The RIAA's Hit List Named 1008
Carpoolio writes "TechTV is the first I've seen to name names in the fight between the RIAA and music downloaders. Using an online court records search service, they've found a number of the subpoenas served by the RIAA to ISPs, which will ultimately end in lawsuits for the people named on this list. Right now, they've published a number of the P2P user names filed with the US District Court in Washington, DC, mainly Kazaa users. Are you on the list?"
phew. (Score:4, Funny)
kazaaliteuser@Kazaa vs. RIAA
RIAA: Please disclose any and all information about kazaaliteuser@Kazaa to us!
Comcast: Um, we're @comcast.net and @attbi.com, sorry.
RIAA: YOU'RE ALL AGAINST US!
Re:phew. (Score:5, Informative)
Oh man! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Oh man! (Score:5, Funny)
(You only have yourself to blame for this).
Re:Oh man! (Score:5, Funny)
I'm not sure which is more disturbing: The name itself, or the fact that more than one person uses it.
Re:Oh man! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh man! (Score:5, Funny)
Because munkeyspankers 1 - 20 restricted their copyright infringement activities to pornography, obviously. Jesus, did you even look at the name?!
"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you will hear testimony during this trial regarding the complete disregard for the law shown by Mr Munkeyspanker. His total disrespect for the rule of law is shown further by his attempts to hide his identity; but I assure you, this law-breaker, this
Re:Oh man! (Score:5, Funny)
Since they are prosecuting the likes of "Lisweet@Kazaa" "ktgurl13@Grokster" and the like, however, (the heartless bastards) I now am of the opinion that "cuntfuckcunt@kazaa" might be the way to go.
Lets see them file papers against that.
Good thinking (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh man! (Score:5, Funny)
munkeyspanker17, while having a large collection of kiddy porn, was not sharing any RIAA-label music. We're only after real criminals here..
The others weren't logged on at the time. We only logged on briefly since we didn't want to draw the attention of the MPAA who will be conducting their own witchhunt next week..
Re:Oh man! (Score:3, Funny)
They must set the sticky bit on all their directories.
Re:Oh man! (Score:5, Interesting)
Get a wireless router
Reformat and securely erase your harddrives
Claim that somebody taped into your wireless router and was using it routinely
How could they prove you were lying?
Not a bad idea BUT (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh man! (Score:4, Informative)
1993: Playboy Enterprises Inc. v. Frena
The Florida Northern District Court held that Frena, an electronic bulletin board operator, had violated Playboy's copyright when one of their photographs was digitized and placed on the bulletin board system by one subscriber and downloaded by another subscriber. According to the decision, "it does not matter that Defendant Frena may have been unaware of the copyright infringement. Intent to infringe is not needed to find copyright infringement. Intent or knowledge is not an element of infringement, and thus even an innocent infringer is liable for infringement; rather innocence is significant to a trial court when it fixes statutory damages, which is a remedy equitable in nature."
Re:Oh man! (Score:5, Insightful)
The RIAA is suing file sharers. I know this doesn't get much play on the news, but it's the unauthorized distribution, i.e. sharing, that is in "violation".
So they don't have a log of you downloading something, they have a screenshot of all the files you are letting other people download.
Re:Oh man! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh man! [OT] (Score:4, Funny)
What about people who don't live in the US? (Score:5, Interesting)
Highly doubtful. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What about people who don't live in the US? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well... Since the last "A" in RIAA stands for America, you probably wouldn't get sued by the RIAA. But I wouldn't put it past an internationally focused recording industry group to try legal maneuvers in other countries to establish a precedent similar to the "Verizon" one here.
Re:What about people who don't live in the US? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What about people who don't live in the US? (Score:3, Informative)
Will I be sued for music-swapping? [bbc.co.uk]
Interesting that (Score:5, Interesting)
So I wonder how many people that covers?
Re:Interesting that (Score:5, Funny)
Bailiff: would munkeyspanker21 please take the stand
please place your right....errr uhhh....left hand here.
hehe
Re:Interesting that (Score:5, Insightful)
"Name = www.k_lite.tk_Kazaa_Lite@Kazaa"
or
"Name = Mr Foo Z Barr a.k.a. www.k_lite.tk_Kazaa_Lite@Kazaa"?
