It's been a mere five years since the RIAA redefined "sharing" from being a virtue to the very bad thing it represents today.

They've taught us other valuable lessons as well during the past half-decade, while seemingly learning nothing at all themselves.

After 7000 lawsuits, the file sharers still dodge and weave, change software, use firewalls, and ask the rhetorical question, "What are the odds?", knowing full well they have a better chance of winning the PowerBall than getting busted for sharing songs (although your odds are obviously much higher if you are on a college campus, but not for the PowerBall). There are still 60 million or so of them out there, a full 20% of the country's population.

If anything, the massive army of file sharers has occasional collateral damage with no real harm befalling the "cause" itself. They have the edge, which can only be altered by changing the law to make the basis of the Internet itelf (the transfer of files from one computer to another) an illegal activity. This is rather like protecting our roads by banning traffic. In theory, it would work; realistically, it's pretty damn stupid.

We have learned that grossly misleading and outright false testimony to Congress, the US Copyright Office and anyone else that will listen is actually true if you can provide an article in Time where you said so.

We have learned that the way to NOT impress a Circuit Court judge is to say "pirate" and "theft" a lot in reference to copyright.

We have yet to learn why p2p is different from BetaMax in any sort of sane, logical manner while still conforming to the knowledge gained from the Circuit Court (above).

We have learned that the independent artists outnumber the RIAA artists by at least 30 to 1 and this ratio is certainly growing as the major labels cull the "underperforming" acts from their rosters. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

We have learned that when you ask the RIAA why prices have gone up for about 15 years in a row, they will say, "Well back in 1982, when we first introduced CDs, the retail price was about $22. If you compare the Consumer Price Index to washing machines..."

Of course, in 1982 a blank CD cost about $10 and a CD burner would set you back about $100,000. Neither of these items -- the primary tools and raw materials of physical CD production -- have followed the Consumer Price Index.

We have learned that the RIAA will change the Constitution in the middle of the night to deprive authors of their copyrights. In this particular fight, the Great War will commence in 2013.

We have learned that the labels have slashed the artist rosters, releasing fewer new titles. We have learned that the RIAA cannot see a connection between fewer releases and lower sales, mostly because they "stopped collecting that information in 1999."

We have learned that the only honest, correct, useful information in the RIAA's annual statistics consists of their address and phone number.

But our biggest lesson to be learned...

In five years, the RIAA has never bothered to show up here and publicly debate any of the issues unless disguised as an anonymous troll, popping in from time to time to accuse everyone in the world of being pirates.

They do not take us seriously, do not consider us a threat at all. It is ironic that we both preach the same message: Do not listen to RIAA music; do not share it; do not allow it on your computers or anywhere else that others may illicitly listen to it.

It's what they've been asking for since 1999.

I've done my very best to comply, ever since the day I saw Lars Ulrich on CSPAN.

And not a word of thanks...

Great article George!

I totally agree!

"We have yet to learn why p2p is different from BetaMax in any sort of sane, logical manner while still conforming to the knowledge gained from the Circuit Court (above)"

Maybe what is different is "our neighbor" isn't next door on the internet. Maybe it is that they finally have a visable foe to point at and say this isn't legal. It has been going on ever since records were sold but there was no physical evidence that could be tracked down and pointed to across the nation. Nor was there any law that said they couldn't as fair use was in effect.

They have managed to nullify that evil law called fair use with the use of DRM. No longer are you allowed to make those copies for travel for the items you have purchase indefinately. It would seem that they have changed what they approve of. One of the reasons you were allowed to make that legal copy was that you purchased a license to hear that song; the container it came on, be it tape, record, or whatever wasn't really in the deal. Just happened to the transport mechanism to get it to you in some usable form. Now the container is in the deal and it makes a substancial change. The DRM is part of the container. Without it you can't keep the music for extended periods of time, even though you paid for the privilage.

