RIAA - Labels aim big guns at small file swappers.

[KeyserSoze]

Originally posted by: TheVrolok
I just CAN NOT believe that the RIAA is getting away with this. The VAST majority of my mp3's are 100% legit. I don't like having to use CDs to listen to music because it's a pain to switch 'em when I don't wanna listen to a certain group anymore. So I've taken the time to rip ALL my CDs to mp3's. That's nearly 250 CDs x average of say.. 13 songs + a few non-legit mp3's and my total is around 3500 mp3s, do they consider this substantial large-scale trading? (I know many people share quite a bit more) I think I'm just going to delete my non-legit songs since most of 'em are songs I liked for a whole week anyway, and keep ripping my CDs as I buy 'em (cheap/on sale wherever I can find 'em, I will pay 11 bucks for a CD). So say the RIAA takes me to court and I produce the 250 CDs that I've ripped.. then what? Counter suit? Which costs me money and I would HOPE that I win enough at least to cover my costs.. but then there are opportunity costs.. going to court takes time. So basically.. I just don't see how the RIAA can get away with this, there MUST be something unconstitutional with this. I guess since we're talking public P2P software it's not really an illegal search.. Either way, INSANE.

Ok, just for the record, I hate the RIAA also. But I don't know how you say that all the mp3's are legal. I mean, when you rip them on your computer, and you use them for your own personal use, they are legal. But once you distribute them on a P2P network, they become illegal for others to have, right?

BTW, I use Direct Connect (Just to let you know that I'm not all Legit.)




KeyserSoze

 

[OREOSpeedwagon]

Originally posted by: TheVrolok
I just CAN NOT believe that the RIAA is getting away with this. The VAST majority of my mp3's are 100% legit. I don't like having to use CDs to listen to music because it's a pain to switch 'em when I don't wanna listen to a certain group anymore. So I've taken the time to rip ALL my CDs to mp3's. That's nearly 250 CDs x average of say.. 13 songs + a few non-legit mp3's and my total is around 3500 mp3s, do they consider this substantial large-scale trading? (I know many people share quite a bit more) I think I'm just going to delete my non-legit songs since most of 'em are songs I liked for a whole week anyway, and keep ripping my CDs as I buy 'em (cheap/on sale wherever I can find 'em, I will pay 11 bucks for a CD). So say the RIAA takes me to court and I produce the 250 CDs that I've ripped.. then what? Counter suit? Which costs me money and I would HOPE that I win enough at least to cover my costs.. but then there are opportunity costs.. going to court takes time. So basically.. I just don't see how the RIAA can get away with this, there MUST be something unconstitutional with this. I guess since we're talking public P2P software it's not really an illegal search.. Either way, INSANE.

if you are sharing them, all they need to know is that you are.

 

[TheVrolok]

Originally posted by: OREOSpeedwagon

Originally posted by: TheVrolok
I just CAN NOT believe that the RIAA is getting away with this. The VAST majority of my mp3's are 100% legit. I don't like having to use CDs to listen to music because it's a pain to switch 'em when I don't wanna listen to a certain group anymore. So I've taken the time to rip ALL my CDs to mp3's. That's nearly 250 CDs x average of say.. 13 songs + a few non-legit mp3's and my total is around 3500 mp3s, do they consider this substantial large-scale trading? (I know many people share quite a bit more) I think I'm just going to delete my non-legit songs since most of 'em are songs I liked for a whole week anyway, and keep ripping my CDs as I buy 'em (cheap/on sale wherever I can find 'em, I will pay 11 bucks for a CD). So say the RIAA takes me to court and I produce the 250 CDs that I've ripped.. then what? Counter suit? Which costs me money and I would HOPE that I win enough at least to cover my costs.. but then there are opportunity costs.. going to court takes time. So basically.. I just don't see how the RIAA can get away with this, there MUST be something unconstitutional with this. I guess since we're talking public P2P software it's not really an illegal search.. Either way, INSANE.

if you are sharing them, all they need to know is that you are.

