The RIAA is launching a war on the internet backbone providers, ISPs, and consumers. The RIAA wants Gnutella, KaZaa, Opennap, and other P2P sharing systems dead.

This has gone as far as Verizon and others getting sued to turn over information about a KaZaa user. In addition, a network tech for San Diego State University, also mentioned that they get letters from the Recording Industry about people file sharing.

In addition, the RIAA and MPAA are pressuring Attorney General John Ashcroft to start criminal procesuctions against P2P downloaders and file sharers. The RIAA claims that over 81 million people are criminals violating the "No Electronic Theft Act", which states that online theft of copyrighted material is a crime.

There are problems with this approach, both for the RIAA, for the justice department, and the consumer. First of all, tracking down all the names of people sharing music and movies would be near impossible, and would take many lifetimes to do so. If a system has Dynamic IPs, and does not have "Dynamic DNS", you may not have a machine name, or who is logged on at that time. Also, what if the user is behind a firewall, or inside a private network (i.e. a non-routable IP such as 192.168.X.X or 10.1.X.X). Users of Laptop Docking Ports, Computer Labs (such as those in K-12 Schools, Colleges, Libraries, and the like), Wireless Access Points, and the like are much harder to track as well, especially from an offsite location.

Next problem, if all were criminals, where would they be housed? There is certtinally not enough jail cells to house all those inmates. Next of all, if too many got in, people would start a lot of "bad press", which would drive down record and movie sales a lot.

Still another problem is the legal costs, even if the music and movie companies win. Many indiviuals do not have the money to pay attorney fees, which range from $100 to $700 per hour, depending on the law firm used. If a minimum wage worker gets procesuted or sued, it could end up costing movie studios a lot of money, or a lot of money for the taxpayers (to pay court appointed defense laywers).

The next problem, is most decentralized networks are so dynamic, that who is sharing varies from minute to minute. Also, they have the ability to RECOVER during procesuction, litigation, and the like. Since there is no central point, there is no one node that can turn all the other nodes off. More nodes can turn on quickly. Combine this with open source code, and shutting off the host web site will not stop new clients from getting the software to connect.

In addition, too much of these criminal and civil charges against ISPs and consumers could cause politicians to lose the election race. Many people will not vote for people who do things they do not like. Also, it can cause their offices to get flooded with calls, which can make them want to change their mind on these issues.

A better resolution:

It would be better to "cut the red tape" out of licensing. Make it easier for services to get the content they want, in the format they want to distribute it in. Allow one to build a subscription service better in content, features, and file usability than KaZaa or Gnutella.


Next, the labels and studios need to be quick to adapt to new technologies. If they do not, the programmers will "port" the big name content to the new technologies themselves. Often the "programmer ports" end up being traded in the "underground world", because the entertainment moguls do want to license, or adapt their business models.

Second to last, the "lobby for copy protection" is not a good idea. Consumers have fair use rights, and they need to be protected. Copy protection gets broken quickly, and in many cases the more a consumer is locked out, the more the demand to break the scheme is.

Last of all, find a way to license Peer-to-Peer, including open source decentralized P2P. Sounds hard, right? No, it is easy. I feel that a combination of a percentage of the Ad revenue from the services that sell ads (Such as LimeWire, KaZaa, Grokster, BearShare, etc), a tax in the price of blank CDs and DVDs, a tax in the price of internet service, MP3 Players, and computer hard drives, along with online "tip jars" (such as MusicLink and PaytheBand) could generate millions or billions a year that could be distributed to Artists, Songwriters, Actors, Technicians, movie studios, labels, producers, and the like in exchange for P2P downloads.

first post! I agree with most of these points. I just can't see them arresting AND filling an already overfilled court docket with "Mr. Smith v. RIAA.. charge- downloading a song"... we'll have to wait and see, but I bet this gets all phucked up and mired down real quick.

"find a way to license Peer-to-Peer, including open source decentralized P2P. Sounds hard, right? No, it is easy. I feel that a combination of a percentage of the Ad revenue from the services that sell ads (Such as LimeWire, KaZaa, Grokster, BearShare, etc), a tax in the price of blank CDs and DVDs, a tax in the price of internet service, MP3 Players, and computer hard drives, along with online "tip jars" (such as MusicLink and PaytheBand) could generate millions or billions a year that could be distributed to Artists, Songwriters, Actors, Technicians, movie studios, labels, producers, and the like in exchange for P2P downloads."
That might work... As long as the taxes were not for everyone in america. Because not everyone in america is a pirate. It should be charged to those who just operate or decide to run P2P applications.

hrrglburf, people who use p2p apps are _not_ pirates by definition, as the industry would like you to believe. The truth is, people who make money from their downloads are pirates. Bootleggers are pirates. Everyone else are just citizens applying their fair use rights. If the RIAA had any brain power whatsoever, they'd see that the majority of people using p2p are _helping_ sales with their use, not hurting.

