so, what the fuck is going on with the RIAA? - GoFuckYourself.com

Amputate Your Head · 06-30-2003, 12:27 PM

been hearing this shit on the news at night lately.... they're gonna fucking sue everyone now?

Quote:

If you're caught and sued, you'd face legal penalties of between $750 to $150,000 per song downloaded

Quote:

"There is no excuse for doing it anymore," says the RIAA's Mr. Oppenheim. "It is time for people to stop."

this seems pretty radical to me... I don't know.... issuing out lawsuits like candy to ordinary people who for the most part have no fucking way of paying $150k PER SONG downloaded??!!! Are they on crack? What a waste of fucking money. They're suing people that can't pay....

Thoughts, insight, or comments?

Xplicit · 06-30-2003, 12:28 PM

They are only targeting people who are SHARING large libraries of songs.

Meaning, if you dont upload anything, you're fine.

EscortBiz · 06-30-2003, 12:28 PM

they should just make em buy the CD and send in proof or face a $500 fine

If it was my music I would fuck people up

Sly_RJ · 06-30-2003, 12:30 PM

They're stuck between a rock and my cock. On one hand, they can allow people to freely download music as is. Not good. On the other hand, they can "sue" people for downloading their songs. Not a good idea, for reasons you already mentioned.

They're fucked either way. The only viable solution that I see, is to offer something like Mac has where you can buy and download individual songs for cheap. Even that won't solve any problems.

Amputate Your Head · 06-30-2003, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by EscortBiz
they should just make em buy the CD and send in proof or face a $500 fine

If it was my music I would fuck people up

check this out...

Quote:

MUSICIANS SAY NO TO PERSECUTION AND PROSECUTION OF MUSIC LOVERS

June 30th 2003

In response to the continuing legal attacks by the RIAA and major record labels on internet music sharing, which now include both criminal charges and civil suits against individuals, musicians are joining together to say NO to the action supposedly being taken on our behalf.

Just because the major labels haven't figured out a way to make money out of the internet doesn't mean that individuals who have shared music should go to prison, or be forced into bankruptcy. The industry is alienating the very people it hopes to sell music to in future with its heavy handed action.

With its collective failure to understand the internet, or the benefit it derives from the peer to peer networks that have sprung up in the vacuum created by that failure, the industry has now turned to desperate methods. Suing your customers one by one is not a business model.

We can only assume that the intention behind these attacks on individuals is to create an atmosphere of intimidation in which music lovers dare not use legally acquired computers to listen to music, except under very limited terms that the industry intends to dictate.

As musicians we recognise and defend the right of artists to be compensated for their work. However, these prosecutions are not helping musicians, or helping the industry create a better system of internet distribution.

We ask that the RIAA refrain from assuming our implicit support for their persecution of individual music lovers, stop equating all free online music with 'piracy', and concentrate its legal sanctions on the organisations who are making money out of the unauthorised duplication of our work.

[Labret] · 06-30-2003, 12:32 PM

Damn, this 360 gig of mp3 is gonna put me into some serious debt.

Sly_RJ · 06-30-2003, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amputate Your Head

The musicians will keep saying that until it hits their checkbooks. Then they'll be the biggest complainers.

Xenophage · 06-30-2003, 12:34 PM

http://www.metroactive.com/papers/cr.../mp3-0028.html

SexxxyChat-T · 06-30-2003, 12:34 PM

If they go through with this crap you can expect to see some SERIOUS backlash... it's one thing to shut down Napster, it's another to sue everyone.

They'd probably build a bigger market by embracing the move to the web instead of rejecting and alienating it like they have been.

I'd expect the case to get thrown out, or the fine be significantly reduced for anyone who is taken to court...

Didn't I read somewhere about the RIAA being involved with profiteering regarding how high CD prices are?

Those bastards aren't supporting the artists, they are supporting their mansions....

eroswebmaster · 06-30-2003, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sly_RJ
The only viable solution that I see, is to offer something like Mac has where you can buy and download individual songs for cheap. Even that won't solve any problems.

