There are now so many RIAA sue 'em all subpoenas that the US District Court in Washington, "already suffering staff shortages," has been forced to reassign employees to help process paperwork, clerk's operations manager Angela Caesar-Mobley is quoted as saying in July 21 Associated Press story.

And a spokeswoman for the US Courts admin office says the Washington clerk's office was, "functioning more like a clearing house, issuing subpoenas for all over the country" and civil lawsuits would likely be transferred to a different jurisdiction, according to spokeswoman Karen Redmond.

But that won't surprise anyone who's been watching the RIAA and its clones around the world, not to speak of the MPAA and other entertaiment industry backed 'trade' organizations, suborn various tax-payer funded national and international agencies in their members' interests.

Police seize 2 million tapes in Egypt; Record industry calls on Lebanese PM to step up action against music piracy; Spanish police arrest 40 in major piracy raids; Italian music piracy epidemic; and Russian government's creation of anti-piracy task force is a selection of headlines on the IFPI (International Federation of the Phonographic Industry) site.

But it's nothing new and in every case the IFPI says it 'assists' local police.

What that means is: IFPI investigators, usually ex-cops who've retired or have entered the public sector for other reasons, or public sector PI firms working under contract, do the investigation and find the perpetrators, at which point local police (who otherwise probably wouldn't have shown much interest) take over.

Although the Big Five labels pay for the first part of the process through their trade organizations, the public foots the bill for the rest of it.

In a now-famous example, Jon Johansen, the Norwegian teenager who reverse-engineered the record labels' DVD Content Scrambling System (CSS) to allow DVD playback on Linux computers, wasn't nailed by the labels. Rather, their investigators did the research and passed it on to Norwegian state prosecutor Inger Marie Sunde, who then sent the cops in.

And you ain't seen nothin yet, as BTO once put it.

well this is gonna get fun,first post

This is pretty much like this article: http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/7176 but with different wording...

Looks like the nutters at the RIAA finally have gone over the edge! I agree, this is gonna be fun.
Soon enough, we'll have spy cameras installed into our houses to monitor our every move...

John Newton,
This article need not be here, there is one just like it on this site already. Someone please be sure to not post duplicates of articles. There is not much if not anything new in this article.
No worries

Actually Jon used this as a jumping off point, it contains a lot of other information...

thumbtack,
Most of the information above is not new.
Thanks

Spy cameras, eh? Let 'em monitor me all they want. They'll have that camera up for 20 minutes, then they'll realize how big a mistake it was in the first place. I'll give the bastards a show, if that's what they want

directive - The point I was trying to make - not very successfully, obviously - was that the RIAA, et al, are using public services as corporate tools. I knew the first two pars are also in another item, but I thought they'd be OK as a means in. Cheers! Ah well ....

Cheers! Jon

Instead of basically reposting the same old informtion over in a different news article, find the one that correlates with what you have, add information to it (make sure it's noticeable), and then when posting it put something like *UPDATED!* in the title.

Why do these courts allow The RIAA to do this? I'm really beginning to hate being an American. I'm ashamed that America has sunk this low. Maybe when the courts are so overcrowed and uncontrollable then the judges will stepup and say enough is enough. The tax payers need to speakup as well.

I thought the post was on point Jon. Sometimes presenting something more than once helps to lock it into memory...that's what they call "the hook" in music,and they use it liberally and to great effect.

There are now so many RIAA sue 'em all subpoenas that the US District Court in Washington, "already suffering staff shortages," has been forced to reassign employees to help process paperwork, clerk's operations manager Angela Caesar-Mobley is quoted as saying in July 21 Associated Press

________

How is this old news??? I havent seen this part on here before.

I am so glad I found this site. I have been a huge critic of the RIAA for years. My biggest criticism is that of CD burners. They are standard issue of every computer of the factory and yet the RIAA stand on this is silent?

The P-2-P genie is already of the bottle. The old, antiquated music industry simply needs to adapt and turn the corner. What better way to alienate your already weakened customer base then by threatening to take them to court?

The biggest question I have is somewhat of a legal one. Exactly how can the RIAA *prove * that “I” downloaded anything? I would imagine that my computer is like a car; If I lend my car to a friend and he gets a ticket while driving it… would I have to pay for his ticket? They can’t prove anyone did anything? It’s all so stupid and trivial within the context of all the other problems we are facing.


W.C. Minor

Hey Grandparents get on the band wagon here, I'll be 59 my birthday and I'm
with you all. They may come after me or my Mother who is 80 + Think about
it. If they get the older people thinking they are getting a kid. We all
enjoy music. But we can stop buying it also. I have quit buying it now. I
don't like the way they are going after the kids. And I don't like the way
the government is trying to stop us. If we all stick together and we all
Boycott the RIAA we will win. Make it clear to all your families what's
going on here get them all to stop buying music and movies. If everyone
speaks up and lets the government know where you stand on this it will help.
Even if they step in with our tax dollars they can't make us buy. That's
what it all comes down to. And the vote for them next time around.

Assuming that you are subpoened and have to answer to the charge of illegally downloading copyrighted music, simply demand a trial and wait. If the RIAA is indeed subpoening up 100 people a day, do you really think they can have trials for all of these people in a speedy manner? I think not. Sure it will be hard for the first 100 or 200 folks to endure the charges but after that, the court system will be backlogged for years.

RIAA...we love music and that is why we download. Do you really think that we will buy music after we have been criminally charged?

