Camara Goes On Offense Against the RIAA 316
whisper_jeff writes "Ars has an excellent write up outlining how Kiwi Camara (Jammie Thomas-Rasset's new lawyer) is following the 'Best Defense is a Good Offense' philosophy and going on the attack against the RIAA. Not content to just defend his client, he is laying siege against the RIAA's entire campaign and beginning the work of dismantling it from the bottom up, starting with the question of whether they actually do own the copyrights that were allegedly infringed. And, if you're thinking this is good for everyone who's been harassed by the RIAA, you'd be right — Camara, along with Harvard Law professor Charles Nesson, plans to file a class-action suit seeking to force the RIAA to return all the (ill-gotten) money they've earned from their litigation campaign."
We first discussed the efforts of Nesson and Camara to thwart the RIAA last month.
Hmmmm (Score:2, Funny)
What does the Campaign for Real Ale have against the RIAA?
A$$ kickin' time (Score:4, Insightful)
On a more serious note, it warms my heart to find that there is at least a couple of "good" lawyers out there who have their clients best interest at heart.
NYCountryLawyer excluded - dude you do good work.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Ray Beckerman (NYCL) is my third favorite lawyer, right after the lady who did my divorce and the gentleman who did my bankruptcy. When you need a lawyer, you NEED a lawyer. If you need a lawyer, (s)he won't cost you, (s)he'll save you far more than his or her fee.
I'm a fan of Lawrence Lessig, too. Too bad he lost that Supreme Court case he wrote about extensively in his book, available at your bookstore, library, or online. It's not full of lawyerese, it's a good read.
Re: (Score:2)
I like Lawrence Lessig too. Hell, how can you not like a guy who has been played on TV by Christopher Lloyd...
But "The Internet changes everything" is one of the biggest face-slapping lines ever. I can't help but believe it was the one sentence that lost that case.
Re:A$$ kickin' time (Score:4, Funny)
Well, the internet did change everything. But like at slashdot, it was offtopic and the Supreme Court modded him down.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, the internet didn't really change anything.
At the core of this are still very old principles and the original form of the relevant law.
The internet only makes the infringement more visible. It didn't even really increase it that much.
It may have made it easier. That's hard to say. The postman still pushes around more digital media.
You shouldn't underestimate the power of sneakernet.
The old law has been bent out of shape and as become badly unbalanced.
The basic questions remain: when does a work en
Re:A$$ kickin' time (Score:5, Informative)
Well, up until 1976, US Copyright law was still fairly sane... 28 years with the possibility to file for another 28 years... and you have to file for copyright on everything.
The Copyright Act of 1976 bumped that to the author's life plus 50 years, made copyrights automatic, and introduced a number of other things into US Copyright law (including Fair Use). It could be that some people thought that the latter changes were good things.
However, by the time the most recent copyright extension happened, in 1998, we had already been exposed to the modern insanity super-long copyrights introduced, and we started to fight against the insanity of increasing it even further. It also introduced nothing new in terms of how Copyrights worked (the DMCA came a year or two later). It was a pure greed move by certain corporate interests, including one mousy movie studio.
lawyers. (Score:5, Funny)
IANAL
Someone on slashdot once wrote "99% of all lawyers make the rest of us look bad".
Re:lawyers. (Score:5, Insightful)
You can say that about many professions, from mechanics to plumbers to technical supporters to software engineers.
Any profession that has special knowledge their customer can't even possibly have unless he's a professional in the field as well is prone to abusing this power. How often did you tell your boss it takes 2 hours even though you knew it would take 2 minutes so you can slack off?
Re: (Score:2)
Er, hi boss. I'll get right on that bugfix now.
Re:lawyers. (Score:5, Funny)
Not often enough to offset all the times he has given me 2-hour tasks and expected results inside of 2 minutes.
Re: (Score:3)
I often wish we could mod things "+1 Sad but True".
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I often wish we could mod things "+1 Sad but True".
Stop copying Metallica!
Re: (Score:2)
You can say that about many professions, from mechanics to plumbers to technical supporters to software engineers.
Any profession that has special knowledge their customer can't even possibly have unless he's a professional in the field as well is prone to abusing this power.