That's something I would utilize. I think it's kind of stupid for apple to not make a pc version of that service.

As most people attest to on here, p2p can be a big hassle. it can take 2-3 attempts to find the right song because of all the misleading stuff out there. And even then it can take forever to download.

i'd rather search for a single song I like and pay 99cents for it, and be able to download it immediately and at a decent speed.

i remember when they came out with a similar system for cassette's back in the late 80's.

You'd go to this machine and fill out a form with all the songs you liked. then pay whatever price the song was listed as and the store would make your compilation cassette and even give you a customized label for it.

I used to use that thing all the time, spent more money there than buying full length cassettes.

eroswebmaster · 06-30-2003, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sly_RJ

The musicians will keep saying that until it hits their checkbooks. Then they'll be the biggest complainers.

I thought most of the big deals was based upon units sold.

So in a sense wouldn't it already be affecting their checkbooks?

Sly_RJ · 06-30-2003, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SexxxyChat-T

Those bastards aren't supporting the artists, they are supporting their mansions....

What's your point?

It's their product. They have every right to protect their product that they spent millions to develop. And actually, it's their responsibility.

It's a big no-no to steal web content, but stealing music from record companies is OK? Ok.

Sly_RJ · 06-30-2003, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by eroswebmaster

I thought most of the big deals was based upon units sold.

So in a sense wouldn't it already be affecting their checkbooks?

If I understand right, when musicians start getting popular they sign large contracts. You know, like $5 million per CD for 4 CDs. If that is the case, then their checkbooks haven't been hit yet because their salary is already locked in.

titmowse · 06-30-2003, 12:39 PM

do the math

Amputate Your Head · 06-30-2003, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sly_RJ

What's your point?

It's their product. They have every right to protect their product that they spent millions to develop. And actually, it's their responsibility.

It's a big no-no to steal web content, but stealing music from record companies is OK? Ok.

I hear what you're saying Sly, but according to the news stations, virtually nobody is siding with the RIAA on this... they have failed to provide people with what they want, which is what p2p gives them. No one wants to go buy an $18 dollar cd with 12 tunes they don't want and 2 that they do. The RIAA would do better to spend it's time finding a way to make people happy and give them what they demand today, rather than fucking threaten everyone with lawsuits.

[Labret] · 06-30-2003, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sly_RJ

It's a big no-no to steal web content, but stealing music from record companies is OK?

Yes

Sly_RJ · 06-30-2003, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amputate Your Head

I hear what you're saying Sly, but according to the news stations, virtually nobody is siding with the RIAA on this... they have failed to provide people with what they want, which is what p2p gives them. No one wants to go buy an $18 dollar cd with 12 tunes they don't want and 2 that they do. The RIAA would do better to spend it's time finding a way to make people happy and give them what they demand today, rather than fucking threaten everyone with lawsuits.

Like I said, the thing Mac is doing is probably the best solution. I remember talking to my old man about this 3-4 years ago and I said the same thing. Only problem, if that becomes the "norm", how will people know about the other songs on the CDs?

FATPad · 06-30-2003, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amputate Your Head

I hear what you're saying Sly, but according to the news stations, virtually nobody is siding with the RIAA on this... they have failed to provide people with what they want, which is what p2p gives them. No one wants to go buy an $18 dollar cd with 12 tunes they don't want and 2 that they do. The RIAA would do better to spend it's time finding a way to make people happy and give them what they demand today, rather than fucking threaten everyone with lawsuits.

On a side note, I've noted webmasters want AYH designs for free and porn surfers want Adult.com content for free, so I've loaded up Kazaa with both.

cherrylula · 06-30-2003, 01:19 PM

I made cassette tapes of the first cd's I ever owned, and gave them to friends.

But I suppose that was illegal too.