Jails for 81 milliom music lovers. I dunno, maybe if we just throw'em all in with the pot smokers, it'll just be one big party. Thing is, the US is notorious for followin' the money, so sumpm tells me that rather than come to our senses, we'll just build more jails.

...And I _really_ like the last paragraph.

but you already know, milla, that any money generated would not goto the artist, just in the industries' pockets, and the licensing fees would be out-of-site.

hrrglburf, go consult your RIAA PR advisers again before you try to brainwash us, you useless fat stain on the fabric of existence.

Now that isn't very nice.

You're probably right, Ryan. Now that I think about it, I've never seen monies distributed 100% properly by the people in control of it. If only artists could be in control of their own business. I don't think most artists wanna be businesspeople, tho.

There's definitely a long way to go.

here is a civilized and reasonable idea (yes, from me) :
let's make Copyrights Non-Transferable and not "for hire"!

I like that, Spica, if an artist CANNOT sell his copyright to his music that changes EVERYTHING.

Also, you can't tax 'computer hard drives' just abitrarily, as most aren't used for music files. Like saying all burners are for music or all blanks are for pirating music.

I think they will just cripple the hardware and the like. Sony is already releasing watermarked SACD discs to their unknowing consumers.

good ideas

Ok, the RIAA says that the "creative" works of artists are being pirated. How much creativity did it take for eminem to make the song "ken kaniff" on the album the marshall mathers lp??? As I recall, the man ken kaniff is gay and is getting his dick sucked in the song, and you hear slurpy sounds.

In fat joe's "whats luv" song, he says about how he wants to screw more than 1 girl at once, and the girl is saying "its about us, its about just me".

In the song "one step closer" by linkin park, for about 30 seconds, in a loop you hear "SHUTUP!! SHUTUP WHEN IM TALKIN TO YOU" over and over again.

In britney spears' "im a slave for you" britney spears sounds like shes gettin screwed in the background, like a dog in heat for the entire song.

In the song "square dance" by eminem you hear "so wont you please jump off my dick, lay off, and stay off?".

In the song "drips" by eminem, you hear "all.. of these diseases, streaming from obie's penis" and "all these bitches on my dick"

tell me how that is creative??? maybe people will buy music when they make songs that sound good, like jimmie eats world, the middle, where he relies on his words and his music, not his being perverted, screaming for no good reason, sounding like youre a dog in heat, and so on. songs like linkin park points of authority were good.

maybe then people will buy music, but until good music comes out, screw buyin it. the reason people download it is because noone knows wheather they will get good stuff or the crap listed above.

RIAA .... blablabla... we'll destroy you... blablabla...

I just enjoy to apply my OWN justice... more effective than the one used in the US.
***I won't buy a single CD of music for the rest of my life.***
I'm not serious you think ?
Hehehe... yes, I am.
And I don't smoke, drink, or take drugs, etc...
Find a FISH somewhere else

I have you beat. Ive never brought an music CD, and never will.

Neither have I.
Oy!

spica: 100% agreement -- i can't think of a single simpler, more obvious solution than that. it just makes sense -- a copyRIGHT is a RIGHT that one shouldn't be able to sell, just like one's right to free speech. the labels would be forced to work according to the artist's wishes, as opposed to vice versa.

Hi there people ! My first post, my first opinion ...


There would be a huge problem to prevent from users to download copyrighted files, so no reason to panic !

It is clear that person who's "sharing" copyrighted materials can be suited (still illegal), however if you download something from somebody there is no crime as long as nobody finds out that you actually store mentioned material (let's say on CD or local disk).

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Example :
1. I use some p2p software (no crime)
2. I perform search for certain string (no crime)
3. I connect to somebody's machine and download file. I CAN'T possibly know what that file contains so obviously no crime so far.
4. I open that file and it appears like some artist's creation. Good heavens, what have I done !?!? I delete that file right away ! Did I do that or it's still here ? Who knows ??
As far as nobody can prove that I actually STORE copyrighted material >>
NO CRIME EVER DONE ! No lawer ever would take such a case

so you can relax dudes, as for people who actually share stuff : thumbs up you are doing great job, thanx for risking yourself in behalf of other p2p users, continue improving our lives !

