12yo Girl sued by RIAA

[MrDingleDangle]

Originally posted by: prontospyder
Looks like she has settled with the RIAA

Link

how did they come up with $2 a song...even if u were to by their overpriced CD's the price doesnt come out to $2 a song....

 

[Zebo]

I was going to buy two albums yesterday but then I heard this and bought a game and two movies instead.

 

[Tetsuo]

Originally posted by: MrDingleDangle

Originally posted by: prontospyder Looks like she has settled with the RIAA Link

how did they come up with $2 a song...even if u were to by their overpriced CD's the price doesnt come out to $2 a song....

Maybe just to let it slide. I'm pretty sure 90% of all americans hate the RIAA. Especially going after a 12 yr old girl. They are saving face

 

[Guild]

Kazaa sux! When was the last time that you actually downloaded an entire album? Ooh, how I long for the days of hotline...

 

[pennylane]

Hey OulOat (too lazy to quote everything.)

Note that I agree that piracy is wrong. WRONG! Don't treat me like some evil pirate who downloads 50 songs per minute with a "The RIAA is evil because they're gonna take away my free music" t-shirt on. I don't have 50 songs downloaded. When I download it's because I want to see if I will like a particular album (which I would then purchase).

I'm not defending people's pirating. I just posted in reply to someone who painted a picture of the RIAA as "doing the right thing" and people that pirate are cold-immoral-evil-followers-of-the-devil-who-have-no-sense-of-right-and-wrong. While their reasons for pirating do not make it right, they do bring up valid points. Not all people are evil. Not all of them think they're some badass who thinks the RIAA is evil for not letting them download music for free. I'd also like to add... many people (like the girl) don't know that downloading music via kazaa is wrong.

My main point is: While piracy is WRONG and the RIAA has a right to pursue legal action, their course of action is NOT RIGHT. That's what I was trying to express. The RIAA may be legally right, but they're not doing what's best for themselves and everyone. It's my belief that the majority of people are willing to BUY (consistently) decent music if it's at a decent price. I think that most people believe (and I agree with them) that if the RIAA embraced the technology instead of sticking to the old ways, they would fare much better in today's world, and everybody would be happier.




The rest of this is all just a reply to everything you posted.

The comment about the 12 year old was just an explanation to the other fellow as to why everyone was angry. No I don't want them to make it go away just because she's 12. But targeting her when there are worse offenders isn't the best thing to do, particularly with regard to public relations.

Do I really have to define "better music"? Okay. How about albums with not just one good song on it. Albums that are 90% good and 10% crap instead of the other way around. Is that good enough for you?

When I brought up the mp3 compression, I just wanted to make note that what people were getting wasn't as good as the original quality they could have got if they bought the CD. It reminded me of my early days when I would just tape an album on cassette or something. The other reason I mentioned that was because I prefer buying CDs because I don't trust the quality of the mp3. That was more of a personal interjection than anything else. Of course it's WRONG to download, even if the quality isn't as good.

 

[Ness]

Originally posted by: fanerman91
Hey OulOat (too lazy to quote everything.)

Note that I agree that piracy is wrong. WRONG! Don't treat me like some evil pirate who downloads 50 songs per minute with a "The RIAA is evil because they're gonna take away my free music" t-shirt on. I don't have 50 songs downloaded. When I download it's because I want to see if I will like a particular album (which I would then purchase).

I'm not defending people's pirating. I just posted in reply to someone who painted a picture of the RIAA as "doing the right thing" and people that pirate are cold-immoral-evil-followers-of-the-devil-who-have-no-sense-of-right-and-wrong. While their reasons for pirating do not make it right, they do bring up valid points. Not all people are evil. Not all of them think they're some badass who thinks the RIAA is evil for not letting them download music for free. I'd also like to add... many people (like the girl) don't know that downloading music via kazaa is wrong.

My main point is: While piracy is WRONG and the RIAA has a right to pursue legal action, their course of action is NOT RIGHT. That's what I was trying to express. The RIAA may be legally right, but they're not doing what's best for themselves and everyone. It's my belief that the majority of people are willing to BUY (consistently) decent music if it's at a decent price. I think that most people believe (and I agree with them) that if the RIAA embraced the technology instead of sticking to the old ways, they would fare much better in today's world, and everybody would be happier.

Bingo!

I love you man.

