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.
25 Comments
- Warstrong, on 06/30/2009, -1/+14"***** The RIAA, ***** the MPAA" is going on the back of my next iPod.
- inactive, on 06/29/2009, -2/+9They can't keep this up forever. Someday someone's going to put a stop to the stunts the RIAA is pulling.
- Haptick, on 06/30/2009, -1/+6What everyone really needs an ambitious (assistant) district attorney to prosecute companies like MediaSentry for their illegal invasions of privacy, and the RIAA and MPAA for conspiracy to commit said felonies.
- stubear, on 06/30/2009, -0/+5I think you're jumping the gun there little whipper snapper. First you have to prosecute to determine if the acts are illegal or not. I know you kids today have trouble with this concept, but trust me, it's the way things work.
- Supertrout, on 06/30/2009, -1/+5I clicked because I thought it was a Bioshock article....I need to get out more.....
- SpoonMSU, on 06/30/2009, -0/+4I think you mean "Obligatory"
- comgen, on 06/30/2009, -2/+5First, I understand that the MPAA and RIAA are just " holding companies " ( or similar ).
However, just a thought....................
For every song / movie being presented in court, at least ( 1 ) one, band member and/or actor should be present during the trial(s) and/or required to testify ( in person, video, etc ). In person prefered, since the point here is to allow the accused FANS to hear ( opinion, fact, pain, suffering, comments, etc ) first hand and require that the musician and/or actor directly connected to the content in question be present and not some lawyer representing the band, movie studio, etc..........in other words the CREATOR(s) of the content. I am not justifying the theft of content, I do however, feel that the MPAA and RIAA use techniques that are misrepresenting the content creators or they ( lawyers ) are misusing the content creators name and stance as leverage. If both parties ( accused and creator ) are in the room together, it would allow for objections and approvals in real time and not delayed / sent via press release later by the content creator(s) opposing the MPAA / RIAA case(s). Though.....theft is theft no mater how you try to justify it !
Now, on the lighter side of things, such a gathering of musicians ( super-band ) could generate extra revenues for the RIAA for example by, presenting after court concerts. If you are reading this and are thinking where the hell did this come from after the above statements ? LOL in America our court systems are mocked everyday on daytime TV, with " Judge < insert name > " shows, an after court super-band concert ( in court even...) is not by any means far fetched, next to these shows. Plus the current RIAA / MPAA court trials would fit in better under a " Judge Mathis ", " Judge Alex " or " Judge Joe Brown " court room, rather than a LEGIT and SERIOUS court room, hell what about a " TV Supreme Court " show and trial, combining the best of daytime TV Judges. ? - kahoona1, on 06/30/2009, -1/+4The first thing that came to mind.
The Little Sisters are taking over?! - ConcernedCanuck, on 06/29/2009, -2/+5Arbitrary: ***** The RIAA!
- tkubic46, on 06/29/2009, -5/+7bioshock
- uberchaoslord, on 06/30/2009, -0/+2***** the gnaa!
- kevro, on 06/30/2009, -1/+3I wonder if the judge and the jury once enlightened to the wonders of bitttorent don't go home and become regular users as well?
- Haptick, on 07/01/2009, -0/+2Specifically old man, I'm referring to the "alleged" abuses of the Wiretap Act committed by MediaSentry. And then, as should have been numbingly obvious from my previous post, if it can be proven that MediaSentry is guilty of violating wiretapping law, then you can also charge the RIAA and MPAA with conspiracy to commit a crime. Your supercilious derision from my exclusion of the arguably necessary adverb then is not an adequate means to support your otherwise precarious point.
- inactive, on 06/30/2009, -1/+3Give it up pirates, it's over. The RIAA has won, TPB is no more, and it's only a matter of time until large-scale torrent distribution is removed from the web entirely.
