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.
120 Comments
- geoken, on 10/12/2007, -0/+288'How do they sleep at night?'
You'd be surprised how comfortable a pile of money can be. - Barman, on 10/12/2007, -6/+109Serious *****, no doubt about it. How do they sleep at night? Oh wait, they're Satan's minions.
- rm999, on 10/12/2007, -7/+105Don't people realize it is the record companies themselves that are to blame, not some abstract organization called the RIAA? The record companies are winning because people blame this made up organization that doesn't care about its name. When Sony sues you, they do it under the name "RIAA," leaving their name relatively untouched from popular opinion.
It's time we start realizing it is the record companies themselves that are evil, and not the RIAA! - latova, on 10/12/2007, -5/+76They don't sleep. You imply that they are normal human beings. Thats just silly. They stay awake 24 hours a day scheming plans of the next person or object to sue.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+70Fav: Another guy had no pants on and had a sign that said, "The RIAA sued the pants off me."
- vemerge, on 10/12/2007, -8/+67@rm999: we know it's the record companies. RIAA is easier to type than "record companies"
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+46Well tell his ass to keep laughing when they don't sell any ***** music.
- rm999, on 10/12/2007, -3/+46vemerge
I think you missed my point, and at the same time proved it by being so convinced of your own. I am saying that grouping together the "record companies" into one unit makes us forget who they really are. They aren't "the record companies" or the RIAA - they are Sony BMG, Universal, Warner, etc.
When there is a story about a 80 year old grandma getting sued, she is being sued by those companies, not the RIAA. But no one remembers that at the store when they are buying the newest release by their favorite band that is being put out by Universal Records.
The other problem with grouping together these huge record companies into a single unit is that it risks making other record companies that don't fall into the RIAA (e.g. Indie labels) look bad. I think it is time we hold individual companies at fault instead of some large fabricated organization. - rune420, on 10/12/2007, -5/+47They only sleep during the day. Nighttime is when they come out of their caskets.
- Rikkochet, on 10/12/2007, -3/+44Downloading music is not stealing. I'm not going to bother reiterating the same ***** argument in every thread because some jackass thinks it's stealing.
- Yez70, on 10/12/2007, -4/+44For your enlightenment:
The RIAA has NEVER went after ANYBODY for downloading anything. It is not stealing. Stealing is the theft of physical property. The RIAA is suing people for letting others copy their digital files. Should the book publishers start suing libraries too?
It's the same as if you go to the library and photocopy a page in a book or copy it to paper with a pen. You haven't stolen anything, you merely made yourself a copy.
Taking a CD is stealing. Downloading and/or copying a digital file is not. - growlzor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+32The RIAA sleeps on pillows made of subpoenas for 8 year olds and grandmas.
- FurtThePirate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+28I think you meant they _underpay_ the artist's?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+27A list of who is part of the RIAA militia, and who is not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_RIAA_member_labels
So EMI, Sony, Universal and Warner sue grandmothers and babies. They are the ones defending their bloated incomes with mafia style extortion attacks. They are the ones saddling defenseless working class and unemployed with thousands of dollars in legal bills. They are the ones who sent in the pinkertons to bully and coerce.
And they know they will eventually lose. There is no doubt; they can't win. Intellectual property laws in its current form is slowly dying and withering away. We will get better and saner laws in a few years. However they are doing what they think they need to do to scrape out the barrel for as long as it lasts; no matter who gets crushed in the process. - tgunner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+25I saw this great line from the comments section, and had to post it here. It's from The Daily Pennsylvania, the University of Pennsylvania's student newspaper:
"This is the RIAA's latest attempt to get money out of college students," she said. "If the goal is to get people to stop sharing copyrighted files, it's clear that three and a half years later it's failed." - xoxuxox, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=11662
The notion of copyright infringement as theft was clearly addressed in the 1985 Supreme Court decision of Dowling v. United States. While this case involved hard goods (phonograph records), Justice Harry Blackmun was most certainly speaking of abstract property (copyrights) when he wrote these words in his majority decision overturning Dowling's conviction of interstate transport of stolen property: "(copyright infringement) does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud... The infringer invades a statutorily defined province guaranteed to the copyright holder alone. But he does not assume physical control over copyright; nor does he wholly deprive its owner of its use." - schwnj, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Yeah, the protesters were pretty funny, but it seemed like they didn't really know what to do after their opening quips. There were some awkward silent moments when the RIAA guy didn't have anything to say, and the protesters didn't know what to do.