I'm 46 and for years have declined to buy a CD burner,telling my kids that we should support the artist and pay for what we listen to. That just came to a sceaching halt. I've bought my last CD until something turns around.

the threat of suits against downloaders and uploaders has become a reality ,but the dream is if they think they are going to recoup all these alleged"losses"by suing anyone.amazing how they can come with a value for something when before its only value was whatever sticker was on it.....$150,000 for one song? ....hmmm...in that case i want to value my car at $50,000 even though it is only worth $1500 just because i say it is worth that....intellectual property you say? no right minded intellect should be saddled with this crap for free let alone pay for it....wonder if they will do a survey months forem now that show the music industry springing back to life after the p2p dust settles?.....nope...i doubt it seeing as how it wont matter....do car makers file suits against buyers of their product when they sell or trade the cars in or worse give it to a relative? oh the humanity!!!

This is so cool...this is something freedom loving Americans can get behind regardless of age,race,religion,musical preferences...tyranny is something we have fought laws about in other lands. Finally, we are coming together and we have the strength that will win!
Not buying CDs, not watching movies of any MPAA member!

......and why is that stupid link in my reply?

no worries newjon, i just wanted to make sure that the info doesn't get printed twice. Not that other news services don't repeat themselves over and over again.

Ah you didn't put a space in between the . and the next word...

MP3 is not a Crime!

The recording industry believes that CD sales are down due to Internet piracy, a claim that has been disputed and by many and not at all proven. It wouldn’t have anything to do with the economy, boycotts by people such as ourselves or the fact that the state of music today is so disposable? Take for example the new Charlie’s Angels Soundtrack. It list for $18.98 ($13.49 at Amazon) and what do I get for my good money: 10 of the 14 tracks have been previously released. Not exactly much incentive to rush out to my local Tower Records.

The songs are not even re-recorded to be more timely.

Stop the madness.

this is just out from zeropaid.com
http://www.zeropaid.com/news/articles/auto/07232003d.php

"RIAA Accelerates Subpoenas; Now 300 Per Week
posted by Dampier on July 23, 2003 @ 05:18am

The RIAA has told reporters that its plans to sue individuals trading on peer-to-peer networks have been accelerated. Because of the ease of identifying IP addresses of users primarily on the Kazaa/FastTrack networks, and the addition of staff committed to the project, the RIAA has indicated it plans to increase the current number of subpoena requests from 75 per week to 300 per week. [ZD-Net UK]
The bar has been lowered on what triggers an RIAA subpoena. Formerly, users sharing large numbers of songs were to be targeted, but now users trading just a handful of songs are also within range of a subpoena request.

To date, the circuit court serving as a clearinghouse for RIAA subpoena requests reports the total number at over 900 and counting.

The ISP's receiving the most subpoena requests are:

Comcast Cable (formerly AT&T Broadband)

Road Runner

Verizon Communications

Earthlink

AOL

It it interesting that only a handful of DSL service providers are among the initial batch - most are going to cable modem service providers as well as colleges and universities. The primary exception is Verizon. A significant number of subpoenas are for users on the east coast, which leads to speculation the RIAA is connection to Kazaa from the east coast, relying on nearby supernodes for connections.

Users are warned that relying on IP blocking software such as Peer Guardian is not sufficient protection. It is likely the RIAA is working with new IP address ranges for this project, in order to target heavy users. The IP addresses are probably masked as well, not clearly identifying the possible source as the RIAA."

It's funny that the RIAA don't realize just how incompetant and lazy the government truly is. They're are not going to want to be bothered with this bullshit. The longer the RIAA does this, the more of an enemy they'll be seen by the government.

That's why you guys should just move on to the next p2p technology. www.slsk.org is a good one. You could also try freenet. That't a completely anon. Internet within the Internet. It's nothing like kazaa, but it's what they are likely migrating to right now. www.sourceforge.net and search for freenet, install it, and then check out frost.

Thanks for the link CodeWarrior. I am curious as to what a "large amount" of files entails. I think that the most I ever had in my shared file was 200-300. I imagine the chances I'll get nailed are pretty minute, but it's a concern anyway. Hopefully Optimum Online hasn't gotten too many of these subpoenas!

Another thing, the RIAA is simply hoping to settle with people. There is no way they can go to court on 1,000 cases. This would likely cost 10 Million (every 3 weeks). (Remember they are all over the country which means hiring local attourneys at 200-350 an hour. Then you request everything you can in pre-trial discovery which they have to photocopy at $1 per page.

Then you just need to cast reasonable doubt it wasn't you. Humm, how could you do that? Maybe a free wifi node? Pay cash for it so they can't trace the transaction date.

The RIAA can't get much more than a list of files and an IP without hacking which is highly illegal. That IP is assigned to you by your ISP. The ISP's are required to keep Radius (DHCP) logins for a period of 2 years. (You might be talking to the guy who developed such a database for one of the ISP's)

All your ISP knows is that IP was assigned to this user from time X to time Y. That user is custoemr John Doe. The have no way of konwing if your running a WiFi network open to the public.

In that case, your neighbors, somebody on the sidewalk or sitting outside in their car could have shared the files.

That's before we even talk about the NHRA defense Napster almost got away with. (They couldn't use it because they planned to make mone with the service) However, most of the p2p users are home users.

At the same time the DMCA needs to get struck down by a court. Think about it folks. I could get an E-Mail list, spam 10,000 people with porn E-mail. In that E-mail I have a link to an image on my server that I have copyrighted. When the user opens that E-Mail, it gets the immage from my server, I capture their IP, and use it to get your name, phone number and address. Then I could threated to tell your wife and kids, etc. Send me 50 bucks. This is very dangerous. No telling what other kinds of scams organized crime has come up with. I would be surprised if it's not happening today. There is a reason or forefathers came up with a thing called DUE PROCESS!