Very true. I've seen some very bad stuff done by some of my own co-workers. And I know a few mechanics I'll never go back to.
How often did you tell your boss it takes 2 hours even though you knew it would take 2 minutes so you can slack off?
I usually over-estimate how long something is going to take... And then pad that estimate... But not because I want to slack off. If you tell someone their server will be down for 2 hours they expect to be up and working in 121 minutes. If anything goes wrong and slows down that process you're going to have some unhappy people on your hands. If, however, you tell them it'll tak
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You can say that about many professions, from mechanics to plumbers to technical supporters to software engineers.
Any profession that has special knowledge their customer can't even possibly have unless he's a professional in the field as well is prone to abusing this power.
It's true, but what makes lawyers different from mechanics or plumbers is the level of that power. A plumber can set you up for an extra couple of hundred bucks. A lawyer can set you up for an extra couple of hundred thousand, and some jailtime too. Hence abuse of that power should be treated much more seriously.
Re:lawyers. (Score:4, Interesting)
It sometimes is, especially when dealing with tax law and the like.
I've been let off with warnings on speeding tickets because I didn't know that the speed limit of the area I was traveling in differed from the standards.
I've also, on more than one occasion, messed up on my taxes, for example taking deductions I thought I was entitled to but wasn't, and when the IRS caught it, I just had to re-file. The most recent time resulted in an in-person visit from an IRS agent. (Last year, dealing with a problem with my 2002 returns).
(While scary at first - "Oh my gods, there's an IRS Agent at my door!" - everything turned out well.
We got along great, too - turns out IRS agents are all a bunch of nerds. One explained to me that it works best to "think of it as a game, with lots of math and complex rules that at least once a year." "So, big Avalon Hill fans, then?" Yep. The office is a giant cube farm, and there was a Robo-Rally game set up in the break room.)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:lawyers. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like they're all out of bubblegum.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Having a client's best interest at heart is a good thing, so don't get me wrong with the following.
More important that the client's interest, is society's interest. If the issue were ONLY whether Jammie had to pay for some songs, I'd say "Big deal - no story here." If the issue ended with whether it might affect whether I can download music as a result of this case, again, I'd say "Big deal - I can do without."
The REAL issues here, involve a concerted effort by RIAA and it's lookalikes to perform social e
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not best chocie of defendent (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Camera goes on offense against RIAA (Score:5, Funny)
A taste of their own medicine (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure that would stop someone from going to a user's comment page and simply following the link from there.
As for metamods, you need to know the context of the post. I don't think that would improve anything much.
Kiwi? (Score:5, Funny)
That is a hell of a name for a lawyer.
"Meet Kiwi Camara. He's a high-powered defense attorney by day... and she's a pole-riding stripper by night! What will happen when these two lives collide? Find out this Fall on Barely Legal, only on Fox!"
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
+1 Internets. Would be more, but you came in as AC.
Hmm. (Score:5, Insightful)
I wish them the very best of luck - thats a very powerful business lobby with a lot of politicians in pocket that they are going after.
Still, its very clear why he chose to represent her - the publicity on this high profile case could make him and give his career a hell of a head start.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Good point. Also, please recall her previous lawyer allowed fees to climb to $150,000 and then pulled the lawyering services when Jammie couldn't pay-up. But then that lawyer didn't seem to have the wisdom to construct Jammie's case as well as her current lawyer either.
Needs experienced analysis (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
More importantly, the indications are that he's fighting them on technicalities, not actual principles. So that'll cost him more in the end.
I think this essentially raises the bar for what's economical for the RIAA to go after. If they want to sue someone, they have to prove that they actually own the copyright, and that the material shared is the material copyrighted. This makes it difficult to sue someone for sharing files that have no economic value.
Yes, it's a technicality; however, the American court system requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Without it, anyone could grab a list of IPs on a torrent, claim copyright, and then sue.
Wow!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK, the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently, probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.
And what would that mean with regards to the MPAA or BSA? They both, quite often, use similar tactics and means of evidence collection.
