The RIAA

Originally posted by Bush_in_2004!
matrix and everybody,

here's an update on the RIAA situation . . .

the RIAA is only suing people who downloaded songs, then allowed people to upload from their computer (ie: through kazaa).

so, if you've only downloaded, you're off the hook (for now!).



(of course, if you PAID for songs and allowed people to upload, then you will have to hire a lawyer to argue your case. I'd be curious to know how much money everybody has put aside for a $200/hr copyright attorney?)
Click to expand...

Let me correct your quote "the RIAA is only suing people who downloaded songs, then allowed people to upload from their computer (ie: through kazaa"

correct me if I am wrong, RIAA is only suing sharing users not downloading users"
 
"correct me if I am wrong, RIAA is only suing sharing users not downloading users"

yes, that's right. I read this today as the RIAA tried to explain its action to angry music fans in the press. of course, the RIAA can change its mind tomorrow. But by having said this, it sort of gives the downloaders-only some breathing room.
 
Whoa...someone said, "it's the law."

That's so funny....even many of you got so much "misinformation."

Sure the current law is just the same as the old law that banned usage of VCRs to record the shows. Now that law doesn't exist.

The technology is changing. The DMCA (the law that RIAA hides behind) needs some major changes.

Did you know that I'm banned from using any Macromedia programs because of violation of DMCA law? I discovered a huge vulerability in those .swf files. I even notified Macromedia about it and they wanted to know how I did it. I even said, "Either $500,000 or a full time contracted job for at least 3 yrs." They rolled along by having me filling out a personal application which had all my personal information and claimed that it'll be for my job processing. I was excited until two weeks later that I got a letter (yes a threating letter from the damn lawyers) I'm not allowed to discuss about a security flaw in their software until "Flash 6" is released....and if I do so....I would be charged with a DMCA violation. My lawyer had told me that what they did were legal and I would face at least 10 yrs of prison if I break the DMCA law.

Even though, Flash 6 never came out. It had to be named exactly "Flash 6" for it to be legal for me to release this information to security bulletins to pressure Macromedia to release a patch which would have to affect all of the flash player versions (even the current one). The next Flash version is labeled as "Flash MX." I do sometimes wonder if they changed their naming tune because of me (a little guy).

Now with me being silent....all I would have to do is unleash a dangerous .swf on a high popular website to upload a backdoor trojan. Who's fault is that? Me as the small guy or the big guys who used this DMCA law to protect themselves instead of you all citizens. However, I'm not a mean guy. I don't want to face the responsiblity of causing millions of dollars damage. It's not worth it.

That is what RIAA is doing with this DMCA law. What really needs to be changed is this DMCA law. There are so many things that a company can do to use this DMCA law to protect themselves.

Did you know that those small timer music bands cannot sell their cds on either ebay or yahoo? Why? Because RIAA threated Yahoo and Ebay that they would face a multimillionarie lawsuit if they ever allowed sales of "home-made" cds. Most of those small timer music bands use their own computer and their own cd burner to make those "home-made" cds. RIAA created this music monopoly.

I regularly preach about DMCA to as many people as I can so they would know what is REALLY going on....instead of what they are hearing....

Sure, if there are DMCA law changes...those recorders and musicans and all those enterinment people would STILL be paid.
 
Movies, They're Worth It (A Little Off-Topic)

YOU'RE BREAKING THE LAW

At the end of the day, when you get right down to it, downloading copyrighted movies off the Internet is illegal. It's against the law. It's stealing.

The Internet is not anonymous.
There is a very good chance you will get caught.
It is not difficult for investigators to trace illegal activity back to your computer through your IP address.

How bad could it be if you get caught?
You could get expelled from school,
Fired from work,
5 years in prison,
and up to $250,000 in fines.

Is it really worth risking that over the cost of a single movie ticket?

www.respectcopyrights.org
 
Re: Movies, They're Worth It (A Little Off-Topic)

Originally posted by Banjo
YOU'RE BREAKING THE LAW

At the end of the day, when you get right down to it, downloading copyrighted movies off the Internet is illegal. It's against the law. It's stealing.

The Internet is not anonymous.
There is a very good chance you will get caught.
It is not difficult for investigators to trace illegal activity back to your computer through your IP address.

How bad could it be if you get caught?
You could get expelled from school,
Fired from work,
5 years in prison,
and up to $250,000 in fines.

