What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
146 Comments
- osc1882, on 10/10/2007, -3/+189Maybe she can sue for not getting the money, pain and suffering, add a $30,000 more to that total.
But really, the RIAA are dicks from hell. It's not like they don't have money coming out of their asses.
BTW, anyone else think it is wrong for any one group to own the rights to all the world's music? Music is such a part of us, it helps us express our selfs and the old ones have almost become a part of us as we relate to them more and more. Yet the RIAA owns it all. At first public domain was set for 15 years, and that was the perfect amount of time. But... the USA has gone to hell. - Senn, on 10/10/2007, -2/+93As a musician, I live in hope that the RIAA and groups like it around the world will simply not be needed in the near future. And not just for music, the whole entertainment industry needs shaking up, and don't get me started on how they hold back technology and innovation...
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+83I am a musician and the RIAA does not represent my best interests. They are a bunch of old suits sitting in a board room trying to find more ways to bilk people out of their hard earned money. They dont give a ***** about music, the art, the emotion, the passion. They are ***** suits that failed in their creative endeavors and now want to punish everyone else for their failures at life!
- Slovenian6474, on 10/10/2007, -2/+80The RIAA seems to act like a overly spoiled little kid. I can see them putting on a pouty-face, crossing their arms, and stomping the ground while muttering, "...I don't WANNA pay!"
- Lyk4n, on 10/10/2007, -7/+83***** RIAA
- JD52, on 10/10/2007, -1/+51They aren't needed now. They just insist they are.
- jontracey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+35Not sure how the law works in the USA, but in the UK you can file to have them pay or be forced into bankruptcy, basically have the company wound up for non payment of debts.
Its time some philanthropic lawyers (there must be some) got together and taught the RIAA an lesson they wont ever forget, or be able to recover from. - gridbread, on 10/10/2007, -1/+26Pay up you ***** hypocritical bastards!
After all the ***** you put average people and families through, you could spare some of your pocket change. - FearlessFreep, on 10/10/2007, -0/+24In times past the labels served a purpose of fronting the high cost of production of material and promotion. Technology has largely leveled the field to where with a much smaller budget you can put together some pretty good material and get the word out.
- theholycow, on 10/10/2007, -0/+24Correct. There's loads of great music you can hear without supporting the RIAA.
http://www.riaaradar.com
http://www.emusic.com
http://garageband.com
http://www.stage.fm
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/#liberated_music
You can also get your fix of RIAA music without supporting them much, in quite a few ways. Borrow CDs from the library. Buy or download non-RIAA versions, such as live recordings and covers. Listen to the radio, Pandora, last.fm, satellite radio, youtubed videos, free online versions (such as found at Rhapsody, Napster, etc)...there's a plethora of other ways to hear what you like without paying extortionary rates for DRM-encrusted CDs. At most, you'd be contributing minimally (ads on Pandora, last.fm, Rhapsody, and Napster probably benefit the RIAA a little bit; small portions of money from satellite radio go to record companies on both sides of the RIAA divide; and libraries do pay for CDs).
Whatever you do, don't buy RIAA-affiliated CDs. The only language they speak is money, so speak that language. Spend your money on non-RIAA music, which shows them that you want to pay for music, you just don't want to pay to be treated like a criminal. - Hubris, on 10/10/2007, -0/+23They won't pay until absolutely forced by law - it's a crippling precident.
- S1L3NTC, on 10/10/2007, -2/+23And they wonder why CD sales are falling?
Answer: People have gotten sick of their ***** and decided to stop feeding them. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+20What is your expertise kid? Where do YOU get off saying this? Who the ***** are you? Who are YOU?!
- a6n28f, on 10/10/2007, -0/+18Don't ever lose that fire. Passion and talent are a powerful combination.
- a6n28f, on 10/10/2007, -1/+19Son, if you think radio play is the mark of a musical success then there's not much point in listening to your opinions on music. Top 40 is, with few exceptions, to music talent what "hooked on phonics" is to literature. Further, the fact that the RIAA can exist is proof positive that the market for music is not a free market. Now back to school with ya!
- lcmatt, on 10/10/2007, -3/+19*****.
- matador3, on 10/10/2007, -0/+15I say sue them for $63 quadrillion and accuse them of pledging allegiance to al Qaeda and buying missiles from Iran.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15What the ***** did the Mustang Club of America ever do to you?!
- VAXcat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14 In the States, you can't force them into bankruptcy this easy...but, if they ignore the judgement long enough, you can get a court order issued to the country sheriff for seizure of property equal in value to the judgement. Some big companies make the mistake of ignoring these small time judgements, and are shocked when the sheriff shows up to seize furniture, cars and computers to pay it off
- rhabd0mancer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12Send them to collections!
- ichibanjay, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12This makes it all more interesting... I hope she gets cleared to seize assets. I can just imagine repo men walking into a RIAA office and begin pulling computers and office furniture from them while they are there.
- Senn, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11I don't want my music on the radio if these people are behind it, so shut the ***** up. But thanks for making me laugh anyway!
- PA42, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11unfortunately that's not how it works here. OJ still hasn't paid
- MarkOfTheDead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10that would be ***** awesome.
- AriaStar, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11You, Sir, have the attitude that makes me want to pay for your music instead of pirate it. When you're more interested in the art rather than the money, that, my dear, is what makes me want to financially support you.
