OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

For the record, I do not Subscribe to or believe in the swapping of music that you do not own or have not purchased. I own all the music on my computer and have the CD's to prove it.

With that said, I read this post made by someone at another site that I thought was interestingly silly.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Forgive me for saying this, but WTF are they doing? Taking the money from a 12 year old girl and her elderly grandmother?

Music is broadcast over the open air and can be copied. IMHO it is not software and should not fall under the catagory of piracy to download. If they play it over the radio for free, then it is "free."

Quote:

"I am sorry for what I have done," LaHara said. "I love music and don't want to hurt the artists I love." The suit claimed LaHara had been offering more than 1,000 songs on the Internet, using the Kazaa file-sharing service.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I love music to and could understand that if a person could not find many of the songs they enjoy at a record store or an on line music shop, they might be drawn to download them.

If I were to download a song I would want to pay for it so I knew it was ok. But there are very few sites that can accomodate that desire. The RIAA will sue any one with a MP3 song on their computer regardless of wether or not it was bough legal or not. So these companies are selling you songs that will get you sued.

Quote:

The RIAA said it was pleased with the settlement. There are 260 cases still pending. "We're trying to send a strong message that you are not anonymous when you participate in peer-to-peer file-sharing and that the illegal distribution of copyrighted music has consequences," said Mitch Bainwol, RIAA chairman and chief executive officer. "And as this case illustrates, parents need to be aware of what their children are doing on their computers."

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Hell ya they are pleased, they just punished a 12 year old girl and her elderly grandmother who are barely making it. Way to go RIAA!

Quote:

Monday, RIAA filed lawsuits against 261 individual Internet music file-sharers and announced an amnesty program for most people who admit they illegally shared music files through the Internet. The amnesty would only offer protection for songs represented by the RIAA and not from publishers, musicians or others with rights to songs.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I say sue the radio stations as well. Hell they are playing the music for FREE!

Quote:

Cary Sherman, president of the RIAA, said the civil lawsuits were filed against "major offenders" who made available an average of 1,000 copyright song files.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Mostly songs that are out of print and can not be bought at a record store or an on line music shop.

Quote:

Record companies blame illegal music file-trading for a 31-percent fall in compact disc sales since mid-2000.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Um hell no! The drop, if true and I am saying its an out and out lie, would be do to the fact that record companies have HIKED the price of CD's and given us utter crap in the way of new bands and songs over the Last few years!

Quote:

Sherman also announced the Clean Slate Program that grants amnesty to Users who voluntarily identify themselves, erase downloaded music files and promise not to share music on the Internet. The RIAA said it will not sue Users who sign and have notarized a Clean Slate Program affidavit.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ya like I am going to ***king tell them who I am! Duh "My name is Dumb *** and I want to be sued now."

Quote:

The offer of amnesty will not apply to about 1,600 people targeted by copyright subpoenas from the RIAA. The decision was made a few weeks after U.S. appeals court rulings mandated that Internet providers turn over the names of Subscribers believed to be sharing music and movies illegally.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I strongly suggest that g that you employ a similar tactic in your virtual life - by utilizing applications that anonymize

Quote:

Until now, the only music file-swapping lawsuits filed by the RIAA were against four college students accused of making thousands of songs available on campus networks. Those cases were settled for $12,500 to $17,000 each.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Because they were dumb enough to think that by being public with who they were and what they were doing would garner support for their cause and somehow protect them from the RIAA. Bad decision boys!

Quote:

Sherman said Monday that the RIAA had negotiated settlements in the range of $3,000 with a "handful" of Internet Users who had learned from their Internet service providers that they were being targeted for lawsuits. The industry is also pursuing subpoenas at universities around the country seeking to identify music file traders.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Hi-way robbery!

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Buying music on line is easy, it cost on average of about $1.00 per song. The problem is that most songs that are rare can not be found. So P2P may be a song lovers only recourse.

What the RIAA did was kinda low, suing a 12 year old girl and her grandma, but a message had to be sent. *ya right*

Pirating software is something that I am against completely. I know the arguements and all, but I have to stand firm on it. Developers, except for MS, make very little on their work while it is popular and even less on when it is no longer popular. I do believe that the poster had a point when he said music is played for FREE on the radio and any one can copy it. YEs that is true, but it is also illegal. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Radio Station have to pay a licensing fee to use music. It is all inclusive and such and cost about 100k a year per station.

