Students at Michigan Technological University had a highly educational, "It's an RIAA Day' experience when they turned up for orientation week.

And it was, "the stupidest meeting I had ever been to," a student who had the pleasure of being present told us.

"They had this whole act set, how two kids were downloading the Matrix and all kinds of music, and then their 'RA' walks up and says 'Do you know you can go to jail for that'?"

Right.

"The kid saying this stuff didn't look like he bought it and later bashed the DMCA," our informant continued. "Everyone cheered."

You'll remember that a MTU student was, "sued by the RIAA last December for $98.6 billion", he added.

"Nobody here actually knows what he did, though. People tell all kinds of rumors; stuff like, 'I heard that he uploaded four thousand songs onto a server and offered them for download'."

No doubt that'll stop, following the RIAA orientation skit. We're equally sure the RIAA paid the staff - and performing student - for their time and effort.

"And it was, "the stupidest meeting I had ever been to," a student who had the pleasure of being present told us."

I'm glad to know students aren't buying the shit the RIAA is trying to feed them. Fuck those greedy bastards.

Am I the only one that thinks a share of less than 10000 songs in small?

I have several college students working for me and none of them show any concern of what the RIAA is attempting to do. They all say the same thing and don't seem to even give any of this a second thought. Any time I mention posts from this site or try to bring up the topic of what the RIAA is doing they just laugh at me! Is there something these students know that we don't ?

All they keep telling me is not to worry about this. They seem , to me anyways, to be throwing caution to the wind, but seem extremely confident that the RIAA hasn't got a leg to stand on. They feel that even if they were to win a case against filesharring that it wouldn't have an impact because the trend is growing beyond anyones control.

I hope they are right!

I have downloaded some of his songs today.....for some of you older farts! I recommend him.....but read what he has to say about getting support as an indie artist!
http://artists.mp3s.com/artist_calendar/201/201967.html

I found his music off mp3.com/au

If you read their copy right laws it says "download all you want, but only for your own use! What the hell is the big problem with dong that here in this country?

Sorry for some reason it did'nt go to that page Patrick J Murphy soloist Jazz artist

http://www.mp3.com.au/artist.asp?id=10868

try that one and click on his web page!

well I guess I can't get the link sorry again! But anyway this guy talked about how much support he was getting and that he was doing VERY well! By the way his cd had 15 songs GOOD MUSIC for $7.50
And He allowed you to download and preview WOW!!!!!!!!

RightoShare, we moved our daughter into her dorm this weekend, and I talked to some of her friends about this.

They looked at me like I had 2 heads and just got off the last transport from Mars. They laughed at me, and rolled their eyes.

I told one of them it would probably not be a good idea to jump on file sharing right away, especially since the RIAA was going nuts on it right now.

They all laughed out loud and told me they were more concerned about viruses than the RIAA.

I don't think they care one bit, and aren't the least bit concerned about lawsuits. My 15 yr old son's friends
are the same way.

Maybe they DO know something we don't.

Have an RIAA day ?

Have at this RIAA!!!

WABBITMAN

well i think the reason kids dont care is this. the federal law protects from frivolus lawsuits or ridiculus fines. how are you going to get 150,000 bucks out of a kid who on a normal day has 20 bucks to his name. i mean i think it comes down to, yaht he riaa is suing, yah therye goign to win. theyc ant jail you for it cause its a misdemenor, and they cant get the money out of you cause you dont have it to begin with. so that blows theyre whole case against you out of the water. its the one time when i enjoy being a poor college kid.

nailed! Its not the kids the will ring out! Its the parents who don't have a clue! they know the parents will cough up the money for the kids.

I was in WallMart the other day and these two older men in their 60's were buying blank cd's....we got to talking said they were very excited about finding this site to download old music they could'nt find from the 40's. Im not sure where they were getting it but it was most likely Kazza!

RIAA Day!!! Whoa, what an excellent idea. We could make it a national holiday for students and high school kids. They could celebrate it by downloading songs of RIAA's favorite artists including chief whiners; Metallica, Madonna and some others.

my cousin is kind of stupid, but she told me that a bunch of her friends that go to pit were "sued" and now she won't use any p2p and neither will any of her friends

thats the unfortunate part. has anyone thoguht to bring them up on monopoly charges? is it still illeagle to be a monopoly in the us.