All in all, I thought I might have come away from the talk with more sympathy for the RIAA, but it was quite clear from his talk that the RIAA has their strategy, and they are going to stick with it for better or for worse. There seems to be no reasoning with them (even with the several thought-provoking smart comments and questions asked), so now I don't really care if they are run out of business.
He even went so far as to claim that the RIAA's model is the ONLY model: He said that if they went out of business, the new record companies would HAVE to do the same thing that the old ones did. - ianweir, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19For the record, there have been 2 so far. So unless WWIII happened without my knowledge, it's next.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14Its not stealing as the original owner still has possession of the 'stolen' goods.
If every time you P2P a music file it would vanish from the uploader's PC, then that might be construed as stealing, but thats simply NOT what happens.
Its "Copyright Infringement", of theft of Intellectual Property (though how music these days can be considered intellectual is beyond me) not theft! - pcghost, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10I can't wait until the acronym RIAA means as much as the acronym SCO does now, not a hell of a lot. Laugh it up man, your business model is doomed.....
- naterose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Don't most villains laugh just before the demise of their evil empire?
- MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Funny, in countries were it isn't illegal, they brute force make it illegal.
RIAA calls the state department... state dept calls ambassador... ambassador calls foreign government.
Legality is not morality. - MinorLemming, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10@rm999
Actually, you'll find that when Sony sues you, Sony actually sues you. Most of the cases that are reported as RIAA lawsuits are actually filed by the label. I have _no_ idea why these are reported as RIAA sues blah... Sure, they coordinate it, but the label is actually filing the suit.
That's why I am now adding stuff like the following to every /. post where I see this:
Please note that the following artists revenue is helping to fund this action by Sony BMG and the RIAA:
Good Charlotte
Shakira
Avril Lavigne
Christina Aguilera
Pink
Justin Timberlake
Evanescence
By buying anything from these or any other Sony BMG artist, you are helping to fund these lawsuits. Please stop!
I've got similar stuff for Atlantic and one or two others now :) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10the RIAA is not a "company".
- umisenken, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11I was at the "talk" and while the VP did allow some questions there were definitely many more questions than he allowed time for. He also said limewire had no place on campus and suggested it could be banned. He also used analogies likening stealing physical objects to copyright infringement even though it was pointed out this was a bad analogy. He also attempted to say DRM wasn't bad for the consumer and it just made people pirate more.
He also tried to say he used the word stealing because he wanted to talk in lamens terms. As if any of us didn't know the term copyright infringement. - skizotd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6here's an article estimating your "average" band's payment
http://www.arancidamoeba.com/mrr/problemwithmusic.html (figures at the bottom of the page)
"The band is now 1/4 of the way through its contract, has made the music industry more than 3 million dollars richer, but is in the hole $14,000 on royalties. The band members have each earned about 1/3 as much as they would working at a 7-11, but they got to ride in a tour bus for a month." - Fafnir43, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7The problem is that the RIAA and the MPAA constantly call it stealing to make it seem worse than it really is. These days, a decent proportion of legally bought DVDs in the UK have an unskippable advertisements with "edgy" music that run along the lines of "You wouldn't steal a foo. You wouldn't steal a bar. You wouldn't steal a baz. Would you steal a movie?"
Yup, the legally bought DVDs. They're actually providing incentives to pirate now! FWIW, I consider piracy morally wrong, but not nearly as bad as actually giving money to the RIAA/MPAA. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Do something about it and convince everyone you know not to buy bland, commercial music.
- leo78, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5What kills me is that some people complain about them but still buy Cd's, DVD's, and downloads that support them.until people can completely stop giving them money and boycott all labels themselves. When the artists really stop seeing the money they will not support the RIAA either. But most people would rather complain and feel bad for the people dealing with the litigation, than actually doing anything about it. We demand more news about Anna Nicole but keep the work of the EFF out of the media. It's not going to change until people make them change.
- Fordi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Heh. You forget that techies are multitaskers. I, for example, am simulataneously capable of aiding in the fight against the RIAA, advocating the impeachment of Bush, supporting Ron Paul and Barack Obama for nomination, discrediting creationism and intelligent design, supporting net neutrality, arguing the finer points of programming languages, advocating desktop linux, correcting misconceptions about various scientific notions, holding down a secretarial job and a side business in web development, maintaining a relationship with my girlfriend, going to the pub and drinking stout, and handling all the little necessities and stresses of life.