This will undoubtedly stir up a hornets nest on a scale we have never seen before. If this guy actually manages to win his cases and motions, it will likely result in new laws being introduced that would effectively make the RIAA's activities legal... that is unless some people are there to stop it which isn't likely considering the way laws like the DMCA are passed... subversively and practically secretly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wow!!! (Score:4, Interesting)
And here I thought the following was true:
http://digg.com/tech_news/RIAA_Keeps_Settlement_Money_Artists_May_Sue [digg.com]
http://www.boycott-riaa.com/facts/truth [boycott-riaa.com]
http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2008/02/riaa_what_settlement_money.html [nymag.com] ...and there are more on this topic. And while it's unquestionably true that these articles are talking about the settlements from fileshare software companies and not settlements from individuals, I see no cause to believe that the money collected is passed on to the labels (or the artists) at all. Do you have any indication that the RIAA actually passes the money they collect on to the labels? You are aware of the RIAA collection web site yes? (https://www.p2plawsuits.com/) People have been known to use that site when paying their settlements. A single point of transaction for all settlements ostensibly run by the RIAA.
I can't claim to have absolute knowledge of the fact, but it would appear that the RIAA does indeed pocket the money taken ostensibly to fund additional litigation and other legal activities.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The lawsuits that have been filed have not been filed by the RIAA
Wrong.
nor have the checks been written to "the RIAA"
And wrong.
Care to try for a third incorrect statement?
Re:Wow!!! (Score:5, Informative)
I'll ignore the snarky end of your reply
What do you mean you'll ignore it? Damn, that's the best part.
and chalk it up to this being a subject near and dear to your heart.
Instead of my just being a snarky bastard? Well thanks for the more charitable interpretation.
Instead, I'll ask for clarification
I can do that too, although I prefer snarky.
- are the lawsuits not the individual company versus the alleged infringer?
Yes they are. But the actual filing and preparation is done by the RIAA. They just stick the record companies' names in. And when needed they give the record companies papers to sign. And then, if they get a judgment, the record companies assign the judgment to the RIAA, and the RIAA brings its own judgment collection proceeding.
For example, the case at hand is "Capitol v. Thomas" not "RIAA v. Thomas". Or is it the cases are filed BY the RIAA on BEHALF OF the company?
Right.
As for the checks, I'll write that off as me being incorrect. It happens.
Yeah, the settlement checks are payable to "RIAA Litigation Fund" (or something like that).
Oh, and by the way, Matthew Oppenheim, who acts as the "client" and the "principal" of the record companies, for settlement purposes, was at the counsel table during the first trial (and was observed by Ars Technica's reporter as reading my blog on his laptop), and has gotten himself admitted pro hac vice in the case this time around, which means he will be doing some questioning, or argument, or both.
Re: (Score:2)
This raises a question - do we actually have a tally of the damages so far? That is to say, do we know how much money the RIAA has taken in as a result of settlements, litigation, and shenanigans? Would the loss of these revenues (for lack of a better term) represent a big enough p
Re: (Score:2)
If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK, the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently, probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.
The statement by the RIAA that they've lost money on this (see http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/05/riaa-responds.ars [arstechnica.com] ) means that most of the money has probably moved out of RIAA and into the hands of the lawyers and MediaSentry. One would hope that there would be some grounds to go after not just RIAA, but also their lawyers and MediaSentry, possibly under RICO-like recovery. But IANAL, and maybe a lawyer can comment on if it's possible to recover the $$ from the lawyers if RIAA goes bankrupt
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, but when you sue someone for ill-gotten gains, you don't sue for "Net Gains" but for "Gross Gains." Their expenses and payroll are irrelevant.
Re: (Score:2)
If the RIAA were forced to give all the money they collected BACK, the RIAA would simply close up shop permanently, probably filing some sort of bankruptcy or some such action to prevent their actually having to pay anything back.
I don't think they've collected enough from piracy judgements to sneeze at, let alone pay for their legal expenses, investigations, PR campaigns, and all the other anti-piracy measures they have taken.
More on Camara/Thomas Vs. RIAA (Score:5, Informative)
MST3K Singalong Time! (Score:3, Funny)
Camaraaaaaaaaaa! Camaraaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Camara is really neat,
Camara the RIAA won't beat,
We've been eating Kiwi, Camara!