BUT.. as long as the people DLing them from me (I don't actually share so it's really a non-issue BUT) have the original CDs as well there's nothing illegal about it. Also, it's not my responsibility that they have the original CD, I'm only giving people who say.. don't have a CD-ROM in their computers the opportunity to digitally backup their music.

 

[GtPrOjEcTX]

Originally posted by: TheVrolok

Originally posted by: OREOSpeedwagon

Originally posted by: TheVrolok
I just CAN NOT believe that the RIAA is getting away with this. The VAST majority of my mp3's are 100% legit. I don't like having to use CDs to listen to music because it's a pain to switch 'em when I don't wanna listen to a certain group anymore. So I've taken the time to rip ALL my CDs to mp3's. That's nearly 250 CDs x average of say.. 13 songs + a few non-legit mp3's and my total is around 3500 mp3s, do they consider this substantial large-scale trading? (I know many people share quite a bit more) I think I'm just going to delete my non-legit songs since most of 'em are songs I liked for a whole week anyway, and keep ripping my CDs as I buy 'em (cheap/on sale wherever I can find 'em, I will pay 11 bucks for a CD). So say the RIAA takes me to court and I produce the 250 CDs that I've ripped.. then what? Counter suit? Which costs me money and I would HOPE that I win enough at least to cover my costs.. but then there are opportunity costs.. going to court takes time. So basically.. I just don't see how the RIAA can get away with this, there MUST be something unconstitutional with this. I guess since we're talking public P2P software it's not really an illegal search.. Either way, INSANE.

if you are sharing them, all they need to know is that you are.

BUT.. as long as the people DLing them from me (I don't actually share so it's really a non-issue BUT) have the original CDs as well there's nothing illegal about it. Also, it's not my responsibility that they have the original CD, I'm only giving people who say.. don't have a CD-ROM in their computers the opportunity to digitally backup their music.

nice...but they won't buy it. who doesn't have a cd-rom type drive in their computers nowadays?

 

[jlee]

If you *legally* own the CD, is it still illegal to d/l? Probably..but I'm just wondering anyways.

 

[OREOSpeedwagon]

Originally posted by: CadetLee
If you *legally* own the CD, is it still illegal to d/l? Probably..but I'm just wondering anyways.

i'm pretty sure it is, but i don't know for sure

 

[MistaTastyCakes]

I can't see why it would be illegal to download a song if you own the CD, but I'm using the logic that the law uses with ROMs for Emulators. If you own the game, you can legally own the ROM as a backup. If not, you're evil!

 

[Linux23]

wow, looks like the RIAA is getting pretty desperate.

 

[bobcpg]

Originally posted by: GtPrOjEcTX
CNET article


The RIAA has also lined up nearly three dozen artists, including Missy Elliott, Shakira, Eve and the Dixie Chicks, to support its plans to sue music fans.

Thats my favorite part, just wait until everyone strikes and no one buys cd for like a month.

 

[dud]

The RIAA "represents" the established music industry and yes they have the right (as any of us do) to sue anyone they feel is stealing from them. Unfortunately they cannot sue everyone and there are ALWAYS ways around what they are trying to do. They are so deperate (because their sales are dropping through the toilet) that they are going to sue their own potential customers!

If you are using Kazaa there are easy ways around this. If you download MP3s just move the files out of your shared folder when the download is complete. If that is the only folder that you have given the network access to then they should not be able to see them, if you move them.

The war has only just begun, we are in the early stage of the war. The RIAA appears to think that they are fighting for their proverbial life. If you look at their sagging sales and profits some of the "established" labels may soon end up going the way of the dinosaur. They must realize that something must be terribly wrong (i.e. many, many customers are dissatisfied with the way they market and sell their product).

I rread the article and I just found another reason to dislike the Dixie Chicks, they are involved with this initiative.