- GreatGrizzly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6' According to Black's Law Dictionary, in the U.S. a company means "a corporation - or, less commonly, --an association--, partnership or union - that carries on industrial enterprise."[1] '
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company
So it seems the consumerist was correct. - alevel27mage, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Yeah, you do realize that the RIAA pays artists almost nothing, and the only reason many of them have a lot of money is because of investments or named-items (clothing, cologne/perfume, etc.), right?
- Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5What were they expecting? For them to cry and publicly apologize?
Everyone knows that soulless monsters don't have tear-ducts. All they have to do is think about their bank account and the laughs just fly out. - Shizlanski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Ya pretty sure you mean underpay. Otherwise agreed :P
- verstohlen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Often laughing is all one can do to pretend to dismiss something that deep down inside you know is painfully and obviously true. How can one not pity such a pathetic creature?
- fcekuahd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Bottom line: it's up to us to make sure that greedy arrogant pigs like this don't profit by abusing their customers. Stop buying music from RIAA labels. I'll do my part.
- sexycommando, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I know pre-emptive strikes have gone out of style lately, but I would totally support one against the RIAA. We can put this guy's face in the deck of 52 cards we give to soldiers for high priority targets. Some good old shock and awe for these fascist bastards.
- TheLoneWolf071, on 10/12/2007, -9/+12I'll Admit That Downloading is stealing music when they admit that:
A)They overprice the music
B)They overpay the artist's
C)They Are Demon-Spawn - Endemoniada, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3What the hell? Do you seriously still wish you could be listening to analog cassette tapes? I, for one, am really glad technology has moved forward and that I can listen to music that is much, much closer to what both the musicians and the producers originally imagined. It's a huge step forward.
What I don't like, though, is that now that we're basically at the point where everything is indistinguishable from the source, they're trying to get us to buy the same content multiple times instead. The RIAA would be happiest if we had to pay each and every time we listen to a single song. So yeah, ***** the RIAA! - actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Agreed, except that it's more like surveying kids as to whether or not they prefer Chuck E. Cheese to a nice Mediterranean Café. The RIAA beat out Hiliburton. Clearly the voting public had adolescent priorities.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@ Minorlemming - Not so sure about the ones you have listed, but there are several musicians that definitely do not agree with the tactics taken by their recording company or the RIAA. In many cases, they are getting just as ripped off, sometimes getting only a few cents per album after the label takes their shares.
http://www.digg.com/tech_news/Courtney_Love_does_the_math_or_Why_you_needn_t_shed_any_tears_for_the_RIAA - Fordi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3And, of course, from losing multiple lawsuits. That's right, guys! Fight on until you're broke!
Then, maybe, we can bring a little sense to copyright law and the remains of the music industry. - HeatVision, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"RIAA VP Laughs At Consumerist's "Worst Company In America" Contest"
Why wouldn't they?
It was a survey of people who visit the Consumerist's site, who are mainly directed from Digg (since every Consumerist story is submitted to Digg), and most Digg users hate the RIAA (understandably so).
It's like surveying the Democrats if they think George W Bush is doing a good job.
The problem with the Consumerist is that they post almost anything people submit to them since they don't fact check anything. Even a small town paper has more journalistic integrity. If they want the RIAA and other business entities to be concerned with what their readers think, the Consumerist needs to earn respect, which is done through fair journalism, not publishing every "Coke machine didn't return my money" story. - xst4t1kx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2If his income were based on public opinion, he wouldn't be laughing.
- Pareidoliatic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Smart artists like Barenaked Ladies are changing the content delivery model forever. The end of the music industry's monopoly is nigh, and the days of talentless drones leaching of the blood and sweast of the artists are pretty well done.
http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/03/05/barenaked-ladies-new-album-free-no-drm-now/ - SniperGX1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Also the fact that all their products are infected with DRM. It is rare that you could download for free a better product than you can buy legally.
- bloobloo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Of course it is a company. It has a CEO just like any other.
- radiofrequency, on 10/21/2007, -1/+3RIAA isn't really a company, it's more of a racketeering scheme. They don't produce anything except extortion threats.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 123 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is