My guess would be that the kids don't realize that it can happen to them. Most teens just ignore anything bad by thinking it can't happen to them. Until it does. As adults most of us have learned that it CAN happen to us. Take the time to teach them so they know the truth and how to fight the RIAA instead of ignoring them and risking a lawsuit.

As for lawsuits not having any effect because you're always broke is not a good reason for ignoring the danger. Sure the RIAA will probably win and you won't have the money to pay but that doesn't make it a good situation. That follow you around for a long time, including liens and garnished wages.

I posted this elsewhere, but it goes much better here.

More and more I realize that these people need Baghdad Bob as their spokesman "Those infidel file sharers are cowering in fear! Our CSS is too strong for them! We are suing them and the judge has already ruled in our favor without the need for due process. There ARE no civil rights but ours to make money."

Maybe he should've gotten up on stage and made that speech at the end.

lol..crawdd..Baghdad Bob..that's classic! Rofl..lmao..stressful day, so I needed that.
RIAA DAY..
Hmm, I could structure that...
First, tell the kids they WILL be graded on this (otherwise they don't pay attention)
Then, you have a list of all the labels that are members, and a list of the more prominent artist scroll by...
And then, you tell them that if anyone EVER uploads,downloads, or BUYS any songs from any of these people, this will be what any such person will look like:
http://www.pacificsites.com/~lakenews/LCFP%20Graphics/head_up_ass.gif

I look for the word RIAA to become a slang term for lousy or really bad...like:
My tooth hurts bad, it's hurts
RIAA bad.
And, we could respell diseases in their honor, diaRIAA, gonoRIAA.
amenoRIAA, rhinorRIAA,galactoRIAA,
seborRIAA,pyoRIAA,dysmenoRIAA...
and on and on.

Code, where did you get that pic of me?? I didn't authorize anyone to put in on file sharing!! hee.

so where do I get a list of artist, I need one for some freinds and coworkers. I have a coworker that is a buddy of mine and is a little worried about this whole thing. (I by chance happened to catch her @ tech tv looking at the supeona list) and came to find out she is a little worried, for her kids were down loading music. I told her about this site and emailed her a link so she will probably come by and maybe even post. so a list would be nice for some one like my buddy. and any one else who may be window watching.

keep the faith and never stop rocking.

mp3.com.au rocks!!!!!!

lets try that link again
www.mp3.com.au

nailedshutpunk -- The RIAA has already been found to be a monopoly several times by the FTC, not to mention the Judge that heard the Napster case.

What we have to prove is collusion, restraint of trade, anti-competitive activity and, oh, for extra punitive damages there is always false testimony to Congress and defrauding the government.

Don't worry. It's coming. The clock is ticking.

I'm glad I'm almost done with my college experience. From an election that damn near threw this country into a constitutional crisis, to the worst act of terrorism in the history of modern civilization, to the unprecedented actions of a conglomerate willing to sue 60 million of their own customers, my college years have been wraught with insanity. I will leave the academic world this coming May into the softest job market in two generations, and with almost no hope for the future of mankind.

Today's college students are a lot more perceptive to reality and level headed than their parents generation. Now's not the time to talk to them, as the MTU skit and several posts to this article have said. Now's the time to listen.

The more viewpoints we gather, the more educated we as boycotters become.

Everyone should check out what Ben Affleck has to say on file sharing. Not only is he a award winning actor and writer...he's also shares. A voice from Hollywood that actually makes sense. Check the link for the video courtasy of Tech TV.

http://cgi.techtv.com/mediamodule?action=view&version=20030718130529&video_src=/thescreensavers/2003/ss030821qq&width=320&height=240&vidsection=3200042&add_date=1058425200&start=&end=&duration=&bitrates='

lol, on my second view, I'm in shock that I havn't seen Ben picketing outside his local record stores by now.

Ben is smart

I saw a Robbie concert on TV yesterday. A huge field, packed full of fans like sardines. Thousands of them. He had to do an extra concert because demand was so high. Theres the problem. All those people buying every CD Robbie makes, and tickets for the concert. The same for every major artist or group. Billions of pounds, dollars and euros. The fans spend, but they dont consider where their money goes. It goes into funding the sue 'em all campaign, into buying laws, into hireing bots to sent automated complaints to ISPs, and into threatening universities.

