What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
192 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -14/+178***** THE RIAA
- native, on 10/12/2007, -7/+83Make that to a full external hard drive.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -16/+85DOUBLE ***** the RIAA
- truspector, on 10/12/2007, -11/+76up the ass with a flash drive full of pirated music.
- Burns, on 10/12/2007, -4/+59NO they are intentionally prosecuting people who have little chance of fighting back.
- mycatsboots, on 10/12/2007, -20/+72TRIPLE ***** the RIAA
- deepsub, on 10/12/2007, -0/+34I wonder if the RIAA has calculated the ill will generated by it's abuse of the courts to prop up their profits? In this case, they'll have 6 less customers methinks...
At the very least, everyone they sue will likely never buy music again, and if this thread is -any- indication, the technology trailblazers (us) will do everything we can to remind anyone that the RIAA is little more than an overgrown, cancerous group of suits and lawyers that cares little for individual rights and everything about profits.
RIAA! Die! Die! Die! - sp4rky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21I agree double *****, triple ***** and multi ***** the RIAA.
Why not send them a warning? Kids are kids they don't know that its wrong about downloading music, most the time. I have 2 little cousins that DL their music free from lime wire and they don't understand the risk they take.
RIAA just wants the damn money, they seem to not care about teaching the wrongs of stealing music. I may be wrong, but they could put some effort into trying to teach that its wrong instead of taking families to court.
It's almost like throwing a child in jail for stealing a piece of candy in a store and not knowing it was wrong. I know all cases aren't like this but come on they could do more then hand out fines. It's just ridiculous - joeyjojo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21"Do you need any cheese to go with your whine? Can someone explain to me when piracy became the 5th freedom?"
This isn't piracy. This, at the 'worst', is copyright infringement.
And, at the best, is fair use.
In addition, we're supposely in a capitalistic society...survival of the fittest businesses...giving customers what they WANT...accomodating the public.
And, finally, it's a simply matter of the punishment should fit the crime.
Did you ever copy your friend's cassette tape of the latest AC/DC album in Jnr High so you could listen to it in your car? Do you think you doing that caused 5-figure damages to the recording industry? - p9s50W5k4GUD2c6, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23"up the ass with a flash drive full of pirated music" Rolling with laughter!
I LIVE for these RIAA stories! The hateful commentary morphs to new heights with each post.
It will be one special day when someone posts this digg story: "RIAA is shutdown." - Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19The US has the finest legal system money can buy!
- Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -10/+27***** THE RIAA TIMES INFINITY
- Chewie67, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19"I wonder if the RIAA has calculated the ill will generated by it's abuse of the courts to prop up their profits? In this case, they'll have 6 less customers methinks..."
It doesn't matter.
The VAST majority of music is purchased by teenagers. Do you really think that "Debbi" cares about the RIAA when she hits to mall to get the latest Jessica Simpson CD? Of course not.
Yeah, they may lose a very small percentage of sales from hard-core net users who read sites like Digg, but that's a rounding error in their total profits.
They have the music buying public by the nads, and they know it. The only thing that's going to stop the RIAA is for someone to beat them in court, and show that the methods they use for "evidence" aren't valid. Good luck with that. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17Eh, they might've been sharing, but honestly that doesn't matter. The point is the settlements in these cases do NOT fit the "crime".
Sharing 6 songs? Big whoop, that's not even an entire CD. I would like an explanation as to why they feel $7500 is a good settlement.
The problem here is that they have absolutely no basis for any amount they pursue. How many people downloaded the song from them? It's undetermined.
These cases have always been, and always will be, purely hypothetical. That is the problem. That and people still think sharing music is equivalent to stealing and rattle off things like "you do the crime, you suffer the consequences."
Besides, what proof do they have that it was even her kids that shared the songs? Did they seize the computer? Did they even bother to look at the computer? In this day and age where it's incredibly easy to leech from someone's connection, assumption without investigation is a dangerous game. - Wyzard, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14http://www.magnatune.com/
http://www.cdbaby.com/
Do buy music... just not music published by RIAA labels. - aliengoods, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14I haven't bought a CD since I bought one that was 'copy-protected' and I couldn't rip it as MP3 files for my player. I just downloaded the songs online and vowed to never buy another CD again, with the exception of Pink Floyd which totally kicks ass(I have an almost complete collection, with the exception of a few hard to find and very expensive gems). And while that is neither here nor there, the point is the RIAAs companies have lost 50-80 CD purchases from me per year. On the other hand, my DVD collection is growing exponentially (I know the MPAA is no better, but I haven't been screwed by them yet).