 

[Jeraden]

Originally posted by: TheVrolok
I just CAN NOT believe that the RIAA is getting away with this. The VAST majority of my mp3's are 100% legit. I don't like having to use CDs to listen to music because it's a pain to switch 'em when I don't wanna listen to a certain group anymore. So I've taken the time to rip ALL my CDs to mp3's. That's nearly 250 CDs x average of say.. 13 songs + a few non-legit mp3's and my total is around 3500 mp3s, do they consider this substantial large-scale trading? (I know many people share quite a bit more) I think I'm just going to delete my non-legit songs since most of 'em are songs I liked for a whole week anyway, and keep ripping my CDs as I buy 'em (cheap/on sale wherever I can find 'em, I will pay 11 bucks for a CD). So say the RIAA takes me to court and I produce the 250 CDs that I've ripped.. then what? Counter suit? Which costs me money and I would HOPE that I win enough at least to cover my costs.. but then there are opportunity costs.. going to court takes time. So basically.. I just don't see how the RIAA can get away with this, there MUST be something unconstitutional with this. I guess since we're talking public P2P software it's not really an illegal search.. Either way, INSANE.

I think you need to study up on the law more. Thats fine if you rip them for your own use. As soon as you let others copy them off you, you are breaking the law.

 

[Beller0ph1]

Do foreigners fall under the RIAA's jurisdiction?

 

[tm37]

Originally posted by: TheVrolok

Originally posted by: OREOSpeedwagon

Originally posted by: TheVrolok
I just CAN NOT believe that the RIAA is getting away with this. The VAST majority of my mp3's are 100% legit. I don't like having to use CDs to listen to music because it's a pain to switch 'em when I don't wanna listen to a certain group anymore. So I've taken the time to rip ALL my CDs to mp3's. That's nearly 250 CDs x average of say.. 13 songs + a few non-legit mp3's and my total is around 3500 mp3s, do they consider this substantial large-scale trading? (I know many people share quite a bit more) I think I'm just going to delete my non-legit songs since most of 'em are songs I liked for a whole week anyway, and keep ripping my CDs as I buy 'em (cheap/on sale wherever I can find 'em, I will pay 11 bucks for a CD). So say the RIAA takes me to court and I produce the 250 CDs that I've ripped.. then what? Counter suit? Which costs me money and I would HOPE that I win enough at least to cover my costs.. but then there are opportunity costs.. going to court takes time. So basically.. I just don't see how the RIAA can get away with this, there MUST be something unconstitutional with this. I guess since we're talking public P2P software it's not really an illegal search.. Either way, INSANE.

if you are sharing them, all they need to know is that you are.

BUT.. as long as the people DLing them from me (I don't actually share so it's really a non-issue BUT) have the original CDs as well there's nothing illegal about it. Also, it's not my responsibility that they have the original CD, I'm only giving people who say.. don't have a CD-ROM in their computers the opportunity to digitally backup their music.

while it is perfectly legal for you to make MP3's of your music the minute you start sharing with me it becomes illegal. There is no way for you to check that I have a copy of the CD when I download. the thing to remember is they are going after thoose who distribute copyrighted matrials. If I legally own XP corp, I can't make all of my freinds copys can I? Not legally. movies are the same way.

When you put this music out there for everyone to download you are DISTRIBUTING it and that is illegal. It is up to the record companies to decide if they want to distribute their music in this manner and to this point they have said no.

 

[bernse]

Originally posted by: dman
Even if you are innocent of the file trading, it's going to cost some money to defend it.

Unless you're judged innocent and the Judge rules costs, then they are on the hook for your fees.

 

[austin316]

so is this gonna stop anyone from using kazaa? or are you not just not gonna share any files? also, does usenet fall under this jurisdiction?

 

[allisolm]

the music industry trade group said it will launch a massive campaign Thursday to target individuals who offer "substantial amounts" of music through peer-to-peer networks.

That's today.

Also from AP article this morning (6/26):
"The RIAA...said it would begin today to search Internet file-sharing networks to identify users who offer 'substantial' collections of mp3 music files for downloading."

