RIAA Grabs Student's Life's Savings

[MercenaryForHire]

Ah, you're one of the "but it's not stealing!" pirates.

- M4H

 

[BadNewsBears]

BTW! Just realized ur a n00b! Ive been here two years longer. Dont even mention post count, nef.
Look whos teh master of teh funny internet pictures now.
Bitch
http://www.attrition.org/gallery/computing/forum/tn/not_another.jpg.html

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: Munchies
BTW! Just realized ur a n00b! Ive been here two years longer. Dont even mention post count, nef.
Look whos teh master of teh funny internet pictures now.
Bitch
http://www.attrition.org/gallery/computing/forum/tn/not_another.jpg.html

Zip up, your Stupid is showing.

- M4H

 

[BadNewsBears]

Ah, your the retarded 'im not retarded' retards.
Are you retarded?

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Shut up and drink your juice.

- M4H

 

[BadNewsBears]

Back to the assclown pictures are we?

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: Munchies
Look whos teh master of teh funny internet pictures now.
Bitch
http://www.attrition.org/gallery/computing/forum/tn/not_another.jpg.html

Originally posted by: Munchies
Back to the assclown pictures are we?

Therefore, Munchies = assclown.

- M4H

 

[syberscott]

Originally posted by: Munchies

Originally posted by: syberscott
The irony is that the RIAA would not be resorting to such tactics if people would just stop stealing music.

I am sybescott and I am fvktard. Its not stealing when you put it into a public folder. YOUR GIVING IT TO SOMEONE. Itd be different if somoene payed .01 for a song, or they hacked you for a song. But they wern't. STFU assclown

You have to be kidding me. Your maturity level astounds me, along with your denial and self serving rationalization.

 

[ParagonX]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire
Arr, matey. This thread gives me a shiverin feelin in me timbers.

- M4H

That''s:


HAAAARRRRR!!

boy: Say it!
girl: HAAAAARRRRRR!!!

too funny

 

[BadNewsBears]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: Munchies
Look whos teh master of teh funny internet pictures now.
Bitch
http://www.attrition.org/gallery/computing/forum/tn/not_another.jpg.html

Originally posted by: Munchies
Back to the assclown pictures are we?

Therefore, Munchies = assclown.

- M4H

Therefore you are doomed to idiocy as you went ahead and posted the first pic. Mor on

 

[grrl]

Originally posted by: CorporateRecreation
Don't get pissed off because you all hate the RIAA and you automatically assume that they are wrong in every instance. They have a right to protect their products. I go to a major university. Every person there pirates anything they can. I just will not buy his arguement that it was just a search engine for the network. There was a motive for doing it. Twist my words all you will, there is a difference between google and what he did.

"Every person" at your major university "pirates anything they can"? That would include you too then, so don't preach to others.

 

[dfi]

I dont know if anyone has made this argument, but here goes.

Some things are hard to sell because they are hard to prevent others from taking. As a trivial example, it is difficult to sell the fragrance produced by your flower garden to your neighbor because your neighbor can easily smell the flower's sweet fragrance from his yard. If you were somehow able to prevent your neighbor from smelling your flower garden, then you can then sell him the right to smell your flowers.

As technology moves forward, it comes difficult to sell traditional media because it becomes increasingly difficult (perhaps someday almost impossible) to protect the media from theft. If the sellers of this media can find a way to protect the media from theft with technology, then they will be able to sell it. But if there is no viable way of protecting this media, then perhaps this industry should become extinct? Or if not extinct, vastly altered.

Now, should we really stand in the way of technology (which I think is probably hard, if not impossible) in order to save an industry that is unable to keep pace?

In the example of the music industry, the ease of information exchange via the internet has elevated music piracy to a widespread audience. The music industry's inability to protect recorded music from theft (except through trying to sue everybody) can not sustain the industry. I have heard that they are working on ways of protecting their music through technology, and if this is done, then the industry will survive. But if not, perhaps the music industry should evolve?