However, it's unfortunate that people don't have the decency that you do. Downloading to sample is how it all should have worked out. It would have been perfect. But too many people got away with theft, and ruined it for everyone.

My guess is that it's the same crowd of people that are throwing fits saying the music sucks... the same music they download.. then saying that CDs cost too much... yeah anything costs too much when you compare it to stealing it and getting it for free.

The problem lies in the fact that until the RIAA can control the file-sharing, there is no way in HELL they are going to promote it, because if you give someone an inch, they take a mile. The RIAA is suing people because if they wrote them a nasty letter telling them to stop it... do you think people would?

So, it's unfortunate that people like me are now promoting something they loved, but NOTHING will ever change until the PEOPLE change. Why in god's name would the RIAA just one day break open and okay music-swapping when everyone has been throwing sh!t their way since 2000?

If everyone would give it up, then we'd have a better chance of the RIAA embracing the wonderful technology we have.

 

[MaDDaWg1018]

I also agree that piracy is wrong. However, think about it...in a world where children are pretty much being raised to think that it's okay to download music online, this is bound to happen on more than one occassion. I think proper public education is also vital in order to help alleviate this problem. Kids just seem to automatically assume that downloading music online is okay. It's not like they're stealing from liquor stores or trying drugs or anything in that area; they're innocently (at least most) seeking music without realizing the consequences. I think a better-suited RIAA action would be to first issue some type of warning before indulging in heavier measures such as the one taken on this 12 year old girl.

But seriously, I think the RIAA's course of action is ridiculous, somewhat unjust, and plain stupid.

 

[ziplux]

Originally posted by: dwell
They are the ones who are the ass-lickers!

 

[Ness]

Originally posted by: MaDDaWg1018
I also agree that piracy is wrong. However, think about it...in a world where children are pretty much being raised to think that it's okay to download music online, this is bound to happen on more than one occassion. I think proper public education is also vital in order to help alleviate this problem. Kids just seem to automatically assume that downloading music online is okay. It's not like they're stealing from liquor stores or trying drugs or anything in that area; they're innocently (at least most) seeking music without realizing the consequences. I think a better-suited RIAA action would be to first issue some type of warning before indulging in heavier measures such as the one taken on this 12 year old girl.

But seriously, I think the RIAA's course of action is ridiculous, somewhat unjust, and plain stupid.

So 3 years of news about this, the constant lawsuits against people and filesharing programs, and vastly inscreased legislation on the subject of this isn't a warning enough? How about that 3 week period where the RIAA released a warning saying they are going to track down and sue people caught sharing files on computer? Did they have to rent every billboard across the country to tell people or something?

People have a responsibility to ensure that everything they are doing is legal. There is no excuse of "not knowing" that could hold up in any court, because it should be common sense that you test the water and make sure the lifeguard is on duty before you dive in, if you get what I'm saying.

If people are doing enough filesharing to be targeted by the RIAA, then they should have at least some knowledge about MP3s and P2P programs, even if it's the disclaimer that pops up when you first open any p2p software that says by clicking okay you agree you won't infringe copyrights.. most works are protected by copyrights, etc.

 

[MDE]

Over at HardOCP they held $5 per ticket raffle to raise the $2000 and give it to the girl's mother. Kudos to them.

 

[idenyit]

heh, i think thats the riaa's goal, and it looks like it's somewhat working if people decide "i don't wanna get caught so i won't share" -- anyways, i don't like what they are doing, i understand stealing is wrong, but i think harrassing 12 year old girls is wrong too...so oh well...

 

[MaDDaWg1018]

Originally posted by: ness1469

Originally posted by: MaDDaWg1018
I also agree that piracy is wrong. However, think about it...in a world where children are pretty much being raised to think that it's okay to download music online, this is bound to happen on more than one occassion. I think proper public education is also vital in order to help alleviate this problem. Kids just seem to automatically assume that downloading music online is okay. It's not like they're stealing from liquor stores or trying drugs or anything in that area; they're innocently (at least most) seeking music without realizing the consequences. I think a better-suited RIAA action would be to first issue some type of warning before indulging in heavier measures such as the one taken on this 12 year old girl.

But seriously, I think the RIAA's course of action is ridiculous, somewhat unjust, and plain stupid.

So 3 years of news about this, the constant lawsuits against people and filesharing programs, and vastly inscreased legislation on the subject of this isn't a warning enough? How about that 3 week period where the RIAA released a warning saying they are going to track down and sue people caught sharing files on computer? Did they have to rent every billboard across the country to tell people or something?

