12yo Girl sued by RIAA

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

jagr10

Golden Member
Jan 21, 2001
1,995
0
0
Maybe the RIAA doesn't realize that the drop in cash flow is due to the crappy music out there and the amount of money they're spending on big shot lawyers to sue people. I mean, what's the difference between this and people taping programs on their vcr's?
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Originally posted by: jagr10
Maybe the RIAA doesn't realize that the drop in cash flow is due to the crappy music out there and the amount of money they're spending on big shot lawyers to sue people. I mean, what's the difference between this and people taping programs on their vcr's?

How do you think they are making up all their lost money? Buy suing people!
 

Ocuflox

Senior member
May 6, 2001
440
0
0
Originally posted by: ness1469
I think that everyone defending their supposed right to download music is stupid.

For everyone that thinks the RIAA is just a bunch of idiots... then you are sorely mistaken. It's THEIR goal to maximize THEIR profits, and it would be stupid of them to not protect their assets. Why don't you people give away 30% of every paycheck to ungrateful strangers who spend so much time bitching about you and what you have to offer, and under no circumstances deserve deserve the money, THEN realize this is too similar to what is happening to them. Then, after all that, why don't you start imagining those same people pickpocketing you after you start to cut off their supply, they give you all sorts of hell for it, and make you out to be the greedy one. Suddenly they don't seem so bad, huh?

I have no pity for a person of any age who isn't responsible with their computer.

All of you greedy little bastards out there who think they somehow have a right to music, or shouldn't have to pay for music that sucks, or any of those other canned excuses needs a real reality check, and you also need to grow up and realize that music is a BUSINESS to many people, it's the way they feed their family. You are not being given a choice whether you want it to be illegal or not, and there is no reason why you should be entitled to blatently rip someone else off and somehow justify it. There are many people out there who still consider it art, and clearly those people are offerring their music to others freely, so your choice is to get their music and be happy with it, or shut the hell up.

Thanks.

 

Ocuflox

Senior member
May 6, 2001
440
0
0
that is interesting - what is the difference of using tivo and dl mp3s via kazaa? screw the RIAA - and for everybody supporting them - im sure you people are the most law-abiding citizens ever.
 

pennylane

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2002
6,077
1
0
"The CD's cost too much" - So thats gives you a right to steal them?
No you don't have the right to steal them. The argument is "Isn't price controlling" illegal (or at least immoral) as well?

"The music sucks" - If it sucks why is it downloaded?
Not all of it does. The argument is "If there's one or 2 good songs, why should I have to buy a CD that's 90% crap?"

"The RIAA are assholes for suing a 12 year old" - She stole from them, if she didnt know the rules too bad. If some dumb guy from a forgien contrey kills someone and says "I didnt know that was illegal." You think they are going to let them walk?

People are mad because she's just a juvenile. What would happen if she tried stealing a CD from a store? Would she be sued? Could she go to jail? She'd get in trouble yes. But not big trouble. How is this any different?

And let's remember... people are NOT downloading the music at its best quality. mp3's are still compressed.

What is pissing people off is that while the RIAA may be not be wrong and are allowed to defend themselves, they are using very foul means of doing so. It's in EVERYONE's best interest for the RIAA to stop suing little kids, start lowering prices, and start selling better music.
 

Ness

Diamond Member
Jul 10, 2002
5,407
2
0
Originally posted by: Ocuflox
that is interesting - what is the difference of using tivo and dl mp3s via kazaa? screw the RIAA - and for everybody supporting them - im sure you people are the most law-abiding citizens ever.



Regardless of what I do in my spare time... IT STILL DOES NOT MAKE IT LEGAL FOR ANYONE TO BREAK THE LAW... and just because I may break laws, doesn't mean the RIAA should get the poo end of the stick and not be able to collect money that should be theirs. It doesn't matter what TIVO does, it doesn't matter what KaZaa does, it doesn't matter what anyone does, because the RIAA wants what is theirs, and they DESERVE it. Yes, you heard me, they DESERVE _THEIR_ money.

Read my previous post if you don't understand why they deserve it, and why it's their money.