Fight!

all i can say is the RIAA are going to make themself a hated enemy of everyone, especially first and foremost with those who are issued subpeonas

Why keep your music on your hardrives? why not copy them to cd or cdrw's. Keep your music sharing programs turned off and even your computers off when not in use? so, turn on machine, open program, download whatever you want, copy to cdrw for storage, then get off and out...if everyne did this, would it not make the riaa's job a whole lot more difficult?

I've done that pepe as well as wiped all of my mp3's (only five of them) with a government wipe program. I've also killed K++ and removed all traces of the program. Firewalled all the ports for a P2P program so there shouldn't be any trouble.

I still have one overlying question. If you wipe the MP3 files, wipe the file share programs and then get a subpoena, what can you do to protect yourself?

I normally just read postings like this instead of responding. Depending on the mode of file transfer, do laws against entrapment apply to a person's defense if you are sued by the RIAA? ie. If you use a program that requires a user to ask your permission before downloading...and you ask them if they are law enforcement or anything else related to the RIAA or whatever...can they lie and still sue you? If not, then why not just talk to each other via Yahoo or another IM program and transfer the file that way? I have traded piccs of the kids with people across the country. It would be just as easy to send mp3's. Hmmmm...I wonder what the file size limit is for file transfers is for those IM's???

Another strategy is to just get a WiFi-enabled router. (They cost under $100.) If you get a subpoena just claim that whoever shared files must be someone with a WiFi-enabled PC who logged on using your signal, and your IP address. The RIAA can't prove otherwise. You're off the hook.

Best solution: Listen to the radio. Don't like what your hearing? hit a button and change channels or turn it off!

crosshairs2003-You can send files via aol, icq, or even your e-mail-one at a time (slowly)-but if you are still getting your tunes through a file share program, you are still at risk.

Pepe...thanks for the response. I agree that you are still at risk but if you talk to the people first...hence the entrapment part of the question. Maybe the RIAA will offer bounties on file sharers...lol

Questor83, In my area, radio station selection is not very good. One country, one rock, and one NPR station come thru clearly. I have thought about getting the new satellite radio thing but good coverage is only in certain areas...or so I have been told by the sales people.

Here is part of an email I received from a friend of mine in India. Thought I'd share it with everyone.

You guys should not worry about the RIAA. If the RIAA shuts you down, me and my other friends will be right here sharing our files. Right now I am sharing more than 20GB of music. Lets see how the RIAA will shut me down in India.

radical1,
I could say similar things about El Salvador. The RIAA fails to recognize the grand scope of internet piracy, they think that even sueing say 5-10 thousand ppl or more will actually deter a WORLDWIDE problem.

Obviously they cannot sue a million people. So they are trying to make examples out of a few to scare the rest. Looks like they are targeting people in universities because they offer better publicity (word gets around pretty quickly in schools).

Question: As with most ISPs, mine provides a dynamic IP address. How can they prove it was me sharing files? Does the ISP actually know who had a particular IP address at a particular day and time?

Also, are the owner/administrator) going to be held responsible for what happens on their network - even if it shared? Does that mean that all the coffehouses like Starbucks will be sued for all the people downloading files while using their wireless signal? This is getting absurd.

absurd is an understatment.

I think the reason that the RIAA is targeting universities is that college students are the only ones naive enough to be intimidated by the threat of a lawsuit like this. If you receive a subpoena, don't settle. Just polititely say that you've stopped sharing files and you agree not to do it anymore. *wink, wink* No way they're gonna go to the expense and risk of dragging you into court and trying to sue you for millions of dollars. They'd open themselves up to a class action lawsuit. Also, you could counter-sue for pain and suffering.

Why are they suing University students? If they really crave publicity, sue every corporation that has an employee engaged in P2P ultra-criminal activity. Nah. Just sue college students, that way we know p2p is bad. Because college students do bad things! damn kids!

You know what's funny as hell? The RIAA is putting pressure on the lebanese prime minister. HA-HA.

government for the corporations, by the corporations. NOW YOU'VE SEEN IT.

vinylman , a "large" amount of files has now been set at 5 or more, given that a supoena was issued to a person sharing 5 songs. "It is substantial in our opinion." Liar.

As far as them knowing if you shared one of their songs, I understand that they can:
A. Look at the title and supoena you. Shortly thereafter they will realize that "Illegal song.mp3" is an ill-named copy (for our own amusement, perhaps?) of your favorite mp3 file of you belching.

B. Download the song from you. In which case, I question their tactic

About the comment about having spy cameras in our houses watching our every move:

1. Read the policeware, tcpa article
2. Cameras at every intersection in my neighborhood.
3. Wal-Mart now has more video of it's customers than any place on earth.
4. Just find one of those websites that lets you view satellite images of earth. Type in your address and see your house from space. Imagine what our military has.

The ONLY place not currently being watched by anyone, in anyway whatsoever is your own home. At that's only if you stay off the phone, because according the Patroit Act and it's sequel you can be tapped whenever the feds get bored with their real job.

Also, you may have to wrap yourselves in ice, because infared technology can also be used.

In which case, you probably aren't being watched if you lock yourself in a closet, but don't be so sure.

thank you verizon, for at least fighting while you lose.

Here's a question about this "legal" process. If you are sued to pay X amount of dollars and you don't, and you don't even go on to settle, could you then be sent to jail for not paying or even settling?

Yes, I believe you can. Which also beckons the question: If a University student is sued for 950 million dollars and in defiance of all that's reasonable, he can't make the payment even though he makes $8 an hour, will he have to serve jailtime? One year for every dollar? Every million dollars? Every hundred million?

