What is Digg?61 Comments
- WazzaInc, on 10/12/2007, -2/+128the RIAA should just quit, for serious.
- TommySalami, on 10/12/2007, -12/+125***** THE RIAA
- Lyanto, on 10/12/2007, -2/+67Of course they don't need warrants. Otherwise they'd have to stop randomly pointing fingers, hoping they find someone who's actually guilty or willing to settle. I mean how can the RIAA recover their losses from piracy if they aren't allowed to sue dead people and people who don't have computers?!
- wdfmor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+64I'm waiting for them to sue their own labels.
- DrScott, on 10/12/2007, -2/+62Don't you usually need like, a warrant for that sort of things?
- sv650touring, on 10/12/2007, -13/+63***** the RIAA. ***** them in their stupid ***** asses.
[EDIT] damn, beat me - brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -4/+44haven't you heard? corporations are the new government. They're constitutionally-exempt.
- JCSaint, on 10/12/2007, -0/+39As far as a warrant is concerned, this isn't a criminal case and the RIAA isn't the government. It's a civil case. Any lawyers out there that want to enlighten us about the precedents for confiscating personal property in order to prove/fine something during a lawsuit?
- pyman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+31Maybe, if the son was dead....
- scoreloot, on 10/12/2007, -2/+26I would love to see them sue a recording artist who is protected by the RIAA.
Now THAT would be fun! - Boondoggle, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25Expect the RIAA to sue EMI and Apple next for breaking DRM.
- OrangeCrush, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22Civil cases don't have warrants. They have to get a subpoena or a motion to compel--which is what the judge just denied in this case.
- aliengoods, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19Do you actually think the RIAA is there to protect the recording ARTISTS?
- OrangeCrush, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14@FutureTelpsum: "Its their fuking lobby.."
You misspelled "racket." - FutueTeIpsum, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15said property cannot be confiscated without a subpoena..
I am baffled as to how the RIAA has been given so much leniency in regard to the way they are handling these cases..
I mean, typically, when there is a prevailing party's clause, the prevailing party is able to secure their reasonable attorney's fees... For some reason, RIAA has been allowed to argue this..
Its their fuking lobby.. - adinb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13If you mean by quit, you mean quit their entire campaign, then I agree.
If you mean quit this case, no way, lets send this to court and establish a precedent (that the RIAA is on extremely questionable ground). - Nick22, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17If the RIAA got ahold of my computer, i would lock everything down and put a big "***** YOU!" image up.
- jongos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12They've already gone after a few major label artists. http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003533767
- Germanopinion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10CAWPIN asked for the screenshots:
they are marked as exhibit 12 that are linked at the RIAA-"expert" deposition
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/03/deposition-of-riaas-expert-available.html
warning: screenshots are ugly big pdf file!! - my10cent, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Truecrypt is the one true friend of the republic
- Corrosionx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Stop buying their CD's and they'll run out of money soon.
The artists will have to go around the RIAA if they ever want to get paid again. - sithlordoflanc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8They'll just attribute the drop in sales to piracy.
Ah well, where are my eyepatch and cutlass? Arghhh, matey. - cawpin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11Does anyone have a link to the screenshot which they speak of? How that is enough to even start a case is beyond me.
- hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7That would be a little late, don't you think?
- circle26, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10@jongos:
yes, its traded under the stock symbol HAL - hukedonfonix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I often wonder what would happen in a case like this. If the password is long enough, and the encryption is strong enough, short of a super computer or a government back door (anyone seen my tinfoil cap?) it would be impossible to decrypt the contents of the hard drive. What would happen then? Would the judge order you to turn over the keys? Can't you plead the fifth on the grounds of self-incrimination? And what if you changed a bunch of passwords at the last minute and genuinely don't remember any of them, what then?
- da_bradler, on 10/12/2007, -11/+16I'm downloading music right now, come get me
Edit: while watching the 300 dvd scr, ***** you to MPAA - Ricapar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I dunno about you guys wanting to F the RIAA, but I wouldn't want to anything of mine anywhere near, much less inside, them.
- Tawni, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Here is your tin foil hat.... Now move along to art bell's site and stay there. Bye
- aliengoods, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Your assumption of their guilt is as ridiculous as your assumption that EMI won't profit for the illegal trafficing of their music. I, for one, have never bought DRM'd music, and I'll have no problem purchasing EMI's tracks if they're in MP3 or OGG format.
- Hubris, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Spam/troll much?
- RyeBrye, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If they had cause to get into it, you would have to surrender it or face obstruction of justice charges.
If you think the outside chance of being sued by the RIAA is worth the performance hit to encrypt all of your media files, and then to decrypt them for playback - I suppose you could still try doing that.
I'd rather just buy gray market russian MP3's than encrypt my whole hard drive. - Xenogis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4just ***** erase anything. if your on digg i will assume you know how to properly delete files
- hbeierg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3no this it what you need to do
http://youtube.com/watch?v=aKQIMlcX9Ko - redxii, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3There are worse things happening in the world than copyright infringement and the RIAA is playing it out as infringers being an enemy of the state.
- my10cent, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2All they have to say is that there are a picture of Bin Laden on the hard drive and they wont need a supeana because it goes under the freedom act.
- feellife, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I believe you can still be charged with obstruction of justice if they can prove that you destroyed the data on purpose before turning over your hard drives, etc. That would be rather difficult to prove, though.