Gutterboy · 06-30-2003, 01:25 PM

Looks like its having an impact too. Kazaa is down to its last 4,401,389 users and 6,529,238 gb worth of files.

TheJimmy · 06-30-2003, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amputate Your Head
been hearing this shit on the news at night lately.... they're gonna fucking sue everyone now?

this seems pretty radical to me... I don't know.... issuing out lawsuits like candy to ordinary people who for the most part have no fucking way of paying $150k PER SONG downloaded??!!! Are they on crack? What a waste of fucking money. They're suing people that can't pay....

Thoughts, insight, or comments?

bad economy = more lawsuits from desperate companies trying to figure out what is wrong with their industry....

MS is sueing spammers, AOL was recently as well, RIAA is going after p2p users, Government also after telemarketers and soon lawsuits will happen there....

bad economy = more lawsuits and more non-consentual ass loving

JMM · 06-30-2003, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amputate Your Head

What's really funny about this is the "forced into bankruptcy" quote. If sued, and they lose, the chances are very good that any judgement would NOT be dissolvable in a bankruptcy action. Judgements of this type are usually considered to be a result of an intentional tort. For the most part, bankruptcy courts will not dissolve judgements as a result of an intentional tort. So the RIAA would have 20 years to collect on that judgement.

They should be doing this. It has gotten out of control and needs to be stopped. People seem to think that because the technology exists to easily steal, that it is ok to steal. These same people trading songs, are also trading YOUR pictures and video. It hurts us all. The sooner it is stopped, the sooner YOUR business will increase.

Amputate Your Head · 06-30-2003, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JMM

What's really funny about this is the "forced into bankruptcy" quote. If sued, and they lose, the chances are very good that any judgement would NOT be dissolvable in a bankruptcy action. Judgements of this type are usually considered to be a result of an intentional tort. For the most part, bankruptcy courts will not dissolve judgements as a result of an intentional tort. So the RIAA would have 20 years to collect on that judgement.

They should be doing this. It has gotten out of control and needs to be stopped. People seem to think that because the technology exists to easily steal, that it is ok to steal. These same people trading songs, are also trading YOUR pictures and video. It hurts us all. The sooner it is stopped, the sooner YOUR business will increase.

well, I'm not saying it's right, but how can they possibly hope to collect $750 to $150K per song per person from your basic average computer user? That's insane

Amputate Your Head · 06-30-2003, 02:06 PM

I'm real interested to see how this all plays out....

Amputate Your Head · 06-30-2003, 02:07 PM

are they gonna go door to door and start confiscating everyone's computers for evidence too?

Amputate Your Head · 06-30-2003, 02:13 PM

"So, whatcha in for?"

"killed my mom."

"Really, no shit huh?"

"yep, how 'bout you?"

"ah I downloaded a fucking Britney Spears song last week."

"c'mere and bend over son."

JMM · 06-30-2003, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amputate Your Head

well, I'm not saying it's right, but how can they possibly hope to collect $750 to $150K per song per person from your basic average computer user? That's insane

That's the easy part....they will settle for much less. My guess is between 1 and 5k. I bet you that many of the people they will go after have that kind of money. They aren't doing it for the money, they are doing it to deter people. Just like 20 years in jail is certainly not a fair sentence for murdering someone, it is there to deter people from murder. Same concept.

And in response to your post after this one, they certainly could confiscate peoples computers. Copyright law allows for the impoundment of anything used to facilitate the infringement.

-=HOAX=- · 06-30-2003, 02:15 PM

I talked to a lawyer friend and he says they could have real problems proving, beyond a shadow of a doubt...that it was actually you sitting at your computer d/ling...

I think there have been a few cases in the past where a indicted surfer has simply denied it was actually him at the computer...although obviously that might not hold out if they find info where you admit to d/ling it, such as telling a friend...blah blah...it'll be a hard one vistory if it happens...but if a presidence gets set...it could be devastating to alot off folks...

