3 and then to your mp3 player is NOT fair use.
They are NOT saying it is illegal.
They are saying you CAN do this, because we, the RIAA have given you the right to do this. You pay for these rights from us, they are not inherent in the purchase of any CD.
What this leads to, of course, is an eventual surcharge on CDs for the right to convert them to mp3, since the RIAA is trying to reserve that as a right of theirs.
I could even see this going so far as having "rights reserved" copies of CDs, that differ only from the "rights granted" CDs in that it would be illegal to rip the reserved ones, and legal to rip the granted CDs. Of course, the "rights granted" ones would cost a premium, and the RIAA would have a very very firm legal background to sue the hell out of customers that ripped the "rights reserved CDs.
This all goes to a very bad place. - gotamd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's a good thing that the RIAA's opinion is not the law. Don't treat it that way.
- breid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They will always rule the day until the fans step up and say no. Send your favorite artists an email saying you'll buy releases directly from them, but you won't patronize the RIAA anymore and stop buying it. It will only take a couple of high profile artists to successfully jump ship to change some people's minds. They got really antsy when Prince went independant, but relaxed after nobody followed suit.
- HarryBauzonia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2AP, February 15, 2007
RIAA Says Allowing Others In Room To Hear CD's Not Fair Use. - Nameless1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2is it just me, or do we pay money for the frequencies that make up sound, and are conveniently placed on a CD? so what makes it illegal to take those frequencies and put them into an iPod or any other media format that we dare to use?
- djdole, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Is there a online list of politicians anywhere that support the RIAA, MPAA, or DMCA?
I think it'd be an interesting hit,...er......checklist...*cough* ....I mean read.
joking (for those dimwits who don't know.) - kittensaretasty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm not sure if this is legitimate or not. I mean, the name of the site, to me, implies a pretty heavy bias against the RIAA, and I like that. But I searched "filing" PDF document for the exerpt they posted and didn't find it in the doc, and the quote they took from it is very vague and doesn't mean anything taken out of context (the way it is). Also, on the RIAA web site it says:
"If you choose to take your own CDs and make copies for yourself on your computer or portable music player, that's great. It's your music and we want you to enjoy it at home, at work, in the car and on the jogging trail."
I think this is either a misinterpretation or a lie, either by the RIAA or EFF. - mattjvw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2There is a way to legally stick it to the RIAA.
Support the doctrine of first sale (another thing they'd like to steal from us). Support local businesses. Buy used CDs. They're cheaper, the RIAA doesn't get a dime, and if you rip it with good software (cdparanoia), your mp3s should turn out fine even if the media has small scratches. - thotpoizn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2 I have ceased (some years ago, actually) making any RIAA-supporting music purchases as a simple matter of principle. For similar reasons, the only financial support the big movie houses get from me is by way of whatever pittance they can extract from Netflix. If there's a new tune out that I want to listen to, I'll get it on the radio or not at all (unless it's indie or otherwise RIAA-unencumbered.)
Stop bending over and grabbing your ankles, people. Vote with your dollars; it's a war of attrition, and you're invited. - centinall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2LOS ANGELES - The Recording Industry Association of America announced Tuesday that it will be taking legal action against anyone discovered telling friends, acquaintances, or associates about new songs, artists, or albums. "We are merely exercising our right to defend our intellectual properties from unauthorized peer-to-peer notification of the existence of copyrighted material," a press release signed by RIAA anti-piracy director Brad Buckles read. "We will aggressively prosecute those individuals who attempt to pirate our property by generating 'buzz' about any proprietary music, movies, or software, or enjoy same in the company of anyone other than themselves." RIAA attorneys said they were also looking into the legality of word-of-mouth "favorites-sharing" sites, such as coffee shops, universities, and living rooms.
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/43029 - LoathRevolver, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's only a matter of time before artists don't need major companies to push their product to the masses. The ball is already in motion. DOWN WITH THE RIAA!!!
- quentinp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Here in Canada we pay the BS media tax, so we get to copy anyways, screw you RIAA! Actually we even get to make a copy of a friend's music and it's all legal. Having said that I don't really listen to music, so I'd rather just not pay a tariff on media at all...
- Zuggy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What I want to know is, has the RIAA and MPAA for that matter, ever consider the fact that they might make more money by embrasing technology then rejecting it. I must say when peer-to-peer was at its height with the original Napster, I bought 10 times the music I buy now. Back then I could see if I liked a song. If I didn't I'd delete it, if I did I'd go buy the CD. Nowadays I don't buy hardly any music because I don't want to waste my money on crap. And there is a lot of crap that the RIAA and major record labels try to pass off as "cool"
Also does the RIAA really think people will stand for buying the same product twice? If I have a 3 year old cd I still listen to I'm gonna rip it onto my iPod not buy it again online. At the rate it's going the RIAA is going to crumble under its own weight as it slowly chips away at its supporters, the customers. - jbus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Only one way to deal with this... Boycott artists that do business with RIAA. This means turning off your radio too.
There are other ways to distribute music... Artists need to wake up and realize that this music-nazi crap being thrown around by their labels is BS. Besides I think we need to wipe the slate clean... Many of these corporately pushed, talentless "musicians" need to go back to their day jobs and keep their over hyped noise out of my ears.
- JCH897, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The RIAA makes a bigger joke of themselves each and every day. It's like they're trying to piss people off and promote piracy.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 369 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is