Two sides (Score:5, Insightful)
This case brings me very mixed feelings. On the one hand, the RIAA (and to a lessor extent, the MPAA) needs to have its ass seriously kicked.
But on the other hand, I wish this was a case where the defendant wasn't so obviously guilty of what the RIAA claimed in the first trial. It sucks that this isn't one of the cases where the RIAA went after a senior citizen who doesn't even know hot to turn on a computer. Its a good thing that the RIAA is so evil and stupid, because otherwise I'd find it much harder to root for her side.
Re:Two sides (Score:5, Interesting)
It sucks that this isn't one of the cases where the RIAA went after a senior citizen who doesn't even know hot to turn on a computer. Its a good thing that the RIAA is so evil and stupid, because otherwise I'd find it much harder to root for her side.
Well that would be kind of dishonest, wouldn't it? Your average file-sharing culprit isn't an innocent old grandpa, but a young adult who downloads movies and music for his/her own use, full well knowing it's illicit. If we're going to defend file sharing, let's be honest and call things for what they are, and not try to embellish the truth or cherry pick facts. The RIAA may resort to reality distortion, but that doesn't mean we should.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Agreed. What is also important is exposing the fact that RIAA does not really protect artists' profit but has built litigation into their business model instead with the intention to maximize their own profit. And as they are doing litigation as a business practice, they are doing everything possible to make it a streamlined, efficient, automated process by going around the laws binding the current judicial system.
And let's not forget that the judicial system costs a lot of taxpayer money. One entity puttin
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You know you would get a lot more attention if you didn't sling around some crap like "Even TPB claim its [sic] not them who are breaking any laws."
US law != Swedish law. TPB might have lost round one, but that doesn't mean it's illegal to do what they do in Sweden.
Re:Two sides (Score:5, Interesting)
She's "obviously guilty" only if file-sharing is not fair use. And she's "obviously guilty" only if the RIAA truly owns those copyrights. If the copyrights were, in effect, extorted from the artists, falsely filed, then the RIAA is representing an industry who's claim of ownership is fraudulent.
This does not, by the way, under current US law, cheat the artists. You by default own copyright in your creative work, even without filing. Clearing the bogus recording industry copyrights off the federal register would, under our law, enable the true artists to file copyrights to their work in their own names. This would then open the opportunity for the true artists to recovery money properly owed them, from whoever has been commercially distributing their music - whether record companies or commercial online enterprises.
That would be a great boon for musicians. If file sharing is not fair use, but the copyrights properly belong to the creative artists rather than the recording companies, then it would be up to the artists to form a cooperative to claim money from file sharers. However, in this case it may well turn out that (1) file sharers are more willing to pay directly to the artists they love, and (2) artists are more willing to be generous to the fans who love them.
This ends up good all the way around. The file sharers, in defending themselves from the RIAA, can make the greatest gift back to the artists themselves - the true ownership of their own works.
Camara Goes On Offense Against the RIAA (Score:3, Interesting)
The situation we have now of large companies using the law to lock down markets would change. If they they feel they are being controlled and constrained by laws they initiated, the law will change.
Re:Camara Goes On Offense Against the RIAA (Score:4, Informative)
Actually I would like to see Open Source/ Creative Commons type licences covering intellectual and creative works.
They are. Cory Doctorow's books, as well as many other writer's books, are. There are a lot of indie musicians using those licenses as well.
You can read any of Doctorow's books online, or download them in any number of e-reader formats from his site. Funny how being online and free (as in both speech and beer) didn't stop him from making the NYT best seller list. If your stuff's good enough to pay for, people will pay for it even if they CAN get it for free.
Dangerous (Score:5, Insightful)
This stunt is dangerous. This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win. The odds may look good for Kiwi right now but if the rookie screws up he may end up handing the RIAA a free ticket to tyranny.
Remember he could lose and set more case precident in favor of the RIAA. This guy is gambling and the stakes are incredibly high.
I am not amused at this, it's risking everyone rights and the future of fair use, by putting the case in his hands. He has noting to lose in this, he'll get his 15 minutes of fame either way. If he wins, great a blow to intellectual tyranny. If he loses, the law suit lottery flood gates are blown wide open.
