RIAA starts going after students

[KMHPaladin]

I too go to RPI. What a lot of you are failing to realize, in your rush to 'criminalize' students for downloading MP3s, is that (at least) the RPI students are not running the next Napster. All these programs do is index files on our campus network. Everything, from shared files to uploaded information in student webspace, is indexed. Want to get the school's licensed Antivirus installation? Search the campus network. Want to find the latest patch for a game? Available on the network.

RPI's search engines are not music search programs, they're not filesharing programs. They simply create a searchable list of files. Personally, I think it's ridiculous to prosecute these people. All it goes to show is that the RIAA has failed with the 'big fish' and is trying to make an example with people it can bully around. I sure as hell hope the EFF or the ACLU or some organization steps up and helps with their legal expenses.

And as someone above said, I find it rich as hell that the RIAA gets slapped on the wrist for decades of price-fixing and then has the gall to go after people running a file index.

 

[Krugger]

Originally posted by: KMHPaladin
I too go to RPI. What a lot of you are failing to realize, in your rush to 'criminalize' students for downloading MP3s, is that (at least) the RPI students are not running the next Napster. All these programs do is index files on our campus network. Everything, from shared files to uploaded information in student webspace, is indexed. Want to get the school's licensed Antivirus installation? Search the campus network. Want to find the latest patch for a game? Available on the network.

RPI's search engines are not music search programs, they're not filesharing programs. They simply create a searchable list of files. Personally, I think it's ridiculous to prosecute these people. All it goes to show is that the RIAA has failed with the 'big fish' and is trying to make an example with people it can bully around. I sure as hell hope the EFF or the ACLU or some organization steps up and helps with their legal expenses.

And as someone above said, I find it rich as hell that the RIAA gets slapped on the wrist for decades of price-fixing and then has the gall to go after people running a file index.

I agree wholeheartdly as our students based their sites off of the one that was developed from an RPI student's work in the late 90's. like i said, it just a search engine, that links to files on other peoples computers. it's simply a source of information, and if the RIAA wins against these student's sites, it'll be a smack in the face of freedom of information.
-Krugger

 

[Karaethon1]

Anyone think these arguments will hold up in court?

Just some new news...

 

[Krugger]

hey, thanks for that link, i've been following this pretty closely but hadn't caught that. some of what this person said makes a lotta sense.
-Krugger

 

[AznMaverick]

nooo...i want my free mp3s!

 

[AvesPKS]

Originally posted by: tm37

Originally posted by: DaWhim
let's retal on those bastards!
anyone interests on some mp3 ftp sites pm me

if whoever is on RIAA side, I hope they don't own a VCR at home recording any copyright materials.

You fail to relize what fair use is.

It is legal to tape a show and watch it later.

It is legal to rip cd's to MP3's for you own personal usage.

It is not legal to allow anyone and there brother to freely download thoose MP'3 however.

I have a question. Is it legal to record a song off the radio and rip it to MP3, and keep it? If so, IN PRINCIPLE (since we'll assume that every song ever made has been on the radio at one time or another), couldn't one justify d/l'ing MP3's on the basis that one could record it, as well?

 

[slickcat]

So next they are going to go after VCR makers and anybody who fast forwards through the commercials?

 

[FelixDeCat]

Shocking!

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: slickcat
So next they are going to go after VCR makers and anybody who fast forwards through the commercials?

VCR (Tape technology) was addressed with a similar battle but since tape is not as good quality as the original was allowed. The Technology of today (Digital) is as good as the original which is contributing to this disaster we are witnessing.

As far as the skipping part, I suspect that they (MPAA) let it slide based on an argument that although "Fast" Forwarding through a Commercial with a VCR you were still able to see Corporate Names and Logos so they were still getting some bang for their buck, However a Digital PVR completely skips Commercials so you never see the Corporate Names and Logos. The MPAA is now battling this on two fronts, the original Tape method but the most interesting one is that they are now adopting a formula where the Commericals are placed in the main programming itself now either by putting the program in a Picture in a picture with the Commerical ( I have seen Commercials scrolling on the bottom, side etc) or they are more agressive with Product placement in the Program.

 

[ChefJoe]

Hrm, I use the forward button on tivo to skip past all those lusty, illicitly sexual scenes they keep putting in my tv shows.



Hey, it could happen!

 

[Kenazo]

Boy, I'm glad i live in Canada. If I remember correctly, or law here states that you are aloud to make a copy of an original recording for personal use, regardless of who owned the original. However, it is illegal to make copies of copies, thus making the digital duplication of MP3 files illegal...

On another note, I 100% agree that the RIAA has the right to prosecute these kids, however It is at times like these that capitalism makes me feel a bit ill.

 

[Krugger]

Originally posted by: Kenazo
Boy, I'm glad i live in Canada. If I remember correctly, or law here states that you are aloud to make a copy of an original recording for personal use, regardless of who owned the original. However, it is illegal to make copies of copies, thus making the digital duplication of MP3 files illegal... On another note, I 100% agree that the RIAA has the right to prosecute these kids, however It is at times like these that capitalism makes me feel a bit ill.

which kids? the college students that ran search engines? the ones that simply kept a list of ALL files already shared by others on the network, and ran a website that allowed students to search that list of files? the RIAA has the right to sue them for tens of millions of dollars? all they did was provide information that was out there already, it was the other students that were doing the file sharing.
-Krugger

 

[Sunner]

My problem with the RIAA is that they don't give one flying fsck about fair right.

Making backup copies of CD's is legal under fair use, no?
Well the RIAA doesn't think so, hence these new lovely "copyrighted" CD's that won't even play in alot of players.

Rip your songs to mp3/Ogg?
See above.

I usually just wait until CD's I want drop to around $10 or below, but Im pretty tempted to try out MusicLink or whatever it's called.
Would be nice to get the music I want, pay the artist more than they would've gotten if I bought the CD, and screw the RIAA, all at once.

I don't mind paying, in fact I gladly pay to show my appreciation for good music.
What I do mind, is that RIAA get's 95% of the money while the artists hardly get jack.
And don't come pulling this old "Distribution costs" argument, if that's such a truth, how come CD's went for ~$7-8 when they were a relatively new media, while they cost upwards of $20 these days?
Typically new stuff will be more expennsive at first, then drop gradually, not the other way around.

The RIAA can go screw themselves.