Cheers for all Gnutes

They destroy your life because: you share some songs with your computer.
Incredible.
And they still hope to be alive after the fight ? (RIAA)
lol

They haven't destroyed anything yet, all the tough talk is to scare as many people away as possible until they can think of something better to do, i0 is right.
I think that the RIAA should let the mp3 battle go and concentrate on marketing high end, audiophile grade digital audio. Make the music sound so good that regular stereo mp3's will sound like shit by comparison. Files that good will have to be pretty big so swapping them over the net won't be as practical as it is now.
How about that? Actually compete with the competition rather than try to wipe it out entirely.

iO just want to download... and won't share.
So...score: RIAA = 1 iO = zero

sorry dudes have nothing to share, shitty conection, life sux
frankly i don't download much since what i need is rarely available

just wanted to make a point
score goes RIAA=0 i0=0 Gnutes=1

Ha,
I'm the biggest sucker of all,
I bought that music on 45rpm records,
then I bought that music on lp records
then I wanted portability so I bought it on 8-track, then 8-tracks didn't hold up so well, so I bought it on cassette, then cd's came along and I wanted better quality so I then bought that music yet again on a cd.
I've spent literally thousands with the riaa. I've been the shmuck who kept them in million dollar houses and parties by the pool. I believe that I've paid more than my share and deserve compensation for keeping their wallet's fat. While I belive in supporting artists who make good quality music, No More free rides for the riaa. I want their grubby paws out of my wallet. I'll never spend money with them again. I want to compensate the artists, not the slimy suits who run blackmail on both sides. yes, there are many good artists who've been scammed by the riaa as much as we have.
Until someone comes up with a viable solution, I'll be content to fire up gnutella and assemble the music I want to hear, Not what some scumbag riaa exec who wouldn't know music from the sound of a jackhammer out front on the sidewalk, decides I should listen to.

I feel much better now

count ludwig,

post your exact same post on the feedback page on the RIAA website.

I regularly send them reports on my used CD purchases, and remind them of how much money they've LOST as I won't buy any new discs in protest of their anti-music sharing policies.

I think EVERYONE should let them know what a fine bang-up job they are doing of alienating their customers and showing just how much contempt they have for folks that are truly passionate about quality _music_.

Deb.

Heh, the RIAA are complete idiots...

Yawwwwwwwwwwn, tooo... tired... toooooo... raaaant, muuuust.... eat... food.. and.. sleep... me.. too.. weak.. too.... rant...

To Spica and goldenpi: if noone ever again bought a cd, where would p2p be today??? Nowhere. We need a few people to buy the cd, enough to get lots of copies of it on gnutella, but not enough to give the RIAA the money it needs.

i am not getting your point, neo...
i have mp3's that started as amateur live-recordings of concerts...

I'm coming out of my 2 month hiatus to comment on this article cause, well, I just feel impelled to.

_Nothing_ the RIAA does will stop file sharing. _Nothing_ short of shutting down the Internet will make a shit of a difference. They can cry, they can whine, they can sue, they can lobby, they can kiss little Johnny's arse...none of that will make a shits difference. The _second_ the RIAA starts going after individuals en mass, they'll have to deal with a _severe_ backlash on the part of the public. If they think their pocketbooks are suffering now (I assure you, they're not), they're sorely mistaken. They'll experience an unprecedented amount of financial suffering as a result of the backlash that will almost certainly occur.

That being said...I shall return to my normal state of lurking.

Go FRAWGSTER!!! [/Drunk guy]

The article is right. Politicians will not want to rattle the puplic on this as it will destroy them. With that aside, the only way to quell the RIAA is to use harsh publicity against them. Look for dirt on them and use it to silence these infidels.

hello ppl do that mob think were stupid? i think so, i have'nt bought a cd for ages i have over 5,000 mp3's on my computer and it's growing fast, so to fu** with the RIAA and your COPYRIGHT...

Just curious unc, I have about 1,700 songs on my computar right now, plus my conventional music collection, when do you get time to listen to it? If you do I envy you.

1Sound.com, a new company created by Rod Underhill, a member of the MP3.com founder's group of yore, is supporting Grokster. Grokster is being supplied licensed content (visible) on the Grokster program page.

An expansion of licensed content for any gnutella based or other p2p services can be very important, and should be considered.

Joy, ip addresses to block

These addresses hav been probing my gnutella folder,
i doubted that even with my connection they were getting 4 gigs of mp3's in 3 minutes, who can it be..Warner, who else.....