I would like to see more on line music stores that allow people to make there own albums filled with music they love for a reasonable price. A buck a song is not bad, but if you do the math, it is very costly over the long run.

The cost should be more reasonable and there should be in place a method to authenticate that you bought the song so you do not get sued for having illegal MP3's on your computer.

[ September 14, 2003, 00:20: Message edited by: Atrocities ]

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

My own views on this are mixed.

However I do believe that the RIAA is fighting a losing battle. Modern security and encrytion methods are available that can stump the NSA and CIA. Once advanced encryption becomes widespread it will become impossible for anyone to crack down on it.

Quite simply the old business model and crime prevention models for these people are dead. Instead of trying to bring it back to life they need to move on and come up with something else that will still let them make money. What is that? I don't know. It isn't my industry. Anonymous and encrypted peer to peer file sharing will spell the end for several standard business models in easily movable data. Primarily music, movies and games... Why not books? Simple. Most people still prefer a solid hard cover that they can easily carry around. Why E-books still aren't that popular. Maybe in time it applies to them as well.

PS: Last I checked the number of peer to peer music/movie pirates was estimated at several million not several hundred, in the US alone. The real damage isn't being done by a few people offering a lot of files it is by a lot of people offering a few.
If the RIAA even tried to sue several million people assuming they could make that list and track em down they would bankrupt themselves in the effort alone. Imagine the legal costs! Imagine the firestorm of bad PR! Oooo boy.

Try it out. Download E-mule or some such, connect and use the built in search feature to search for whatever movie/game/music you can think of. I bet you find it, despite 200+ people offering thousands of files for download being forced to stop.

PS: Please note that the RIAA amnesty offer only applies to lawsuits they themselves would enter into. It does not say that they won't give your name upto some other interested party and that that party won't sue you. BEWARE!!!

[ September 14, 2003, 03:06: Message edited by: Cyrien ]

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

128 KB encryption is the standard now, and it is a tough nut to crack. Wait til 1024 KB or higher encryption comes out. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

The RIAA is most devious!

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

incryption could be used to show that you bought the song, if you bought a download.

[ September 14, 2003, 03:22: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

Yes, and it could be used to remain completely anonymous... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

Cyrien:

This loophole in the RIAA amnesty has been pointed out by many others, and there have actually been lawsuits filed against RIAA for this 'amnesty' tactic, claiming it is a form of entrapment....

I wonder how many people have been paying enough attention to the news to notice their cynical lobbying tactics, as well. They've had lobbyists before congressional committees claiming that P2P networks are supporting terrorism in hopes of stampeding lawmakers into some extreme action to shut them down. Most recently thay've been shouting about all the p0rn available in P2P and the lack of controls to prevent children getting access to it. As if kids need to go to P2P if they want p0rn? How many ordinary middle-class dads (erm, or moms... 60 percent of Playboy Subscribers are female... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif ) lock up their Playboy magazines? And how many 14-year-olds can't get p0rn from 16-year-olds, who got it from 18-year-olds? But they'll try anything. I'm sure they'll start screaming about the evil 'bomb making information' available on P2P networks or something else like that soon...

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">There are open discussions in Slashdot stories covering the current RIAA legal maneuavers about completely "blacked-out" P2P networks that trade a constant flow of encrypted fake data so you can't even tell how much traffic any one site is carrying let alone what files are being moved. And also discussions of preventing any one site from having to serve all of a given file, further obfuscating the actual data being traded and creating some difficult issues of 'legal liability' for the copyright hounds. If this is already being discussed in the open, there's a lot of work already underway in the quiet corners of the 'hacker' community. There will be a new generation of P2P applications coming out, probably within months, that will give RIAA nightmares. They really cannot win.

[ September 14, 2003, 04:13: Message edited by: Baron Munchausen ]

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You can tape TV shows with that handy-dandy VCR, no prob. You can record the radio station with your cassette tape.

The only difference is the format you've saved it to. Everything is fine with analog recordings, but "digital" is the boogeyman.

Without the internet, it would be a non-issue I'm sure.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

Yeah, cause those digital bits are just EVIL!

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

well, people are just going to have to learn self-control.

either that, or with technology quickly outstripping common sense, where going to destoy ourselves.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

Look at all of the artist that got nothing for their work in the 40's, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's, and yes even into the 90's because of crooked record companies. They claim they are doing this for the artists. Bull ****!. They are doing this because there is a market on the internet and the first step to controlling a market is to surpress it, regulate it, and then manage it. Its all about the all might golden dollar.