- mrgreen4242, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18I'm going to give a negative vote, not because I think you are wrong, but because the RIAA isn't suing anyone for DOWNLOADING music. They are suing people who are sharing or UPLOADING music. It's a big difference, which I think pretty much makes your post irrelevant and inaccurate, hence the down vote.
- theone3, on 10/12/2007, -8/+20I know it's totally nitpicky, but a family of 5 != 5 kids + 1 parent.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Just refuse to buy cds anymore at all!!! i will not ever buy a cd again because of the RIAA
- trialofmiles, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13@deepsub
Basic copyright law covers unauthorized file sharing, but there are other laws that cover other aspects of it.
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 113 > § 2319A
§ 2319A. Unauthorized fixation of and trafficking in sound recordings and music videos of live musical performances
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002319---A000-.html - airship, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11This is the solution. I do not buy CDs. I do not buy DVDs. I don't even rent them. I refuse to support these organizations or their members. (There is plenty of independent music out there that is better than the cookie-cutter crap the RIAA members publish, anyway.) Until the laws are changed, I won't give them my money.
This worked when the migrant workers called for a grape boycott way back in the 60's. It can work now.
Oh, and give money to the EFF so they can fight these bastards. - trialofmiles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11The wikipedia link brings up a good point that this case is more than just a woman who got caught with her hand in the cookie jar (even if she didn't know it was there). It's about the RIAA using the justice system to do its dirty work.
"One frequently cited criticism of the RIAA's lawsuits is that they use an assembly line approach to lawsuits, trying to get the same result in every case no matter the evidence" - graywolf323, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12different case if you bothered to read the full article
- TheKillDoctor, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12I've helped parents rid their computers of p2p software, their kids had no idea that what they were doing was illegal. The parents had no clue either. I was just removing spyware because their PC was so slow.
The RIAA should be sending people a warning with an enclosed video explaining what they're doing wrong and how to correct it (removing software). Instead they drag these people through the courts and take their money. - Rigbymatt, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13"In fact, the corporate music industry is doing just fine, apart from the fact it still hasn't grasped the fact it's in the 21st digital century, not the 1970s."
perfectly said - ConceptJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -15/+25QUADRUPLE ***** the RIAA version 3.0 for Windows!
- Doggpound, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10I don't know about you but I am never buying another CD in my life and I think you should think twice about it also.
- deepsub, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15She got caught breaking what law? Right. There's no law broken.
It's just the RIAA again taking another customer to court hoping to establish legal precedence and thus, WRITE LAW. Don't let them. - MrGeneric, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Want to put a stop to the RIAA thuggery? Put the Recording Industry on notice that their massive consumption of drugs (and promotion of drug culture) will be looked at more closely. The RI does not give a ***** about the law in general, they just use parts of it for their own gain. It is time that the RI and the RIAA respected the law in FULL.
- chicken101, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14Don't ***** the RIAA.
It's gross. - CrioKnight, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8This is one of the saddest things I have ever read. I don't see the point of harassing and persecuting end users. It's a real shame that the RIAA bottom feeders are only adding to the already flimsy economic base of this country by suing people that probably live pay check to pay check.
Shame on you RIAA.
(just dont come looking for me.) - deepsub, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9No. It's not breaking the law. The RIAA's propaganda would have you believe that laws are being broken, when in reality, there aren't laws to keep people from sharing music.
IANAL, but I have yet to see a statute that clearly states the criminality of p2p. - sp4rky, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9LoL, I don't think I could bring my self to even pretend.