Amputate Your Head · 06-30-2003, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JMM

That's the easy part....they will settle for much less. My guess is between 1 and 5k. I bet you that many of the people they will go after have that kind of money. They aren't doing it for the money, they are doing it to deter people. Just like 20 years in jail is certainly not a fair sentence for murdering someone, it is there to deter people from murder. Same concept.

And in response to your post after this one, they certainly could confiscate peoples computers. Copyright law allows for the impoundment of anything used to facilitate the infringement.

if they go through with this crap, this shit will enrage the public....

JMM · 06-30-2003, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amputate Your Head
"So, whatcha in for?"

"killed my mom."

"Really, no shit huh?"

"yep, how 'bout you?"

"ah I downloaded a fucking Britney Spears song last week."

"c'mere and bend over son."

Funny. But seriously, are you saying that lesser crimes should not be enforced? What they are doing is a crime. It hurts the business of the artist and the people who pay the artist. The record companies gamble everytime they sign an artist. Both the artist and the record company are entitled to receive 100% of the benefit from the exploitation of the artists work (exploitation in a good way). For every signed artist that makes it big, there are 20 that don't. The record companies count on the big artists picking up the slack for the smaller artists. That is how their business works.

Bottom line is this. In the year 2003, if you don't know that trading music files, or porn files, on a p2p network, or website, or ftp server, or whatever, is illegal..then you are either retaded, or you are trying everything possible not to know. ( I dont mean YOU specifically..Im talking about the general public).

JMM · 06-30-2003, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by -=HOAX=-
I talked to a lawyer friend and he says they could have real problems proving, beyond a shadow of a doubt...that it was actually you sitting at your computer d/ling...

I think there have been a few cases in the past where a indicted surfer has simply denied it was actually him at the computer...although obviously that might not hold out if they find info where you admit to d/ling it, such as telling a friend...blah blah...it'll be a hard one vistory if it happens...but if a presidence gets set...it could be devastating to alot off folks...

Baloney.

Lets say a husband and wife have two kids, 13, and 15.

They sue. The parents say it was their kids. Bummer for them since they are responsible for the illegal activity of their children.

Second scenario. The wife says it was the husband, the husband says it was the wife. they go to deposition and under oath, same thing..husband says it was the wife, wife says it was the husband. Someone is lying and the court wont tolerate it. These cases are very very very easy to prosecute.

Amputate Your Head · 06-30-2003, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JMM

Funny. But seriously, are you saying that lesser crimes should not be enforced? What they are doing is a crime. It hurts the business of the artist and the people who pay the artist. The record companies gamble everytime they sign an artist. Both the artist and the record company are entitled to receive 100% of the benefit from the exploitation of the artists work (exploitation in a good way). For every signed artist that makes it big, there are 20 that don't. The record companies count on the big artists picking up the slack for the smaller artists. That is how their business works.

Bottom line is this. In the year 2003, if you don't know that trading music files, or porn files, on a p2p network, or website, or ftp server, or whatever, is illegal..then you are either retaded, or you are trying everything possible not to know. ( I dont mean YOU specifically..Im talking about the general public).

Yes, fine... but the problem here is not the trading of the files. The problem is the RIAA has dragged its feet and not stepped up to meet the demand of its own customers. So instead of finding a way to solve it, move into 2003, and meet the demand, they're going to put their customers in jail.

Whoever is advising the RIAA needs to be shot.

JMM · 06-30-2003, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amputate Your Head

if they go through with this crap, this shit will enrage the public....

And that means what? People will stop buying music? Not likely. The public that doesn't steal will not be enraged. The public that does steal can be enraged all they want, they are breaking the law.

I am surprised that you don't see how this very same thing impacts your business as well.

JMM · 06-30-2003, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amputate Your Head

Yes, fine... but the problem here is not the trading of the files. The problem is the RIAA has dragged its feet and not stepped up to meet the demand of its own customers. So instead of finding a way to solve it, move into 2003, and meet the demand, they're going to put their customers in jail.