(IANAL, and I've never seen a subpoena so . . )
Re:Interesting that (Score:5, Funny)
So I wonder how many people that covers?
They track a combination of username and IP address. For the default username, the IP address they have on record is 127.0.0.1. If that's not the address of your computer, you're safe!
So File Swappers *are* Terrorists (Score:5, Funny)
Reckon the RIAA's trying to make a point here?
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
This guy... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This guy... (Score:5, Funny)
I've always been tempted to call myself "Whiffles the Wonder Pig" just to see them try to keep a straight face when they say, "Joe Smith, alias Whiffles the Wonder Pig, approach the bench!"
Re:This guy... (Score:5, Funny)
You must be just DYING to be anally raped in prison.
Re:This guy... (Score:3, Interesting)
Mr. Skippy...
Which one?
The Evil Twin
He isn't here right now...
hmm... (Score:5, Interesting)
RIAA will probably make more out of lawsuit settlements than through their music
KoalaBear33
Re:hmm... (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, but I want to know what their long-term sales (and losses) will be like when people like me, who used to buy music regularly, decide never to buy it again. For example, Jane's Addiction's new album came out yesterday and even though I have three of their previous albums (all legit), I have no intention of buying this one simply because it was put out by a member of the RIAA. It's painfully clear that music purchases support a draconian industry with utter contempt for its customers more than they feed "starving artists".
As the RIAA starts suing individuals for even minor infractions, it won't be a stretch for them to be perceived by regular customers as 'evil', and when you attack and alienate customers, your overall business model is doomed. You can't tell me that every one of those people sharing mp3s has stopped buying music completely, and once they're sued, you know all their family & friends are going to stop buying music too.
It's really too bad that it would be impossible to figure out how many people have stopped buying music because of the actions of the RIAA. Any poll on Slashdot would be heavily slanted. Maybe at a concert they should ask people as they're standing in line whether or not they plan on buying music in the future if the RIAA will sue them for sharing 10 mp3s over p2p.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Gandhi
True Names (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:True Names (Score:4, Funny)
Perhaps it was You Dropped A Bomb On Me [angelfire.com], by the Gap Band?
Check out PACER!!! (Score:5, Informative)
I never knew there was such easy accesible tools to information that the government owes us anyways. Takes about a week for them to e-mail you a password, and you are free to register as a individual citizen!
Always referred to as theft (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Always referred to as theft (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Always referred to as theft (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Always referred to as theft (Score:3, Interesting)
Thanks for the clarification. But it still doesn't matter jack squat. When the media talks about "theft" in the context of file-sharing, everyone knows they're talking about the mass copyright-infringement of media that happens on p2p networks.
What you're doing here is nit-picking because of sour grapes. There's no substantial damage being done to society because of these misappropriation of terms, since everyone knows they are talking about copyright infringement. And in court, t
Theft != infringement (Score:5, Insightful)
By accepting the word "theft", the seed of the notion that this is about tangible property, not distribution rights, is planted. Tangible property has an intrinsic value, while distribution rights over something non-tangible are more difficult to relate to, especially for non-techies.
By calling it "theft", the RIAA avoids the whole issue of their being distributors of goods that are so easily shared as to be a commodity. By making it seem as though it were about the theft of property, the RIAA avoids justifying their role and the possible subsequent questions about the value and validity of copyright and IP laws.
Most non-techies can not relate to digital data. The RIAA, by calling it "theft", brings to mind books. Books are copyrighted, and they cost money. When people buy a book, they "feel" that they pay for the medium. The "unauthorized reproduction" clause is there, and most people understand it because text isn't easily divorced from paper.
Digitalization makes the separation of content from medium very possible (obviously) and this is where the confusion by the public comes in. "What do you mean I can't share this? I didn't make a physical copy. It's digital, not REAL".
Calling it "theft" is the RIAA's way of making it feel real, but it is a misrepresentation of what it is. It's not theft, it is unauthorized reproduction and redistribution; and the ugly side of that is that people who didn't properly buy the right to access the content now do not need to give the RIAA money.
Were the RIAA to put this whole issue in semantically correct terms, they would come across to Joe Public as running a racket, which, really, they are. Joe Public would then, at the next election, likely influence legislation in a direction unfavorable to the RIAA. So they're calling it what it's not, to stack public opinion in their favor.