If artists were the issue I'd say hell ya, pay to download, but its not. The artist get next to nil for each record they sell. Something on the order of 11 cents per disk if they are lucky.

"Music is broadcast for free. Books, and software are not. Movies are not. Although TV does air movies, we all know that thay are hacked to crap and full of commericals."

"New music should be free from P2P for a period of a year or so. Then open the gates. Embrace the P2P market and allow the industry to grow. Stop trying to scare everyone strait and use the system to make the system work."

These are true enough statements, but we all know that sooner or later we are going to be seeing P2P clients on America's Most Wanted.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

Court cases trying to show P2P networks as illegal, based on the availability of illegal copyrighted material, have already been heard. The court rulings all pretty much stated that the P2P networks themselves are not illegal as their is a great deal of legal material that can be obtained, thus giving P2P networks a legal footing.

In fact the current crop of law suits is arising as a direct result of the failure of the record industry to get P2P applications made illegal. Tactic A fails try tactic B. So they have two options... they can try and get a law passed that will likely be found unconstitutional as so many recent internet restricting laws have been. Next they could try and get a constitutional amendmant passed. The public outcry against anything like that would kill any attempt almost instantly. The Senate and Congress members do need to get reelected after all.

So as for P2P on Americas most wanted... I doubt it. Even so that would only solve a fraction of the problem. Look up server locations on your local P2P networks. I bet a large fraction of them are not even in the US. The other countries would have to be just as rabid about it as the US based recording industry is trying to make the US.

Quite simply I don't think it is going to work.

I think this Quote can sum up the position of the Current Record Industry quite well.

We will not go quietly into the night,
We will not vanish without a fight.

I would add the Last part... but I don't think it applies, because they won't survive or live on. Not as they are anyways.

And here is an interesting article that shows how internet downloads are very likely not at the heart of decreased music CD sales. But rather the industry itself is at fault with its bad business practices and attempts to control the industry and kill off the free internet competition, illegal or otherwise.

http://www.bricklin.com/recordsales.htm

Course those are just my opinions.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You're lucky.
I don't.

And there is no way I am about to keep my long dead tape of Pink Floyd Drak side of the wall just to prove that I did buy it years ago.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

That girl will be OK, several internet providers offered to paid her fine. It is a cheep advertisement and very good publicity for them http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Fyron, that's 128-bit encryption that is the standard now. If 128KB encryption was the standard, only broadband Users would bother with transmitting encrypted data. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Although, having 131072-bit encryption would be super-duper-ultra-secure. As long as nobody else has the key, that is http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">You're lucky.
I don't.

And there is no way I am about to keep my long dead tape of Pink Floyd Drak side of the wall just to prove that I did buy it years ago.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Great now the RIAA knows who you are and will force Shrapnel to give them your user info and IP information. Then they will force your ISP to give them your personal info and by this time next week you will be looking down the barrel of a very nasty and in my opinion, wrongful lawsuit.

Been nice known ya UE.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

The RIAA can not possibly go after even 1% of the Users that have illegal mp3s. To do so would bankrupt them with legal fees. All they can hope to do is to (what should be) illegaly acquire the personal information of major mp3 distributors and sue them. This of course will do nothing to stop piracy, as you still have millions of Users worldwide sharing a small number of mp3s each, as well as all the non-American major distributors that the RIAA can not touch.

Unless you share 10000 mp3s on a high bandwidth pipe, your chances of being sued by the RIAA are probably less than winning the lottery.

[ September 15, 2003, 18:58: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

I just wonder... what would happen if a small/independent recording co. started printing a small label on the back of their CDs : "We are not affiliated with RIAA. We do not support RIAA policies." Could turn out to be good advertisement.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

That's what I'm waiting for, Erax.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

That would indeed be good advertisement. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, but how can you get people to forfeit their royalties ?? We all know the modern musicians to it for money and money only. The 60s will never come back http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, but how can you get people to forfeit their royalties ?? We all know the modern musicians to it for money and money only. The 60s will never come back http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why would they need to forfeit their royalties? Just because you're not affiliated with the RIAA doesn't mean you don't make money. I mean, it's not like it's some socialist state-run record company, it's just a very successful corporate bully.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes, the RIIA is an US monster. But it seems to reproduce quickly and it is breeding new laws everywhere. At the moment the french government is playing dead on this subject as he already got his hand full. No need to alienate just another bunch of people.

But it is just a question of time. It is not "IF" but "WHEN" some dumb DMCA will be voted in France.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

I can see it now. The French people stand up and march in the streets and there government surrenders to them. Just like old times. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

I read somewhere that the word surrender was described simply in a german WWII handbook as "French."

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Sounds true enough. j/k

[ September 16, 2003, 00:27: Message edited by: Atrocities ]

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

He is lucky, he lives in France. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

Regarding the RIAA, I read today in the paper that the reason they only filed some 200 lawsuits is because they can't prove anything. They went after the cases that they new would "settle" only to stir the pot and make people scared to trade music. It worked. On line uses of P2P programs have dropped off by an estimated 70% over the Last week.

The RIAA cannot prove, or identify people who trade music or movies. People can say their IP was hijacked, which can and has happened.

The article goes on to say that the RIAA is being counter sued by some rights group for placing worm viruses and spy ware on peoples computers in order to find out who they were. That the programs were "enbedded" in the data of the song and when the song was played, the spy worm program was activated. They claim that only about 200 or so of these worms actually worked and those are the people being sued.

"If this is true and accurate, as evident by the increased detection of spy ware and other privicy violating programs by anti adware programs such as Pest Patrol in many of the songs downloaded over recent months, then we do have a big problem."

If the RIAA is embedding worm virus in songs that they release into the P2P community to track and catalog P2P useres, then they should be sued. Sued into bankruptcy!

[ September 16, 2003, 00:38: Message edited by: Atrocities ]

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">????

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

I’m amazed that so many people think of the French as „cowards“ or something like this. There are few countries with a more glorious military history. BTW, the joke with the rifle you can buy, dropped only once, is quite an old joke and originally about the Italian WWII-Army. Just FYI.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

French defeat in the Franco-Prussian War, near-defeat in WWI and defeat in WWII was the result of outdated military doctrine. Which may say something about the rigid thinking of their generals but has no bearing on the prowess and courage of the individual soldier.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

Here in sweden it's still legal to download music from the net, to burn those on a cd and to give them to your friends, as long as there is no commercial gain.
But it's not legal to share the songs on the internet, to upload them to a server or by sharing them through p2p, only downloading and posession is legal.
There was some discussion about if this was legal or not some time ago so one of our ministers downloaded some songs, burned them to cd and gave to a friend and filed a report to the police about it, the prosecutors did an investigation and came to the conclusion that there was no law against it. (Not the same minister that was killed a week ago (Anna Lind) but another one (Margot Wallström)).

The same goes for movies but not for software, downloading software is illegal.

The law will propably change soon to include movies but music will propably not be included.

[ September 16, 2003, 20:09: Message edited by: Ruatha ]

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

Artists are starting to speak up:

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news...77730564461625

They don't like the suits either, and they know very well this lawsuit bull**** is not for their benefit.

And Orson Scott Card, a fairly prominent Scifi/fantasy author, also knows what copyright is really about:

http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2003-09-07-1.html

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

Strike one against RIAA:

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/apps/p...YT01/309160363

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

it doesn't matter if it's the wave of the future, it doesn't matter if it'd be hard to stop, it doesn't matter if the recording companies are engaging in unjust business practices, piracy is piracy and another's actions do not justify your own.

i know i normally don't take a serious stance like this, but it seems like there's to much justification going on.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wow... most of our ministers don't even know what a computer is, let alone know how to download a bunch of crap and burn it to cd. Doesn't stop them passing laws on technical matters though. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif That's half the problem- in the absence of knowledge, policy-makers rely on ppl with vested interests (ie the music companies) to explain things to them and shape the law.

Narf: I think if a law is unjust then there is no shame in breaking it. This whole "intellectual property" gig is unjust, and if we all just drop our troUsers and bend over for the sake of law and order then there will be nothing to stop big biz getting what it wants: every idea on the planet up for ransom.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

Blame Canada

A desperate American recording industry is waging a fierce fight against digital copyright infringement seemingly oblivious to the fact that, for practical purposes, it lost the digital music sharing fight over five years ago. In Canada.



"On March 19, 1998, Part VIII of the (Canadian) Copyright Act dealing with private copying came into force. Until that time, copying any sound recording for almost any purpose infringed copyright, although, in practice, the prohibition was largely unenforceable. The amendment to the Act legalized copying of sound recordings of musical works onto audio recording media for the private use of the person who makes the copy (referred to as "private copying"). In addition, the amendment made provision for the imposition of a levy on blank audio recording media to compensate authors, performers and makers who own copyright in eligible sound recordings being copied for private use."

-- Copyright Board of Canada: Fact Sheet: Private Copying 1999-2000 Decision



The Copyright Board of Canada administers the Copyright Act and sets the amount of the levies on blank recording media and determines which media will have levies imposed. Five years ago this seemed like a pretty good deal for the music industry: $0.77 CDN for a blank CD and .29 a blank tape, whether used for recording music or not. Found money for the music moguls who had been pretty disturbed that some of their product was being burned onto CDs. To date over 70 million dollars has been collected through the levy and there is a good possibility the levy will be raised and extended to MP3 players, flash memory cards and recordable DVDs sometime in 2003.



While hardware vendors whine about the levy, consumers seem fairly indifferent. Why? Arguably because the levy is fairly invisible - just another tax in an overtaxed country. And because it makes copying music legal in Canada.



A year before Shawn Fanning invented Napster, these amendments to Canada's Copyright Act were passed with earnest lobbying from the music business. The amendments were really about home taping. The rather cumbersome process of ripping a CD and then burning a copy was included as afterthought to deal with this acme of the digital revolution. The drafters and the music industry lobbyists never imagined full-on P2P access.



As the RIAA wages its increasingly desperate campaign of litigation in terrorum to try to take down the largest American file sharers on the various P2P networks, it seems to be utterly unaware of the radically different status of private copying in Canada.



This is a fatal oversight, because P2P networks are international. While the Digital Millennium Copyright Act may make it illegal to share copyright material in America, the Canadian Copyright Act expressly allows exactly the sort of copying which is at the base of the P2P revolution.



In fact, you could not have designed a law which more perfectly captures the peer to peer process. "Private copying" is a term of art in the Act. In Canada, if I own a CD and you borrow it and make a copy of it that is legal private copying; however, if I make you a copy of that same CD and give it to you that would be infringement. Odd, but ideal for protecting file sharers.



Every song on my hard drive comes from a CD in my collection or from a CD in someone else's collection which I have found on a P2P network. In either case I will have made the copy and will claim safe harbor under the "private copying" provision. If you find that song in my shared folder and make a copy this will also be "private copying." I have not made you a copy, rather you have downloaded the song yourself.



The premise of the RIAA's litigation is to go after the "supernodes," the people who have thousands, even tens of thousands of songs on their drives and whose big bandwidth allows massive sharing. The music biz has had some success bringing infringement claims under the DMCA. Critically, that success and the success of the current campaign hinges on it being a violation of the law to "share" music. At this point, in the United States, that is a legally contested question and that contest may take several years to fully play out in the Courts.



RIAA spokesperson Amanda Collins seemed unaware of the situation in Canada. "Our goal is deterrence. We are focused on uploaders in the US. Filing lawsuits against individuals making files available in the US."



Which will be a colossal waste of time because in Canada it is expressly legal to share music. If the RIAA were to somehow succeed in shutting down every "supernode" in America all this would do is transfer the traffic to the millions of file sharers in Canada. And, as 50% of Canadians on the net have broadband (as compared to 20% of Americans) Canadian file sharers are likely to be able to meet the demand.



The Canada Hole in the RIAA's strategic thinking is not likely to close. While Canadians are not very keen about seeing the copyright levy extended to other media or increased, there is not much political traction in the issue. There is no political interest at all in revisiting the Copyright Act. Any lobbying attempt by the RIAA to change the copyright rules in Canada would be met with a howl of anger from nationalist Canadians who are not willing to further reduce Canada's sovereignty. (These folks are still trying to get over NAFTA.)



Nor are there any plausible technical fixes short of banning any connections from American internet Users to servers located in Canada.



As the RIAA's "sue your customer" campaign begins to run into stiffening opposition and serious procedural obstacles it may be time to think about a "Plan B". A small levy on storage media, say a penny a megabyte, would be more lucrative than trying to extract 60 million dollars from a music obsessed, file sharing, thirteen year-old.



If American consumers objected -- well, the music biz could always follow Southpark's lead and burst into a chorus of "Blame Canada". Hey, we can take it....We'll even lend you Anne Murray.



