What is Digg?63 Comments
- combatchuck, on 10/12/2007, -1/+30Wait a second, when did the RIAA go dishonest? I always thought everything they did was on the up and up!
- merreborn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+23"Imperial Empire"?
Oh yes, I remember them. I take it you were a official officiating officer of their "Department of the Redundancy Department" too? - astrotrain, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16The RIAA is worse then the Imperial Empire..... Glad to see that users are fighting back and attempting to
stab the beast. - Maceyhw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11There is no substance to this article, it is almost exclusively quotes from the plaintiff and his attorney and excerpts from whatever they filed with whichever court they filed in (the article doesn't specify anything beyond "they're suing the RIAA). The article doesn't provide any information on say, why they believe the RIAA affidavit doesn't provide the amnesty it's advertised to.
- LucasOman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10I don't see how the "dishonesty" of downloading music is any worse than this dishonesty. The RIAA's hypocritical moral relativism is exhausting. At least I never made a promise not to download music. Anyone who believes that the RIAA has started this crusade to protect the poor "starving artists" is a fool.
- EmSixTeen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Read the bloody article, notably "Parke, who's never downloaded music".
Do you even know what the Clean Slate program is? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+14tell that to the mac fanboys who submit an article every time steve jobs breathes
- t0dd, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7If you are at work and a site is blocked try and use Google (which wont be blocked) to translate it from english to english. Peep an example URL http://www.google.com/translate?langpair=en|en&u=www.someSiteThatsBlocked.com
www.someSiteThatsBlocked.com being, well... some site thats blocked. Booyakasha. - eltomo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5http://www.p2pnet.net.nyud.net:8090/article/7771
- Synoptic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I don't know...I like to hear stories of people fighting back. It gets discouraging always hearing about the big fish swallowing up the little ones. If that makes me a zealot, then I can live with that.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6But did you see that today? He breathed at least 30-40 times in one minute today! It was SEXY!
- LiquidPenguin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4A lot of people haven't been RTFA for a long time now.
- LucasOman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3In all fairness, it's more of a heads-up than anything else. According to the article, the RIAA has not responded to the suit yet, so there is nothing else to report at this time. I hope the poster keeps us informed.
- FredSanford, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Seriously, this article is from September of 2003. The RIAA has since discontinued the program. This story is over two years old.
- LucasOman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3No one is forcing anyone to stop making music. I refuse to pay $18 for a CD. I belong to yourmusic.com, where I regularly buy CDs for $6, which I think is a perfectly reasonable price (no shipping, either; check it out!). The recording industry has become unnecessary, bloated overhead for the art of music-making. Because online distribution is effortless and cheap, the record companies are no longer the gatekeepers of fame and fortune in the music business. They know this, and they're fighting to delay their invevitable demise as long as they can.
- KayMan2k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"P2P Net - Always First"
Wow, this story is YEARS old.
http://www.atnewyork.com/news/print.php/3075931
http://msl1.mit.edu/furdlog/?p=480
http://www.mixburnrip.de/index.php?itemid=200 - dragoth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Blocked by my work filter... Anyone have a mirror?
- flamingmb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I hope this is true and that it exsposes the riaa for eveyone to see.
- loker269, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3forgive me I am not trying to insult anyone but didn't this amnesty program get challenged a year or two ago?
- ricodued, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Breathes like butter.
- acomj, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The RIAA doesn't represent you (the consumer) or even the artists who create the music. The first hint should be what the letters mean R=recording, I = industry, A= association, A= america. As such it reprents the recording industry. Large record labels that use it as a club to try and prevent piracy and lobby for laws and other dirty work. Oddly people buying recordings support the record industry which then puts some into the RIAA, which is supposed to look out for the recording industry..
People who download music and who chose to "share" with anyone who has a computer and internet are quite often not paying customers so the RIAA doesn't care what those people think about them. Of course RIAA member companies pay artists to create records (if artists are being ripped off is another question). People who "share" are paying artists 0 and forcing them into regular non artistic labors. - tarzanbigcity, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Just more bad publicity for the RIAA. The more of these types of cases we see the more people decided not to take it lying down anymore. Way to go!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3This is nothing new! The RIAA regularly engages in misleading and fraudulent practices.
- JackSpratts, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2yes. this one is years old. gotta watch links to jon's stories, he's allergic to datelines.
- js. - orbitalleader, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Boy, that shark is definitely in the rear-view mirror. Digg is now officially as bad as slashdot with the way everyone automatically responds on the issue without even bothering to RTFA.