The courts have already ruled that the Internet providers are REQUIRED to identify subscribers suspected of illegally sharing music and movie files.

 

[FuzzyBee]

I'm sick and tired of the RIAA and their repetitive attempts to blame all of the problems in the world on filesharing.

Last night on CNBC, the new head of the RIAA was crying about how much the artists were getting jacked around by services like kazaa. Here are a few points for you, Mr. Sherman:

1. Yes, music sales are down. On the other hand, music costs are up. It now costs ~30% more for a new CD now than it did a couple of years ago. Why is that? Are the artists getting more money? No. Are costs going up? No. That money is just going to line the pockets of corrupt music executives, and allowing for more underhanded payola to radio stations to continue this endless stream of utter crap that emanates from FM radio.
2. In case you didn't notice, Mr. Sherman, a lot of Americans are out of work these days. Believe it or not, music purchases aren't essential. Call me crazy, but when I was out of work for six months last year, purchasing music was the last thing on my mind. Especially when CD prices were rapidly increasing. (see #1)
3. One of your grandiose solutions is the iTunes store. First, iTunes is Mac-only. Wintel boxes still rule sales, and will for quite some time. While iTunes may be a good model, most computer users can't utilize it. Second, it has recently come about that a lot of artists hate it when consumers can purchase individual tracks off their albums. They claim that it damages the "artistic integrity" of the album. Bullcrap. They realize that most albums these days have one or maybe two decent tracks on them, and the other 45-60 minutes are composed of utter crap. Of course they don't want you to spend only $1 on the entire quality music on an album.

As Fred von Lohmann of the EFF stated last night, this could very well be the RIAA's own little Vietnam. Mr. Sherman, please stop trying to keep the system from changing - file sharing isn't going away. Use those millions of dollars you are currently spending on your high-priced attorneys to figure out how to adapt to the new system instead. It'll save everyone a lot of heartache.

</rant>

 

[cycleman77]

I didnt feel like reading thru all of these posts so if this is a repost then im sorry...

Downloading from the kazaa network was never "safe". Yes I think there is more risk now, but there is what....over 6 million users on the kazaa network? What are the chances of the RIAA getting you? Its impossible for the RIAA to get everyone. I'm willing to bet that the RIAA only goes after users with a certain about of files or maybe a certain amount of space filled up with illegal downloaded material.
Well if you do get caught, there is some help out there. Fellow users have been giving donations to the unlucky individuals that have been forced to settle with the RIAA.

 

[gigapet]

I'm sure all this will really pay off when they win the cases against already broke as a joke college and highschool kids. Like the judge is really gonna award them a students 50 dollar a week work/study paycheck. Such friggin losers the RIAA is.

Have fun sueing people that have nothing for you to take.

so friggin stupid!

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: Beller0ph1
Do foreigners fall under the RIAA's jurisdiction?

I would say if you are in the U.S., yes. f you are downloading while on your yacht in the South Pacific, then no.

 

[Kenazo]

What kind of pull does the RIAA have in Canada?

 

[MaxDepth]

Originally posted by: Kenazo
What kind of pull does the RIAA have in Canada?

Or, for that matter Mexico or China?

Hmm. seems to me that there will be a little more programming on the back end of P2P programs to account for routers and proxy IPs...

I feel more secure in downloading and surfing because my own machine hides behind a proxy server firewall and then connects to a proxy not in my country.

At work, I don't even bother because of the newest corporate mandate on external downloading. (Hint: DON'T)

 

[FeathersMcGraw]

I can't see this announcement being anything more than a desperate scare tactic. But at least we know that they're making good use of their declining album sales revenues.

 

[beyonddc]

Does all of these RIAA things apply to private FTP server? Someone who has a 40gig worth of mp3 in his ftp, are they in risk also?

and does this apply to English music only or other country music? Let's start listen to africa music!!!

 

[mikedwz]

How do you track the ip of the source of your download in kazaa?

What about mp3's of live music, especially for those bands who are "taper friendly"?