DRM is still undergoing changes. It isn't jelled yet as to the end result and what that will be. See the article above this one about the movie. Here is an evolution they hope you will accept. To actually watch the movie on a computer you gotta install more software, update that software and then get a license to proceed to the part you bought the product for in the first place. To watch it. After a week it doesn't work anymore and you gotta get another one? So how did that guy get the product in the first place? He had to go around the world to get the key. An example of how this changes the aspect of DRM. It is a small step from there to having to pay to watch it again even though you bought the movie. So what did you buy? Appearently you bought a headache with very little guarentee that you will be able to do with this product what you purchased it for. Not a very good product in my opinion. Certainly not one I will spend money on.

To make matters worse, no labeling to tell you of these changes. No truth in labeling here, unless it is for the benefit of the maker. Seems it is ok to display the FBI logo and claim protection. Where though is the consumers protection for his money? Plain and simple there is apparently none. So why on earth do I want this product?

No good reason at present can I give. I think they should keep their product. I will keep my money and we should both be happy. After all, there is no way I can possibly make a backup of a product I didn't buy is there?

Once again.. DRM cheats the due process clauses of the constitution.

IT denies people liberty and property without due process.

Another Christmas present!! George is finally writing again!! As tired as I am this evening, thank you, George, and please continue to contribute. And Merry Christmas!!!

This is Michael Speck from MIPI, in Australia.

Happy to debate/discuss the issues here anytime convenient.

I appreciate that Codewarrier has in the past lapsed to the profanity at the mention of my name and others have resorted to suggestions of violence but surely this is simply metaphor for the perceived distance between us.

Feel free to email ARIA with off line contact details and I will arrange to be available.

Mr. Speck,
We are all right here.
No e-mail addy's needed.
No contact details necessary.
All arguments for and against, in one
place, for MANY eyes to see.
As many eyes to see your reasoning,
as well as ours.
Why do you need more contact info ?
We are right here.

You have started the ball rolling, you introduced yourself ..
The door was open, you walked in and said .. "Hello".

Now,
Having seen our positions,
speak. Address them.
We are listening.

To the rest of the members ,,,
Let us control our passion for this for the
moment, and allow Mr. Speck to say his
piece, without profanity or attack.
We are all tired of the trolls in disguise.
He came openly.

Lets see if he will speak openly.

Very well. I am rather interested in what he has to say.

I second the suggestion for staying our hand... for now.

First of all "Speck"...get the name right...
It's "CodeWarrior" not "Codewarrier"...but , of course, when did lack of accuracy or truth ever get in the way with your pronouncements.

Secondly, please document any suggestion that I have EVER made on this board about violence. Document or shut up!

The gauntlet has been thrown Speck...time for you to do your work!
~CodeWARRIOR

First of all, I applaud Mr. Speck for stepping into the fire. None of his American counterparts have had the huevos to do the same.

To my knowledge, I have never advocated violence on this or any board as a way of dealing with the RIAA, and in fact, have also advocated NOT trading in their inferior products. I have supported boycotting them (which is entirely legal) and avoiding uploading and downloading their product, which I think they SHOULD support as well since they are suing tryign to stop people from doing this.

Thus, lemme state for the record...I do not now, nor have I , advocated anyone to engage in any sort of violence against the RIAA, ARIA , or affiliated companies nor organizations.

I am on the record saying that people should avoid their products like the plague and not traffic in them at all...no uploading, no downloading, no purchasing, and no listening to them on the radio.

That is my stance, now, and has been my stance since I began.

CLEAR?

Mr. Speck welcome to the site yes we are a vocal bunch but we are a reasonable bunch as well please keep an open mind in what we have to say I'm sure we can be considerate to you, we may not agree on all sides of the issues but it's the thought process that helps or rather try's to solve some of the issues people need to be heard not just lawyer types and courts or judges if the RIAA/MPAA and all of their affiliates would just listen to the consumer maybe some of this we talk about may not have come this far making the consumer all criminals and the industries some sort of hated evil corps.
I seriously would like to know what you have to say.

If it IS "Mr. Speck". The only other Speck I have heard of, was the American named Richard Speck.
Upon research, I find there are other Michael Specks, including Michael Speck of LGames
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=1518

an artist named Michael Speck
http://www.theatre3dallas.com/artistbios/speck_michael.htm

and, the one apparently this poster is alleging himself or herself to be
http://msl1.mit.edu/furdlog/index.php?p=444&more=1&c=1
"An Australian case in which three men pleaded guilty to online music piracy has “exploded many of the myths” related to copyright infringement, asserts the head of an investigation firm.

