http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/09/09/music.swap.settlement/index.html
Oh yeah, Brianna's 12.
RIAA Goes after horrible, devious criminal thieves
- Thread starter John Corn
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 20
- Views 3K
- Status
Perhaps but their technics could be better. All this will do is spurn more downloading.
Roger said:
I dunno ... I have (my sis, bro & me) we have 1300+ songs ................... I use it to download obscure songs like 60's/70's/80's tunes or one hit wonders and such.
So if you discount my share of songs downloaded that would leave my bro and sis with as much as 800 songs.
So if you discount my share of songs downloaded that would leave my bro and sis with as much as 800 songs.
If the RIAA continues attempting to enforce their copyright by pursuing individual offenders, they will soon be broke. Young Miss LaHaye was found liable for a full $2000. The RIAA's legal fees could have easily been four times that amount (not to mention investigative costs). The end result of this process may be the discovery that copyright laws are unenforceable in the world of internet file sharing.
I just broke the LAW!!
I just broke the LAW!!
Here's what I do ...........
Hi .............
Here's what I do ...................... 1st, I'm terrible remembering song titles, song lyrics and artists.
So I go to the Top 40 website and surf through the top songs from the 60's thru the 80's and then search and download them thru a peer to peer thingamajig.
Is it elegal ... yeah.
Is my conscious clear ... yeah.
First off, I would likely never buy these tunes ... heqq, I dunno if I could find any to buy.
Second .... these tunes are great exposure for the artists ... I mean, I may like the song I downloaded so much that it prompts me to go out and buy the whole album to see if I connect with the accompanying songs.
Hi .............
Here's what I do ...................... 1st, I'm terrible remembering song titles, song lyrics and artists.
So I go to the Top 40 website and surf through the top songs from the 60's thru the 80's and then search and download them thru a peer to peer thingamajig.
Is it elegal ... yeah.
Is my conscious clear ... yeah.
First off, I would likely never buy these tunes ... heqq, I dunno if I could find any to buy.
Second .... these tunes are great exposure for the artists ... I mean, I may like the song I downloaded so much that it prompts me to go out and buy the whole album to see if I connect with the accompanying songs.
Re: Here's what I do ...........
Can you find a pirated copy of Huked un fonecks for yourself? hehe just kidding couldn't resist. I know your misspells were intentional
Can you find a pirated copy of Huked un fonecks for yourself? hehe just kidding couldn't resist. I know your misspells were intentional
bert gordon said:
Hi .............
Here's what I do ...................... 1st, I'm terrible remembering song titles, song lyrics and artists.
So I go to the Top 40 website and surf through the top songs from the 60's thru the 80's and then search and download them thru a peer to peer thingamajig.
Is it elegal ... yeah.
Is my conscious clear ... yeah.
First off, I would likely never buy these tunes ... heqq, I dunno if I could find any to buy.
Second .... these tunes are great exposure for the artists ... I mean, I may like the song I downloaded so much that it prompts me to go out and buy the whole album to see if I connect with the accompanying songs.
Bert wrote:
"Is it elegal ... yeah.
Is my conscious clear ... yeah. "
So it's ok for you to steal but it's not ok for Charlie to lie then sell out and offer porn?
Geronimo would call that hypocritical.
Hey John Corn..... I don't care if it cost a billion dollars the thief’s must be stopped. You’re not appalled by stealing this but you would be appalled if I stole Scott’s post and posted elsewhere as my own.
"Is it elegal ... yeah.
Is my conscious clear ... yeah. "
So it's ok for you to steal but it's not ok for Charlie to lie then sell out and offer porn?
Geronimo would call that hypocritical.
Hey John Corn..... I don't care if it cost a billion dollars the thief’s must be stopped. You’re not appalled by stealing this but you would be appalled if I stole Scott’s post and posted elsewhere as my own.
This is all a bunch of crap, if the music industry really wanted to stop the peer to peer thing all they would have to do is supply a reasonably priced web site for downloading. Instead they decide to obtain a new power (ISPs must supply users names without a subpeona) to intimidate potential customers and kids. Sure it is wrong to steal music from the artists, but it is also surely wrong for the RIAA to bully our country's political system to ensure that they can still take a huge profit from the artists and claim the majority of the money.
If you people don't like the RIAA, spot voting for senators who don't understand the implications of what they do. Congress will never be able to deal with this issue until new blood is elected. The RIAA has ever right to defend its copyrights, but the Congress won't stand up for "fair use" of our products. Anyone who uses Kazaa is stealing IMO and costing me the ability to usethe Music I paid for the way I want.
I don't buy the argument that the RIAA is hurting artists. There are pleanty of ways to get noticed on the internet these days, yet artists continue to sign with record labels because of the huge bonus they get. Even when their contracts are up, and they have lots of money and the ability to fund themselves, they still sign with record labels.
I the artists really want to help, how about a strike?
I don't buy the argument that the RIAA is hurting artists. There are pleanty of ways to get noticed on the internet these days, yet artists continue to sign with record labels because of the huge bonus they get. Even when their contracts are up, and they have lots of money and the ability to fund themselves, they still sign with record labels.
I the artists really want to help, how about a strike?
Hmmm...so if you make a tape of songs you recorded off of the radio, and then you make a copy of it, or give it to your friend(s), this in turn warrants a lawsuit as well?
Thats my point John, that is called "Fair Use". I am now limited by doing this because of the people who share thousands of songs. Fair Use is fine when I am going to personally give it to you, but opening up my hard drive to the world is not Fair Use. People of the poor judgement of a few people, ordinary users such as myself pay the price. If we had a Congress that understood the laws, they would enforce Fair Use.
In your example, Fair Use applies, but riping hundreds of CDs, and then sharing them is not what Fair Use is about.
In your example, Fair Use applies, but riping hundreds of CDs, and then sharing them is not what Fair Use is about.
I undertand your point James. I honestly didn't look at it that way.
Actually, whether file sharing is illegal or not it is also contested. Copyright infringement has only been prosecuted against commercial violators, like bootleggers, people who produce copies for sale and commercial gain without permission. The law is pretty clear-cut on that. But so far, none of these P2P cases have gone to trial, and not one single person has paid a "fine". They've paid settlements in civil lawsuits, which is completely different from a fine. In fact, not one of these people has been charged with a felony or even a misdemeanor. They've only been hit with civil lawsuits.
I think there's a reason the RIAA is so quick to settle. I don't think they want many of these cases going to court, because it is still a grey area of the law. If a decision were to not swing in their favor in one of these lawsuits, their entire plan could blow up in their face. Especially with the recent price fixing conviction.
Actually, whether file sharing is illegal or not it is also contested. Copyright infringement has only been prosecuted against commercial violators, like bootleggers, people who produce copies for sale and commercial gain without permission. The law is pretty clear-cut on that. But so far, none of these P2P cases have gone to trial, and not one single person has paid a "fine". They've paid settlements in civil lawsuits, which is completely different from a fine. In fact, not one of these people has been charged with a felony or even a misdemeanor. They've only been hit with civil lawsuits.
I think there's a reason the RIAA is so quick to settle. I don't think they want many of these cases going to court, because it is still a grey area of the law. If a decision were to not swing in their favor in one of these lawsuits, their entire plan could blow up in their face. Especially with the recent price fixing conviction.
- Status