I remember when I told everyone that TPB was finished, long ago, and the kiddies on this website didn't believe me. - brickbat, on 06/30/2009, -1/+3The whole "It's publicly available information so we aren't investigating" is just stunning. Even more stunning is the fact that it worked in the first case. Private investigators generally use publicly available information when they are investigating someone. Or, say I follow you around in public and record what you say. Well, you are saying it in public, so that means I am not investigating you?
- azbmr, on 06/30/2009, -0/+1You will probably find all ambitious ADAs want to be friends to these sort of companies and interests. That is what comes of their ambition.
- comgen, on 06/30/2009, -0/+11.) it is theft in the " EYES " of the RIAA / MPAA so until the terminology is adjusted and widely accepted ( mass public acceptance ), it is theft. You do NOT under the current legal terminology have the right to for example: purchase a legal copy ( if that's how the source was obtained ) and then give a near 1:1 copy away ( 1 copy or 500 Million ) and/or resale such copies. I'm not making an argument against the CREATOR losing out, or not directly...........what " I " suggested is that the current path the RIAA and MPAA are on, from their POINT OF VIEW, you steal and it hurts everyone, even the creator of content, which...............................
* IF * the RIAA / MPAA were actually presenting the case as it REALLY IS " the RIAA and MPAA " is being stolen from and thus they're attacks on the FANS are costing them money and in return costing the creator / actor / movie house / studios that happen to sign under them ( sign in terms of, these groups are legal..though behind the times, strong arms / union like ).......then, I would justify and agree 110% with the RIAA / MPAA cases, not the current investigative practices though..............
2. Having both parties present at trial would be interesting and I'm sure, if some bands for example, really knew how the people that represent them are treating fans in court ( excluding the sugar coated memo updates they might receive ). The game might just change...............
3. " but I watch it anyway though an open window? " THAT IS A CRIME with or without the movie dude.................we call that " peeping tom " or " Invasion of privacy ", plus " trespassing "..................
3a. PER current terminology, if you are screening a movie or content in public ( including a private home ), screening by multiple people is also illegal. NOW, what about my family ( more than 1 ), they tend to let that slide, non direct family not living in the house...nope........
What about bars and stores ? Bars and stores pay a fee each time and/or monthly / yearly. The traffic of each location determines the fee. Public screening was one of the reason ( some ) boxing specials went pay-per view - DJWilsonX, on 07/02/2009, -0/+1simple. just don't listen to top 40 or go watch new movies anymore. that's what I do.
even if we nuke the RIAA HQ, they'll somehow regenerate like the T1000. - inactive, on 06/30/2009, -1/+1It doesn't hurt to try even though it's a long shot.
- HelAom, on 06/29/2009, -2/+2Their strategy is: if you can't beat them, join them... then try to beat them while making a fool of yourself and if you're very lucky and have a biased judge, you'll get some money out of it
Respect for Nesson - davewelsh79, on 06/30/2009, -1/+1There was no theft. If there was then the creator would not have his creation any more.
Why don't you call it "murdering the creator"? I'm sure that would get ever more headlines?
On another note, if I never watch Wolverine, did I "steal" from the MPAA? Now what if my neighbour invites me over to watch it on DVD? What if my neighbour doesn't invite me over, but I watch it anyway though an open window? At what point does the creator get an unalienable "right" to my money? It's not cut and dried that a download is a lost sale. Infact, each download might benefit rather than detract from the creator's earnings. - velveetaavenger, on 06/30/2009, -1/+1I thought file-sharing already died with napster?
- inactive, on 06/30/2009, -2/+0He has now joined his one-time mentor on the Tenenbaum case, which goes to trial at the end of the July.
- Lateralis1, on 06/30/2009, -5/+2If you support Charles Nesson digg this up!
- FieldAnonymouse, on 06/30/2009, -3/+0Unfortunately, Apple probably won't let you. Most companies don't like engraving profanity onto their products.
Of course, that just means you go find some laser engraving place to do it for you after the fact.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is