I'm still waiting for the day when someone can answer these questions with a legit answer:

What entitles you to download the music that you do not own for free?
What is the RIAA so bad for collecting money (regardless of who it goes to when they have it)?
 

isofilez

Banned
Jul 5, 2000
1,146
0
0
Originally posted by: CrazyDe1

I for one wouldn't convict anyone of guilt on just an IP address. What is the RIAA's evidence? This IP address with this Kazaa name downloaded this amount of songs and this is traced back to this ISP and this name. Well, you go in and go look, my hard drive has none of these songs. Look, my MAC address on my network card doesn't match this IP address. Look, I don't even have kazaa installed. Then they're going to ask how could someone have downloaded these songs. Then you say well...I'm not saying they did, but I have a wireless router and someone could have been stealing my bandwidth. This is VERY reasonable doubt.[/quote] think about what you are saying....lets say you've had your current broadband connection for 1 yr. and on average had your connection operating 16 hrs a day using your current nic and its mac address on file w/ your isp....then after the riaa accuses you of stealing music, you claim that someone was stealing bandwidth and that the mac address (on your newly swapped out nic) doesn't even match the one they have....you gonna tell em that that old mac address was being used by some jackass on your curb for 16hrs everyday for the last year and you havn't used you connection until recently which your current nic mac addy. lol just think about it.

but yea if the riaa ever contacted me, i definately would not cooperate in any way, i would impose all types of ways that it wasn't me as well. of course that wouldn't happen to me because id ont use p2p progs.
 

isofilez

Banned
Jul 5, 2000
1,146
0
0
Originally posted by: HJB417

what if you maintain a (wireless )router? How will the RIAA know which IP it came from if its NATed[/quote] because your WAN ip is used for accessing anything outside of your router. they dont need to know which pc on your lan it came from or the local ip for that box. if they have your WAN ip then that traces back to you.

 

Mardeth

Platinum Member
Jul 24, 2002
2,608
0
0
Originally posted by: SunnyD
Originally posted by: Dedpuhl
Originally posted by: Nitemare
Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
Originally posted by: FallenHero
Originally posted by: MacBaine
The group blames computer users such as Brianna, who use software programs to trade music with others on the Internet, for a 30% drop in music sales.

Maybe it's because you sued 30% of your customers.

or maybe its the slumping economy! OMG!

The RIAA has to be run by monkeys.

30% drop? I thought it was like 10%....

Next week it will be 50%.

welcome to the world of RIAA math

New-Age voodoo economics? hehe

However, RIAA sales revenues are up by $450 million over the same period. Yet downloads are hurting sales...

Did the parents pay Kazaa or RIAA 29$?
 

OulOat

Diamond Member
Aug 8, 2002
5,769
0
0
Originally posted by: fanerman91
"The CD's cost too much" - So thats gives you a right to steal them?
No you don't have the right to steal them. The argument is "Isn't price controlling" illegal (or at least immoral) as well?

Two wrongs don't make a right.

"The music sucks" - If it sucks why is it downloaded?
Not all of it does. The argument is "If there's one or 2 good songs, why should I have to buy a CD that's 90% crap?"

If 90% of the cd is crap, then think of it this way. Those one or two songs cost 16 bucks, and the other 90% is free. Don't feel like paying 16 bucks? Then don't buy it. But that still doesn't give you the right to steal.

"The RIAA are assholes for suing a 12 year old" - She stole from them, if she didnt know the rules too bad. If some dumb guy from a forgien contrey kills someone and says "I didnt know that was illegal." You think they are going to let them walk?

People are mad because she's just a juvenile. What would happen if she tried stealing a CD from a store? Would she be sued? Could she go to jail? She'd get in trouble yes. But not big trouble. How is this any different?

When the RIAA filed the lawsuit, they didn't know it was a twelve year old girl. All they knew was a name and it's isp. Are they supposed to drop it once they found out the age of the individual? "Oh, we're sorry, we didn't know you were only 12. Don't worry about the lawsuit, it's good as gone. And do remember to tell all your classmates and friends that it's okay for them to steal music because they are not adults yet." Is that what you want them to do?

And let's remember... people are NOT downloading the music at its best quality. mp3's are still compressed.

What does that have to do with anything? Just because pirated games aren't the best quality still doesn't give you the right to pirate.

better music.

"Better music"??? WTF is "better music"??? Explain and define. And "music that doesn't suck" is not a valid description or definition.
 

thraxes

Golden Member
Nov 4, 2000
1,974
0
0
It's the neverending story again... I don't use Kazaa that much anyway, I tend to get music the old fashioned way: borrow CD from a friend and burn it / copy to MD. Then theres the real old fashioned way that I use for rock classics: Buy an LP... yup if you know where to look, vinyl is cheap. Also has the added coolness of being authentic.

Something else has to factor in, that the music industrie isn't making as much cash has it would like: In the past the main consumer base for music has always been teens to 30-somethings, mostly with a limited cash supply that can be used for entertainment. 20 years ago there were no PS2, XBBOX or Nintendo consoles in the mainstream (The NES came a little later but its effects were lessend by the transition fromLP to CD), now of course the software for these consoles is in competition with musik for the same buck. Now some might argue but a majority of male teenagers would rather save the money that they would have otherwise spent on music to get the latest GTA game (I know I did). Another competitor for the entertainment buck is the movies: going to a cinema is statistically more popular than ever before while at the same time being more expensive than ever before. The MPAA wouldn't dare touch me: I go at least once a week to the movies, sometimes even twice a week.