Whoever is advising the RIAA needs to be shot.

First of all, that is not true. There are many sites you can go to and pay to download music. They have met the demand. The problem lies in the fact that too many people are stealing the music, and then redistributing it. When that disappears, you will see many more sites pop up where you can pay to download music. I would say that the biggest hurdle to entering the pay to download market is that too many people are distributing the music for free. Take that hurdle away and watch what happens.

Amputate Your Head · 06-30-2003, 02:25 PM

I think it's a humongous effort in futility. Even IF they were to somehow magically shut down all p2p, people will find other ways. Fucking email if they have to. Like I said, I think they'd be better off looking for a way to turn it into a profit rather than threaten everyone.

Amputate Your Head · 06-30-2003, 02:29 PM

not to mention there is still a whole world outside the US... there isn't a fucking thing they can do about them, so what's the point? The shit will still be distributed. They can't prevent it.

TheJimmy · 06-30-2003, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JMM

Funny. But seriously, are you saying that lesser crimes should not be enforced? What they are doing is a crime. It hurts the business of the artist and the people who pay the artist. The record companies gamble everytime they sign an artist. Both the artist and the record company are entitled to receive 100% of the benefit from the exploitation of the artists work (exploitation in a good way). For every signed artist that makes it big, there are 20 that don't. The record companies count on the big artists picking up the slack for the smaller artists. That is how their business works.

Bottom line is this. In the year 2003, if you don't know that trading music files, or porn files, on a p2p network, or website, or ftp server, or whatever, is illegal..then you are either retaded, or you are trying everything possible not to know. ( I dont mean YOU specifically..Im talking about the general public).

we need to go house to house and start enforcing the same fuggin concept then in regards to video taping TV shows and movies, and casette taping radio, etc....there is no difference, only choice of media / medium

time to crack down on those evil fuggin VHS & Casette recorder companies....setting up and selling the equipment for illegal duplication/recording of vhs and casettes...oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

JMM · 06-30-2003, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheJimmy

we need to go house to house and start enforcing the same fuggin concept then in regards to video taping TV shows and movies, and casette taping radio, etc....there is no difference, only choice of media / medium

There is no difference? You are joking right?

There is a HUGE difference. When you tape a tv show at your house, you arent distributing that tape to hundreds/thousands of other people. If you did, that would be a crime and you would get busted.

Your analogy is not valid.

JMM · 06-30-2003, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amputate Your Head
not to mention there is still a whole world outside the US... there isn't a fucking thing they can do about them, so what's the point? The shit will still be distributed. They can't prevent it.

Of course there is..and I bet they will. Copyright law is covered from country to country by international treaty which covers most of the civilized world.

In the U.S, depending on where you live, you have choices on who to get internet service from. In MANY places in the world, there is but one choice. Wait until people are threatened with losing their internet access and see what happens.

If you are in the adult internet business you should applaud and support their efforts. You will be a beneficiary of their success.

Amputate Your Head · 06-30-2003, 02:40 PM

Simple solution for the RIAA:

Hire some people to sit around all day and flood the fucking p2p's with chopped music, and mix in a blurb in the beginning of each one to go to such and such a url of their choosing to pay to download the whole song. I'm sure most people wouldn't have a problem paying a buck or two for the music they want, versus getting fucked for $18 a disc for a bunch of crap.

Why is that so hard? Turn a profit, everyone's happy, life goes on.

But noooooooooooo..... we'll just sue everyone instead. That'll fix it.

loverboy · 06-30-2003, 02:41 PM

well, as long as there are free ripping tools out there, RIAA can't control things here.

Sly_RJ · 06-30-2003, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amputate Your Head
Simple solution for the RIAA:

Hire some people to sit around all day and flood the fucking p2p's with chopped music, and mix in a blurb in the beginning of each one to go to such and such a url of their choosing to pay to download the whole song. I'm sure most people wouldn;t have a problem pay a buck or two for the music they want, versus getting fucked for $18 a disc for a bunch of crap.