Re:Always referred to as theft (Score:5, Insightful)
You see, that's what you're saying. That the media is allowed to lie and misuse terms if we "know what they mean." This is untrue. It's a form of the type of subtle spin and bias that big media conglomeration promises us it won't do. "Copyright theft" in this context is as much a misnomer as "Consumer Broadband Protection Act."
Besides, it has yet to be proven that trading mp3s is truly copyright infringment, let alone theft. We're merely assuming it is, because lower courts have said so. The same lower courts that readily ignore supreme court judgments on flag burning and abortion. The supreme court, the only court that really matters in terms of what's constitutional, has yet to speak definitively on the matter. Probably because it hasn't had reason to yet...people's constitutional rights aren't really being infringed upon to the point that they had to include that in their busy schedule.
But they will be. Probably with this case.
You see, the RIAA would like us to believe that copyright means only they have the right to "copy." That's not what the word means -- "Copy" refers to lyrics, similar to the words "ad copy." Copyright gives a person the rights to performance and production of a song. I copyright my songs so others won't turn them into hits and not give me a cut. I copyright them so they can't be used in movies without my permission (and a cut).
It doesn't necessarily give me a right to control home users who are putting my songs on a mix CD. And I shouldn't (and don't) care, because that doesn't infringe on my rights as a musician. And since I'm a self promoting independent artist, who needs all the exposure he can get, I appreciate this kind of publicity. Mix makers are a musician's best friend. Which is why so many labels give out their singles on mp3s for free...sub pop and coup de tat are two off the top of my head.
The main reason the RIAA wants to abolish file trading is that it gives users a medium to learn about new artists that their members (who include the same labels involved in payola scams, price fixing and very few independent labels) can not control. Which means people will be spending their money not on RIAA albums, but on independents. Activity we've alreadt seen. And as radio becomes EVEN LESS diverse, and members scale back their releases EVEN FURTHER to please shareholders who don't like the libertine Rolling Stone idea of funding albums that might lost money, file sharing will (and has) become a primary way for people to discover new music. New music which doesn't have a big SONY label glued to the back. And that's apparently a Bad Thing. Because if artists jump to the indies, they'll be making 3, 5, even 7 dollars per album sold instead of 1 dollar kept to offset production costs and held in case of returns. They'll be impossible to control by corralling them into a culture of drugs and debt to ensure their willingness to sign shockingly one sided contracts. And then there will be no money to pay the worthless A&R men to manufacture singles!
Re:Always referred to as theft (Score:5, Insightful)
Hey, you're welcome to your opinion, no matter how wrong it is. But the fact is that the argument supporting your opinion depends on the file trading being an infringing activity, which is a legal statement that has yet to be proven.
I mean, if you want to get REALLY technical (and by trying to make a distinction between "sharing" and "copying" when in the digital world the only difference is a change of state, you ARE trying to get technical), MP3s may fall under a different area of fair use: that protecting the right to establish works in the style of other works. A 128 kbit ogg file is not a "copy" of the copyrighted work on CD -- it's a digital interpretation of it which eliminates at least 90% of the original and bears as much resemblence to it on the data level as a cassette does to a record. The RIAA says it doesn't matter, but they're kind of an interested party, aren't they? Maybe we should let the courts decide, though that will never stop us from freely trading our opinions -- no matter how wrong they are. No, those are protected in the constitution, and are subject to fair use
Frankly, I'm surprised (Score:3, Insightful)
Second, where is kazaalite? There is only one entry for that, but I know there are more users of kazaalite than that...
I guess I'm also shocked that anyone actually hasn't heard of Klite and/or isn't running it instead of Kazaa.
hmm. Glad my name isn't on there - HillaryBlowsMonkeys@Riaa.com
Now what? (Score:4, Funny)
Oh no! (Score:5, Funny)
UserID to Person Mapping (Score:5, Interesting)
Not that I'm on the list, but do they intend to catch the person who actually created the account, but may not have downloaded any copyrighted material, but inadvertently forgotten to log off? Failing to log off isn't a crime by itself, nor should you be responsible if your account was used for illegal activity, unknown to you.
in the navy ... (Score:5, Interesting)
At the risk of telling boring old war stories, I attended a military college where one sad soul forgot to log his machine off. Someone found the machine and used it to send a vulgar message to the universal e-mail alias, including the commandant, director of cadets, and professors, on down to the lowliest first year. In true military fashion, they made no attempt to find the real author of the e-mail, but instead threatened to court martial the guy who left the computer logged on, for violating security rules. Eventually he avoided court martial, but was given a severe administrative punishment.