Digg, we hardly knew ye. - br0ck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The linked Amnesty Complaint PDF has more detail. I think the gist of the complaint is that the amnesty program was introduced as a 'clean slate' with no possibility of getting sued, but in fact the RIAA provides no real protection from lawsuits because they won't protect you from copyright holder lawsuits. Also, the RIAA has language in the privacy policy which potentially allows them to provide the identities of amnesty seekers to the copyright holders.
- battybattybatt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1To me, that is the quaint child-like charm of digg.
- INHUMANITY, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Very nice.
- battybattybatt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The RIAA did not get its START from anything like that, it ogt its START by collecting licensing fees for Rcording Studios to be legally allowed to stay in business.
To be a record label, guess how much the bond costs? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Perhaps I misunderstood the article, but why would he even come forward if he's never downloaded music?
- spyrochaete, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3You can get past almost any work filter by using Google cache or by using a translator like babelfish.altavista.com. For the translator just input the URL of the English page, tell it to translate from Chinese to English, and the text will be 99% the way it appears otherwise. Hack the planet!!
- battybattybatt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Actually, the RIAA started as fee clearing house for Recording Studios to pay into, then they added Studios that want ed to create In-House labels, THEN hey finally added the Record Label Stand-alone Companies, like EMI, Sony, CBS, etc.
Recording Studios is still their core business - about 80% of that core. - LiquidPenguin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I haven't purchased a big label music CD for four years. It's not because I don't like paying $18 for a music CD. It's because I don't like paying $18 for a CD mostly made up of crap songs that I'm never really going to listen to once I rip the song(s) I *do* want to MP3. This is why things like iTunes literally exploded. People are willing to pay small amounts of money (as in $1) for single songs.
- stringmun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Question? Where does the money the RIAA sues for really go.....to the starving artist? I bet not. I've never known anyone to buy $10,000 worth of music in a lifetime. So who is stealing from who? The little ole ladies that get sued because thier 13 year old daughters are downloading music? The RIAA is making a killing off of suing folks. The money never goes back to the artist.....so who is really stealing from the artist who wrote the music? None of themoney the RIAA sues for ever winds back up in the artist hands.
- charmedguy18, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I wish there was actual amnesty. I would sign that in a minute. What downloader wouldn't?
- tony23, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1RIAA?
RICO. - Synoptic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That first link you have has a lot more info on the subject...good read. I hadn't heard of the Clean Slate program before, or the lawsuit against the RIAA for it, and judging by the number of Diggs this story has gotten in the last hour, a lot of other people haven't heard about it, either. I'm not even sure how old the p2pnet article is, but I thought it was digg-worthy when I saw it, so I submitted it.
- LiquidPenguin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Slightly off topic. My friend has just shy of 500 albums and I'm reasonably certain he's over the $10,000 mark. Of course, his collection isn't just domestic CD's, but other media such as LP's consisting of both domestics and imports.
One thing I haven't quite figured out is exactly how the RIAA comes up with the magic $10,000. Best I can tell is that it comes in just under the cost of lawyers fees. - dasunst3r, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Anything the RIAA/MPAA does is "hollow and deceptive." Now as far as the last two A's are concerned, I think they should change it to A******s Association or something like that...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1He is suing them for their deceptive practices. He is trying to be a good person for those that download music.
- Hubris, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Digg and other sites provided a lot of analysis when the 'clean slate' program was announced, that while the RIAA might promise to not sue for admitted offences, that the member organizations which make up the RIAA, or other parties acting on behalf of the RIAA would not be held to any restriction. Not a lot has been published about it since that time.
This is the first time I've heard someone taking the RIAA to task specifically about this program, which in my mind is a good thing. A lot of people have complied with this program and sent good money to the RIAA when in actuality they might not have any protection from future prosecution. - battybattybatt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Bootlegging is another matter not dealt with by the RIAA. Bootleggers have to answer to the US Treasurey Department.
- jbreaux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Bottom line is the RIAA are freaking morons...see Darl McBride
- Jeebugorn, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4so true!!
- ccanni1028, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1From the page info:
Last Modified Sunday, December 28, 2003 12:00:00 AM
Old news. No digg. - longman2g, on 10/12/2007, -7/+7amen
- joxrox22, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0NAZIs ALL! LOL. But seriously: damn NAZI.
- Synoptic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I didn't realize the article was that old...sorry about the old news. Still, for those of us who missed it, it's good to see someone taking a swipe at the RIAA.
- Cerberus047, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1yep now they just force you to bend over while they sue you...
- tomarocco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I bootleg, and I'm proud of it.
-
Show 51 - 62 of 62 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is