- mastercheif, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I would back up everything on dvd's and scatter them trough my house, and let my dog eat my hard drive. So they come knocking on my door, and I'm like, sorry, Dog ate my hard drive.
- RayBeckerman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Dear CAWPIN
The screenshot is exhibit 12 here:
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/03/deposition-of-riaas-expert-available.html
Best regards,
Ray - cliffordmerkel, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Good. Who's able to open the link?
- JSparrowInc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Here's the thing:
Piracy has been around since the 80's. i remember recording tracks off the radio to cassettes, then cassette to cassette.. is that not "piracy"?? i cant be the only one who made "mix tapes" for any number of reasons (mostly to impress a chick)!!! why all the fuss now? because Tower Records went out of business? they went out because they were WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYY overpriced. their "sale price" was twice as much as the same cd is at regular price at target/best buy/wal mart/k-mart...
i'd rather buy merch from the artists web site/myspace...at least i know they get some $ from that
i never understood why the French cut off Marie Antoinett's head...Now I do. - RayBeckerman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1They are being held liable for the defendant's attorneys fees in Capitol v. Foster
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com#Capitol_v_Foster
See February 6, 2007, decision - HCProgramr, on 06/25/2009, -0/+1I wasn't aware you were on Digg, good sir...
Thank you for all you've done in the name of sane Copyright law. - xShad0w, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1based on what the riaa has been doing latly i'd have to say that they think way to much of themselves, everyone hates them, i mean do the people who work for the riaa support this *****, everyone who works for them should just get up and quit, i bet half the people who work for the riaa download music illegally too and everything of the nature that their solely against, not even half i bet most except, for the top people.
- Ajajadude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Some do, some have, and the RIAA tries to make life difficult for them. I've noticed a trend with various artists I listen to on a regular basis: their older albums were released under an RIAA label but the newer ones aren't. Hmmmmmm
- HCProgramr, on 06/25/2009, -0/+1"Don't Copy that Floppy!"
Seriously, though...I think the only reason they care now and didn't 20 years ago is quality degradation. A 7th-generation (copy of a copy of a copy of a...)mix tape sounds like sh*t. The dyes in CDRs decay at amazingly fast rates unless cared for meticulously [disc rot], and even then will degrade over time via repeated application of a laser.
On the converse, a 7th generation MP3 sounds like...an MP3. Well, unless the people passing them around are dumb enough to decode and re-encode them each time.
But in the end, I see it boiling down to 3 factors:
1) The price for music is way too high. Most people are, by nature, honest...and more importantly, will take the path of least resistance. Hardly anyone makes their own candy bars...when a candy bar is less than a buck, why go through all the trouble? iTunes is proof of this. It's convenient...right there at the same computer they'd be using to download. It's cheap...at less than a buck a song, why go through the trouble of sifting through poisoned uploads, low-quality uploads, virus-laden uploads, porn disguised as music, etc?. The price is close, given the number of people that use Apple's service...but if copying is still that rampant, then the price is still too high. For $45 I can get MAYBE 3 hours of new music, or I can get a 'released a few months ago' game that will give me anywhere between 10 and 60 hours of new experiences. If i get 3 used video games at $15 each, I can get 30-180 hours of new experiences. I think it's pretty obvious which has the most value for the dollar there.
2) Music in-jewel-case is a pain in the neck to get. People want instant gratification, and there's none to be had in that case. Drive to store. Browse through discs that are invariably on the wrong shelves, mixed around when they're supposed to be alphabetized, not carried for being popular enough, not carried for being unable to pony up the bribe money [err..."compete for shelf space'], are too new, are too old, or are just plain out of stock. Find what you want. Wait in line while clerk gossips with her friends. Pay the clerk that doesn't care about her job. Get home. Find out some stockroom-jockey swapped the disc you were supposed to get with the disc in the case. Drive back to the store. Argue with the clerk. Argue with the manager. Pray that the manager will think you're being honest instead of trying to scam them. Get repacement disc. Go home. Listen to music.
-OR-
Go online. Find an internet retailer that carries it. Pay for purchase. Wait 3-14 days for arrival. Open box. Pray order isn't wrong / disc isn't damaged / disc wasn't delivered to the wrong house.
Either way, they can't compete with the simplicity of Point-click-get [or buy]...places like iTunes are the singular hope for the music industry to stay alive in an era of ever-increasing convenience.
3) Backlash. The popularity of 'sticking it to the man' has become incredibly popular in the wake of RIAA acting in ways that'd make Al Capone have a mobgasm. Normally honest people, fed up with the offensive news of 'latest stunt of RIAA', caught up in a mob mentality and doing it for the sake of 'getting back' at them.
I'm not advocating it...but I understand why. - ericsemail, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Maybe he thought he was in the next article down? :P
- JohnnySoftware, on 07/01/2009, -0/+1Dude, what the heck is with the asterisks in the site domain name of that URL? Is that URL a joke?
- sunhaze, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Gah the RIAA is doing some pretty rediculous ***** now days. How about focusing on productive law enforcement..
- Keefu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@redxii
I really do wish they'd put the manpower or whatever they have driving the RIAA into something to -help- people instead of completely bankrupt them. It's just one of the most depraved things, way above "sharing music" on the list, if there was one. But then, focusing power you have for something good would be completely wrong. Or something. Yeah, that makes sense. -
Show 51 - 60 of 60 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