- HiddenLYNX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Yeah, genius, WE know, but he dont know, You think parents of our Generation know how to monitor the computer??? We know how, and our kids will have to learn that we are more tech savvy than our parents. This guy obviously doesnt, and you think the girl understood, i well understood what i was doing but i bet you a friend told her of this program, i dont think she realized everything. Ohh free access to music, cool, downloads a few songs thats about it. Does she realize that its set default to share or the rest of the community can get to it? Prolly not
- mrgreen4242, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7From my understanding they log IP addresses of people sharing music. They then file what's known as a "John Doe" lawsuit against the person who was using that IP address. At that point, during discovery, they ask the judge to order the ISP that controls that IP to reveal the identity of the person who was using it at that time, so that they can procede with the trial. Generally speaking, they have to do it so that they can then evaluate the merit of the lawsuit.
If I am wrong, please correct and mod me down please. :) - wesmoc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I too disagree. The problem is with the way that the RIAA is "enforcing" their copyright. Do you honestly think it is by chance that they are picking individuals rather than groups of individuals? It's easier to get money *and* free press from an individual when they are approached by a huge entity. The free press only passes on the fear to everyone else (with a small price to pay in the RIAA's reputation, but, really what do they have to lose there?) which, to the RIAA, is priceless.
That, and they are not in this for the money. They are in it for the fear. It's the only tactic that makes any sense since getting pennies out of ma and pa does not represent any profit in it.
The problem is that their tactic is offensive and immoral.
And to anyone who thinks they can completely monitor their teenager, you need to get a reality check. Think back to when you were a teenager and remember what it was like. Parents have a LOT on their hands, and monitoring their kids is just ONE of them. - truspector, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10@samus
I believe the term you are looking for is winner. You did, however, make yourself look like a weiner. - t94xr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I happen to know a homeless man that has a mp3 player with illegal music, maybe the RIAA should sue him for $115k
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Excuse me while I go vomit in disgust. I don't advocate piracy in any way, but there are people in basements ripping absurd amounts of music and videos. Try doing some real investigating and finding the people who are really "ruining" your business, not producive American families... this guy has to take time out of his job to go to court...probably over a small amount of songs that his kid downloaded... complete nonsense. It sickens me that people are being sued left and right for mediocre amounts of music when there are so many other people who have millions of songs and actually try to turn a profit by selling them on the streets and crap. I don't like piracy, but the RIAA is a bunch of thugs looking to make some money of hard working American people, instead of stopping the real pirates out there.
- equusdc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Actually, the RIAA is hundreds of companies.
http://www.riaa.com/about/members/default.asp
If the RIAA is evil, so is everyone on that list. If you don't like the RIAA, don't consume anything made by anyone on that list. - Faken, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Guys, stop stealing from the RIAA...
They can't stand the competition ;) - theoverlord, on 10/12/2007, -21/+27While I agree that the tactics being used by the RIAA are predatory and repugnant, the truth of the matter is that *most* of the people they are prosecuting have downloaded songs illegally. Stories like this one have value in showing how badly the RIAA is handling the situation, however taking such an immature tone does nothing to help the cause of pushing for changes in how these cases are handled.
If you really want to foster change, it is going to take more than swearing and childish finger pointing to actually accomplish something.
(go ahead and digg down my comment, it proves my point) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6This is all the more reason to use anonymous communication services like Tor (http://tor.eff.org/)
Teach your kids to download from sites like easynews.com where you can get secured HTTP/NNTP connections.
Not only that, but we need more developers for anonymous file sharing services. - deepsub, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Most ISP's resists id'ing file traders because it might lead liability on the part of the ISP. Besides, it's not their job to enforce the RIAA's agenda.
- Dehx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8***** EM! WE HAVE TO DO SOEMTHING TO STOP THESE BASTARDS!!!
- Razerious, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8You're not the sharpest knife in the drawer, that's for sure.
- m0nk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Studies have actually shown that the majority of people that download music do it so they can check out a cd before buying it, and then guess what they do....they go and buy it. STFU
- porkbun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Would someone in US tell me how RIAA know the identifies of the p2p sharers? In Hong Kong, court will approve any request for the ip identification of suspicious participants. Is it similar in US now?
- MrKite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5If the RIAA can't embrace technolgy, then they can kiss my ass full of music.
- TheKillDoctor, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Oh wow, we should all stop discussing the issue because you think it's immature. If you want to know who needs to grow up then look in the mirror.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 192 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is