- octophobic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9So they're just going to pirate all those legal hours? Bastards.
- aposter, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10I would say from the number of diggs at the moment the readership is finding you boring. TTFN.
- sotopheavy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Companies like Sony own it... If you download a song you have not stolen it. it just commercially devalues the song slightly. If something was making the value of pharmaceutical drugs go down should the government step in and prevent it so that we pay more for something that we can get for less? If people want to share music then others have no right to stop them. Artists will just have to do what they used to do to make money... actually perform. Who knows. maybe good music will be more prevalent for once. Record companies need not exist.
- therightclique, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8you can sue someone for anything. you might not win.
- hexydes, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6That's ok because someday soon, the ones that are getting sued by the RIAA will BE the new congress, and most of them aren't likely to forget what the RIAA has done to them, their family, or their friends.
- Cerebral, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Unfortunately though, some of the labels that are known as indie or lesser known labels are still RIAA.. like Trustkill, or Tooth & Nail.
- TriTech, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I don't think extortionists want to pay out any money; they just want to collect it.
- theholycow, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Well, it is kinda like organic health food...it's icky until you get used to it, then all of the sudden greasy mass-produced food becomes icky.
I still eat greasy mass-produced foods, but now I listen to RIAA-free music while I eat my cheeseburger. - Slovenian6474, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Copyright infringement is NOT stealing as it is not a criminal offense where theft is. That being said, it is still illegal. The problem with the RIAA is that the times have changed. File sharing has entered the scene offering an illegal, hard to track, but free way to listen to music. The RIAA had a choice to either stop it out and continue their current business plan or make create a new business plan that adopted to the new technology. As with Napster, it worked....for a little bit. At this point in time, there is no hope to stomping out file-sharing, but yet they are STILL holding onto their over-priced business plan. The RIAA offers very little to the consumer as incentive to buy CDs or download legal music other than the "We probably won't sue you".
- prisoner24601, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5It is an utter travesty of justice that when pharmaceutical companies can spend millions of dollars to develop a life-saving drug they get exclusive protection on for about 7 years and these RIAA/MPAA guys think a song by some gansta rapper deserves to be giving them royalties until their grandkids retire.
I wish these lawyers would go do some real work to improve society somehow instead of trying to figure out how to keep this pathetic royalty gravy train on the rails. - VeganG, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I don't think you can sue someone for pain and suffering. At least, that's what Judge Judy tells me.
- MonkCanatella, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5That was possibly the worst metaphor I've ever heard.
- norman619, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Much like the Mafia
- zakaf, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Seriously, this lady just needs to just SHUT UP. I think W should ship her off to Guantanamo or something. God, I am so sick of greedy private citizens who trample all over big business and industry like this in the name of "justice." I totally admire the RIAA and all that they do for us.
Excuse me now, I am going to eat dinner with Dick Cheney. - ripple123, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6I really hope the solution to this is a police raid of the RIAA to seize assets equivalent in value to this judgment, plus some extra thrown in for making them come and get it. Prolly not, but the image of lawyers getting arrested just feels so right
- zengonzo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Makes them angrier? They don't get angry. All they care about is money.
Napster? *****. They've made file sharing to be a far more severe crime than it ever ought to be.
The real issue was that their corporate model was slowly eroding. They can't control internet music the way they did radio music. - meamog, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5I didn't know people still listened to corporate radio, much less relied on it to deliver any music of quality. Huh, I learn something new every day...
- meldroc, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Not too far off. If the RIAA fails to pay the judgement, Deborah's lawyer can start filing motions with the court to attach bank accounts, issue liens on the RIAA's property, etc. Effectively, the court can seize RIAA assets to force them to pay the judgment.
- sgtpppr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Uh, the RIAA is actually a pseudo company made up of the heads of the major record labels. It's set up to be used as a shield for bad publicity and lobbying. It is NOT a third party claiming to represent the record companies. It IS the record companies coming together to form a large lobbying and IP protection firm. From wikipedia:
The RIAA is led by Mitch Bainwol, who has been Chairman and CEO since 2003. He is assisted by Cary Sherman, the President of the Board of Directors. There are 27 members of the board, who are drawn from a number of record companies.[2]
It's really a consortium of the big four labels: Warner Music Group, EMI, Sony BMG, and Universal Music Group. Look at the board of directors:
http://www.riaa.com/aboutus.php?content_selector=who_we_are_board - projectstartrek, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Actually, the RIAA has a magical amulet that makes them immune to court judgements.
- prisoner24601, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Just to clarify, I'm not suggesting the drug companies should have longer patents. I think the currently lengths are pretty much right. (Long enough to incentivize, short enough to make sure they can't just rest on last decade's work...)
So really my comment is not "lengthen drug patents" but rather "RADICALLY shorten copyrights." - nicepants, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Time for the Sheriff to collect some RIAA property.
- Azriel7, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Can't you ask the judge to add a per day charge when people fail to pay in a reasonable time frame?
- exomni, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4The Radio, Pandora, and last.fm pay the RIAA through the noses, even radio stations that play nothing but independant music pay the RIAA to play it, because it's assumed that, since the RIAA owns everything, they must be playing at least something they own, so they just pay the RIAA.
- WayneCA, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Yes, the RIAA is the music company corporation. They don't care about their product, their employees, or the goodwill of people in general. They just want more money so their stock can go up.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 147 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is