Going on the offense against an industry who is backed by both parties, who have pretty much hand picked damn near ever appeals judge out there, sounds like about the dumbest idea since the Sword-Chucks from 8 bit theatre.
I'm not a fan of gambling with people's freedom.
Yeah I said it. Mod me whatever, but this scares the hell out of me... IANALBMWIAPL and she's pretty spooked too.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, we should just cower and hide~
Re: (Score:2)
"Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win" - Sun Tzu
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I am not a lawyer but my wife is a paralegal?
I am not a lawyer but my wife is a property lawyer?
I am not a lawyer but my wife is a patent lawyer?
I am not a lawyer but my wife is a ?
Re:Dangerous (Score:4, Funny)
practicing lesbian...?
Re: (Score:2)
paralegal. I throw the L on the end because people can't for the life of them guess the P alone.
Re: (Score:2)
A valid point, however anyone had the opportunity to do something like this before and not one person took up the challenge. Not one of those highly experienced lawyers could be bothered or was willing to take the risk; so as he is the first to step up to the plate, he can take the swing.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd rather have seen a colation of about 12 lawyers get together first and think this through... Even Babe Ruth played on a team of more then 2.
This stunt is dangerous. (Score:4, Informative)
This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win. The odds may look good for Kiwi right now but if the rookie screws up he may end up handing the RIAA a free ticket to tyranny.
This "Rookie" is teamed up with a Harvard law professor who's called the "Billion Dollar Charlie" [encyclopedia.com] and has a 1998 movie, "A Civil Action [imdb.com]", about a case of his about a toxic polluter.
Falcon
This kind of reminds me of the Soviets. (Score:2)
Remember when they used to have those parades of military hardware in Red Square? They didn't just do that to whip up domestic national pride. The parades were also an instrument of foreign policy. They reminded the West that it didn't really want a shooting war with the Soviet Union. The Soviets didn't want a shooting war with the West either. Everyone made sure everyone else knew that that was on the decision tree somewhere.
Litigation seems to be a little like that. Lawyers always prefer to settle, b
Re: (Score:2)
Very good point. Although we are hurting now, isn't it better to wait for when an appeal has a better chance of giving us a favorable outcome? It would be disastrous if a case went all the way to SCOTUS and fair use was struck down? I don't know how the present justices stand on fair use policies but lately they don't seem to be for the little guy. Isn't it better to wait for a more favorable time?
Re:Dangerous (Score:5, Interesting)
This stunt is dangerous. This rookie kid might just as well land the RIAA a win. The odds may look good for Kiwi right now but if the rookie screws up he may end up handing the RIAA a free ticket to tyranny. Remember he could lose and set more case precident in favor of the RIAA. This guy is gambling and the stakes are incredibly high. I am not amused at this, it's risking everyone rights and the future of fair use, by putting the case in his hands. He has noting to lose in this, he'll get his 15 minutes of fame either way. If he wins, great a blow to intellectual tyranny. If he loses, the law suit lottery flood gates are blown wide open. Going on the offense against an industry who is backed by both parties, who have pretty much hand picked damn near ever appeals judge out there, sounds like about the dumbest idea since the Sword-Chucks from 8 bit theatre. I'm not a fan of gambling with people's freedom. Yeah I said it. Mod me whatever, but this scares the hell out of me... IANALBMWIAPL and she's pretty spooked too.
I wouldn't worry about it. This firm has shown that they are (a) enthusiastic, (b) tech-savvy, (c) smart, (d) principled, and (e) hard working. Sure they're young, but that's okay. Win, lose, or draw, only good can come out of their being in the case and giving the RIAA a run for its money. I wish every case was litigated with this much dedication and "attitude". The RIAA's lawyers are so accustomed to having a walk through the park on almost every case, that they are probably in shock at the moment.