Of course, this evolution would probably mean the end of music labels as we know it. It would demolish the entire music recording industry. Needless to say, none of the labels would be happy about that and will go down kicking and screaming (which is what I think we are seeing now).

This is my guess as to what would happen if music piracy cannot be stopped. Selling recorded music as a product for a large profit on a widescale basis would probably disappear. Major record labels would disappear as a result. Instead, bands record music in order to create fans and entice these fans to come to live shows. As a result of the lack of a major record label, most bands will be much more localized until they can get the funding to go national. More ambitious bands will travel a lot to try and get airplay on local radio stations across the country. And of course every band will have a website to promote their music, or at least distributed on every file sharing network they can find. In addition to live shows, bands will try to more aggressively push merchandising to make a profit.

Personally, I kinda like the above scenario. But to get back to topic, I think that piracy is wrong but if no one can stop it then the industry has to change to accomodate it.

And I'm glad to see the student has gotten back most of his life savings through donations.

dfi

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: dfi
I dont know if anyone has made this argument, but here goes.

Some things are hard to sell because they are hard to prevent others from taking. As a trivial example, it is difficult to sell the fragrance produced by your flower garden to your neighbor because your neighbor can easily smell the flower's sweet fragrance from his yard. If you were somehow able to prevent your neighbor from smelling your flower garden, then you can then sell him the right to smell your flowers.

As technology moves forward, it comes difficult to sell traditional media because it becomes increasingly difficult (perhaps someday almost impossible) to protect the media from theft. If the sellers of this media can find a way to protect the media from theft with technology, then they will be able to sell it. But if there is no viable way of protecting this media, then perhaps this industry should become extinct? Or if not extinct, vastly altered.

Now, should we really stand in the way of technology (which I think is probably hard, if not impossible) in order to save an industry that is unable to keep pace?

In the example of the music industry, the ease of information exchange via the internet has elevated music piracy to a widespread audience. The music industry's inability to protect recorded music from theft (except through trying to sue everybody) can not sustain the industry. I have heard that they are working on ways of protecting their music through technology, and if this is done, then the industry will survive. But if not, perhaps the music industry should evolve?

Of course, this evolution would probably mean the end of music labels as we know it. It would demolish the entire music recording industry. Needless to say, none of the labels would be happy about that and will go down kicking and screaming (which is what I think we are seeing now).

This is my guess as to what would happen if music piracy cannot be stopped. Selling recorded music as a product for a large profit on a widescale basis would probably disappear. Major record labels would disappear as a result. Instead, bands record music in order to create fans and entice these fans to come to live shows. As a result of the lack of a major record label, most bands will be much more localized until they can get the funding to go national. More ambitious bands will travel a lot to try and get airplay on local radio stations across the country. And of course every band will have a website to promote their music, or at least distributed on every file sharing network they can find. In addition to live shows, bands will try to more aggressively push merchandising to make a profit.

Personally, I kinda like the above scenario. But to get back to topic, I think that piracy is wrong but if no one can stop it then the industry has to change to accomodate it.

And I'm glad to see the student has gotten back most of his life savings through donations.

dfi

inspiration to write a good song is not the same as a fragrance from a common flower.


as for your often repeated dreamland niavely idealistic scenario, you don't have to look far to see reality. like if all the workers owned the means of production, the world would be paradise! oh wait, communist russia failed. lets look at some real world examples, in asia and south america where piracy runs rampant and the music industry is dying, is artistry is blooming? i don't think so. its dying with the rest of the industry. music industries there cannot afford to risk on new artists or different artists, so only sure thing pop artists are being supported.

oh and many unknown artists have popped onto the scene after word of mouth spread after they were shared on file networks. oh wait, that hasn't happened. giant conspiracy? no.... i don't think so. not enough time? haahhaah, the networks have been up long enough. i guess massive musical talent doesnt really bloom that way either.

why have patents? if i could steal your idea and sell it, why not? kinda takes away the incentive for investment and innovation

maybe we should just say f*ck it and mail chinese companies a copy of intels/amd's chip designs so they can copy em.