RIAADD - Recording In Absolute Abyssmal Denial Disorder.
There's another one for the books, but you can ONLY get it when you sign a contract with an RIAA lable. I think they put it in the needle used to draw the blood you sign the contract in.
Oh well. As for the kids knowing something we don't.. I'm sure they do. They know that if enough of us "OGs" make the noise, they won't have to. So there ya have it ffolks.
ttmmm

woodhead , here's how to look up which artists have labels with the RIAA
http://www.magnetbox.com/riaa/search.asp
And, for a list of usernames on subpoenas, searchable database at
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/riaasubpoenas

Complete list of names so far targeted:
http://www.techtv.com/news/culture/jump/0,24196,3506996,00.html

ISPs
Comcast Cable Communications (259)
SBC (176)
Time Warner Cable (135)
Verizon Internet Services (94)
Charter Cable (62)
Adelphia Communications (30)
RCN (26)
Cox Communications (19)
EarthLink (16)
Mediacom Communications (7)
InterQuest Communications (6)
Bentley College (Boston) (5)
Boston College (3)
CenturyTel Internet Services (2)
CSC Holdings
Northeastern University (2)
New York University (2)
San Bruno Municipal Cable (2)
AT&T Worldnet, America Online, Boston University, Columbia University (New York), DePaul University (Chicago), Insight Midwest, Loyola University (Chicago), Loyola Marymount University (California), MIT, Northeastern University (Boston), Pacific Bell Internet, University of Southern California (1 each)
~code

thankx code I will pass the info on

ok, I've been checking up in the this site for the last month or so, While doing my research against the RIAA. I've Decided its about time I let my voice be heard. At my college The Ra's use P2P sharing just as much as the students, I even Know of Resident Directors (the ones that actually kick misbehaved students out the dorms) who have kazaa installed on their computers.

An RA even told me of an alternative P2P service when Kazaa was running super slow at our school. My school never actually blocked any file sharing they just capped the available bandwidth on them becuase it slowed the school network to where using a 56K modem was faster for surfing the web.

When they did this download speeds on kazaa where a max of .8 kb/s not joking so it would take over a day to download song, Most people didnt bother. I mayself got sick of kazaa becuase of all the messed up versions of songs I was getting. I bought an MP3 ripper and ripped all my CD's to mp3s which adds up to over 4000 songs.

Its a lot easier that way, 300 + cds takes up a lot of room especially in a college dorm. I can play any song I want at on second instantly, instead of looking thourgh my cd collection trying to find a cd for the one songs I happen to be in the mood for.

I've stopped purchasing CD's becuase they are now $20 a couple years ago I was able to find them for $12, Thats why I've bought less CD's @SSholes. Not to mention colleges eats up all my money and I'd rather spend $20 so I can go out and enjoy myself on a saturday night then buy a CD.

I've started buying used cds for as little as $3 and ripping them, its cheaper then paying the dollar per song they want online, and I will never buy a CD again if they make it so I cannot rip a CD, if I purchase the music I should be able to listen to it the way I want to. And if I do purchase music online I should be able to play it in wimamp 2.xx if I choose, not some software I have to download that takes up too many computer resourses and slows my computer down. Offer a decent price for music and allow me to use any music player I please and I'll consider buying music online until then shoove it up your ass.

As a former broadcaster, I enjoy listening to broadcast stations on the web. I was shocked on my last surfing trip to find practically NO American music stations left! The stated reason? The RIAA. Why wouldn't the RIAA want the extra exposure that its music would get from radio stations going worldwide on the web? If it doesn't want as much exposure for its own product, why doesn't the RIAA just order commercial radio stations to lower their power output; then, the music would have even LESS exposure!!!

Yo George... you should really look into throwing the RICO book at them, in all honesty from a legal standpoint, it's more applicable and more suited to the criminal activity at hand.

Truth is, the RIAA acts more like a criminal syndicate (which, in my eyes, they are) than an Anti-Competative monopoly, even though when you have the one, the other usually follows.. look what most of the original 1920's era gangsters did to THEIR competition for example ?

They're not just a monopoly, they're a criminal syndicate, and RICO does apply.

If you can get, force, or bribe ANYONE with the authority to do it - they're toast, the problem isn't proof, it's finding someone with the power that won't be so easily bought off.