Re:Dangerous (Score:4, Insightful)
Kiwi Camara is a race troll (Score:2, Interesting)
In his first year at Harvard, Camara was involved in a racial controversy that would gain attention from the national media. Like many students, Camara posted his course outlines to a popular student-run website. Camara's, however, referred to blacks as nigs. For example, to summarize Shelley v. Kraemer, he wrote "Nigs buy land with no nig covenant; Q: Enforceable?"[7] The notes were prefaced with a disclaimer that they may contain racially offensive shorthand.[7]
Upon discovering the outline, a classmate alerted other students and professors.[7] Camara issued an apology and the outlines were promptly removed, whereupon a third student using the pseudonym "gcrocodile" e-mailed the classmate who discovered the outline expressing disappointment that they were no longer available and an intention to use the word nigger more often.[8]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Camara [wikipedia.org]
He sounds like trouble in a box!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
He sounds like trouble in a box!
He does? Did you only read that one paragraph in the wikipedia article? Here's another part:
Camara was born in Manila, Philippines [in 1984]. A year later, his family moved to Cleveland, Ohio before settling in Honolulu, Hawaii, where Camara attended the Punahou School.[1] He wrote a medical paper on alternative treatments for rheumatoid arthritis at age eleven,[1] which was published in the Hawai'i Journal of Medicine.[2] At sixteen, having skipped high school, Camara earned a Bachelor of Science in computer science from Hawaii Pacific University.[2] He completed the program in two years and was singularly recognized by the university for outstanding academic performance.[2] The Philippines awarded him their Jose Rizal Certificate of Achievement while he was in college and later, in 2005, recognized him with a Presidential Commendation.[3]
Yeah man, watch out for that guy, you see him coming and you better go the other way.
reality check (Score:2)
At last ! (Score:2)
goddammit. this was a long time coming.
I have a stupid question (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
RIAA only needs preponderence of evidence because it is civil. Law enforcement needs beyond reasonable doubt because its criminal.
IANAL (Score:5, Funny)
Sorry, I'd been waiting a while for an excuse to say that in a slightly relevant way.
Here's a thought... (Score:2)
I know in most cases where class action suits are filed, the attorneys filing and operating the case get a rather sizeable chunk of the take. If/when this class action is filed and won, does Kiwi intend to take from the rich to give to the poor or will he take a sizeable chunk for himself?
Re: (Score:2)
I know in most cases where class action suits are filed, the attorneys filing and operating the case get a rather sizeable chunk of the take. If/when this class action is filed and won, does Kiwi intend to take from the rich to give to the poor or will he take a sizeable chunk for himself?
In most class action suits, if it fails the attorneys get to eat the entire cost as well as their own time. So I'd say they're entitled to some return. Now, one would hope the victims would get a good chunk back (one wou
Admirable, but Quixotic... (Score:2)
They don't have a prayer. The legal system is this country is so bent it's going to snap in half. :(
The RIAA's ill fated motion to bar objections (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
exciting, but ultimately resulting in a loss?
Re:More exciting than the play offs (Score:5, Funny)
Re:More exciting than the play offs (Score:5, Informative)
Except Redwings Hockey isn't a sport, it's a religon. And they'll bring home the Cup on Friday night.
But I like the idea of RIAA getting a dose of its own medicine. This day has been a long time coming, just like that other case [wikipedia.org] we've been watching from the peanut gallery. Almost makes you wish you could sell tickets & popcorn at it. It's gonna be a helluva show...
Re: (Score:2)
Except Redwings Hockey isn't a sport, it's a religon.
So it's not more exciting on Slashdot but instead it is ridiculed?
Re:More exciting than the play offs (Score:5, Funny)
What is this "sports" you speak of?
Its a generic name for a certain type application (OSI Model, Application Layer), it often relies on NPT (Newtonian Physics Transport) and BCC (Body Collision Crumpling) in the transport and network layers.
Re:More exciting than the play offs (Score:4, Funny)
Lies, damned lies.
Sport is a type of car where cost approaches out-of-my-price-range for large values of features or for certain values of make.
Re:Look that gift horse in the mouth, Jammie (Score:5, Insightful)
What does it matter what his motivations are, so long as it results in a loss for the RIAA?
BTW, boycott the major labels, listen to indie music. By boycott I mean don't just not buy, don't even download or listen. Funny how the RIAA never mentions the almost decade long boycott as a reason for decreased sales...
How practical is such a boycott? (Score:2)
BTW, boycott the major labels, listen to indie music. By boycott I mean don't just not buy, don't even download or listen.
