RIAA Grabs Student's Life's Savings

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
Oh, I can't wait for when the RIAA goes after Google or Yahoo. Oh man will that be a major court battle. You know Google will tell the RIAA to bend over, cause it's gonna ram it in the ass like a ton of bricks.

who are you kidding, google gives out stuff all the time to the government! Google from all I've known has been notoriously weak.

 

[Mallow]

wow... that is all I can say. took the kids life savings for only running a search engine. This sets a very scary powerful precident.

 

[Trygve]

Originally posted by: CorporateRecreation
If I recall, the google cache of his website allowed a drop-down menu to filter what you search for? What was in that drop box? ".mp3, .avi, .mpg" etc. Still think it was a "network search engine"? It also had file size filtering, so you could ensure it wasn't just a sound effect, or a movie clip, but an entire song, or an entire film.

That may be, but there are still reasonable and legitimate uses for that which would not constitute piracy. (I do my share of distributing .mp3, .mpg, etc., files over the internet and, apart from one misguided nastrygram from ASCAP, I haven't received any legal threats so far for doing this.) My reading of recent court decisions on the matter is that if a technology or device does have legitimate uses other than piracy, than creating or distributing it would not be actionable, at least under the DMCA.

 

[StormRider]

Playing Devil's Advocate here:

Should all music be free? Should it be illegal for artists to make money off of music? If nobody was allowed to make any money off of music (except when they appear in concerts), would the music be purer? For example, lots of times when an artist becomes popular and they start producing a more "commercial" sound we hear complaints that they are sellouts.

However, if all music was allowed to be traded freely then artists wouldn't be able to make money off of their music and hence their music will remain pure.

 

[syberscott]

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

 

[cpals]

Dang, he had $12,000 saved up. I know he lost it all, but I wish I had something like that saved. That's a lot of money...

 

[Entity]

Anyone have a list of labels/etc. not affiliated with the RIAA?

Rob

 

[UglyCasanova]

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

The irony is people would stop stealing if something decent was put out and the price was lowered to a reasonable level.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Originally posted by: Entity
Anyone have a list of labels/etc. not affiliated with the RIAA?

Rob

My favorite
Another good one

:music:

 

[stormbv]

If I keep a bucket of acid close by, can I throw my hard drives in there in the event that the RIAA storms my house?

 

[UglyCasanova]

Originally posted by: stormbv
If I keep a bucket of acid close by, can I throw my hard drives in there in the event that the RIAA storms my house?

Just get some strong magnets like off of The Core

 

[syberscott]

Originally posted by: dparker

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

The irony is people would stop stealing if something decent was put out and the price was lowered to a reasonable level.

The argument about the music industry not putting out any good music is pointless. If it's good enough for you to steal, it's good enough to buy. As far as the price goes, listen to the radio if you are cash strapped. Don't rationalize stealing.

 

[AznMaverick]

Originally posted by: Lyfer
The RIAA can go fvck themselves.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Originally posted by: syberscott

Originally posted by: dparker

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

The irony is people would stop stealing if something decent was put out and the price was lowered to a reasonable level.

The argument about the music industry not putting out any good music is pointless. If it's good enough for you to steal, it's good enough to buy. As far as the price goes, listen to the radio if you are cash strapped. Don't rationalize stealing.

Try before you buy. You would not believe how many CD's I've bought because of mp3's. There would be no way in hell I would randomly puchase a CD without knowing whats on it. As far as the radio, the day they start playing good music is the day hell freezes over. Sharing music is the only way for many people to find out what a band sounds like because many bands do not have the luxury of being on MTV or the radio.

 

[clamum]

Originally posted by: Mallow
wow... that is all I can say. took the kids life savings for only running a search engine. This sets a very scary powerful precident.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Why haven't they sued Microsoft yet for writing the Indexing Service? Or even FindFast?

 

[Occifer]

Originally posted by: RGN
yup, this is why I made a special point of downloading the new Metallica CD - even though I hate the music.

 

[TheBoyBlunder]

Originally posted by: conjur

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

- M4H

That''s:


HAAAARRRRR!!

ROFL

 

[gopunk]

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

didn't your mother ever tell you that two wrongs don't make a right?

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: CorporateRecreation
Thank god there is someone else....

If I recall, the google cache of his website allowed a drop-down menu to filter what you search for? What was in that drop box? ".mp3, .avi, .mpg" etc. Still think it was a "network search engine"? It also had file size filtering, so you could ensure it wasn't just a sound effect, or a movie clip, but an entire song, or an entire film.

Video-clips are not illegal, mp3's are not illegal. Hell, I have a 200mb avi on my HD. It's a presentation regarding 3D-accelerators and it's perfectly legal. But according to your logic, since it's a video-clip, and it's so big, it MUST be illegal!

 

[Nemesis77]

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

Few facts:

1. Downloading mp3's from the net is not stealing
2. Record-companies have been found guilty of price-fixing
3. Cost of CD's has gone up faster than inflation
4. CD's are ridiculously overpriced. Hell, soundtrack of movie costs almost as much as the DVD of the movie!
5. There is no real evidence that mp3's or "piracy" is hurting record-sales.

I just love it when RIAA and others whine how "sales of CD's have dropped by 5%! It's those wicked pirates and their mp3's that are to blame!". In reality, more realistic reason would be:

1. Slowdown in the economy. People simply have less money to spend on overpriced CD's
2. There are more products competing for limited amount of money (consoles, DVD's etc.)
3. Lots of people (like myself) are not buying CD's because they are criplled with copy-protection
4. Modern music is simply not worth buying. Crappy generic bands with crappy generic songs.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: CorporateRecreation

Originally posted by: SludgeFactory
Some of you need to understand what's going on here.