Search results for: 216.52.242.66

Internap Network Services (NETBLK-PNAP-8-9 PNAP-8-98
216.52.0.0 - 216.52.255.255
Warner Music Group (NETBLK-PNAP-LAX-WARNER-RM-01) PNAP-LAX-WARNER-RM-01
216.52.242.0 - 216.52.242.255

----------------------------------------------

Search results for: 64.106.170.138
Search results for: 64.106.170.136
Search results for: 64.106.170.135



HiSpeed Hosting (NETBLK-HISPEED-BLK4)
609 Washington Street
Hoboken, NJ 07030
US

Netname: HISPEED-BLK4
Netblock: 64.106.128.0 - 64.106.191.255
Maintainer: HIDH

Coordinator:
HostMaster, DataPipe (DH1029-ARIN) hostmaster@datapipe.com
+1-201-792-1918 (FAX) 201-792-3090

Domain System inverse mapping provided by:

NS1.DATAPIPE.NET 64.27.65.13
NS2.DATAPIPE.NET 64.27.64.76
NS3.DATAPIPE.NET 63.251.230.37

ADDRESSES WITHIN THIS BLOCK ARE NON-PORTABLE

Record last updated on 02-Apr-2002.
Database last updated on 23-Aug-2002 16:56:03 EDT.

They seem mainly to be checking if there are new mp3 files, they kept hitting the same ones over and over again

Just to add - I've got 400+ CD's, and around 30Gb's of mp3's 75% of which I've DL'd - and your right - even I don't have time to listen to them all I generally cycle through about say 30 CD's a time, I don't share all my song's, I share about 500 max.

The thing being is I love hoarding things, i.e. the 400+ CD's before I got hooked on mp3's, but even with mp3's I go through cycle's either I want a new album, i.e. Linkin Park's latest and I'll spend a week or two downloading ALL the song's I can my hands on that seem to be from that album and then manually go through checking them, e.g. bitrate and track names, and compiling them and super-tagging them before sharing them, all my mp3's are at least 128kbs, but mainly 192 when napster was in it's heyday, all my own ripped stuff is 320. Or conversely I can’t be bothered and I’ll try DL’ing a game or some software.

Unfortunately a lot of my mp3's are on DVD-RAM, and I've only got single channel ISDN - so even if I get all of my CD's ripped and add them to my DL'd collection and then put them on my file server (200Gig's of drive space), not nobody gonna be downloading them in a hurry, also becoz I live in the arse end of nowhere in the UK broadband and cable aren't easy to come by, but if and when I can get it I'll mebbe post here and then it'll be free for all . . . . ?

Apologies for the vague musings - but just wanted to show my support in some way when and if I can get a faster connection.

MP3 rules

P.S. - RIAA sux - but if OFFICIAL AUTHENTIC MP3's could be downloaded and the money went to artist and the artist only then I'd quite happily pay 50p/50c per track and then a premium for the quality content on top.

It's just like software - I hate M$, I'm a qualified MCSE 2000 but I'm moving onto Unix/Linux instead and concentrating more on networks for my career - I'll pay for software if I either think it is worth it or it's not too expensive, I don't own a licence copy of any M$ operating system that currently have installed, not to say it's all warez, but i've got a Win95, 98 & NT licence, but only Win2k doesn't blow monkey's . . . XP is shite, plus most software for Windoze is too prohibitively expensive, even though I earn £30k+ I'd prefer to buy a car or save for a house and settle down, then maybe when big Corp.'s get a clue and lower their costs I'll start buying CD's and Software, as for DVD's I've bought about 50 and I'd much prefer to watch a film in full DVD quality either at the cinema or on a home cinema setup, but books, cheap, lovely, reuseable books, covered by copyright with all the 'fair' use policies in tow are one of the simplest pleasures in life, £5 and a 3 to 4 hours of sheer escapism . . . well I'll leave u all to it, I'm sorry for the unsanctioned use of the £ sign's what with being a Brit, but whatever effects the American's will eventually end up affecting most other USA affiliated countries so that's my reason to give a shit about this cause !

Noone would make mp3sd ownloadable because there are royalties for comercial use of the format. They would go for either WMA (more expensive than mp3, but it has DRM to satisfy the paranoid execs) or ogg (absolutly free).

I dont dl or share mp3s. I dont like music that much.

(The BBC is riticiseing the USA on the radio! This is unusual.)

Spica, what I am saying is that if noone ever bought a cd again, they could never record it with musicmatch or some other program into mp3 and put it on gnutella. We need very few people to buy the cd, fot these people to put them on gnutella, and for the RIAA to die. Than when artists stop using the non-existent RIAA to distribute their music, start buying them again.

debart: did just what you proposed, went to RIAA and gave them a summary of my CD collection (80% used since inception in 1986) Also told them from now on I am specifically refusing to purchase new CD's from labels on their member list.

On a different note:

Anyone consider the possibility that a hidden resistance to file-sharing is coming from commercial bootleggers (the real pirate$) ?