It'd be like Harrison Ford's Fugitive, except for downloading mandy moore instead of killing his wife.

A lot of people fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan are in their mid-20's. Heck if they can fight a real war, we all can fight the RIAA.
United We Stand!

Thousands of kids were sexually abused by priests. But what are we doing in the courts? Suing people for downloading files. What has the world come to.

It would be interesting to see someone, in an act of martyrdom, say "fuck it" and go to jail. like a college student or something, just to see the reaction that the RIAA gets.

can't you just select hide and they can't see your files?

I suspect that most people in the U.S. just stopped sharing files but still download. That still leaves the rest of the world to download files from. Eventually this whole nonsense will blow over and it'll be back to business as usual...

I am almost ready to let out a nervous laugh at all this madness by the RIAA. Almost. These people are invading lives and profiting from it. It is funny and sick at the same time. I just don't need a call from my ISP telling me the RIAA is calling...

here's some food for thought... what happens when this generation, I like to call it the Un-generation, grows up. Do you think we will become like our predecesors and want to ban this, or will we destroy these creations as our ancestors look on?

As more and more of this generation approaches voting age, they'll dismantle the DMCA, if not sooner.

I have been following this site for the past few weeks. I am glad to see that everyone is getting pissed at those whiney RIAA assholes. I have been using articles from this site on mine. Hope you don't mind. A little background on me I am have been webcasting for about 4 years now and as of starting this week I will not support any RIAA artist at all. So are they going to come after me for NON-RIAA Members? Can someone answer me that. Also I belong to emusic. Are they going to come after me for that also. Can anyone answer this

Smoke and Mirrors my friends. The RIAA is only doing the lawsuits to put on a good show. They are going on a basic premise, that the American public is STONE BLIND STUPID. Make a few examples, and the rest will be SOOOOO scared they won't do it. You might get a subpoena, but I bet if you put up a fight like a cornered animal, they will let it drop. Smoke and Mirrors.

Hmmm... If I create a bunch of fake mp3s named as top 10 songs, and they sue me for having copyrighted materials, can I countersue them? Hmmm.....

This is some useful info:


http://clearstatic.org:2396/node/view/185

This is some useful info:


http://clearstatic.org:2396/node/view/185

This is some useful info:


http://clearstatic.org:2396/node/view/185

I found our Spanish counterparts.
http://www.internautas.org/
(It is in spanish, but you can translate it using babelfish)

Also here is some news of what the Spaniards are doing in their country
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,59720,00.html

Thats about it. Someone should put those links up.

is there anyway to know if you're on the list of people who are gonna get sued because of downloading by the RIAA?

truehope01, see:
http://www.zeropaid.com/news/articles/auto/07232003g.php

MP3 Is Not A Crime!


truehope01,

there is a way. the link below is where you have to go. On that page there is a link and you need to sent up a "Pacer" account. The access fee is .07 cents a page.

http://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/

It seems like too much trouble to me, I was curious at first to see if I was on the list but to be honest F**k it. If a guy comes to my door so be it.

The RIAA can kiss my hairy bean bag.

TechTV has an initial list.

http://www.techtv.com/news/culture/story/0,24195,3484600,00.html

Messed up, to say the least.

In my opinion, the only reason the RIAA still exists is because of the political power it holds. Remove that, and they will fall.

We need lobbying reform.

MusourenkaL
You're right about the need for lobbying by the people,for the people, and all the rest, but there's an old saying..follow the money. Money and other perqs are what gets the influence. Very few lobbylists ply the politicos with hohos.If you are Mr. Moneybags (and an arsehole) you can get access...if you are sweetness and light and have no money...you get zilch. The RIAA and MPAA get access and have influence because they have money or represent media moguls with money. You bankrupt them, and their calls don't get answered. The assets of the masses (we are the masses) are votes and exposing crooks in the media. The boycott will work if people just follow it and don't spend their hard earned money on the crap that the MPAA and RIAA and their arsehold masters try to foist on us. Have I ever bought any music by Metallica or Madonna? No...I don't even LISTEN to these arseholes. I have bought CDs from AC/DC, because they rock...but if their record company is a member of the RIAA, then, until the boycott is over, I won't buy any. Even if you really love an artist and a grou[. their CD will still be around after the boycott (and it will probably be cheaper then too). We already are having an effect on Sony. Their numbers were awful this morning and are getting worse. We MUST bankrupt the BIG 5 and the quicker the better. To kill a cancer, you can cut off the blood supply to it. Money is blood to these malignant arseholes. If you are in doubt about whether an artist's record label is an RIAA, play it safe and assume they are until you check it out. Their CD will still be available after the boycott (I know I already said it...this is the "hook" of this tune). REMEMBER, THEIR CDS WILL BE THERE AFTER BOYCOTT AND PROBABLY CHEAPER...
BOYCOTT THE BASTARDS! BAN THE BASTARDS!

Let em fuck with me. They'll be back to the stone age when there servers are wiped.

Some court victories would help. I'm glad that MIT and Boston College are fighting them. Also, if some of these people who are about to get subpoena'd will fight them, the RIAA may back down. How many people can they sue before there's a backlash?

Here's an AP story about the first subpoena notices:
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/breaking_news/6371621.htm
Some quotes:
"Outside legal experts urged the music industry to carefully select targets for its earliest lawsuits. Several lawyers said they were doubtful the RIAA ultimately will choose to sue computer users like the Pate family.

'If they end up picking on individuals who are perceived to be grandmothers or junior high students who have only downloaded in isolated incidents, they run the risk of a backlash,' said Christopher Caldwell, a lawyer in Los Angeles who works with major studios and the Motion Picture Association of America."

