What is Digg?146 Comments
- Dradis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+128I'd also call it, "cowardly", "reprehensible", or "sickening".
- drgordonfreeman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+64The RIAA is fast replacing the IRS as the most hated organization among Americans.
- hchaudh1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+61How about some good old Civil Disobedience, everyone get online and download as much music as you can. They can't sue everyone.
- architectzero, on 10/12/2007, -2/+51Age and complacency happened.
The only movement you'll hear about today is one assisted by a high fibre diet. - Tufriast, on 10/12/2007, -1/+47You know, how long before someone openly starts a war with them? I mean, when are we gonna say enough is enough and take these sick screwballs down? I mean come on. This is the Friggin' United States. I used to see scenes like this, and I'd hear about MOVEMENTS.
What happened? It's like I can protest enough, or donate enough cash to even start making a friggin' difference with jerks like this around. - LoadStar, on 10/12/2007, -3/+45Evidently, the legal language is confusing people -- including the website linked to above. I'll try and clarify.
RIAA filed suit against the mother. RIAA then asked the court to dismiss the suit with prejudice (meaning, they cannot refile the same lawsuit), which was granted. RIAA then filed suit against the kid. [What - they got confused as to whom they were suing?]
As a part of this lawsuit, they asked the court to appoint a guardian ad litem. Apparently, it confused even the courts as to why they were asking for this course of action, because the probate court responsible for assigning the guardian ad litem responded that none were available [...for something this stupid, at least.]
The district court where the RIAA case was filed then ordered RIAA to provide a plan as to how they would suggest a guardian ad litem be appointed and paid for. RIAA then pretended the court never ordered such a thing, so the district court dismissed this specific course of action - but not the original copyright infringement lawsuit.
The title is inaccurate. It makes it sound like they randomly sued people in the family after "losing a case." They sued one person, then asked to have that case dismissed, then sued another member of the family. No case was lost, at least as it relates to this story. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+48I say let them come after me. I'm a pretty stable guy. I honestly am. Happy life.
But so help me god if they tried to sue me, i will shoot the ***** RIAA rep in the ***** head first chance i get. And i'll kill myself and write a suicide letter depicting how ***** horrible my life will be now that i'm buried in dept and the RIAA brought this upon me, and be sure to mail it to the media first and foremost. - deut, on 10/12/2007, -1/+27wow DigDuality, I'll make a note to never piss you off man.
- Dinosaurus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25"America is the problem"
Lawyers are the problem. Everyone in America is afraid of being sued. - pbjorge12, on 10/12/2007, -8/+28Well...They can sue some...And that might be me...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+22I want to make this clear though. I own no weapons. I'm against owning them. I'm also talking out of my ass 100%. I'd be likely to sucker punch the *****. but i wouldn't do anything. So don't take what i say as a threat or a promise, i'm talking out of my ass in frustration. Please please please understand that.
- manchld, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19Open war with the RIAA. I can imagine the waterhoses on the 6 o'clock news already.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17Yes, I agree, but that doesnt excuse the RIAA either.
If I steal a physical CD from Target and get caught, what will my punishment be? Less than 1 500 dollar fine.
If the RIAA sues me, because they THINK I shared 1 song online (ignoring IP/Mac address spoofing - or if I was even at the computer) they want to sue for THOUSANDS of dollars.
This is WRONG and should not be tolerated. The RIAA is planting the seeds of their own doom here. - MissionSix, on 10/12/2007, -5/+20The RIAA can suck a D.
- manchld, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15I want to screw over the RIAA, but not artists.
- animecrazy9, on 10/12/2007, -5/+17DigDuality... you're my hero.
Also, for the suicide... van + explosives + you + RIAA building = well, you know... *cough* - Jeffrey903, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12foolfromhell - isn't that basically what a codec does? It changes the data in some way for some purpose (usually to get smaller file sizes and/or better quality), but it is still the same music. I wish that your suggestion was that simple and would screw over the RIAA, but it just isn't. I can't wait for the day when the RIAA is legally forced to stop suing people (or something similar).
- dbre2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Fantastic idea, however the problem is people don't realize really owns the RIAA. To boycott the riaa means to boycott pretty much all mainstream media: http://www.freepress.net/content/ownership
Search for RIAA on google news...how many big name news companies have published stories about the RIAA and what they're doing?