They are the ones who stand to lose the most, but they don't have the legitimacy of a legal/commerical interest. This occured to me reading the arguments in this and the other forums. IE, I'd think an industry mole would be more articulate and sound like an informed college-graduate.

After reading through all the ranting above, I would like to put forth what I think is some commons sense.

First, P2P is not a real threat to the music industry for now. Sure their revenues will be impacted, but given that connection is still slow and MP3 quality is mediocre, people will still buy CDs. Indeed, I often check an album out on gnutella, and if I really like it, I buy the CD. That simple.

Second, in some ways they deserve a loss of revenue. For what happened to the old "singles" my parents used to buy. Now, if you like a song in one album - usually the "Hit" song - you have to buy the whole thing, even if the rest sucks, which is often the case with modern pop singers. If the market were really competitive - as it is now becoming - artists would sell copyrights to individual songs as well as to whole albums. Right now, the RIAA behaves like a monopolist, in that it reduces supply of "Hit" songs by adding 8 more crappy songs under the pretense of an album and thereby charging a mar-up. In other words, once you've got a "hit", just make sure you squezee it to the max.

Finally, a free for all P2P cannot be the solution, in that musicians need to earn some money (and it is worth remembering that the RIAA was not the first to sue - Metallica led the way). But that will only come once the music industry realizes that the new technology - like most new technologies - is here to benefit the consumer through lower prices; i.e. the big fat days of yore are gone. Yet somehow, I sense they will not let go without a fight.

When the RIAA switched from vynil to CD they had to refit all their pressing factories. They did it at the artists expense, by adding a refit fee in the contract. The factories are refitted but still the fee remains

What I want to know is if there's this *right* called 'civil disobediance' that allows individuals who gather to break the law in protest of it without fear of arrest, isn't the GNU network, a 'meeting place', and the folks who are filesharing, engaging in 'civil disobedience'?

If I get busted, you bet your ass that's what I am going to claim as my right.

Deb.

I just thought that's exactly what this website was for: a gathering place to discuss file-sharing and advocate change. I mean, it's 'GNUtella.com' not 'music_piracy_inc.com' or some such.

Nobody in these forums has broken any laws. They may admit to it, but there is nothing wrong with discussing it. Freedom of expression was fought for and won not too long ago.

Harplus: What you call 'common sense' is only a concession that the media distributors are pretending to examine because of file-sharing. If there hadn't been the media attention on Napster or the one-sided discussion between Lars Ulrich and honest, better informed musicians, none of what you are proposing would ever have happened.

Likewise, if file-sharing went away tommorrow, you can be certain the big labels behind RIAA will drop such plans as quickly as they can dismiss their temporary staff. We'll be stuck with $18 CDs, a radio spectrum with no programming diversity, and complete death of incentive for non-mainstream musicians (independent labels will simply be squeezed out of the market)

See big-time, wealthy businessmen are truly 'evil.' There is simply no way to be that wealthy and successful without:
1. Active contempt for your own employees and customers.
2. Eliminating and/or exploiting smaller competitors, suppliers, distributors, retails, and workers.
3. Approval, either explicit participation, or by passive, willful ignorance, of atrocities committed on impovershed people overseas and the environment.

OK, point 3 is an extra bit (the music business is only the beginning for me...)

Actually, I think we can use more dramatic protests in the United States. It would still not compare to what's being done to civilians in South America or Palestine or Indonesia. But the class war in the US has been one-sided and silenced long enough.
I have a feeling bricks are going to start flying into windshields of parked luxury import cars soon.

Oh, and Lars Ulrich is a hypocrite at worst, an uninformed stooge at best. Metallica became popular by distribution of bootleg recordings. After signing, they released something called "$6.98 EP" as a tribute to those origins. Most of the musicians who came out against Ulrich with more credible, less-selfish arguments had the grace not to go into that.

*LOL* Hopefully those bricks will fly in the parking lots of Sony Records and Warner, the other Big Music Labels and the MPAA.

Oh I freely admit that I am sharing songs. I will continue to do so in protest of current copyright laws, until they are changed.

Currently, thanks to the sons of bitches at Disney, a copyright is 95 years.

Let's investigate this, shall we.

Given that a human being lives on average, 75 years, and the working lifespan (in the west anyhow), is from age 15 to 65, why is there a need to extend copyright nearly 45 years longer than that working lifespan?

A corporation is given 'legal personhood' status in it's corporate charter.

In effect, these large multinational 'beings' with possible lifespans that stretch across centuries are now getting the ability to control information for almost as long.

Think about that.