Jay Currie is a Vancouver writer whose writing and blog is at www.jaycurrie.com

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

From one of the articles linked to by the Baron :

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Heh, heh. Basically, Apple is telling the recording industry, "Wake up... you're obsolete". They still have time to catch the direct-download boat, but they'll probably stick to their stupid lawsuits and miss it entirely.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">But what kind of Poll? A Flag Poll? A Telephone Poll? A North Poll, or were you refering to a Poll(ish) person?

This post 'Includes Humor', but one man's humor is another man's tumor. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Cheers! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Hehehe I'd forgotten they did this. How nice for the music industry that I pay them for all the CD Roms I buy that are used exclusivly for backing up data and giving out large files to our clients. Of course no doubt the music industry is handing all those profits back to the artists. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

problem with apple is that if you download it in the usa you can only use it in the usa. Your not allowed to take the music out of the country

ot

http://www.theonion.com/3936/top_story.html

This hit close to home. A little too close

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

And how is Apple (or anyone else) ever going to enforce that ?

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

[quote]Originally posted by dogscoff:

Quote:

... This whole "intellectual property" gig is unjust, and if we all just drop our troUsers and bend over for the sake of law and order then there will be nothing to stop big biz getting what it wants: every idea on the planet up for ransom.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">PAY UP Dogscoff!!!
That idea was mine first. I have records.

BTW: "Glutinous Maximus" was mine too. I created it and I want my royalties.

[ September 17, 2003, 19:52: Message edited by: Wardad ]

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

I should have encluded a poll in this thread. Hindsight is always 20/20.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

protests of unfair actions still should not be done by breaking the law; and it is not the law that is unjust, but the recording company's. mass blackmall by angry musician's would fix it quick. people need to start boycotting more.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Wow... most of our ministers don't even know what a computer is, let alone know how to download a bunch of crap and burn it to cd. Doesn't stop them passing laws on technical matters though. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif That's half the problem- in the absence of knowledge, policy-makers rely on ppl with vested interests (ie the music companies) to explain things to them and shape the law.
QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ditto in Oz, I remeber the debate about internet gambling, some archaic pollies calling for its banning http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif . Any one with half a brain saying that it is pointless 'cause they will go offshore - much better to allow it and tax and regulate it.
Of course if you could ban gambling world wide that might be a good thing as it is a tax on stupidity - then again if you *really* think you can beat the odds - heh go for it.

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

oh, sure, anybody can beat the odds...

...oh, you mean without cheating http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anyone who gambles for profit without being the house is an idiot, granted. However, for those who gamble properly, a loss is expected - gambling takes on the role of entertainment, where a loss of money is reasonable, not something done for profit. For that portion of the population, gambling is not a stupidity tax. For the rest of the population, however....

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anyone who gambles for profit without being the house is an idiot, granted. However, for those who gamble properly, a loss is expected - gambling takes on the role of entertainment, where a loss of money is reasonable, not something done for profit. For that portion of the population, gambling is not a stupidity tax. For the rest of the population, however....</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Problem is that it can become a very expensive from of entertainment that can result in all sorts of crazy stuff. Such as kids locked in cars at Casinos, no money for food because the pokies ate it instead.
It is hard when a form of entertainment can be so obviously problematic to some - the question is - when is the social detriment worse by allowing it than banning it?
(aren't we all happy that a SEIV addiction is so comparatively cheap!)

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Anyone who gambles for profit without being the house is an idiot, granted. However, for those who gamble properly, a loss is expected - gambling takes on the role of entertainment, where a loss of money is reasonable, not something done for profit. For that portion of the population, gambling is not a stupidity tax. For the rest of the population, however....</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Jack, do you want to play some 7 card roll your own, no peek, low spade in whole stud poker? Or do you prefer the odds of Black Jack? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Re: OT: RIAA and Their Law Suits
 

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No Peek makes it a monkey game, much like uncounted Black Jack.

While playing for money inarguably makes it gambling, properly played Poker is not a Game of Chance, but a Game of Skill. Luck might determine the course of a single hand, but Skill determines the course of a night.

That said, I prefer Texas Hold'em, Seven Card Stud, or Five Card Draw for their simplicity, or any number of insane 'home games' for variety and to keep the Math Masters on their toes.

We play once a week, and 'friendly' means that the buy in is low enough that losing it is no cause for sympathy.