Why is that so hard? Turn a profit, everyone's happy, life goes on.

But noooooooooooo..... we'll just sue everyone instead. That'll fix it.

They already do that.

-=HUNGRYMAN=- · 06-30-2003, 02:50 PM

Major blow to the RIAA

http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grok...on_motions.pdf

Amputate Your Head · 06-30-2003, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sly_RJ

They already do that.

well they're doing a lousy fucking job of it. I've only ever run into 2 chopped songs.

TheJimmy · 07-01-2003, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JMM

There is no difference? You are joking right?

There is a HUGE difference. When you tape a tv show at your house, you arent distributing that tape to hundreds/thousands of other people. If you did, that would be a crime and you would get busted.

Your analogy is not valid.

ok, touche' not distributing it to 'hundreds/thousands' but the ACT itself is what is illegal in either form, not the level of distribution...that is what I was getting at....although I understand RIAA's perspective that the shit has gotten out of hand DUE TO the level of distribution...

but even in the case of the vhs/casettes....people have friends & family that they have sent/shared those tapes with....just a lot lower level of distribuation and thus impact on the industry...

There was an interesting article on the 'privacy p2p's' poping up now and that will become more and more popular unless kazaa, etc add those features to their clients...

http://wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,59448,00.html

foe · 07-01-2003, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JMM

That's the easy part....they will settle for much less. My guess is between 1 and 5k. I bet you that many of the people they will go after have that kind of money. They aren't doing it for the money, they are doing it to deter people. Just like 20 years in jail is certainly not a fair sentence for murdering someone, it is there to deter people from murder. Same concept.

And in response to your post after this one, they certainly could confiscate peoples computers. Copyright law allows for the impoundment of anything used to facilitate the infringement.

20 years in jail is more than a fair sentence for murdering some one, if you kill another person you should get life. Its not to deter its to punish

06-30-2003, 12:28 PM	#3
EscortBiz Fuck Checks, CASH only! Join Date: May 2002 Location: New York City Posts: 19,422	they should just make em buy the CD and send in proof or face a $500 fine If it was my music I would fuck people up __________________ Spanking, Medical Fetish, Sleeping, Strap-on Anal Lesbians, Girls Fucking Guys, Handjob site REAL HOT, Shemales, Anal and Ass Licking sites 100% Real EXCLUSIVE with amazing retention, ccbill payouts, lots of content FREE FTP HOSTING Promote the largest and oldest member paid escort site, Converts 10 times better then any dating site, CCBill payouts ICQ# 158802076

06-30-2003, 12:30 PM	#4
Sly_RJ Live Hard - Die Hard Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Ready to leave... Posts: 17,042	They're stuck between a rock and my cock. On one hand, they can allow people to freely download music as is. Not good. On the other hand, they can "sue" people for downloading their songs. Not a good idea, for reasons you already mentioned. They're fucked either way. The only viable solution that I see, is to offer something like Mac has where you can buy and download individual songs for cheap. Even that won't solve any problems. __________________ PHAT SERVERS - Quality dedicated hosting at a quality price! sly AT phatservers DOT com - 147479144

06-30-2003, 12:34 PM	#9
SexxxyChat-T Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 697	If they go through with this crap you can expect to see some SERIOUS backlash... it's one thing to shut down Napster, it's another to sue everyone. They'd probably build a bigger market by embracing the move to the web instead of rejecting and alienating it like they have been. I'd expect the case to get thrown out, or the fine be significantly reduced for anyone who is taken to court... Didn't I read somewhere about the RIAA being involved with profiteering regarding how high CD prices are? Those bastards aren't supporting the artists, they are supporting their mansions.... __________________ Need more cowbell? Then offer SexxxyChat live webcam feeds to your customers! Make up to 35% of all sales, $30 on first purchase, or $10 per signup

06-30-2003, 12:39 PM	#14
titmowse Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: TEXAS Posts: 5,320	do the math __________________ I still love everybody

06-30-2003, 02:06 PM	#24
Amputate Your Head There can be only one Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Somewhere else Posts: 39,075	I'm real interested to see how this all plays out.... __________________ SIG TOO BIG

06-30-2003, 12:28 PM	#2
Xplicit Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: █◄►█ Posts: 3,558	They are only targeting people who are SHARING large libraries of songs. Meaning, if you dont upload anything, you're fine.