Some such “myths” include the view that online copyright infringement is an expression of free speech and that copyright misappropriation is good for the music business, said Michael Speck, head of Music Industry Piracy Investigations.

“Increasingly, courts here and around the world are seeing criminal offenses driven by Internet technologies as no different to other criminal acts,” Speck said.

[…] However, Speck lashed out at three Australian universities–Sydney University, Melbourne University and the University of Tasmania–currently involved in legal action over the music industry’s attempts to gain access to records of network usage. The legal action may lead to charges of copyright breaches against staff or students at those institutions.

“We hold no hope that this case will be settled by negotiation,” he said. “Those three universities have resisted providing any assistance at all, while the rest of the university population has moved on.”

Hmmmmm does he not want to comment?

Item 1 -- Writing to the ARIA.

I've written to the RIAA numerous times. At the beginning it was to report actual pirates -- people on eBay who were selling mp3 collections.

I've written to ask questions, to inquire about statistics, ask for clarification and, when all else failed, to try sarcasm and direct attacks to get their attention.

No one ever replied.

So don't hold your breath waiting for me to come to you privately. I tried that and was ignored.

Item 2 -- Do you guys really want us to remove ALL of your music from the Internet? Because there are about a quarter million acts in the US alone who, deprived of any chance to get their music played on radio due to rampant payola, have chosen such entities as Kazaa in an attempt to be heard.

If "leveling the playing field" means removing you from it, that's okay.

But the rest of us like it here. We came to play the game. We'll keep feeding Kazaa our music.

Do you want to be erased from the world's hard drives? Is that the goal?

Nitedreamer -- it's the middle of the night in Australia.

Other links mentioning our alleged guest, Mr. Michael Speck, a former police officer...

http://www.apcmag.com/apc/v3.nsf/0/896ABB36E6E76CB5CA256D44001A7792

http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/id;827213196;fp;2;fpid;3

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/10/18/1097951613400.html?from=storylhs

http://www.whatpc.co.uk/news/1133130

http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/12088
"However, Justice Wilcox had specific warning for Michael Speck, general manager of Music Industry Piracy Investigations (MIPI), the group investigating the alleged copyright infringements on behalf of the Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA).

He told the court that Speck's credibility as a witness might be called into question if he continued to speak to the media.

The warnings came after lawyers representing Sharman Networks made veiled accusations that Speck had been tipping the media to significant events surrounding the case.

Senior counsel for Sharman Networks Robert Ellicott QC drew the court's attention to a media article that appeared in the latest issue of a technology trade publication. It featured pictures of raids that took place at premises occupied by Sharman Networks, and its associates, early in February.

MIPI carried out the raids in accordance with Anton Piller orders it secured from the court giving it permission to seize material stored at the offices of Sharman Networks and Brilliant Digital Entertainment, and the homes of several key executives associated with the companies.

Ellicott then referred back to previous instances in which Sharman's former legal counsel had drawn Speck's conduct to the court's attention."

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/business/0,39023166,39164195,00.htm
MIPI boss Speck takes stand in piracy trial
"The general manager of Music Industry Piracy Investigations (MIPI), Michael Speck, took the witness stand today to give evidence in the case against retired police officer turned music download Web site owner Stephen Cooper.





Speck was forced to admit by lead counsel for the defence, Anthony Morris QC, that "not at any time was there an MP3 located on this site". However, Speck refused the notion that the defendant's site – mps34free.com – was in effect the same as any other search engine.

Morris questioned Speck if he "had any trouble finding MP3s" on the "usual search engines that we all know of…AltaVista, Google, Yahoo…", and following Speck's answer to the negative, Morris followed by asking "has you client ever sued any of the operators of these search engines?"