Also, while you are mulling on that, consider that information can become little more than corporate propaganda. It can also be a movie, a song or a commercial that fosters a belief in a life style.

It can make one believe that happiness can only be found by using Brand X, that Fletcher Christian was the hero and Captain Bligh was the villan, or that the United States never attacked the Soviet Union.

Excuse me for being the only one seeing that the emperor is naked, but that is a VERY dangerous thing to allow.

With domination over the media, and a 95 year lifespan of restriction of content (guaranteeing taxable revenue for the out of control government), do you think that anything liberating can come of this?

Anything good?

Take one look at the Opie and Anthony horrorshow in New York.

A corporation (Infinity Broadcasting), that has NO discernable roots to the community that it broadcasts into, was blindsided by the antics of two of its on air hosts who put their listeners up to a contest where they would see who could fuck in the most inapproipriate place.

The stupid asshole couple who did, chose a church, where there was a service going on an got caught with their pants down.

Do you think that if the radio station had been locally owned, and the owners actually lived in the area such a low-class stunt would have happened? I doubt it.

Get used to it though.

The mega-ownership of imformation outlets by these non-human corporate 'beings' is going to mean much more anarchy and tastelessness on the airwaves. Have no doubt of that.

One look at the current fiasco with Enron, WorldCom, and a few other corporations shows that by and large, these groups are NOT interested in doing what is right for anyone but themselves.

So, back to it. I AM sharing songs in direct contradiction of Copyright law, and will do so until some sense gets through the thick and stupid skulls in Washington that in the name of little more than mammon (money - taxable revenue - this is the latest argument that Jack Valenti et. al. are using before the legislature to get their way - 'look at how much *money* we make for you to tax!'), they are giving too much control of the activities of daily living into the hands of too few people.

'One Nation Under God' my ass.

'One Nation Under Mammon' is more like it.

Deb.

Petula.. I think you may be right about the real pirate$ online.

As for going onto the RIAA site - EXCELLENT!

Feedback is what they need to know about, if they see a direct causal relationship between their terminating Napster and AudioGalaxy and a direct loss in sales of disks, then maybe the dimbulbs will brighten.

To be honest, music is one of the main artforms I love, painting and illustration being the first.

It pisses me off that many of the artists I want to hear are RIAA bands, but I haven't bought anything new in a long time, and I can outwait the industry.

Mostly I share my fakes and artpics, and have really not even found much in the music department that's good.

What I am listening to isn't really easy to find online, so I get it off the public and college radio stations. I record directly from my amplifier's tape output onto my hard drive via my stereo line in jack, using an analogue recorder, then convert to mp3.

As much as I love the stuff I'm hearing, I have made this decision to stick by my guns.

I'll go see the acts when they play live instead and support the artists that way.

I figure my 'need' to buy from an RIAA label is less than their 'need' to sell it to me.

Supply and demand is a harsh mistress, and as someone who's been hawking my own artwork for years, I know all too well how much a bitch she is - esp, when the item sold *isn't* food, shelter, clothing or something _essential_ to a human life.

That's the problem with the RIAA, and the MPAA.

They think the product they sell as 'entertainment' is the be-all and end-all of human experience.

I watched the sunset today, and listened to the crickets chirp and children laugh as it went down.

Spectacular, peaceful and free.

How can anything Jack Valenti or Hillary Rosen represent come close to that?

Fuck 'em.

Deb.

the riaa have a strange sense of humour they want me in gaol. he he he he good good where i can never buy another cd again. well a year is a year my friends and one can learn alot of bad things in a year in gaol... like how to do things to things. the riaa may reap what it sows they forget the fields they sow are right next door so after they ruin my life, have me locked up for a year i'll have nothing to lose with only my 250 dollars gate money and with all those skills from a year in gaol to my name. i'll have to live someplace and it may well be right next door to them or there hood. with nothing to loose i will have a ax to grind to say the least and i well i may not be responsible for my actions. they want to make it a felony so you can't vote. you see the ugly spiral i am starting to thread when people can't vote they get violent and they stay that way because they have nothing to loose this is bad bad bad bad. the us isn't free any more it just replaced the soviet union.

Its not the soviet union yet, but parts of it are comeing close. The main difference will be government cs corporate rule. We will be able to commit whatever crimes we want as long as it doesn't endanger the Holy Bottom Line, and the police will be too busy tracking down hobbyists who dare to violate the CDTBPA by building their own hardware.

If you are like most people in the US, going to work is a time-warp into the Middle-Ages. The workplace for most Americans is basically a feudal society, little tyrannical fifes beyond the scope of our democratic government control. We are used for the labor, but the revenues are siphoned off, with as little as possible spent on benefits like health care.