People have a responsibility to ensure that everything they are doing is legal. There is no excuse of "not knowing" that could hold up in any court, because it should be common sense that you test the water and make sure the lifeguard is on duty before you dive in, if you get what I'm saying.

If people are doing enough filesharing to be targeted by the RIAA, then they should have at least some knowledge about MP3s and P2P programs, even if it's the disclaimer that pops up when you first open any p2p software that says by clicking okay you agree you won't infringe copyrights.. most works are protected by copyrights, etc.

I'm not saying it's a just thing. Like I said before, I agree that piracy is WRONG. But who's teaching younger children about this? They're raised and publicly taught not to do drugs, or not to fire guns, and what not, but where's the initiative to teach kids about internet piracy? None that can discern at the moment. And yes, I know that this has been going on for a while, but it was pretty recently when this issue evolved to the level where it's actually hitting the actual public majority. I can understand if an 18 year old child (or possibly younger) is charged for this felony, but where is the morality/justice in doing this to a 12 year old girl? Go to your local elementary school and see how many kids know what illegal music trafficing is. (This is where I think public education comes in). I think this would definitely help to somewhat enervate the problem.

But like I said, I know it's not right, and a course of action must be taken. But look at the situation in this case and tell me if you'd do the same thing. (I'm looking at this through a moral perspective as well as legal). No doubt will some people agree with me, and some people antagonize my ideas. But hey, there's always two sides to an issue, right?

*Haha, I think this debate could go on forever. Take for instance..."Free Kobe! Free Kobe!"

 

[OulOat]

Originally posted by: fanerman91
I'd also like to add... many people (like the girl) don't know that downloading music via kazaa is wrong.

Ignorance is not an excuse. If the parents or kid don't read the newspaper or watch the news, they should be arrested for stupidity. The RIAA's action wasn't out of the blue, the warnings were everywhere. If they choose to ignore the warnings and quit their activities, they deserve what they got. Good riddance.

The RIAA may be legally right, but they're not doing what's best for themselves and everyone. It's my belief that the majority of people are willing to BUY (consistently) decent music if it's at a decent price. I think that most people believe (and I agree with them) that if the RIAA embraced the technology instead of sticking to the old ways, they would fare much better in today's world, and everybody would be happier.

Pirating would still be rampant even if they go the digital music route (like Apple Music). A simple calculation will show this. Lets say the average user has a gig of music (college student have a lot more, but I'll go the low route). That is 256 songs if each song is 4 megs each. That's also 256 dollars if it's a dollar per song. No one is going to shell out $250 bucks if their friends got it and they can obtain it for free without any consequence. If the RIAA tries to enable any copy-protection scheme, people would be complaining about it and it would get broken anyways in less than a week, if not sooner.

The comment about the 12 year old was just an explanation to the other fellow as to why everyone was angry. No I don't want them to make it go away just because she's 12. But targeting her when there are worse offenders isn't the best thing to do, particularly with regard to public relations.

What kind of message would they be sending out if they were just targetting the worse offenders? What kind of society would we have if the cops only arrested killers while child molesters go free? Hm?

Do I really have to define "better music"? Okay. How about albums with not just one good song on it. Albums that are 90% good and 10% crap instead of the other way around. Is that good enough for you?

I don't understand why people think all songs are worth the same. Let me explain it again. If that CD is 90% crap, then the other 10% of the CD would worth the $16. The 90% is free. You can either pay $16 for that one song, or you can not pay if you don't think that song is good enough to cost $16. Plus, your views are your views. Just because you think a song is crap doesn't mean one else will like it.

 

[MaDDaWg1018]

The law is the law, you're right. Rules should be upheld. However, think of a typical court case. Do all of them sway in one direction? NOPE. This is just one case out of how many out there. And how many offenders out there do you think deserve this kind of punishment, who are PURPOSELY trafficing mp3's and do not get caught. How is that fair? I think in this case, the girl deserves a chance, especially considering the fact that this girl is 12 years old and probably hasn't been taught anything about these laws (which isn't the fault of bad parenting either).

I think of it this way. Do you think every 12 year old child has been educated about piracy? No. HOWEVER, do you think they should be? Yes.

That's just my 2 cents...you can't say that the law has never been lenient before...and this is one case where I think leniency wouldn't be such a bad idea...again, in THIS case.