Yet, according to Speck the Web site goes beyond a typical search engine as he said it is related to the MP3s that it links to."

http://www.cpd.com.au/cpdnews/pa/Archive/PA40.htm
""Music Industry Piracy Investigations
"Privacy has taken a backseat to the fight against online piracy in a recording industry offensive against illegal music swapping over the internet. Australia’s major record companies have initiated action in the Fed Court against Syd, Melb and Tas universities to obtain evidence of suspected illegal copying by students and possibly staff. The Music Industry Piracy Investigations (MIPI) group funded by the Australian record industry has been using web crawler software to track music file swapping on the internet and presented the evidence in the universities case. MIPI director Michael Speck told Privacy Alert the tracking software showed music file swapping was increasing: "We’re talking significant and substantial music piracy." He said universities were founded on intellectual property. "We are not looking to rewrite the privacy legislation in Australia. The request we have made of the universities is within the spirit and parameters of the Privacy Act." Speck said the tracking software was "so specific it would not impinge on the privacy of people who have not breached copyright."

The Australia government website gives this infor on MIPI
http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/288585/fromItemId/340639

Description
Deals with all piracy matters regarding the Music Industry. Part of ARIA(Australian Recording Industry Association). Hotline:
Direct: 02 8569 1177
FAX: 263 Clarence Street
SYDNEY NSW 2000
Web: http://www.aria.com.au
Email: aria@aria.com.au c/- ARIAPO Box Q20QVB
SYDNEY NSW 1230 "

OHHHHH. LOL that figures I'm in ARIZONA we have our own time too lol. I forget about the other timezones slap me again.

I'm in AZ, too.

Thanks for the info, Code. This guy is NOT a voice of the recording industry. He's just a hired gun who works "on behalf of" the ARIA.

He has nothing to do with the music industry. He's just a pirate hunter. As such, he is in no position to discuss artist contracts, the removal of copyrights from the author, unpaid royalties or anything else of any significance.

So we're still waiting for the RIAA to show up.

BTW..
the quote
"Author: CodeWarrior
Posted: February 6, 2004 at 4:13 PM EST
I wondered that too surfside...

and riaadestroyer...I agree...I have my 357 Magnum and 12 Gauge Remington Express 12 Gauge Magnum Full bore..and a Japanese Katana and one of those Arkansas toothpicks...i.e. Big Bowie knives..." was in reference to an earlier quote...
"riaadestroyer
Posted: February 6, 2004 at 3:28 PM EST
but this is americana code

and by god and texas we have our guns and our gods to keep us safe "

Some of us in America believe our personal safety in our homes, must be zealously guarded. Self defense is ones home is a legally acknowledged right of Americans. This is not a call to violence of any kind, any more than having a can opener necessarily means you must go forward and open every can you see.

It's no coincidence that the assault rifle ban was dropped at the same time we shipped the entire National Guard to Afghanistan and Iraq.

I suspect that our visitor is not being truthful with his identity.

For the record let me also state that I do not believe that violence is a method for solving issues and think that such clouds the purpose of this site. By supporting violent actions we only feed into the hands of those we don't support.

As for the supplying of identities on the net by email, I think that is uncalled for. The purpose of a forum is for discussion, after all. If you wish this thorn out of your side, what better method than to talk to us all, each and every one of us, at the same time?

We simply advocate that major label music isn't what we want. As the business model seems directly tied to the product and the majors have used their position for attempting and getting favored status in legislation, we believe these actions wrong as they directly contradict many of the rights of citizens here. (Yes we do realise you are from Austrialia and are not under those laws as such.) Still the multinational megacorporations that you represent do business here and as such are indeed under them.

I don't expect an answer as I do truely suspect the answer posted here wasn't a legit one.

"Micheal Speck (Hardman of internet piracy. Can't be stopped by the federal court)"

To be honest Micheal Speck is not worth speaking to. He is currently embroiled in sueing the pants off of Sharman of Kazaa fame and although I am not really bothered too much whether they win or lose that case I am bothered by the smug attitude that Micheal Speck constantly portrays to the media.
Like some kind of 'untouchable' arch nemesis to so called 'pirates' and 'thieves'.

Having a head up in the clouds and constantly spouting hot air like a flying dirigible, maybe we should call him Micheal Speck on the horizon.

Insulting? Not half as insulting as his outspoken insults against filesharers!

I do not believe it is Micheal Speck anyhow and I would need substantal proof this was not a troll post before aknowledging him.

A very good point. Given our guest's silence, it can be assumed that he is a troll.

However, I remain skeptical.