Is it really worth risking that over the cost of a single movie ticket?

www.respectcopyrights.org
Click to expand...

ever drove above the speed limit? I bet you have.
Downloading and sharing music on the internet? I bet 90% of the internet users are doing that.
RIAA is doing something pretty risky, if they keep suing everybody, very soon people will purpose a new bill and/or change the law that favor their way. This is a democracy, you are living in the USA. Power to the people. If you don't like what the majority are doing, you better learn how to live with it.
 
Re: Re: Movies, They're Worth It (A Little Off-Topic)

Kalboy,
If you don't like what the majority are doing, you better learn how to live with it.
Click to expand...

[SARCASM]Oh everybody, Kalboy is calling the majority of America a bunch of low-life thieves!

Well, it's true that Americans did steal the land from the Native Americans.

I guess Americans haven't changed at all according to Kalboy.[/SARCASM]

Piracy is a felony, speeding isn't.

Speeding isn't stealing, there's a difference. Heck, they even have a different name for it since it isn't a felony.

Piracy is a serious crime, and it is not taken lightly. You shouldn't too.

Heck, I prefer to pay for what I get since they usually come in the best quality possible in comparison to these crappy movie files on the Internet.

Remember this, as long you download illegally... you're a thief.

Artists are getting ripped off. Even though the money won in the lawsuit may not go to the artists. Justice is still being done because thieves are nothing but a bunch of low-life scumbags.

If you really believe that 90% of the Internet population download illegally.

Please prove it.

If you can't, then your assumption is debunked.
 
Last edited:
Re: Re: Movies, They're Worth It (A Little Off-Topic)

Originally posted by kalboy
RIAA is doing something pretty risky, if they keep suing everybody, very soon people will purpose a new bill and/or change the law that favor their way. This is a democracy, you are living in the USA.
Click to expand...

I can guarantee you that these people will never be able to get such a bill like that passed. There are already laws to protect the artists' copyrighted properties.

Even though you live in a democracy, but they'll never let such a foolish bill get passed.

If you want the properties, at least pay for them.
 
Hey guys, let me put this simple way, First, Downloading, and Copying anything is an Illegal unless you own the original software’s, movies, music’s, and etc. that is simple, how hard for u guys to understand? :Cool:

Every day, we take many risks of something I do not know what it is but it is serious crime. Banjo is always right. Please do not doubt him unless get a proof that he is wrong :)
 
kalboy, just because "everybody else is doing it" doesn't make it right. I bet quite a few of y'all steal from your employer (ever take a pen home?), from the gov't (fudge about your taxes), from retailers (used a product then returned it to a store claimed it "doesn't work"), but if you get caught, tough cookies.

btw, if you do get caught your attorney is going to tell you to NEVER NEVER NEVER say "everybody else is doing it" in court!
 
Laws are created to protect us and our investments, and to provide safety for all. We could break the law by speeding; it is a crime -- not a felony or misdeamendor. Speeding limit law was created to protect United States' gas supply from running out because it could increase the gas prices beyond low class' ability to afford them. There are laws against piracy to protect people from losing their investment equally to those low class' ability to afford gas. You create something out of raw materials with hard work, and you expect to acquire something back in return. Taking your product without returning you something renders you incapable to live. "No work, no food" is truest to the every letter. It wouldn't make sense if you worked so hard and unable to eat because someone else is eating the food off your work. Law was made exactly for that reason. RIAA is suing, simply because they are protecting their investment and demanding something in return that was stolen. I couldn't blame them.

I felt sorry for SilenceGold, trying to help them, but in return got sued. I don't understand why hackers got a good paying job when they got out of Federal prison, but instead, sued SilenceGold? What a world that we are living in....
 
Someone said:

Artists are getting ripped off.
Click to expand...

RIAA rips off the artists. They are using those artist copyrights as an excuse.

Try starting up your own music band without RIAA....you would make a decent profit....but no...you can't...because Yahoo or Ebay won't allow you to sell your home-made cds. Where else could you be able to sell your cds? The only choice is to go thru RIAA. That's monopoly and THEY BROKE THE LAW.

That's where the citizens DOES NOT know. They need to put more pressure on the justice dept to urge them to take action on what RIAA is doing.

Banjo is fed by the information from RIAA and other misleading media hype.

Sorry, Banjo, you're not really trying to stay on the fence and learn the facts.

Facts:

1. It's illegal to download copyrighted images/files/and other materials listed to be permitted to be protected by the copyright law.

2. It's NOT illegal to use p2p softwares.

3. It's NOT illegal to create backups as long as you own the copyright legally (RIAA says otherwise because currently there's a bill to make it illegal) (also remember, a bill is not a law)

4. DMCA forbids security countermeasures on any copyright content of USA origin. That is what RIAA is claiming that the p2p softwares are doing, countermeasuring the security checkpoints of legal copyright music.