So in my case why don't I buy much music? I spend my money on the odd game for the PC (another expensive hobby that is very cash hungry on its own) or the PS2 and on going to the movies. The movies I won't quit, I met my SO there and it as become the best relationship of my life... I can't imagine that happening in a record store
 

WayneTeK

Golden Member
Apr 3, 2002
1,283
2
0
Originally posted by: ness1469
Originally posted by: Ocuflox
that is interesting - what is the difference of using tivo and dl mp3s via kazaa? screw the RIAA - and for everybody supporting them - im sure you people are the most law-abiding citizens ever.



Regardless of what I do in my spare time... IT STILL DOES NOT MAKE IT LEGAL FOR ANYONE TO BREAK THE LAW... and just because I may break laws, doesn't mean the RIAA should get the poo end of the stick and not be able to collect money that should be theirs. It doesn't matter what TIVO does, it doesn't matter what KaZaa does, it doesn't matter what anyone does, because the RIAA wants what is theirs, and they DESERVE it. Yes, you heard me, they DESERVE _THEIR_ money.

Read my previous post if you don't understand why they deserve it, and why it's their money.


I'm still waiting for the day when someone can answer these questions with a legit answer:

What entitles you to download the music that you do not own for free?
What is the RIAA so bad for collecting money (regardless of who it goes to when they have it)?

what entitiles us to get music? because no stupid group should make that much $$$ and still be greedy about it...
 

TheCorm

Diamond Member
Nov 5, 2000
4,326
0
0
What astonishing at the moment is there is more focus being put on people downloading songs off the net than child porn.....just fantastic....
 

skace

Lifer
Jan 23, 2001
14,488
7
81
Here is a question. If you've ever downloaded music from Kazaa, you would realize that a lot of the times (90%), the end of the song is cut off. If I recall correctly, since the song isn't in its entirity, then it is mearly a sample of the music... which is OK. Yes / No? Doesn't the RIAA have to prove that you shared COMPLETE songs?
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: CrazyDe1
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: CrazyDe1
Originally posted by: ReiAyanami
Here's the question: if a multi-person household shares an internet connection, how can the RIAA prove which person actually commited the terrorist activity of file-sharing? suppose there are 4 ppl in a house, then each has 1/4th of a chance of being guilty, and 3/4ths of being innocent, which is well beyond a reasonable doubt.

They can't...in this case they'd prosecute the person with the ISP account...which again, could completely be innocent. This is like photo radar...I've gotten 3 or 4 photo radar ticekts but since my car is not registered under my name, they alwys get thrown out.

This is slightly different. This is a civil case, its not ticket court, or criminal court. All they have to prove is the person is liable, which would be fairly simple to do. Now if we are talking about the proposed law in congress, that doesnt have the support to pass. The Senate is investigating the RIAA at the current time.

How are you liable if they can't prove there's any files on your computer? The only thing they can prove is that someone using your ISP account downloaded the material. Aren't liability cases, like the cigarette cases and mcey d's coffee cases always jury based? I still don't know any reasonable person who would find someone liable of doing something based on evidence like that....

There is no Jury of your peers. The Jury, Judge and Executioner is the RIAA themselves. They don't have to go to Court to accuse you, they don't have to follow any due Process, nothing. All they have to do is fill out a Form at the Court putting your name on it. Thank the Congress of 1998 and President Clinton at the time for signing it into Law, it is called the DMCA, Digital Millenium Computer Act.
 

Regs

Lifer
Aug 9, 2002
16,665
21
81
And of course they go after the 12 year old girl. Lets see them pull that crap on Bill Gates' daughter with 100 lawyers from Yale behind him. They only go after the ones most likely to settle because the RIAA would go bankrupt taking every case to court.
 

Nitemare

Lifer
Feb 8, 2001
35,461
4
76
Originally posted by: skace
FINALLY they found the 12 year old criminal mastermind who has been behind this whole "music stealing extravaganza". We can only hope that once they've taken as much money as they can from a 12 year old, that kazaa will just crumble and all the really intelligent people will stop downloading music from programs such as waste and newsgroups. Er, I've said too much!

That's alot of milk money

God, how i hate those fvckers. I wish I were a lawyer then I would handle all of the defense cases pro bono.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
CD sales are down not due to Piracy as much as the RIAA's business model of producing Quantity over Quality. The Records (CD's) by Artists that have multiple good tracks on them sell well (Ex. Eminems last CD)where as the CD's with only one or two good tracks don't (ex. the RHCP's last album) I am not going to buy a CD for only one or two good tracks on it (Well I'm not going to buy a CD period until the RIAA pulls it's head out of it's ass)

Good article on what the Music Industry needs to do!
 