Other ways they won't know (Score:4, Interesting)
2) You use a free wireless access network (you know trading MP3's while at the baseball game mentioned in recent post)
3) You use somebody else's network (An unsecured wireless network, etc)
4) Your ISP doesn't keep good records
I imagine most of these people can eventually be traced to a person, but I'm sure more than a few are getting away with it.
Let us know if you're on the list & the lowdow (Score:5, Interesting)
If I were to end up on the list I'd damn sure let everyone know and I'd fight it with everything I have.
Remember don't fund an entity that will only sue you into financial ruin. We can hurt them where it hurts them most...in the wallet. This is the only way to make a statement. Once these lawsuits start then the shit is really going to hit the fan and the backlash will be severe.
Think of it this way...what's more important violent crime or copyright violations? Well the RIAA is sending out so many subpoenas without judicial oversight I might add that court systems are having to redistribute their workers to cover the overwhelming workload. That means less work on violent, horrible crimes and more work on copyright infractions? This is beyond ridiculous!
Join the boycott starting August 1-30th and do not buy any music in this period.
Here's a list of who to boycott Boycott List [boycott-riaa.com]
Here's the products to boycott Products to Boycott [cafepress.com]
Re:Let us know if you're on the list & the low (Score:5, Insightful)
Ummm, a quick piece of a dvice, first, for those of you whose user names are listed: Don't. Or, if you really want to, get a lawyer and ask him for advice. If this does get to trial, you don't want something that you posted to slashdot to be used against you and torpedo any of the defenses you and your lawyer develop.
The effort expended by the Court in the processing and issuing of these subpoenas is probably insubstantial. The court's and judges duties are largely ministeriel. Of course, if these cases are actively prosecuted then the court's workload would of course increase. But, if my understanding of how the federal court's work is correct, the impact will only be on the civil side of things, not criminal; generally speaking, criminal cases are given priority in matters of scheduling, etc.
I am on the list (Score:4, Interesting)
What am I going to do about it? Nothing. They can keep sending legal threats, but I will simply ignore them. Arrest warrents?? Pfft. Most cops will not even bother to take someone in for something so stupid. I don't have the time to download movies and music, I simply have plenty of server space and fast connections. I'm doing a public service, and a major disservice to the RIAA/MPAA by moving 100+ Gb a month. Half the stuff that moves through is junk that I would never even want to watch or listen too.
I'm not going to go on about how unfair it all is, I don't even care. I know that what I'm doing is wrong, and I will continue to do it because I know it pisses people off. This is an ideal hobby, especially since it's lower risk, and less time-intensive than pushing dope to kids.
And boycott . Ha! Sounds just like that stupid 'don't buy gas on April 23rd and we'll show those rich fat-cats who's in charge'. Even if such a boycott took off, the RIAA would simply absorb the loss, then attribute it to more filesharing. Way to go! That'll show 'em!
My thoughts, and a simple solution (Score:5, Informative)
1) Boycott the RIAA - Since they've cranked up their customer attacks, Ive stopped buying their product (6 months and counting).
2) Shop via used cd's if you must. It will help show their loss in the upcomming year (used sales are Not tracked). Ebay/Amazon/Local stores/Whatever.
Vote with your wallets people! Stop being hypocritical and buying their stuff while complaining how they stink!!
Hah (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm sure some other places are similar too. The college itself recently changed their network to do a similar thing for all their dorm connections.
Suck on that, RIAA!
Is everyone on Kazaalite screwed? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm pretty sure that they ruled that since the filesharing services could be used for other things, they can't really go after KazaaLite... but what about the users?
Are there (accurate) logs of everyone who has ever used KazzaLite? Should we worry?
My name's not on the list (Score:4, Funny)
Brilliant business plan.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Brilliant business plan.. (Score:4, Funny)
1. PROFIT!!!
2.
3. Sue your customers, and make a bunch of penniless college kids into matryrs in the media.
Re:Brilliant business plan.. (Score:4, Interesting)
I honestly believe that the majority of file-swappers spend MORE money on cd's than they would otherwise.
These ARE thier customers that they are suing . .
An eerie feeling… (Score:5, Insightful)
In this case I'm not a P2P'er, but I did find one of my boxes was hacked [slashdot.org] and turned into an FTP server / port scanner the other week. With the way this week has gone so far...
Jack-O says NO (Score:5, Interesting)
Michael Jackson [cnn.com] has denounced the RIAA
couple o' quotes:
"I am speechless about the idea of putting music fans in jail for downloading music. It is wrong to download, but the answer cannot be jail,"
"Here in America we create new opportunities out of adversity, not punitive laws
It's not surprising that I actually had to do a search to find the story, although it was on the front page yesterday. It's not even on the entertainment page anymore.
RIAA sucks dong (Score:4, Funny)
Legit names (Score:5, Funny)
Muahaha i thought of a wicked idea. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Muahaha i thought of a wicked idea. (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you really to paint a big red target on yourself for an onganization that has more money -- and less ethics -- than you do?
Reserved addresses... (Score:5, Funny)
Subpeonas 0 and 255 are reserved for networks (whole ISPs - all your user list are belong to us) and broadcast subpeonas (first use of SPAMMED Subpeonas) respectively.
-Adam
RIAA capitalizing by targeting KazzaLite (Score:3, Interesting)
The RIAA basically just knocked out thousands (possibly millions) of glass houses with a pebble rock.
Not only Kazaa (Score:4, Informative)
The reason why the Kazaa users were LISTED is that you can reverse look up their "screen names" more easily, and that's more interesting to publish for TechTV than a list of IP addresses.
Regards,
--
*Art
Block the RIAA/MPAA yourself (Score:5, Informative)
Username selection pattern... (Score:3, Insightful)
I seriously doubt we'd see "RIAA vs. FuckRIAA@Kazaa" on the news, or "RIAA vs. YourGoatsAssFuck@Kazaa".
I don't see any usernames on that list that have R-rated language in them. The worst appear to be "pimp", "booty", and "hot", in whatever self-serving context the user thought would be exciting.
Actual Subpoenae at Cryptome (Score:5, Informative)
[cryptome.org]
http://cryptome.org/riaa-hit.htm
Or, for the lazy:
This is one of several hundred similar subpoenas issued by RIAA recently under the DMCA. Most have been filed in US District Court in the District of Columbia.
US District Court in the District of Columbia
1:03-mc-00273-UNA
Unassigned, presiding
Date filed: 07/02/2003 Date of last filing: 07/02/2003
Entered 07/17/03
LAW OFFICES
MITCHELL SILBERBERG & KNUPP LLP
A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS
TRIDENT CENTER
11377 WEST OLYMPIC BOULEVARD
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90064-1683
(310) 312-2000
FAX: (310) 312-3100
June 30, 2003
Sir or Madam
Comcast Cable Communications, Inc.
3 Executive Campus
Cherry Hill. NJ 08002
Re: Notice of Copyright Infringement (17 U.S.C. 512(c)(3))
Dear Sir or Madam:
We are counsel to the Recording Industry Association of America, Inc. ("RIAA") and its member record companies. The RIAA is a trade association whose member companies create, manufacture, and/or distribute approximately ninety percent (90%) of all legitimate sound recordings sold and distributed in the United States. Under penalty of perjury, we submit that we are authorized to act on behalf of the R1AA and its member companies in matters involving the online infringement of their copyrighted sound recordings.
A user, customer, or subscriber of your system or network, identified by the IP address, date, and time on the attached document, is offering tbr download over the Internet files containing copyrighted sound recordings owned by RIAA member companies. The attached document also includes a representative list of the recordings the identified user is offering for download. We have a good faith belief that such activities are not authorized by the copyright owners, their agents, or the law, and assert that the intbrmation in this Notice of Copyright Infringement is accurate, based on the data available to us.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Should you have any questions, please contact me at (310) 312-3297 or at dmca@msk.com.