Listen to your local artists, turn off your tv, stop going to movies and support your local theatre, read blogs for your news, find out who really owns your favorite radio station... Stop digesting the ***** that is being fed to you by the these huge media conglomerates. - fishbert, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13The judge did not call the RIAA's actions inexplicable... he called their lack of any action inexplicable.
"The Court finds Plaintiffs%u2019 failure to respond to the order inexplicable..." - animecrazy9, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Yes, DD, we understand. We just are supporting your venting. Well, at least I am :) I am sure many of us have had the same thoughts scurry through our head at least once. But no one ever says it, even though they know they wouldn't act. And you finally said it so.... hooray!
- imdwalrus, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14That's not really relevant to the story. Or the discussion.
- digismack, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Martyrdom. What a concept.. The media would turn on the PR machine and say it was the music you listened to that made you do it, then the RIAA would doubly slammed. I say go for it. What's the worst that could happen?
- tidu, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14Reminds me of oil prices.
- AngryBacon, on 10/12/2007, -10/+18Maybe the fact that its America is the problem, every one either doesn't care, is too lazy, or is too scared to do anything about it.
- StoneWolf, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14Koshak - downloading a song or movie or whatever isn't stealing, but it IS wrong. It's copyright infringement, much like photocopying an entire book. The owner of the book still has it, but you have an illegal copy. The last time I checked the pirates are making copies rather than hijacking truckloads of CD and DVD shipments.
Just because people don't consider it stealing doesn't mean they don't think it's wrong/illegal. - G00mper, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11It's called copyright infringement; right or wrong its not stealing. look it up genius.
- foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -10/+16Fast replacing>? It has already!
Great Idea I got!
Everything is in 1s and 0s right? well, All programs should switch teh 1s for 0s and the 0s for 1s, and a sperate program that switches em back! You wont be sharing copyrighted music... and... THey cant sue u for spreading it. Sure, possesion is possible, but uploaders cant be prosecuted! - trogdoor, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Yeh because warez are legal as long as you zip them first right?
- blanski, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Thats foolish, fool (no pun intended).
That's like saying...
"No I'm not sharing any copyrighted material, they are just zip files! The data is not the same! Compare the bits!"
Real far that'll getcha. - JubbaG, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Here's a relevent link:
http://www.boycott-riaa.com - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11Illegal? Wrong? File sharing is great. I can get tons of free stuff and not have to pay large companies who have billions even more. I don't have the money to buy Cd's or Movies. However I buy all of my Games and Programs. I support programmers like myself who don't get paid much and have to work long hours.
Not all of us have a Computer Science degree. Some of us have to start from the bottom, grab certifications, get good recommendations and then continue on. We don't all have money to feed rich fat pigs their daily fill of ribs.
BTW: Buying a CD gives hardly any money to an artist. I go to lots of concerts. I have redeemed myself.
Also, stealing is a little harsh. would you get in trouble if you went into a store and made a 3D copy of a chocolate bar? - treelovinhippie, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Surely the days of the RIAA must be numbered.
How about we all start a massive campaign to tell the masses about what the RIAA is doing and convince everyone in the world to pirate music. Then what will they do? :) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+710101000100101011111001010001010101010101010100001111111000101010111010101011100110001100111010100010O010101010101010101010101001010010100110010110
Thats the new smashing pumpkins album. Can you spot the point where Billy Corgan hits the high note?
F the RIAA - foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Lets all Auto-Refresh www.riaa.org!!
Digg Effect their website
We must fight back!
They fu*ckin blocked my IP since my plugin refreshes once every .01 second when im at www.riaa.org. - geekee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"In its response, Plaintiffs respectfully declined the Court�s suggestion to have Plaintiffs pay into escrow Defendant�s guardian ad litem fees and asked the Court to look to the Defendant and her parents for payment first."
RIAA got screwed again. I like how the article is biased and there are ads for Bearshare and Morpheus on the sides. - anagami, on 07/02/2008, -1/+5"How about some good old Civil Disobedience, everyone get online and download as much music as you can. They can't sue everyone."
Better yet: download Creative Commons music so they cann't sue anyone. - alf86, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Just wait until they come after you for singing the new Shakira song in the shower.
- agimat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4make sure you dump that console before you waste anyone or the media (and ol' jack) will just play and say its all about all those violent games that you play :)
- rv8ch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3> I mean, they have bought and paid for Senators and Representatives,
> evidentally they feel that this should extend to the courts as well.
Now you know why there is a lot of huffing and puffing by many people in congress about an "out of control" judiciary. - Cyberdactyl, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The RIAA is the knucklebustering shake down goons for the music industry.
Once this simple fact is understood, all their actions beome clear. - mistshadow2k4, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6"I want to screw over the RIAA, but not artists."
Neither do I, but I don't see why our society is set up so as to continually pay them over and over for the same piece of work. Everyone else gets paid *once* for their work, including those pursuing other forms of art, such as painting and sculpture. Why is it that musicians and writers are able to live off the income for their work decades later when others cannot? No one who paints even a masterpiece continues to receive income from it decades later, and no one in any field who actually workd for a living does either. By the same token I should be paid 100 times for fixing someone's computer once. Doesn't that sound a bit silly to you?
The RIAA is a huge problem, but the source of the problem is the framework of the system itself -- they're just exploiting it. - alf86, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3traumatic like their latest "hit" release?
- chokeyou, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9Hey koshak, you don't like us or this site? Feel free to leave. The 'Net is a big place, I'm sure you can find a hangout where you feel more accepted.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Heres my solution, On May 15th, everyone grab a copy of your favorite CD, burn a few copies of it, and print out a few sheets of papers stating that you encourage everyone to do the same, on every 15th of the month (burn, print, hand out). attache the paper to each cd, and hand it to people randomly.... even just stuffing it in a mailbox.
And ask everyone to keep doing this untill the RIAA Stops with this mafia *****. I have paid a LOT of money for my music, but havent bought (or downloaded) a damn thing in nearly a year, because the RIAA's lawsuits sickens me. I refuse to help their bandwagon, Now I goto concerts more often, and don't buy music at all. - wilf_brim, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Ah, I love this. Reading the brief, the RIAA seems to think that the US court system exists for their exclusive benefit. I mean, they have bought and paid for Senators and Representatives, evidentally they feel that this should extend to the courts as well. This particular judge expected the RIAA to show some deference to the court, and do what he requested. With usual arrogance they didn't. This time the judge decided he didn't really like that particular attitude and told the RIAA (basically) to sod off.
- kaidovak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"Why is it that musicians and writers are able to live off the income for their work decades later when others cannot?"
simple answer: Think of it as being paid on commission, and people continue to buy the product. If you don't like that analogy, think of it as like inventing something and earning royalties from it.
You also have to consider that the record company pockets an insane percentage of the total revenue of an album, so unless you're a mega band like Metallica (sellouts) you're not going to make a whole hell of a lot. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Actually, the problem is the song. A song is copyrighted, so having X amount of melody or X amount of lyrics in common, for example, is illegal. If you could get rid of the melody (switching 1's for 0's would do this), then it would be legal to trade the file online. What would be illegal is somehow reproducing the tune of the original song, which would happen when you switched the bits back. However, the RIAA would be unable to track this, and I'm fairly certain someone would crack down on them tracking your reversed 1's and 0's, seeing as how the RIAA has no business monitoring your transferring of a data that isn't theirs.
Codecs don't free you from copyright because, as I stated above, it's not the digital file, but the song itself that is copyrighted. Wasn't there a program on Digg not long ago that involved randomly changing the data so it could be traded, then using a third file to convert it back to the original file? That's the same idea as switching the 1's and 0's, and both would make trading files legal. - xodex, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4http://www.riaa.com/*****
Digg effect that url, Their Web Stastics Report will show the url/invaild/404/referral/most access url
So who ever maintains their website will see some gracious words from our community. - Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5You have no idea what proposals RIAA and co. are lobbying congress for, nor what they did. Making shallow statements that show no understanding of the depth or breadth of the issue shows you are simply uninformed, which is a shame.
- Ribald_Jester, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5too ***** bad - people are tired of getting raped by companies like the RIAA - so they found a better way to get their product. Monopolies can die hard painful deaths, and suing people isn't going to replaced their failed business practice. Besides, with a track record like the music biz has (screwing their artists over in contracts, payola, price fixing, DRM, terrible product quality) I doubt you will find anyone who feels "bad" about infringing on their "copywrights". Besides, the status of copywrights in this country are ambysmal, and grossly unfair. Civil disobediance is what this country was founded on. No run along and go be a good little consumer.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 144 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