Jesse Jordan was sued for both direct and contributory infringement. He was apparently caught dead to rights with MP3's on his hard drive. Come on, WTF do you think he was doing -- just running a search engine for the good of mankind and not indulging in any of the files available on the network?

The recent college cases

The complaint against Jordan

Defendant is committing direct copyright infringment himself by copying and distributing hundreds of sound recordings over his system without the authorization of the copyright owners.

The TechTV article glosses over this. As do most people, which is what the RIAA wants. They want you to think this kid got busted purely for a search engine, so that you think twice when you get the idea to do it. Maybe he could have fought the search engine charge and beaten it, who knows. If you're sued for whatever insane amount he was sued for (the type of suit that destroys you financially forever, that you spend YEARS fighting), know you're guilty on many counts, and then are given the opportunity to settle for $12,000 --- which option do you take?

The RIAA had him on the direct infringement, offered him a quick and relatively easy settlement, and are counting on idiots in the media to report that search engines are now somehow illegal.

Thank god there is someone else....

If I recall, the google cache of his website allowed a drop-down menu to filter what you search for? What was in that drop box? ".mp3, .avi, .mpg" etc. Still think it was a "network search engine"? It also had file size filtering, so you could ensure it wasn't just a sound effect, or a movie clip, but an entire song, or an entire film.

My windows search autocomplete will have those in the drop down too. RIAA SOLUTION: Sue MicroShaft. REALITY: No Crime

My System has GB's of Video, and MP3's of 'song length' on it. RIAA SOLUTION: Sue me. REALITY: these are my own works, no crime.


Before you become Judge, Jury and Executioner you need to get the facts, which are thin on the ground in this thread.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77
1. Downloading mp3's from the net is not stealing

jigga what? what do you call using a product without paying a price that the seller agrees to?

2. Record-companies have been found guilty of price-fixing

thats not pertinent

3. Cost of CD's has gone up faster than inflation

actually CD prices are damn near the same as they were 18 years ago when CDs came out. but thats not pertinent either.

4. CD's are ridiculously overpriced. Hell, soundtrack of movie costs almost as much as the DVD of the movie!

thats not pertinent. by that logic we should all go steal mercedes.

5. There is no real evidence that mp3's or "piracy" is hurting record-sales.

thats not pertinent either

the only thing that applies is that they have the right to sell their products at a price they'll agree to and you have the right to buy the product at that price, attempt to haggle them down to a price more agreeable to you, or do without their product. their behavior does not give you the right to use their product without their consent.

 

[syberscott]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77

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

Few facts:

1. Downloading mp3's from the net is not stealing
2. Record-companies have been found guilty of price-fixing
3. Cost of CD's has gone up faster than inflation
4. CD's are ridiculously overpriced. Hell, soundtrack of movie costs almost as much as the DVD of the movie!
5. There is no real evidence that mp3's or "piracy" is hurting record-sales.

I just love it when RIAA and others whine how "sales of CD's have dropped by 5%! It's those wicked pirates and their mp3's that are to blame!". In reality, more realistic reason would be:

1. Slowdown in the economy. People simply have less money to spend on overpriced CD's
2. There are more products competing for limited amount of money (consoles, DVD's etc.)
3. Lots of people (like myself) are not buying CD's because they are criplled with copy-protection
4. Modern music is simply not worth buying. Crappy generic bands with crappy generic songs.

You claim that piracy has not hurt record sales. Then you say that you don't buy cd's anymore because of copyright protection. Why do you think the copyright protection is there? Because people steal the music. See the circle?

It doesn't matter how many excuses there are or how many people rationalize it; it's still wrong and illegal to steal music, period.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Nemesis77
1. Downloading mp3's from the net is not stealing

jigga what? what do you call using a product without paying a price that the seller agrees to?

Downloading mp3's is not stealing, it's copyright-infringment. If I went to record-shop, and shoplifted a CD, I would be stealing. But downloading songs from the net is not stealing.

2. Record-companies have been found guilty of price-fixing

thats not pertinent

It shows that the record-companies themselves are to blame for the drop in sales of CD's

3. Cost of CD's has gone up faster than inflation

actually CD prices are damn near the same as they were 18 years ago when CDs came out

Not really, I have seen statistics that show that prices have gone up considerably. Which is trange, when you consider the following:

1. When CD's were released, they were a hi-end product with considerable price-premium when compared to the more common alternatives (cassettes and LP's). Today, they are the most common media for music, and they cosat less to produce, yet the price has not dropped. Their price was justified when they were considerably better and more expensive to manufacture than their cheaper alternatives. But that is no longer the case.

2. When CD's were released, their production numbers were limited and therefore unit-price was high. Not so today. As volumes increase, prices should come down. That has not happened

read this

4. CD's are ridiculously overpriced. Hell, soundtrack of movie costs almost as much as the DVD of the movie!

thats not pertinent. by that logic we should all go steal mercedes.

It shows that CD's are overpriced when compared to what they offer. People are unwilling to pay that much for CD's, therefore sales are dropping. Mercedes offers things that cheaper alternatives do not (brand among others), CD's do not.

5. There is no real evidence that mp3's or "piracy" is hurting record-sales.

thats not pertinent either

it shows that RIAA's struggle against "pirates" might be 100% pointless, if reasons for declining sales are elsewhere. If RIAA wants to find the reason for falling sales, I suggest that they look at the mirror