"Barnes expressed some concern about a possible lawsuit but was confident that 'more likely they will probably come out with a cease and desist order' to stop him sharing music files on the Internet.

'I think they're trying to scare people,' Barnes said."

As I've said all along, it's about intimidation. We need to show them we're not afraid of them. They're not going to sue. They'll back down.

Here's a good link about defending against these RIAA subpoenas:
http://www.subpoenadefense.org/

a subpoena is not an admission of guilt so dont take it as one....they couldnt kill the snake so instead they will beat the citizens instead? is everyone one of these suits going to be found in favor of the riaa ,doubt it,also they are banking on a few high profile wins against joe downloader and some college kids to put a scare into the masses....DONT FALL FOR IT!!!! they have the money but we have the numbers

Great article IFeelFree! It begs the idea - I think the general public would be more supportive of the RIAA if they decided to use Cease & Desist orders FIRST, and then sue only if the person kept sharing music.

great link ifeelfree...and much thanks!
The other info was really good as well.
Gee..we have some great folks on our sides...they pretty much have the sleaze market cornered on their side!

OK couple things.. I love my two cents heh. I just looked at the list and im not on it, but some people i have downloaded from is.

kazaa
This is what I do anyways, I limit my upload to one, and my download like 6. So it ties up the upload and no one wants to upload from me.

Also, ther was an post on one of the articles here.. I wish there was a way to get to previous artcles. Anyways it stated that MP3 is an inferior data file to a CD. Therefore it is considered a different product and by the definition of the copy right acts, downloading mp3 is not illegal. So here we are, the RIAA is trying to get us for doing nothing illegal.

You know, I am really disgusted by the government [well I always am] but now more than ever. Instead of doing important stuff, like a better healthcare system, or increasing our popularity in the world, or making everyone EQUAL, what do they do, sue everyone and put everyone in jail. We are a joke to everyone. The world precieves us as a joke as well as a threat. And you know what, ¡good! because when you elect dumfuks like bush, cheney, etc this is what you get. There are about 190 countries.. 1 down 189 more to go. Soon we are going to find ourselves in the biggest war, and this one wont be as nice as the gulf wars. If the populas is in jail, who the hell is going to fight?
Another bullshit move by a bullshit government for a bullshit minority.

Run for congress. The true way to change stuff in this country is if you do it yourself. The RIAA will be here for a long time. If the anti-kazaa acts get passed, it will be a long time before it reaches the supreme courts and then they take forever and a day on stuff. Short alternative is to either elect them out of office, or run. I woul seriously run, but I am a 22 year old and the Const. forbids my rights to participate in the government.

TAKE ACTION NOW!

All they are filing are civil suits, right? They aren't charging any criminal suits. So, how are these people going to jail?

Or, are you talking in the future if that bill passes? If that bill passes, wouldn't the people who get nailed now be immune to it being a felony? Has anyone seen any information regarding whether or not the RIAA is making any criminal charges against these peopel?

diab999:
Everything I've read is that this purely a civil matter. A bill has been introduced in congress to effectively make sharing copyrighted material a felony (punishable by up to 5 years in prison) but I hear that it's unlikely to pass.

diab999 - Yes they are civil suits, which means big money but no jail.

And no, even if they passed the bill today making sharing music a felony, you could not get busted if you did it before it passed.

Isn't it a felony now? Don't the ammount of damages dtermine whether or not it is a felony?

Just curious. That guy that got nailed for distributing The Hulk is being charged with a felony and is facing up to 5 years in prison.

I doubt they will start sending people to jail. What do you think the chances of a judge sending someone to jail for sharing music are?

diab999 what vinylman is talking about is called "EX POST FACTOR" wounderful law which means that after a law is passed..those who have violated this in the past cannot be prosecuted.

and if the fukin government tries to pull shit on you... that law suit...all i can say is wow..


this is an article from CNET http://news.com.com/2100-1027-1020876.html?tag=nl

and it has on there a couple artists who have joined RIAA... EVE, MISSY ELLIOT, SHAKIRA the DIXIE CHICKS, and dozens more. I guess this strikes me that they got the dixie chicks. i mean the dixie chicks who are vocal about a lot of stuff.. kinda seems to me that there was something that went down behind the doors.


as a question...has anyone downloaded the new kazaa's? are they really private or just say they are? also does zone alarm pro help as well?

DONT SIT ON UR ASS! STAND UP AND TELL THOSE FUKERS OFF!

OK - riddle me this one: what if the song(s) I have downloaded years ago (thank you Napster) were from out of print CD's? Hence, stuff you can't purchase. How is the RIAA going to handle that?
I have only purchased 2 CD's in the past 18 months simply because there is NOTHING out there worth spending $16-$20 on. I'm sorry, I feel that there are bigger fish out there to deal with than something like this.

opheial624:

If it's copyrighted, it's illegal for you to have it (if you didn't purchase it). That's the copyright law but, of course, it's stupid if you can't even buy the CD! That's my argument for file-sharing anyway: I'd gladly pay a reasonable fee to download music I like (some of which is obscure) if there were no restrictions on how I used the files. But I can't. That option is not available thanks to the backward, greedy thinking of the RIAA dinosaurs.

opheial624:

If it's copyrighted, it's illegal for you to have it (if you didn't purchase it). That's the copyright law but, of course, it's stupid if you can't even buy the CD! That's my argument for file-sharing anyway: I'd gladly pay a reasonable fee to download music I like (some of which is obscure) if there were no restrictions on how I used the files. But I can't. That option is not available thanks to the backward, greedy thinking of the RIAA dinosaurs.