[Signature]
Yvette Molinaro
for
MITCHELL SILBERBERG & KNUPP LLP
24.61.155.10 on 6/26/2003 at 11:49:00 p.m.(EDT)
The user at the above-identified IP address, using the screen name Tyler@KaZaA, has offered for download through the online media distribution system known as KaZaA copyrighted sound recordings owned by RIAA member record companies, including the following representative recordings:
Michelle Branch - All You Wanted
Avril Lavigne - Complicated
Radiohead - Just
Incubus - Nice to Know You
Busta Rhymes - Pass the Courvoisier
Sheryl Crow - Soak Up The Sun
Incubus - Stellar
Guns N Roses - Sweet Child O' Mine
A PERFECT CIRCLE - Three Libras
suddenly (Score:5, Funny)
Average Age? (Score:4, Insightful)
When you all get arrested... (Score:3, Funny)
But who the hell is being sued? (Score:4, Interesting)
But who the hell is being sued? Is the RIAA suing downloaders or sharers -- or both? Is the RIAA really selectively choosing defendents based on the particular songs? If I download an MP3 of an unsigned local band or an independent whose music is not owned by the RIAA, will the RIAA sue me anyway?
I'd like to see these details. They speak to the ultimate motive of the lawsuit, especially if it appears that the RIAA is intentionally trying to flatten the independent music scene or prevent artists from choosing production/distribution by an entity other than the RIAA and its members.
Incidentally, Munkeyspankers 1-20 can hide out at my place until the heat blows over. #21 is SOL.
Any good ISPs out there that destroy records? (Score:5, Interesting)
I know that many librarians, after the Patriot act was passed, started to destroy circulation records daily - it wasn't illegal for them to do it, and they felt very strongly that the government shouldn't be able to see what books people were getting. (Incidentally, this is a tragedy in some literary circles since a popular field of study in literature now is examining old library records from the 18th century onward to see which books were popular during eras past).
These big ISPs, comcast, earthlink, etc. offer unlimited plans, and have no need to record which account is mapped to which IP for anything longer than a day (just to ensure bandwidth usage isn't being abused or something). If they were to have a policy of discarding the records every day at midnight, it would save them hassle (what a pain in the neck it must be to recieve 200 lettes from the RIAA in the morning) and protect thier user's rights. How can they go wrong?
The RIAA doesn't care... (Score:5, Insightful)
10 years ago few people had even heard of the RIAA. Sometime in the last decade the industry decided to start utilizing the organization as their hired muscle; the guys they let loose to do the dirty work none of the individual companies want to be associated with. But let's not forget who the RIAA really is. It's as much Andrew Lack and Tommy Mottola as it is Hilary Rosen.
The RIAA is sitting back and reading all this and saying "bring it on". They're happy if they get bad PR, because that's bad PR deflected away from the real names behind the RIAA.
Of course, I'm not arguing that the RIAA's strategy is sound in the long run, I'm just saying I understand it. Many of the things they're doing will still turn people off buying CD's even without people associating those actions with Sony or BMG or EMI or Universal. What the RIAA is doing is still stupid, but it's at least a better thought-out strategy than most of us here seem to give them credit for - and our tactics in trying to belittle them in whatever small ways we do here seem to miss the point completely. The RIAA knows exactly what they're doing and the reaction they'll get to it, and they don't care.
striking back at the RIAA's OWNERS! (Score:5, Informative)
Of course the reason why the RIAA is being out front and public and is making itself hated is to take the heat off the major labels.
A record industry music boycott sticks the heat right where it belongs.
To destroy them, just do all your music spending on independent artists [cdbaby.com] and tell everyone else you know to do the same.
Most people don't appreciate just how fragile the position of the major labels is. They're all losing money, and so far, the music label CEOs have not only gotten away with using PIRACY!!! as an excuse with Congress, but with the multinationals that own them..
Simply refusing to buy music plays into their hands, they'll say "People refuse to buy our products because THEY'RE ALL STEALING THEM VIA P2P AND WE NEED NEW LAWS TO PROTECT US!!!"
Buying from independents will send exactly the right message both to Congress and to the companies that own the major labels.
Enough of us do this and the companies that own the major labels will be forced to dump them... lest their own stock prices follow their record companies value straight into the toilet.
Just a few percentage points of major record company sales transferred into the profit margins of independent artists and the war will be over, settled over the smoking corpses of the Big 5.
This should only take getting 1M people on board.