Also, the corporate aristrocracy try to destroy family life by forcing people to put in more hours, making it difficult to get maternity leave, etc.

Of course, when you are eliminated, you are laid-off, not killed. Woo-hoo! Such are the advances of civilization.

lol

The aim of business is profit. If a company ever says customer satisfaction is important they really mean getting them to come back and spend more is important. If a company says it is commited to quality they mean they are commited to high prices. If they say they have the lowest prices they mean sticky tape and cardboard are important materials for building their product.

i liked your tax idea,that was smart

Hello All.

There's some very interesting points of view in this room. Please allow me to put my two cents in.

Consider the following scenario:

I'm a Pink Floyd fan (just for example purposes - substitute your favorite band) and I own several Pink Floyd albums (not CD's, but albums).
Obviously I can't take my albums with me in the car, so I go to Kazaa, Audiogalaxy (god rest their souls), or wherever to download mp3 versions of, let's say, Dark Side of the Moon.
Now the RIAA comes sniffing around my computer and sees all of these Floyd songs and says "Um, er, excuse me but you downloaded copyrighted material. You better have proof that you own these songs because we're sending a Gestapo over to your house to check this out."

Does anyone else in here see the potential for a severe civil backlash against the RIAA?
First, if a song is, in fact, intellectual property, then the medium is unimportant. If I own it on album, then I should have a right to posess it on CD, tape, reel-to-reel, 8-track (ugh), whatever.
Second, it assumes that if a person downloads a song, he/she is automatically up to no good, must not own the material, and is therefore guilty (until proven innocent).
I read an earlier post where someone said that you have no idea what something is until you open it, examine it, or otherwise see what the hell it is.
Let's face it people, what the RIAA is trying to do is to make DOWNLOADING something a crime. They want to know where you've been and what you're doing. They're justifying illegal search and seizure under the guise of copyright protection.
I can't understand where all of the Civil Liberties organizations are when our rights are being so blatantly trampled upon.

Comparing the contemporary American working environment to medivel feudalism? Blaming corporations for the destruction of family life? My God, I don't know where to start with that.
As for the last sentence, a person who is laid off can and usually does find an equal or better job. Unless you believe in heaven, death is pretty final, I don't think the comparison works very well.

Oh, geez, you really do have your head stuck up your filthy rich ass.

Ramamageesh - You DO have the right to have the music you've already purchased in whatever format you desire. It's called the right of "Fair Use."

Consider that I like you am an album collector, who inherited my parent's record collection (which goes back to the mid 60's) - so yeah, for the sake of convenience I DL a few songs on the computer..

With the exception of the new stuff I listen to before I decide to go out and try to find it used, most of what I've on my hard drive, I have also in the living room in vinyl. Nearly 800 LPs to be exact. How many songs is that? I don't even know. Dont' let anyone tell you differently, but if you own the LP or CD or tape, you can listen to it in whatever format your fluffy heart desires. Anyone who says otherwise is a lying sack of shit who can go to hell.

Deb.

Ok I am new to this website. And I can see the pros and cons for both sides of the argument.

I am a dj, working full time, and over the past 20 years I have spent an absolute fortune on music, I have thousands of cds and vinyl recordings, and paid mostly through the nose for all of them. As I see it, the music industry has, on the whole, become the criminals in this dog eat dog profession.

The artists make a minute percentage of the revenue their own recordings and talent generate. The biggest demographic of true musicians do what they do for their music, and to share their talent with the people. Their real high doesn’t come from a hit record or from an industry award, but from the real deal, the standing in front of a crowd of people who took the time to experience the music!

Recordings SHOULD be a form of advertising for the artist, and as such they should be paying us to sample their product. Lets face it, the artists see precious little of the money anyway. File sharing is where the future has taken us, and will see the profits of the large companies in the music and software companies into line with the rest of our civilisation. It is absurd for so few to have control of such a large percentage of the money available on this planet!!

I have paid my debt to the record industries a thousand times over. Please don’

Please don’t take this as a personal arrogance; I have made a living from the music so it is ok with me. I have confidence that the battle will be long and hard for the RIAA, and when they have spent much of the money that they have acquired from the overpricing and extortion they have implemented to both the artist and the paying public (which could take a long time, but as has been suggested this is a complicated matter both legally and ethically) they will have to rethink their strategy and sense will prevail. This is happening in all parts of our social and economic environment these days, and is a testimony to the people who are just not prepared to put up with this type of behaviour from the (so called) giants of our industries!


File sharing has a future because it is the want of the people!! And if the industry in general has less money to spend, then the quality of the product will have to be a little better than the money orientated drivel they constantly pour from their epicentre, pop for the masses that all sounds the same and inspires no-one!