Sorry about the multiple posts. Connection problems.

Those artists can only show support the action, how ever they can not sue. For they no longer own their copyrights. So therefore they really don't have a voice in the matter at all for they are now just employees. LOL. Kind of a smack in the face I think. They produce a piece of art, their employer (record label)makes almost all of the money on it and if someone steals it, they can't even sue them, because they gave up there rights. Buhahaha.

MP3 Is not a Crime!

Truly scary but now the RIAA (read Jack Booted Thugs) are trying to intimadate parents:

Headline: Music-Sharing Targets Parents

WASHINGTON - Parents, roommates — even grandparents — are being targeted in the music industry's new campaign to track computer users who share songs over the Internet, bringing the threat of expensive lawsuits to more than college kids.

*read the entire story here:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=541&ncid=541&e=6&u=/ap/20030724/ap_on_he_me/downloading_music_2

It's so obvious what they are doing I just hope more people will see through this and not be afraid. Stand up for your rights!

Would you, however, take them to court if you get sued? You can settle out of court for probably much less. Would you take the chance if they offered you a $15,000 settlement, or risk losing millions by fighting them?

Although I hate the RIAA, I really see no viable defense if you get sued. If anyone thinks otherwise, please share your ideas... Who knows, I may be one of them that gets nailed.

diab999:

If they served me a subpoena I would respond that I stopped sharing files and promise never to do it in the future (*wink, wink*) and offer them a $1 settlement. If they balked, I would make them sue me. Most likely, they'd dropped it. If they proceeded, I'd fight it. There are several possible defenses:
1) The Audio Home Recording Act of 1991 allows for "non-commercial use" of digital recordings.
2) There was no way for me to know at the time I was downloading which songs were copyrighted and which were not. With all the publicity I have since stopped downloading and deleted the files.
3) I have wireless router and someone must be downloading files using my ISP connection.

Of course, at this point I'd consult a lawyer and determine the best option. Also, I might hide my financial assets in case the RIAA won. (I don't own real estate but I have some savings.) However, 95% of all judgements are never collected anyway. Even if the RIAA won, just let them try to collect from me.

I love this site! Just what the "free" world needs. Now seeing that I know alot about law and the likes, I'll put out some free info for you all. First on the list, the Free Trade Act of 1993. Under this act, if you recieve goods without paying for the service or the item(s) which was obtained, then you cannot be punished by federal, state, or local laws. Second of all, under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act of 1998, yes it is true that anything that is copyrighted and is downloaded is considered illegal. But are you ready for this little bit of info? There is a loophole in it! It does not supercede the FTA, nor does it amend it in any way, shape, or form! Whereas if for instance, I ripped a CD to my hard drive, then placed the file(s) on the internet for others to download at no expense to them using a P2P or other file-sharing program that is free, then I cannot be charged with violating any laws or acts! Another thing to consider, is the Copyright Laws themselves. This will enlighten some of you who may be of an older age, and for those of you who may be younger but are inclined to listen to their music. Stated in the CL of 1976, any works (ANY!) published after Jan. 1, 1978, are not protected by CL, and any music that is "fixed" after Feb. 15, 1972. So download those oldies all you like, and tell the labels and the RIAA to put that into their pipes and smoke it! Oh, one more thing. Jonle1 is correct in his statement. MP3 files are considered an inferior media type, and what's even more funny, MP3's are NOT covered anywhere in the Copyright Laws! Another post stated about "burning the song's to CD-R(RW)s". After researching a little bit, I found that if you do burn them to disc, and you do not sell copies of the disc, then you are absolutely blameless!

Now for my finishing remarks. If you want to really fight the RIAA, the MPAA, and all those other groups out there taking away your RIGHTS, yes, even the government, then use their own weapons against them. We all know what hacking is right? Well, under the DMCA and in specific, the CFAA of 1996, anyone who "intentionally accesses a computer without authorization, or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains information from any protected computer" is PUNSIHABLE BY THE LAW! The definition of a "protected computer" is that which uses any type of data encryption to "protect" the file(s) or the computer itself. Thus, they are HACKING your machine if your files are "protected" and they try and gain access to them! If the government wishes to get involved in it, by federal law, they MUST physically issue you a warrant, allowing them to PHYSICALLY look into your computer, with you being there to provide witness that they served the warrant without extending the bounds of said warrant!

Here are the tools people. Use them and FIGHT BACK!!!!

- DoomSayer

"....and there shall come one, one who will speak your doom...."

(Not Copyrighted, so use and distrbute freely!)

DoomSayer:

Good points. To that I would add the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 which allows copying of audio recordings for "noncommercial use by a consumer". I'd like to see someone who's been subpoena'd, and has a sharp lawyer, challenge the RIAA in court. I bet they could win.

Savings? I thought you spent all your savings buying a Metallica CD that someone stole from you didn't you>?

I don't think there is a whole lot of sympathy for the RIAA out there. Just looked at foxnews.com and found an article on a subpoena of a 67 year old grandfather. The article said that the president of the RIAA "did not expect this". Also, today on CNN (an RIAA member) they asked a reporter for time about the court suits. His reaction was negative toward the RIAA and you could see that the reporter was being prompted to have the Time reporter move to the next topic.
I have been reading about the RIAA in Cnet, many groups are afraid of them because they will sue them out of exsistance right or wrong. But it looks like they are losing in the court of public opinion. I don't know if you noticed but the MPAA is taking a different tact by setting up movie download sites.