And the person who observes the RIAA boycott as I advise will get chances to find a lot of good new music of whatever kind you like that hasn't been dumbed down for the faceless masses RIAA product is aimed at.
Re:k-lite users.. (Score:3, Troll)
Re:What I'd like to see (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What I'd like to see (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm curious how it would do that. Kazaa, as far as I can tell just acts as a middleman, and your computer makes a direct connection to the computer hosting the file, or vice versa, depending on firewall setups. You'll always have an ip address to work off of. This, and a time of day gives you an ISP account, even in the case of DHCP, and an ISP account gives you a name, address, and credit card, and o
Re:What I'd like to see (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Oh man! (Score:3, Funny)
Oh. All the "names" end with @Kazaa. I don't use kazaa.
Never mind.
Re:Oh man! (Score:3, Informative)
Not all Kazaa (Score:3, Informative)
Not quite. 117 of 124 do. Here are the other 7 of them that don't:
- Ariel167@fileshare
- Ashley@Grokster
- Carolyn@fileshare
- d-dubb@Grokster
- flowerpower0818@fileshare
- ktgurl13@Grokster
- madkirk@fileshare
grep(1) is your friend.Re: well... (Score:4, Interesting)
It's just, damnit it's not right. I didn't think I could hate the RIAA any more than I did, but seeing this shit's happening just makes it all the worse.
I swear, if I ever get signed to a label I want to make sure in my contract it says the RIAA have no rights to sue over anyone downloading my music!
(I'd do it unsigned but I couldn't afford to get by that way, which makes me feel even better...)
Re:Oh man! (Score:5, Insightful)
When they came for the Grokster users, I said nothing because I wasn't a Grokster user;
When they came for the Gnutella users, I said nothing because I wasn't a Gnutella user;
When they came for me there was no one left to speak for me.
Re:Oh man! (Score:4, Insightful)
People have shared their music with their friends since the compact cassette was invented. It's a great thing to do.
Now people are doing it on the internet: the great thing that brings people together accross the world.
That means it's happening on a WIDER scale. That's all. It's not imoral. It's "big issue" status seems to be solely to do with it's transparancy.
Re:Oh man! (Score:5, Informative)
Are others receiving these as well? I realize in matters of tracing criminal acts (such as kiddie pr0n, molesters stalking in chat rooms, etc) I would hope ISPs would release names, but in cases of music/movie piracy (and any other crime that doesn't have a *real* victim) I would hope the ISPs would push back on the P2P networks.
Am I the only one that sees a difference between a police agency with a warrant in hand asking who's who and the damn 'copyright holder'? Shouldn't there be a burden of proof before my privacy is violated?
Re:Oh man! (Score:5, Insightful)
I disagree, the more serious the alleged offense the more important due process becomes. I don't mind ticketing for parking offenses but there'd better be a proper trial in a murder case, and so on.
If someone is being accused of owning kiddie porn then that's an extremely serious matter, the case had better stack up and all the proper steps had better be followed. I agree that's true in the cases of alleged copyright infringement too but if you have to rate it in order of importance then it's the serious charges where it's most crucial to get it right.
Am I the only one that sees a difference between a police agency with a warrant in hand asking who's who and the damn 'copyright holder'?
The difference is the warrant, not who the person is. I agree that proper court orders should be required in all cases.
Shouldn't there be a burden of proof before my privacy is violated?
Yes, there should. I'm just worried that you seem to think that that stops being an issue if they accuse you of something more serious, when the consequences are highest.
Re:Oh man! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:NO! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:last name on the list: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:IP's (Score:5, Insightful)
Try to claim you are innocent after doing that... because after all, you didn't explicitly say that they could.
In that situation, you are providing the enabler to steal the content. Just like when you use a p2p app, you have to specify what content to make available, and whether you would like to make it available, and then respond to search queries.
Hope this helps clear your mind.
Re:IP's (Score:3)
Bull. By "sharing", you have authorized your computer to make copies (keeping your copy and sending the other one over the wire) of (presumably) copyrighted works you have no license to copy and spread around.
"I never said anyone could d/l..."... please. It doesn't take a particularly smart person to see right through that one.
Re:Why not say you're behind a wireless router? (Score:5, Insightful)
This could have a chilling effect on the public access WAPs.
Re:Why don't they just put up tip jars? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Phew!!!! (Score:3, Funny)