How do I avoid listening to major label music at work or in a grocery store?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
BTW, boycott the major labels, listen to indie music. By boycott I mean don't just not buy, don't even download or listen.
How do I avoid listening to major label music at work or in a grocery store?
You could try clapping your hands over your ears and loudly shouting "LA-LA-LA!" while you walk down the aisles of the grocery store. You'd probably benefit the other shoppers who would be also unable to hear the Muzak over your masking noise.
I'm not sure how you'd keep the music stopped once you've been committed into the asylum, however.
Re: (Score:2)
You could try clapping your hands over your ears and loudly shouting "LA-LA-LA!" while you walk down the aisles of the grocery store.
No, the RIAA would claim copyright to "la la la" and sue you.
Re: (Score:2)
Did MP3 players go out of fashion?
Re:How practical is such a boycott? (Score:4, Funny)
They're already on /., how much more do they need to do before hanging the 'Mission Acomplished' sign?
Re: (Score:2)
It matters because if the lawyer is trying to make a name for himself on this case and over-reaches, this will not result in a loss for the RIAA. It will result in a win for the RIAA.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the what kind of a lawyer this person is. If they are going out to make a name for themselves then I would think they would see over reaching as being a career killer. It would look bad if he went down in a ball of flames on a high profile case. Now the fact that this lawyer is working with Harvard Law professor Charles Nesson I would think that he's got some good council to help him. I hope he will win if not this makes it harder for the future.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny how the RIAA never mentions the almost decade long boycott as a reason for decreased sales...
Much like me, I doubt they even knew there was a decade long boycott...
Re:Look that gift horse in the mouth, Jammie (Score:4, Interesting)
Get off my lawn.
Re:Look that gift horse in the mouth, Jammie (Score:5, Informative)
Problem is, most "Indie Music" is really on a major label. Take Sub-Pop. Every band on Sub Pop has been called Indie at some point, and most think Sub Pop is an independent label. On the contrary. 49% of the label is owned by Warner Brothers. Sub Pop does not directly fund the RIAA, but every Sub Pop album you buy supports Warner Brothers, which does.
One can use RIAA Radar [riaaradar.com] to cleanse their music collection, but it's not perfect, since it does not detect this sort of indirect RIAA support. Realistically, if one want's to boycott the RIAA, they might as well boycott the idea of record labels themselves. In an age where bands can make their own album with consumer recording equipment, and make it sound just as good or better than professional releases, then distribute that music with the most powerful communication medium known to humanity, why do we still have these record label middlemen?
Re:Look that gift horse in the mouth, Jammie (Score:5, Insightful)
The term "indie" has somehow become a genre, and not an actual signifier of "independent". This is also true for Hollywood, most "indie" films are produced by major studios, and the signifier basically means "emulating Juno" now. Indie in music basically means watered down punk rock, or "sounds kind of like Radiohead", or "pop for people over 15". Actually, it might be one of the most useless genre tags after "alternative".
There are TONS of decent independent labels out there. John Zorn's Tzadik, Mike Patton's Ipecac, Mimicry, Drag City, Relapse, etc... Odd thing, most of the music put of by the aforementioned labels would never actually be called "indie", even if they are independent artists.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, maybe having some ambitious young hot-shot looking to make his representation defend you isn't as good as being able to buy any kind of defense you might want, but it sure beats going into a knife fight armed with a rubber chicken.
Re: (Score:2)
Does young "Kiwi" there really have your best interests at heart, or is he more interested in making a name for himself by shooting for the moon?
So long as he hits the moon, it's a win both ways. He's going to try hard, because a high-profile loss isn't going to do his name any good.
old age and cunning will always defeat youth and vigour. And the RIAA are ancient and well versed in the ways of the Dark Side.
The RIAA seem to be more the equivalent of a mugger armed with a rock. Intimidating if you're alon
Re: (Score:2)
Does young "Kiwi" there really have your best interests at heart, or is he more interested in making a name for himself by shooting for the moon?
Yes.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn straight! It's about time somebody took these bad boys out to the wood shed and gave them a good spanking!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Isn't that Gamera?
-dZ.
Re:Camara is a friend to all children! (Score:5, Funny)
Where??