 

[dfi]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
inspiration to write a good song is not the same as a fragrance from a common flower.


as for your often repeated dreamland niavely idealistic scenario, you don't have to look far to see reality. like if all the workers owned the means of production, the world would be paradise! oh wait, communist russia failed. lets look at some real world examples, in asia and south america where piracy runs rampant and the music industry is dying, is artistry is blooming? i don't think so. its dying with the rest of the industry. music industries there cannot afford to risk on new artists or different artists, so only sure thing pop artists are being supported.

oh and many unknown artists have popped onto the scene after word of mouth spread after they were shared on file networks. oh wait, that hasn't happened. giant conspiracy? no.... i don't think so. not enough time? haahhaah, the networks have been up long enough. i guess massive musical talent doesnt really bloom that way either.

why have patents? if i could steal your idea and sell it, why not? kinda takes away the incentive for investment and innovation

maybe we should just say f*ck it and mail chinese companies a copy of intels/amd's chip designs so they can copy em.

I think you are badly misinterpretting my post.

Yes, inspiration for music is not the same thing as a flower fragrance. Hence why I said it was a trivial example. The real point is that in our current world, it is difficult to prevent the theft of both.

I don't support communism. Furthermore, I don't see how my prediction of "if the recording industry cannot find a way to protect their media the industry will be demolished" is support for communism, or naive/idealistic.

I never claimed that bands would become popular through word of mouth. Rather, I specifically wrote that bands would have to promote their music very hard through the internet and through a lot of traveling in order to find fans. I also wrote that most bands will be localized (aka, not very popular). Keep in mind, this is all just my prediction of what would happen to the music recording industry once it has completely lost the ability to prevent copyright infringement.

On patents... patenting an idea is quite different from recording a song. Yes, they are similar because they are both forms of intellectual property. But the key difference is that a patented idea is usually used to create a product, whereas in the case of music/books, the idea itself IS the product. I think that's why songs are not patented, but rather copyrighted. Even with a patent a company will still try very hard to keep the patented idea/process under tight secrecy. Whereas with music the idea itself is meant to be distributed. Injecting patent infringement arguments into a music copyright infringement debate, in this case, is nonsensical. (If you were wondering what I thought of patents, I am for them. I esp. like the form that the US has adopted for medicine: a grace period to allow the innovator to profit and recoup the investment/research costs, followed by legal imitation by other firms to allow the propogation of this new benefit to more people.)

dfi

 

[0roo0roo]

actually thats flawed. in music, the idea is not the product. the idea is the sheet music, which is used to create the music. sheet music by itself is not ussually compelling

you write down your idea, then you make it into something.

the reason we use copyright instead of patent for music is because we separate artistic invention from normal invention for simplicities sake.

 

[dfi]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
actually thats flawed. in music, the idea is not the product. the idea is the sheet music, which is used to create the music. sheet music by itself is not ussually compelling

you write down your idea, then you make it into something.

the reason we use copyright instead of patent for music is because we separate artistic invention from normal invention for simplicities sake.

Heh, this is actually getting confusing. When it comes to books, ideas are written on the book. An idea is abstract and can be transmitted through media. Now is the book itself the idea or does it just transmit the idea?

This gets even more confusing when it comes to music. Sheet music is a media used to instruct on how to reproduce music. But is the sheet music the idea, or is music itself the "idea", or is it the feelings that the music is meant to invoke the "idea"? (And if the latter, what about the subjective way music is interpretted and can that really be copyrighted? Blah see this is going on a tangent faster than a speeding bullet train.)

Anyways to get back on topic... this is my feeling about the current music piracy/copyright issue in a nutshell: music piracy is by law wrong, but unless the music recording industry can prevent piracy on a mass scale, the industry will be radically altered. If the industry can't stop music piracy, then music piracy will become the norm as the industry changes and it will no longer be "piracy".

dfi

 

[Cuda1447]

Originally posted by: SammySon
Gives me more reason to pirate now.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: Munchies

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: Munchies
Look whos teh master of teh funny internet pictures now.
Bitch
http://www.attrition.org/gallery/computing/forum/tn/not_another.jpg.html

Originally posted by: Munchies
Back to the assclown pictures are we?