I for one applaud those who continue hiding behind a million firewalls and networks to share the music that people want to hear. Maybe our future music chart will be determined by “the most downloaded song”. Now that would be progress!!!

Dave.

Apologies for going off on a tangent . . .

http://www.boycott-riaa.com/forums/general/255

Boy, don't I wish I were rich, even middle class.
But you must have to be wealthy to see the difference between mideval serfs and the average contemporary American working person, who has it pretty darned good by global standards

dayveboy: Right there with you! Hope you find a label/distributor that respects your rights and freedom. I will gladly pay to see your show/buy your music.

Where are you located?

haha Im not an artist nor am i self promoting..Surprised?

shoshidge: I am not rich, neither are people I work with. IE, NIH stipends for graduate student researchers are about $19,000/year.

I suppose you are going to tell me you make half of that or something for working 80 hours a week bussing tables, but you'd have to see that there's an obscene income differential even in an 'honest' mid-sized manufacturer in the US. Then you have to consider difference in health care benefits, child care costs, working conditions, control of product of your work, etc.

I find that intolerable - I can't even justify the little I make, a rice farmer in Southeast Asia makes a more significant contribution to society than I ever do.

It's the poor, disenfranchised people (that's why I post here) in this country that are encouraged to hate each other, not the rich. I need to remember to keep my anger directed at them, not you.

dayveboy, I'm a little suprised - You got me. Still, nicely put. Your words or not, I'm gonna use that post.

I am glad you found something in my words. They are mine. Is understanding a situation for who and what it effects really so unusual?

We are all getting there slowly but surely.

Proper credit should be given the underpaid health care workers and teachers in the United States too. It seems the country as a whole has a severe contempt for these professions as well.

Oh, and that precious $19K/year, if grad students are caught working 2nd jobs or apply for scholarships, they lose it.

dayveboy: Your integrity is appreciated. I'm not sure if said understanding just doesn't occur, or is unconciously suppressed.

You can see why a major daily paper, or network executive would be inclined to not piss off the advertisers, though.

We are not getting there fast enough, and if we let up, things will just roll back. Just like how, when we invade Iraq yet again, the media will quickly forget about Enron/Worldcomm/Accounting Houses. Nothing has really changed since my internship at a finanical consulting firm 10 years ago.

I make about 25,000 a year in Canadian dollars. I don't think I'm hard done by.
People in other countries make a lot less than that, yes, but they also have a cheaper cost of living.
For five thousand dollars, I could go to some poor southeast Asian country and live like a king
for six months, maybe three months in Mexico, and a month and a half here.
That same amount of money wouldn't last me two weeks in New York, Singapore or Tokyo.
A person here can make 10,000 dollars a year and be officialy considered poor. Yet that same amount of money in the hands of a Vietnamese peasant would make him the envy of his whole village, that's relativity for you.
You and I might not disagree as much as you think on the question of global wealth distribution.
In order to distribute wealth more evenly we would either have to raise the poor to our level, which would be an environmental disaster, or teach ourselves to get by with less.
I'm all for the latter solution. I don't respect materialistic people, which is maybe why Spica annoys me so much.
What I never hear from 'leftists'(for lack of a better term), are viable solutions, just a lot of cultural self-loathing.
And contradictions too. In the same sitting, they will revile the western world for being so rich, and then in another discussion, villify the government for not raising the minimum wage, or freak out because jobs are going to Mexico.
If we lower the average standard of living in North America, the ones who will suffer are the ones who are one paycheque from using the food bank. The wealthy ones will only be inconvenienced.
I'm eager to hear your response to this, especially if it doesn't include speculation on my ignorance, intolerance or lack of schooling.

I KNOW I could live like a king in Cambodia. That's exactly what the problem is.

Read my last note to you.

We would be kings in Cambodia but paupers in Hong Kong or New York.Rich and poor are relative, and we have no reason to feel guilty about making the amounts of money we do. I don't know how Bill Gates sleeps at night though.
That poor Cambodian rice farmer, doesn't have it any worse than some guy sweeping floors in California, even though the floor sweeper is technically making 50 times the income. They are both in the same position in the economic hierarchy relative to the country they live in.
I would not wish the superficial trappings of western civilization on any person in the third world if he were my worst enemy.
And the question remains, do we try to make the Cambodian farmer more like us? Or do we try to become more like him? And how would that be accomplished?

The RIAA is launching a war on the internet backbone providers, ISPs, and consumers. The RIAA wants Gnutella, KaZaa, Opennap, and other P2P sharing systems dead.

erm, are we getting a little of topic? hahahah as valid as your points are.