RIAA hitting us hard, already 3-4 people got Subpoenas, just read

[slackerinabox]

What about countless class action lawsuits against them? I'm sure we can find a press-hungry lawyer out there..

 

[Rastus]

Originally posted by: Rogue
Technologically, it's probably easy to beat them at their own game. Something I realized one day is that when I VPN into my employer's network, my public IP address is the internally assigned IP address of my employer's network, at least as far as I can tell. Anyone else notice this?

My company would fire me for sharing files from their VPN.

 

[TheBoyBlunder]

*sigh*....time fire up the ol' firewall...

 

[morkinva]

Originally posted by: AkumaX
bonkers, use kazaa lite 2.4, blocks riaa ips

Just that version? Not 2.0 ?

 

[yellowperil]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Hmm, are you sure about this? Judges do have the power to interpret laws, and because of our common law system their decisions have binding power in their jurisdiction.

Judges interpret laws the legislature passes, which is to say courts try to ascertain what the legislature intended the law to mean and how the legislature intended it to apply.

Courts do not determine public policy (activist courts excepted), that is the job of the legislature.

So how would that not apply to what nycromes said? When judges write opinions they draw lines in gray areas and explain their reasoning. It doesn't matter if the judge is an judicial activist or believes in judicial restraint, whatever their decision is, it becomes the law in that jurisdiction until it is overturned (stare decisis). What you described is a civil law system which is prevalent in Europe, but our common law system (adopted from England) allows judges to "make" the law.

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: NogginBoink

"There's no way either us or our daughter would do anything we knew to be illegal," Pate said, promising to remove the software quickly. "I don't think anybody knew this was illegal, just a way to get some music."

Bullshit.

Haahbwhahahaa!!

 

[neutralizer]

Originally posted by: freedomsbeat212
You know, if P2P trading is shut down I'm just going to have to go to the library to get the newest albums and rip them myself.. Or maybe the RIAA would shut down public libraries as well..

My library is so crappy, they only have old albums and none of the new ones. I don't want to rip old music.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: freedomsbeat212
What about countless class action lawsuits against them? I'm sure we can find a press-hungry lawyer out there..

Class action makes it too cheap for them since it's all bundled in one case... BTW- Class action for what? Right to steal? Sorry won't work.. People who do wrongs only hope is the make RIAA go away though costing them to much to persecute the individual file swapper. IE kids with nothing to loose, no assests I mean, drag these incidents out individually as long as possible and greatest expense to them. File about 50 motions for every answer you file. Tie them up in court, most liky you will loose but 10 or 20 of these and it will stop.


I'm surprised there's not a site up yet on getting ther ball rolling, whereby all you need to do is fill in the blanks, and most of the work is done for you. Look for it.

 

People should fight the RIAA. Fight the RIAA with public lawyers if they can't afford it. Fight them with coalitions against their monopolistic business and nature.
Obviously a scare tactic to get people to stop using an infinitely superior distribution system.
By the time the industry gets around to using the current p2p model, we will be telepathically transmitting it.

 

[dtmbb92]

Ok. Serious Question. I'm just wondering. How many people here are going to stop downloading music and things because of this?

 

[neutralizer]

I stopped using Kazaa a long time ago since it kept giving inferior music anyways.

 

[idNut]

Originally posted by: dtmbb92
Ok. Serious Question. I'm just wondering. How many people here are going to stop downloading music and things because of this?

Eh, I'm thinking about it. Subpoenaing anonymous people for what you download scares me. What about porn!? AHH!!

 

[BDawg]

Originally posted by: dtmbb92
Ok. Serious Question. I'm just wondering. How many people here are going to stop downloading music and things because of this?

I've never used filesharing to download music; I've always ripped my own. Now, getting TV shows that I watch might be another story.

 

[tcsenter]

err.... yes. but then they also evaluate constitutionality.

Which is why I already stated: Had you said "constitutional", maybe, but "legal", no.

Miss that part?

So how would that not apply to what nycromes said? When judges write opinions they draw lines in gray areas and explain their reasoning. It doesn't matter if the judge is an judicial activist or believes in judicial restraint, whatever their decision is, it becomes the law in that jurisdiction until it is overturned (stare decisis). What you described is a civil law system which is prevalent in Europe, but our common law system (adopted from England) allows judges to "make" the law.

Sure, in civil cases arising from a civil dispute between two parties. Judges do not 'make law', they base decisions on common law principles where no law exists to enforce or uphold.

 

[ClueLis]

Originally posted by: morkinva

Originally posted by: AkumaX
bonkers, use kazaa lite 2.4, blocks riaa ips

Just that version? Not 2.0 ?

2.0 has the capability to block the IPs, but there is not default list until 2.4.1.

 

[isaacmacdonald]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

err.... yes. but then they also evaluate constitutionality.

Which is why I already stated: Had you said "constitutional", maybe, but "legal", no.

Miss that part?

oh yes I did... I wonder... is it possible to be more condescending?

anyway. perhaps you missed the part where I went on to say:

err.... yes. but then they also evaluate constitutionality. In some cases, it's just basic stuff, but in other cases, it's far more platonic than aristotilean interpretation. For example, the role that prevailing public opinion plays in cases like sodomy or the michigan admissions policy.

IE: evalutating consitutionality in some cases = mfg'ng law (platonic interpretation).

 

[yellowperil]

Originally posted by: tcsenter
Sure, in civil cases arising from a civil dispute between two parties. Judges do not 'make law', they base decisions on common law principles where no law exists to enforce or uphold.

I think you are referring to 'civil' in a different context. There is 'civil' in criminal vs. civil courts, and 'civil' in common vs. civil law. But they're different concepts, and I digress. The basic point is that courts have discretion to interpret laws in their jurisdiction (here, pertaining to copyright), and what they decide becomes law. Basically, until the decision is overturned by statute or another judicial decision, the ruling in ____ vs. ____ becomes the way the law is interpreted. The law on paper is often generally written and does not provide a clear answer to a question (e.g. is tape recording a radio part of fair use?) so whatever the decision is on ____ vs. ____, becomes the law (yes, it is fair use, or no, it isn't). That's what I meant by 'judge-made' law.