Therefore, Munchies = assclown.

- M4H

Therefore you are doomed to idiocy as you went ahead and posted the first pic. Mor on

You seemed determined to one-up my mediocre idiocy with your Big Picture Of Stupid +4. Attrition is ghetto-linked now. Find a new host.

- M4H

 

[BadNewsBears]

Uh, can I get a STFU here please?

 

[0roo0roo]

Heh, this is actually getting confusing. When it comes to books, ideas are written on the book. An idea is abstract and can be transmitted through media. Now is the book itself the idea or does it just transmit the idea?

difference being that i can print out a book and it'll be about the same. whereas if i sing a song for you, its no where near the same.

not to mention, movies and software are just "ideas" according to your broad standard.

i think i'll start calling my shoe brand nike

 

[Kyteland]

Originally posted by: Munchies
Uh, can I get a STFU here please?

Ok, fine. STFU please.

Originally posted by: Munchies
I am sybescott and I am fvktard. Its not stealing when you put it into a public folder. YOUR GIVING IT TO SOMEONE. Itd be different if somoene payed .01 for a song, or they hacked you for a song. But they wern't. STFU assclown

Can I share your credit card please? I don't have one of my own but I want to try it out before I go and sign up for one. PM me with the card number.

 

[drunkenpanda]

if we were ever sued...its copyright infringement. What if we asked the artists if we can copy it...and tell them the consequences...maybe theres a chance...in evermore ..you'd lose the case.

 

[Kenazo]

I sent the guy $3. Not much, but hey if enough ppl do.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Hanpan

Originally posted by: CorporateRecreation
Don't get pissed off because you all hate the RIAA and you automatically assume that they are wrong in every instance. They have a right to protect their products. I go to a major university. Every person there pirates anything they can. I just will not buy his arguement that it was just a search engine for the network. There was a motive for doing it. Twist my words all you will, there is a difference between google and what he did.

I do not hate the RIAA. In fact I do not even reside in the United States of America, so I have very little dealings with the RIAA. I do however value the american ideals of freedom which include the right not only for companies to protect their products, as you stated, but also for anyone to write a program as this person did. I certainly agree that there may be few legitimate uses for such a program, but this fact alone does not meet the defintion of an illegal product (note napster and kazaa victories in court).

I agree with you on premise, but I would venture to say the legitimate uses of search engines far outweight the illegal.

 

[KnightGalahad]

:disgust:

Ok, I hear from my friend that my school was talked about on this forum, so I decided to drop by and take a look, and there are people bashing this poor kid. Look, let me fill in you on a few facts.

1) My school had/has 3 search engines running on its campus. The School Administration never cared about it, cause it was JUST a search engine, specifically for the schools SAMBA server. You try finding a class presentation when you do not even know the name of the computer or the workgroup that it is located in.

2) All of the search engines were designed to search for any and all open, non-password protected folders on a person machine. It was a students choice to have this computer shared or not. You can always turn the option off. and it only searched Windows and/or Mac machines (mainly Windows), last I checked. If you ran linux, you were home free. If you shared mp3's, then people can search for them. It was not the fault of the person who hosted the engine. If no student in our campus had mp3's, or if no one shared their mp3's, then there would not be any in the search results of any of the engines.

3) The RIAA is just being bullies about this manner. You get contacted at the end of the year, right when you are taking finals, and are told you are in violation of some law, and have to go to court or settle. What do you think you are going to do??? Do you seriously think you want to screw over your college education just so you can prove that your "Napster clone Engine" is really just a web-based SAMBA search engine?

I am not trying to be mean, but you have to understand everything. And for those of you who are not from RPI, and are saying the kid was wrong, you need to rethink what you said. Cause if what that Joshua did was wrong, then Google and Yahoo are even more crinimal than any student in any college. You love the RIAA so much, rally them to go after someone with a fat check book, then see who bows down and calls the other one master.