Nitemare

Lifer
Feb 8, 2001
35,461
4
76
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
CD sales are down not due to Piracy as much as the RIAA's business model of producing Quantity over Quality. The Records (CD's) by Artists that have multiple good tracks on them sell well (Ex. Eminems last CD)where as the CD's with only one or two good tracks don't (ex. the RHCP's last album) I am not going to buy a CD for only one or two good tracks on it (Well I'm not going to buy a CD period until the RIAA pulls it's head out of it's ass)

Good article on what the Music Industry needs to do!

Text for the non-subscribers?
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Nitemare
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
CD sales are down not due to Piracy as much as the RIAA's business model of producing Quantity over Quality. The Records (CD's) by Artists that have multiple good tracks on them sell well (Ex. Eminems last CD)where as the CD's with only one or two good tracks don't (ex. the RHCP's last album) I am not going to buy a CD for only one or two good tracks on it (Well I'm not going to buy a CD period until the RIAA pulls it's head out of it's ass)

Good article on what the Music Industry needs to do!

Text for the non-subscribers?
Here you go!


Considering that the lifestyle of most people I know in the entertainment business involves at least some excess, it's no surprise that the industry's scheme for bringing CD sales back to life is one of excess. The plan, simply, is to beat consumers into submission by delivering more, more, more. Maybe that'll get us all off Kazaa.

The idea that more content increases the value of a CD makes sense on the surface, particularly if the additional material cannot easily be pirated (at least not yet), as is the case with the "bonus" enhanced CDs and DVDs Eminem and other popular performers have shrink-wrapped with recent releases.


But the quantity-over-quality ethos is a collector's mentality, focused at the top of the market. It doesn't work for the mainstream. A collector might buy an album with bonus tracks in order to build his or her music library (one record-company owner and music buff I know admits to an "almost fetishistic relationship with 78s"). For the general consumer, however, a 70-minute CD isn't much of an attraction. When a great half-hour rock 'n' roll album appears, like the latest efforts from the Strokes and the Hives, it becomes a hit in part because it's so concise. Who but a collector wouldn't rather have a lean, one-great-cut-after-another CD than a flabby one with an extra 30 minutes of subpar material or pointless alternate mixes that should have been excised?


The collector's market has room for everything-ever-recorded box sets, and this approach has proven even more lucrative in generating DVD sales. Of course, this only works if the core artistic effort is any good: A longer version of the latest piece of crap from Martin Lawrence isn't likely to be any funnier than the original.


So, if appealing to the collector impulse won't help record companies reclaim the mainstream market, what can they do to save themselves from Kazaa? Here are three steps the music industry can take right now to regain what it's tossed away. They're all dramatic, and they all go against everything the labels have tried lately, but a quick look at a graph of CD sales quarter-by-quarter (think Grand Canyon) suggests that only bold moves will save the industry from an otherwise inexorable slide. What to do?


Reduce CD prices. The new CD by [insert your favorite performer here] may be wonderful, but it's hard to convince people that it's worth $19.98 at the local mall, especially during a downturn or a recession or an invisible recovery or whatever we're in. The labels could maintain their margins by adopting new distribution schemes, digital and real, that sidestep the current bloated structure. And maybe record companies would then think twice before spending $2 million or $3 million on a promotional video.


Abandon copy protection and invest in consumer-friendly technologies. Copy protection efforts, if continued, will become a tremendous legal expense for the major labels as consumers rebel. Also, it's been demonstrated that such technologies don't work. Why cut into margins by developing dead-end technologies that alienate customers and inevitably fail? Consumer-friendly innovations, such as those that place multiple formats like SACD and DVDA on single CDs, are more likely to generate interest, especially for older titles.


Abandon current online efforts and buy Kazaa. Give up. The Recording Industry Association of America should have learned from its dealings with Napster, Aimster, Scour, etc. that legal recourses, even if they work, take months or years to have an effect, by which time users have already moved to a new platform. Buy Kazaa -- its software is more reliable and scalable than Pressplay's or MusicNet's -- and charge subscribers a low monthly fee. Roughly 190 million copies of Kazaa have been downloaded. Registering just 10 percent of those copies (a conservative estimate) at a $10-per-month all-you-can-download rate would net the major labels at least $2.28 billion a year. Only hubris is preventing the music industry from adopting such a speedy, lucrative solution. And the labels would get extra points for using Kazaa Lite, which has no ads and doesn't include spyware.


These three moves have to happen in conjunction. Lower CD prices will work only if there's another legitimate and large revenue stream. Abandoning copy protection will have a positive revenue effect only if CDs are no longer overpriced. To survive, the major labels will have to do something more courageous than simply adding outtakes to otherwise finished albums. The longer they wait to start, the more likely it'll be that a generation of kids will grow up having learned to acquire music without paying for it.



 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |