I am just your average p2p file sharer that happens to read the daily posts on Boycott-Riaa ( Great Site ),I like many other p2p users are fed up with the RIAA tactics and all the suing and lives they are affecting with these lawsuits.

I believe there is a way for file sharers and the RIAA to co-exist but the RIAA does not, because of this fact I have had to take precautions against them such as others have in the form of "Peer Guardian", Firewalls,etc.

Just recently I tried the new version of KaZaA Lite - Resurrection,only to find that the Fastrack Network is loaded with fake files from a couple of programmers who were recently awarded for their effort to flood p2p networks with fake files.
I had heard about an anonymous file sharing program called "Mute" so I thought I've got nothing to lose by trying it. It took a little work to get it up and running,I had to download Microsoft's "NET. Framework Version 1.1" to get it to work but after that it was a pleasant suprise,the interface is user freindly and the amount of mp3 files available was quite suprising.As far as how it will fair with the passing of the newest threat to p2p the "Induce Act" only time will tell but in a snipet from an article from the designer it looks like it might just be the next KaZaA! ( Read Article )
http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2004/08/12/mute.html?page=2

"HW: Have you considered the legal ramifications of what you're doing and prepared for any possible legal action? As everybody knows, the RIAA and its international counterparts have been going after both users and developers of P2P software quite aggressively.

JR: So far, these organizations have confined their attacks to corporations that are peddling P2P and making money off of it. There is no precedent for a suit against an individual P2P developer who is releasing non-commercial, open-source software. Selling a product that helps people break the law is very different from giving it away. Furthermore, there is no explicit law against software like MUTE."

you know what the RIAA will argue. "giving away a gun to someone to commit a crime is just as bad as selling someone that gun to commit the crime"

it'll be interesting to see how Mute does in all this.

Wouldn't the Induce Act cover this? I don't remember the specific wording of it, but if it makes it possible for people to commit copyright infringement, the RIAA would surely try to put a stop to it. I'm not sure there were any exclusions in the bill about whether or not it was necessarily for profit.

Yes, the induce act covers it. There is very little it does not cover. Awkward to use through. Induce could be used to stop development, and if the RIAA decides to set an example could charge the devlopers enough to destroy their lives. But that wont do anything about the existing network, or the client already released, and with an open-source protocol non-US developers would soon pick up. The only way the RIAA could possibly stop Mute would be to extend its Uni- and ISP-intimidation. Scare them, bribe them, offer discounts on Napster content, just somehow convince them to install p2p blockers. But we have already considered the implications of an arms race. Its the best the RIAA could hope for, expensive for both sides, and the loss of usability and freedom would be huge. Not that the RIAA cares about that part.

The Induce Act would probably criminalize giving a neighbor the address of the local public library.

Yes, Induce would cover this.

I thought an inordinate amount of fakes were showing up on K-Lite recently. Here's hoping K-Lite's programmers figure a way to filter out the fakes.

actually if they could figure out how to filter out the fakes couldn't the industry show that as proof they could filter copywrighted material?

If you are boycottint RIAA-crack music, it doesn't matter. If you REALLY wanna bring 'em down, don't trade in their "products" and get your friends to do the same.

BOYCOTT. EDUCATE. REGISTER. VOTE.

So your saying in order to boycott the riaa I can't listen or download any of their music otherwise I'm a traitior?
How about not purchasing any of their products but instead sampling them from an anonymous p2p ap like "Mute' then make my own decision on what I like or dis-like,is it so hard to believe that there are artists out there who belong to the Riaa(Unfortunately) that have music that you and I like?
If you really believe in boycotting the Riaa then by all means do not buy their products but for crying out loud if you like a tune why not enjoy it - Geez!!

Buy Used Cds if you like the artist but they are part of the RIAA

This guy is full of s***

"JR: So far, these organizations have confined their attacks to corporations that are peddling P2P and making money off of it."

Not so. The lawsuits have not been confined to corporations or programmers. The majority of the law suits have been against average everyday joes just wanting to listen to music. People who made no profit or offered any.
Anyway, I used to use Kazaa and I don't remember paying for Kazaa's program or its services.

makogt - I can understand your side, but what Jazzmary is saying is important. The RIAA can only be effective in their suits, when people are creating a demand for RIAA affiliated record music.

Now, the boycott-RIAA community is certainly not monolithic. Some do in fact probably trade in tunes online, but are boycotting the purchase of music. As much as I enjoyed the music of many RIAA label artists, I am not only not purchasing their tunes, but not uploading nor downloading them and the reason is simple. We want the RIAA to understand this, clear and loud. "YOU DON'T WANT US HAVING MUSIC FROM YOUR LABELS? FINE...WE WON'T UPLOAD, DOWNLOAD, OR PURCHASE IT". That's a total boycott, both from economic standpoint and a use standpoint.

Obviously, no one here can control what others are doing. Many of those of us who have been around this movement for a year or more, have completely lost interest in what JazzMary calls their "crack music".

And, I personally believe, as does JazzMary, that once we as a block of digital consumers quit trading or purchasing their tunes, they will start seeing the true power of the American public.

Cary Sue and the rest of the "girls" at the RIAA will REALLY get concerned when you can't even give their tunes away on K-Lite, eDONKEY,
Gnutella, Shareaza, or BitTorrent.

Just my humble two bits!
~CW

Many suits have been against users. A few against corporations. Somewhere in between are those against non-profit programmers. Google on "chewplastic" for one of the most unfair cases.

code warrior- First of all let me say it's an honor to here a reply to my post from such an admired Boycott-Riaa member.
I have not purchased any Riaa products in years and don't plan to any time soon. I guess I'm finding it difficult to understand that we must go without the music we love in order to truly boycott the Riaa,although I understand your viewpoint along with Jazzmary I find it difficult to give up my freedom of choice.
I will however take your humble two bits into consideration.

If the RIAA/MPAA sues P2P users, How much of that money gets paid to the artists themselves? If the artists don't get anything, then the RIAA/MPAA should be brought up on extortion and theft charges. After all, the RIAA claims they represent the artists.

dogpile - Totally agree,at the rate the Riaa is going with these lawsuits at $3000 to $5000 per settlement.
Someone with enough resources needs to stand up to them and contest these lawsuits ( but who? ),especially now with the government backing them even more the common man is screwed.
With each passing law we are losing more and more of our god given rights!

Next Generation File Sharing!!
Almost a 1/2 Million people have now downloaded "Mute" Wow!!
It looks like people really are concerned about anonymous file sharing after all, that's an amazing number considering "Mute" has only been available since April, be one of the soon to be million users download the latest version "MFC Mute" here >>> http://mute-net.sourceforge.net/

I wonder what the RIAA's tactics will be with MUTE users. Flood the network? Put trojan's on there? Either way is illegal, so the RIAA is really just screwing themselves.

If I know the RIAA, a combination of spoofing techniques/fake files, legal harassment of node operators, a media smear campaign portraying Mute as a haven for pornographers and pedophiles, and continued attempts to convince ISPs and other access providers to filter it.

makogt. Good to see you agree. Looks like a good investigative story. How about getting Michael Moore? All it takes is one artist to say to the RIAA where's my share of the money? If one artist is successful, then others will follow. Perhaps only a matter of time.