5. The facts all say it here at this link which I didn't hotlink so you can see what this link says. http://www.boycott-riaa.com/facts/
 
Originally posted by LinuxGold

I felt sorry for SilenceGold, trying to help them, but in return got sued. I don't understand why hackers got a good paying job when they got out of Federal prison, but instead, sued SilenceGold? What a world that we are living in....
Click to expand...

I didn't get sued. They just threatened that they will sue me if I go forward with this security countermeasure information. I could have done it anonymous but I want all the credits so I'm waitng for a change in the DMCA law.
 
SG sez: "RIAA rips off the artists."

that's kind of a blanket statement that makes your statement untrue. for one thing, the RIAA collects royalties from broadcasters and returns them to the artists. this is hardly "ripping artists off."

Yes, its true that it is difficult for new start-ups (new bands) to get established, but not impossible.

But this is the same for any business. Wanna write a book and sell it independently? You gotta pay the book God: RR Bowker. If you don't pay and get a ISBN# (includes videos) NOBODY will carry your product.



For the record I hate the RIAA almost as much as you. They've gone overboard and need to moderate their actions.


btw, I paid $180 to the RIAA in 2002 to do what I do to be RIAA-compliant. God knows what it will be in 2003.
 
This convo start to sound like Microsoft. Microsoft collects ideas and monopolize them in whichever way they could.
 
Originally posted by Bush_in_2004!
SG sez: "RIAA rips off the artists."

that's kind of a blanket statement that makes your statement untrue. for one thing, the RIAA collects royalties from broadcasters and returns them to the artists. this is hardly "ripping artists off."

Yes, its true that it is difficult for new start-ups (new bands) to get established, but not impossible.

But this is the same for any business. Wanna write a book and sell it independently? You gotta pay the book God: RR Bowker. If you don't pay and get a ISBN# (includes videos) NOBODY will carry your product.



For the record I hate the RIAA almost as much as you. They've gone overboard and need to moderate their actions.


btw, I paid $180 to the RIAA in 2002 to do what I do to be RIAA-compliant. God knows what it will be in 2003.
Click to expand...

When I said "RIAA rips off artists" I meant that RIAA made so many misleading statements about their earnings for the artists. They even claim that they sold less cds than the years before. They also claim that they had to raise the prices of the cds to beat the low earning records. There are many misleading statements that even judges had to throw them out when RIAA failed to prove those statements or deblunker the other opposed statements. If you want to read about those....go and google it...there's a lot of results on their misleading statements. That's also known as FRAUD to both customers and artists.

The artists got dragged into this.

Imagine this...

RIAA spokesman walks up to you and says, "You used to sell millions of cds before napster software was obtained and regularly used to download your mp3 copies and we didn't gather any cents from those downloaders. Currently your cds are sluggish selling because of napster. We need your help to support us to go and fight to get all your hard earned money back for just you because you deserve it." You get nagged like that by various of different RIAA spokespeople.

Now here's the truth...

1. Why did they have to go and ask for their artists' support instead of asking them what they should have done?

2. How the hell did RIAA know exactly how much of those artists' mp3 were downloaded? It was just guessing games.

3. Did they really produce enough cds to be sold or did they really do low number of producing to sell it low on purpose then use that as an excuse that something should be done?

4. How can the artist get their money back if they're regularly spent on the lawyers and other court fees?

5. Many of artists have expressed their frustrations on what RIAA is doing. Even some got embarrassed when RIAA got bashed after getting personal informations from Verzion customers.

6. RIAA is just bunch of greedy people who is hiding behind the DMCA law which desprately is too broad.
 
SG, here's another problem . . . apparently most music artists support the actions of the RIAA, after all this organization is run by these artists to protect their interests. If enough of them opposed things, we'd see changes in the organization (they all have votes you know), but apparently most artists are happy with the RIAA which is why we see action in court and congress instead of from within.
 
WHAT the HELL is DMCA??? I know its for something but what does it fully stand for ?????
 
If RIAA entered in your computer via IPs, without asking or being aware about it, true? I find it wrong. You cannot seize something without the warrants.

It's part of the issue by supporting The First Amendment on this case that everybody have the rights to not download or dowload. That's their choices.

There's one thing I don't get it, I am not following this issue closely, how come you don't get in trouble for recording your favorite show which it sounds like breaking copyright/ illegally to you?

Also supposed if you buy a CD, and you decided to upload one of your favorite song from a CD, and that song u uploaded already got copyrighted info and how can it be not legal if you uploaded a copyrighted material in a p2p program?
 
Back
Top