Heh. I mostly share "christian" music. I wonder if I recieved a subpoena(sp?) if I could use freedom of Religon to fight the RIAA.

I could hear it now... "Your honor, I was only attempting to prosletize (again SP?) my fellow man. Its my freedom of religon to share the good news. My rights are being trampled!"

QUOTE
********
Date: July 23, 2003 @ 1:17 PM
I am so glad I found this site. I have been a huge critic of the RIAA for years. My biggest criticism is that of CD burners. They are standard issue of every computer of the factory and yet the RIAA stand on this is silent?

The P-2-P genie is already of the bottle. The old, antiquated music industry simply needs to adapt and turn the corner. What better way to alienate your already weakened customer base then by threatening to take them to court?

The biggest question I have is somewhat of a legal one. Exactly how can the RIAA *prove * that “I” downloaded anything? I would imagine that my computer is like a car; If I lend my car to a friend and he gets a ticket while driving it… would I have to pay for his ticket? They can’t prove anyone did anything? It’s all so stupid and trivial within the context of all the other problems we are facing.


W.C. Minor
*******
I just have to say to this person that you took the words out of my mouth.. Right on partner!! they can't prove that I downloaded the music.. What if my dog did it. What if I ripped it to my computer with a CD that I OWN.. hmm.. interesting...

peace and fight for your right for music!

kudos to doomsayer for quoting me.. i feel special And to return that.. one more thing to add to his list... the Patriot Act. We all know it.. its a useless act that takes a lot of our freedom away. However.. hacking into computers are covered in it.

While the USAPA is the biggest bullshit there is, and we loose a lot of our rights, it does have one thing in it. True that the government can now basicaly do whatever it wants, because of this act, no one else can. If an outside party were to hack into someone's computer, this could be seen as a terrorist activity.

At a time like today, where everyone wants to kill Americans, and the fact that RIAA is mostly foriegn, and argument can be made that this is terrorism. They want to jail everyone, and therefore by having everyone in jail, they can easialy try to launch an assult. Ofcourse this is farfeched... but it leads to ideas.

For every move the RIAA makes, there are infinite counter-strikes we can make. LETS EXPLORE THOSE!

In response to the suggestion of purchasing a wireless router in the event of being sued, keep this in mind.

They are launching "Civil" lawsuits, which equates down to this, the Burden of proof required for a conviction is significantly lower. This basically means, that an attempt to establish reasonible doubt will not be effective in the least. If these were criminal lawsuits, then yes, reasonable doubt would be all that would be required . But as stated before, these are civil lawsuits, which means the verdict is going to be decided by who's side is more convincing logically, and logically, stating to the judge that "I have a wireless intranetwork at home, which is wide open for someone to park across the road from my house, do a frequency scan with their wireless NIC in their laptop, and download music and other copyrighted material, without fear of being caught" is less plausible, and will more than likely result in your lawyer advising you that your best option would be to try and settle and cut your losses. While it may be appealing to try and play the David to the RIAA's Goliath, Numbers will not mean anything, Tiem will. Education on the matter is the only defense. Both knowing your rights, (and for those who constantly need their MP3 fix) knowing how to defend yourself from ever facing litigation will be key. Freenet in particular, is currently the safest means to share files, as opposed to the now compromised Kazaa, and Kazaa-lite(Kazaa-lite users, while hiding under the default handle that the program assigns, are at the same amount of risk that Regular Kazaa Users are). Freenet, while not exactly the most User Friendly, or streamlined program is completely anonomous. Despite the fact that I am no supporter of the RIAA, and am participating in the boycott myself, I try and place this bit of information on the table as clear headed and Objective as possible. Be Well.
D.

I just took a peek at the initial subpeona list and I see that the majority of the users being targeted were on Kazaa. Being a WinMX user myself (and not seeing any mention of WinMX on the list) I decided to take a peek at the WinMX terms of use. In the terms of use they have the line "This software may be used for personal non-commercial purposes only. ANY OTHER USES OF THIS SOFTWARE ARE EXPRESSLY FORBIDDEN." In my opinion, this means that the RIAA can't legally file a subpoena on a WinMX user. In order to see what I have on my hard drive they would have to use the WinMX software. It seems to me that using the WinMX software to spy on users for the purpose of taking legal action against them doesn't fall under the umbrella of "personal non-commercial purposes", therefore, the information they collected could not be legally used against you because it was collected as a direct result of violating a legally binding agreement they entered in to by using the software. Anybody see any loopholes in this arguement?

So let me get this straight... if i buy a CD, i am legally allowed to make a copy for personal use, which would include puting the tracks on my HD. Now if I'm a "dumb" user and I don't know how to pull the tracks from the CD to the HD then I could, per say, download the same tracks that match the CD...

so what happens if I "lose" or "broke" the CD. Do I have to, legally speaking, delete the songs from the HD, or do they still belong to me since I legally purchased the CD? Seems to me that if I paid for the CD I am allowed to listen to those tracks indefinitely.

Look captain, up ahead, it's a LOOPHOLE

Noone understands the intricacies of what you can and cannot do with a CD you buy legally, but some thing people do agree on:

1. If you pay, you have the right to listen to that disc for as long as the physical disc is in your posession. If you sell or give away this disc you can no longer listen to it legally, and must either transfer any copies along with the disc or delete them.

2. If the disc is broken, you can still listen to any copies you made. If you want, you can sell the broken disc (or rather, the concept of a broken disc) provideing you transfer a working copy for the buyer to use. As with selling the physical disc, you have to either transfer or delete any other copies.