06-30-2003, 12:32 PM	#6
[Labret] Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: Са́нкт-Петербу́рг Posts: 10,945	Damn, this 360 gig of mp3 is gonna put me into some serious debt.

06-30-2003, 12:34 PM	#8
Xenophage Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 12,122	http://www.metroactive.com/papers/cr.../mp3-0028.html

06-30-2003, 01:19 PM	#19
cherrylula lol Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 15,969	I made cassette tapes of the first cd's I ever owned, and gave them to friends. But I suppose that was illegal too.

06-30-2003, 01:25 PM	#20
Gutterboy So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Dis Posts: 4,751	Looks like its having an impact too. Kazaa is down to its last 4,401,389 users and 6,529,238 gb worth of files.

06-30-2003, 02:07 PM	#25
Amputate Your Head There can be only one Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Somewhere else Posts: 39,075	are they gonna go door to door and start confiscating everyone's computers for evidence too? __________________ SIG TOO BIG

06-30-2003, 02:13 PM	#26
Amputate Your Head There can be only one Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Somewhere else Posts: 39,075	"So, whatcha in for?" "killed my mom." "Really, no shit huh?" "yep, how 'bout you?" "ah I downloaded a fucking Britney Spears song last week." "c'mere and bend over son." __________________ SIG TOO BIG

06-30-2003, 02:15 PM	#28
-=HOAX=- Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: CrackYaMental Posts: 4,365	I talked to a lawyer friend and he says they could have real problems proving, beyond a shadow of a doubt...that it was actually you sitting at your computer d/ling... I think there have been a few cases in the past where a indicted surfer has simply denied it was actually him at the computer...although obviously that might not hold out if they find info where you admit to d/ling it, such as telling a friend...blah blah...it'll be a hard one vistory if it happens...but if a presidence gets set...it could be devastating to alot off folks... __________________ Insert Value Here.

06-30-2003, 02:25 PM	#35
Amputate Your Head There can be only one Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Somewhere else Posts: 39,075	I think it's a humongous effort in futility. Even IF they were to somehow magically shut down all p2p, people will find other ways. Fucking email if they have to. Like I said, I think they'd be better off looking for a way to turn it into a profit rather than threaten everyone. __________________ SIG TOO BIG

06-30-2003, 02:29 PM	#36
Amputate Your Head There can be only one Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Somewhere else Posts: 39,075	not to mention there is still a whole world outside the US... there isn't a fucking thing they can do about them, so what's the point? The shit will still be distributed. They can't prevent it. __________________ SIG TOO BIG

06-30-2003, 02:40 PM	#40
Amputate Your Head There can be only one Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Somewhere else Posts: 39,075	Simple solution for the RIAA: Hire some people to sit around all day and flood the fucking p2p's with chopped music, and mix in a blurb in the beginning of each one to go to such and such a url of their choosing to pay to download the whole song. I'm sure most people wouldn't have a problem paying a buck or two for the music they want, versus getting fucked for $18 a disc for a bunch of crap. Why is that so hard? Turn a profit, everyone's happy, life goes on. But noooooooooooo..... we'll just sue everyone instead. That'll fix it. __________________ SIG TOO BIG

06-30-2003, 02:41 PM	#41
loverboy When it rains, it pours Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 20,609	well, as long as there are free ripping tools out there, RIAA can't control things here.

06-30-2003, 02:50 PM	#43
-=HUNGRYMAN=- Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Between your mamma's legs Posts: 4,753	Major blow to the RIAA http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grok...on_motions.pdf __________________