Do not see this as defending him, I cannot and shall not defend those whose actions are indefensible.

"...any more than having a can opener necessarily means you must go forward and open every can you see."

I've got alternates...

...any more than having breasts means everyone you meet gets free milk.

...any more than having a spare tire means that you try to get a flat.

...any more than ...

Sorry. I really only had the breast joke.

It's a public holiday in Australia in the middle of summer and everyone is at home watching the cricket. Speck may not be "right" person to talk about all issues pertaining to the music industry but I don't see his boss Stephen Peach coming forward. (Peach is the Oz equivalent to Bainwol)

This is Michael Speck again. Please post your questions here and I will be happy to answer them for you.

Oh no! I used the wrong ID!

: )

Bad mroop--your grammar's not that atrocious.

mrpoop would be more fitting

Aw, shucks, that's kinda rough on mroop!

The letters M-R-O-O-P may stand for "Mr. Out-of-Print". He's somewhat of an expert on hard-to-find music.

lol mroopie!

Checking back into the archival material, I think he has contributed quite a bit to these forums.

test

You passed the test Code.

"In five years, the RIAA has never bothered to show up here and publicly debate any of the issues..."
Perhaps the Admins should make each member of the RIAA an account here, then Email, or registered snail mail, 'em thier username and password. I'd love to hear their comments on what's going on. Perhaps if they visited they would relize that Dmusic is NOT full of musicians waiting to be signed, that Boycotting the RIAA is NOT about filesharing, and just because its an online community we are NOT just a buncha geeks.
It just seems weird there's no forum at the RIAA's site...

They have no forum at the RIAA's site because they don't like all the four-letter words they would find there. And just because they don't post, I would still bet they hide in the shadows and read....

EMI ran a forum in Oz when they introduced so-called "copy protected" CDs. Not surprisingly they received hundreds of emails which were justifiably critical of CDs that couldn't be played on CD players. Shortly therafter they closed the forum. I suspect the RIAAs of the world spend a great deal of time reading fora like this one, so they feel they have no need to create one of their own. They already know they have lost the technological and creative "debate".

The RIAA website that is up is nothing but a front and honeypot for hackers to keep busy at and not interfer with internal web communications. If hackers hit the website and take it down, they think they did good. The RIAA is happy it wasn't something important to them and is content to give them a meaningless target to vent at that doesn't interfer with their operations.

One of the posts within the articles here gave an excellent method of protest. Go buy one of the albums and continually return the item as defective till there are no more on the shelves.

I get it, arm chair radicals. You guys only want to say you want to have the debate but soil yourselves the minute anyone turns up!

It was a scream watching you wimps squirm for a reason not to have the debate.

How's that again? You actually want to debate? Great!
BRING IT ON!

"Come on, punk; make my day."

Soil ourselves ???
I cordial asked for the Troll's return, politely.
We have eagerly awaited his return.
Whoever it was is to cowardly to come back.

And you, Codeworrier ...
you only seem to show up when it's all over.

Diogenes,
Codeworrier is not the least bit worthwhile to debate with.
Just a Troll.
Iggy 'im

"You guys only want to say you want to have the debate but soil yourselves the minute anyone turns up!"

I don't believe I've seen anyone show up to debate yet. A few have attempted such folly in the past, our pal Doug77 comes to mind. None has stood the test of the facts.

Once again, do you have a point to make? I'd be glad to start a new thread and give you an opportunity to expound. Is there a specific topic you have in mind?

Appropriation of copyrights from authors, perhaps?
Manufacturing records and how they disappear?
How about a discussion of the terms of the average recording contract?
The volume of authorized music on the Internet?
The relation of sales to an ever-dwindling number of new releases?

Or do we have to listen to another fucking pirate story?

Outstanding, George! I love how you've offered him/her the chance for a thread to use to debate issues.
And those topics you mentioned -- SUPERB. I made a copy of them for posterity.

I almost wish a person like codeworrier would actually make him/her self available for debate. Instead, they seem to just make a quick pit stop now and then, leaving a smoking insult and/or a moral condemnation behind as they retreat quickly off into the shadows... even claiming we members didn't want to discuss issues with them!
How silly, when it appears to be the opposite case is true.