3. You can make as many copies of a CD you paid for as you want, but you must keep these copies yourself. You cannot sell them, lend them or give them away, except as part of a transaction involveing the CD as described in 1) or 2). (Unless it is a protected CD, in which case you can still copy it but the tools nessicary to do so are illegal, or at least in a grey area).

4. However, you are free to lend the origional CD and all copies to friends, provideing you do not keep any copies for yourself during the lending.

The basic rule is that you can do whatever you want with the CD, provideing that if you make copies these copies are always owned by the same person who owns the origional.

diab999: "I doubt they will start sending people to jail. What do you think the chances of a judge sending someone to jail for sharing music are?"

Don't doubt it. Judges are slaves to money. If the MPAA says "send this person to jail and we'll give you $10,000" you better believe the fucking judge will do it.

money talks...
the majority of the population is scared to fuckin death already...this needs to fuckin stop...why isn't anyone fighting back...i can't do much...but i know there are some computer wizzes out there...please do something...

goldenpi:

I lend out a lot of CDs. You're saying I've got to keep track of which ones I have made copies for and delete the copies, then re-copy when the CD is returned? Get real. Nobody's gonna do that. Doesn't matter what the law is. Is there some MP3 police who are going to check my PC? A law is meaningless if it's not enforced.

musicfreedom:

You've just implied that the majority of judges will take bribes to send someone to jail. Do you know that for a fact, or are you just being cynical? Do you work in the legal system and have observed this yourself? How do you know this?

yourworstmemory wrote:
...i know there are some computer wizzes out there...please do something...

Its already been done. Its called Freenet and is absolutely anonymous, but not very user friendly right now. Only a matter of time before someone makes it user friendly for the masses.
Check it out at http://www.freenetproject.org/

Does anyone know if the list of those subpoened, at least the original 871, is listed anywhere, i.e., besides through Pacer? Thanks.

Is it feasible, since they so proudly proclaim they hold 90% of the music royalites, to get a bunch of us together and file a class-action lawsuit based on having a monopoly?

It would be interesting to see some geographic numbers on the lawsuits being filed.

And, these people that the AP made aware of their lawsuits - Doesn't your ISP have to let you know someone subpoened you? So, wouldn't you have a little bit of warning before getting bitch slapped with a lawsuit?

diab999:

The problem is that most of the copyrights are held by 5 different companies so it's not a monopoly.

Yes, I've read that people are being notified by their ISPs that a subpoena has been received from the RIAA requesting their identity.

Actually, I worked for the Justice Department for 15 years and saw numerous judges taking bribes. Unfortunately they're "in bed with the feds", which is what we used to say.

Feisar:

Excuse for being naive, but if you observed judges taking bribes, I'm guessing other people observed this as well. How come noone bothered to turn them in? I believe it's still a serious crime for a judge to accept a bribe. I would think that someone might be be upset about it.

Judges Payoffs.

it's all a political games. Bribes do not come in the form of money under the table. Bribes are fun little things like getting judges daughters into nice Ivy League schools. Bribes are expensive golf trips disguised as working holidays.

The people in power know who to play the game and are really slick at doing it.

They may have the money but we have the numbers.

MP3 Is Not A Crime!

did the judges take bribes from the defense or the prosecution Feisar?

I have been following this horse crap since the Napster day's.. and it has totally gotten out of hand. The RIAA has stooped to the lowest level, going after the people that keep them in buisness. The only reason there going after us is because the only way they (RIAA) make money is off album sales. But it's NEVER occured to them that maybe the high price of crap music/art work/bands could be the reason of the decline in sales and not to mention the economy.

The majority of songs I have downloaded are songs that you can not find on an artist's album, most of them are live recording, never put out there, but I hear even a song at a concert is copyrighted, BUT the whole thing here with any song that's been downloaded is WE ARE NOT MAKING MONEY FROM SHARING THIS MUSIC... isn't that the reason why songs are copyrighted, so no one can record them and sell them? - WE ARE MAKING ZERO PROFIT

Also, what if I have the cd's of the songs that I've downloaded? Didn't I pay my $20 bucks already, why do I have to pay again? Plus the fact the only reason I have a lot of the cd's I have is beacuse of the Internet, I don't think I would have found half the music I listen to if it wasn't for the internet.

AND, if I like the band, I'm sure as shit going to go out and by the album cause it's WORTH it (I will always try to find the lowest price though, cd's are outrageously priced).. it's not like I can go down to my local Tower records and sample say a "Coheed & Cambria" tune to find out if I like it.. I got that FROM THE INTERNET.. found there website and bought it! No thanks to the RIAA.. FUCK EM.. FIGHT BACK..

I know if I get busted by them I'M FIGHTING.. they'll wish they never found me! Not like I have the funds, but I have the brains and the info. to fight them... MUCH THANKS TO THIS SITE FOR THE INFO., this will be a HUGE help to many people that are getting SCREWED by the
Real Ignorant Asshole Assoc.(AKA - RIAA)

well the democrats nor the republicans will be of no help. much as we can blame bush, the truth is al gore wouldn't be any better. i personally didn't vote for either because both bush and gore didn't represent me. we right now need a politician that shares our view points and can pull some strings.

Well, a couple of questions...

1. What gives the RIAA the authority to sue anyone? Do THEY own these "copyrites"? Aren't they a conglomeration of Music companies that own the copyrights? Wouldn't the OWNER of the copyrights have to sue the individual violators of copyright infringement?

2. When does the RIAA claim I broke the law? When I downloaded the song?

3. IF I delete the music, have I corrected the wrong? Or have I commited a crime I can NEVER fix?

4. If I download a song today, does my ISP provider have a record of this transaction for some period of time?

Just the tip of the icebrerg...Fight