arstechnica.com— The RIAA is fighting allegations that its identical tactics in over 25,000 file-sharing lawsuits demonstrate that it is an anticompetitive cartel, and therefore guilty of copyright misuse.
Aug 31, 2007View in Crawl 4
What about racketeering? There is a Federal Statue called the RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) Act that has been used against the Cosa Nosta in the past. Isn't this getting real close to the tripwire? It's no longer an issue to me what they are trying to accomplish at the RIAA/MPAA with these lawsuits, it's a matter of how they are going about it that I take offense to.
Yes, probably, but Rand wouldn't side with the RIAA either, who takes the talented music artist and screws them with long-term contracts that pay very little and hoard all the money for themselves, while aggressively trying to shut down other avenues of music distribution.
hagnar: My post never says copyright infringement = theft. It only uses theft as an example to illustrate my point. How about: If I was stopped for driving my car 100 mph on a sidewalk while drunk, should I be able to sober up, drive the neighborhood safely and walk free, or should I be arrested and prosecuted? Does that mean, by your reasoning, that I'm now the first "****s****r" to believe copyright infringement is a form of drunk driving and public endangerment? Nope, it just means that you are either reading what you want into my post or you possess very poor comprehension skills.
No, the point was that the RIAA bitches about losing CD sales and the sharp decline that CD sales have taken in the last 5-10 years. What I'm trying to say is that it's no wonder why they're declining. They are overpriced and you get 2-3 tracks of anything decent on a disc of 10-15 tracks. That is the model they are trying to protect. Yes, now you can buy the individual tracks for a buck or so and that's what the RIAA hates. They don't want you to be able to do that. They want you to spend the $20 to get those two tracks you want. I'm not making excuses for anything. I'm willing to pay for what I want. But i don't want to pay for what I _don't_ want and I don't want to be bullied by someone who says that I should. I want to buy what I want and that alone and I want the RIAA to stop bitching because I'm not flushing my money away.
pglowiakAug 31, 2007
What about racketeering? There is a Federal Statue called the RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) Act that has been used against the Cosa Nosta in the past. Isn't this getting real close to the tripwire? It's no longer an issue to me what they are trying to accomplish at the RIAA/MPAA with these lawsuits, it's a matter of how they are going about it that I take offense to.
xmalvolioAug 31, 2007
Yes, probably, but Rand wouldn't side with the RIAA either, who takes the talented music artist and screws them with long-term contracts that pay very little and hoard all the money for themselves, while aggressively trying to shut down other avenues of music distribution.
Closed AccountAug 31, 2007
Why they're called Apple Jacks but don't taste like apples?
kufu91Aug 31, 2007
a lawyer
actorboyAug 31, 2007
hagnar: My post never says copyright infringement = theft. It only uses theft as an example to illustrate my point. How about: If I was stopped for driving my car 100 mph on a sidewalk while drunk, should I be able to sober up, drive the neighborhood safely and walk free, or should I be arrested and prosecuted? Does that mean, by your reasoning, that I'm now the first "****s****r" to believe copyright infringement is a form of drunk driving and public endangerment? Nope, it just means that you are either reading what you want into my post or you possess very poor comprehension skills.
Closed AccountAug 31, 2007
No, the point was that the RIAA bitches about losing CD sales and the sharp decline that CD sales have taken in the last 5-10 years. What I'm trying to say is that it's no wonder why they're declining. They are overpriced and you get 2-3 tracks of anything decent on a disc of 10-15 tracks. That is the model they are trying to protect. Yes, now you can buy the individual tracks for a buck or so and that's what the RIAA hates. They don't want you to be able to do that. They want you to spend the $20 to get those two tracks you want. I'm not making excuses for anything. I'm willing to pay for what I want. But i don't want to pay for what I _don't_ want and I don't want to be bullied by someone who says that I should. I want to buy what I want and that alone and I want the RIAA to stop bitching because I'm not flushing my money away.
blacklilyninjaSep 1, 2007
artists stop using riaa