-user

online radio stations in the US cant afford to pay the high fees that the record industry wants. They want fees from anyone or any company that plays music to the public. Radio stations have to pay fees, which I do not get the radio staion plays a song or two off the album as an advertisment for the album, so people will go out and buy it. If the radio stations refused to pay the fees and played indie music instead the record industry would be a little screwed

Awesome post Code,

diaRIAA, gonoRIAA.
amenoRIAA, rhinorRIAA,galactoRIAA,
seborRIAA,pyoRIAA,dysmenoRIAA...
and on and on.

let's put something like that on a bumber sticker!!!

submission:

GONO - RIAA
THE SOCIAL DISEASE YOU CAN TURN OFF.

CodeWarrior have you seen this page I don't know if it has something in it that may be used. But I'm not sure.

http://www.authorslawyer.com/ellison/brapp1a2.html

In the
United States Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit

Ellison v. Robertson et al.

Harlan Ellison, a natural person,
plaintiff and appellant,

v.

Stephen Robertson, an individual;
RemarQ Communities, Inc., a corporation;
Critical Path, Inc., a corporation;
and Does 1 Through 10,defendants,

America Online, Inc., defendant and appellee.

In this doc it has

III. THE COURT IGNORED THE LAW OF THIS CIRCUIT ON VICARIOUS INFRINGEMENT

I don't know if this is important I don't know that much about law terms.
I do know that you and some others here will understand this. It also talks about safe harbor provisions. I don't think anybody here has said anything about the safe harbor provisions.

I hope the RIAA is wasting lots of money on this idea, plus it gives college kids a good laugh.

The reason most of these kids think all us old farts are goofy is because of this: they have done the math. 60 million filesharers divided by 1175 subpoenas (EFF's figures) gives you about a 50,000-1 chance of being sued. Now, the RIAA's pledge to not even sue all 1175 they have subpoenad increases the odds even more. Hell, you have a better chance of meeting Elvis, Jimmy Hoffa senior and the Easter bunny in a UFO at midnight on Halloween. Sure, they'll make some examples, but the cagey ones will find a technological way to get around the RIAA. These idiots are desperate or they wouldn't be suing individuals in the first place. They're dying and when they do they won't be back....

gilbd - MUCH THANKS!
I hadn't seen that. I used to see Harlan Ellison on television talk shows years ago, so I wanna print this out and read it. As usual, great content to all your posts!
YOU RULE
l8ter..
~code

Thanks CodeWarrior I don't know much about the laws. But You do a lot to help us understand it.

After reading the appeal, it was very interesting, and I would be interested as to the outcome of the appeal.
Harlan Ellison is a sci fi writer, and apparently, some of his works were posted to a USENET, newsgroup. He somehow became aware, and went after the individuals who apparently posted it, and downloaded it, but went after the deep pockets of AOL, because AOL was the provider used by one or more of the alleged infringers. It was odd, because at one point in the appeal, they claim that AOL is NOT a service provider. The real burr in the plaintiffs saddle was that he lost against AOL, because apparently, the competent court of original jurisdiction, was held to have "safe harbor" status afforded under various subsections of the DMCA. Appellant/plaintiff's attorneys felt that the ruling, ironically, would give ISPs too much protection under the DMCA. The DMCA offers safe harbor for different providers, for example, those who hang on to the data transmitted across the net for a second, arguably, should not be held to the same standards as the final destination IP which arguably would have more control over the nature of the information passing on their networks. In essence, the claim was made that AOL was guilty of vicarious infringement because they got subscribers by offering USENET access, and the claim was that AOL did not terminate the accounts of "repeat infringers". The interesting thing to me was that it seemed that the plaintiffs admitted that there was little in law that would require ISPs to wander around monitoring the activities of their customers. In fact, the admissions were of such a nature as to make me wonder aloud something I asked in another post, exactly what ARE the laws or statutes which mandate the keeping of individual logs of customer accounts.

Great reading on the appeal, and it leaves you wondering who to route for, mainly though , I am backing the AOL/Time Warner win, because it lessens the duty of the IP to rat out and to terminate alleged infringer accounts.
~code
"I'm not a barrister, but I know the jokes."

Look at this I posted it on another thread. But I don't think anybody read it:

RIAA To Sue Radio Listeners For Copyright Infringement

http://www.newshax.com/modules/news/article.p hp?storyid=439

Here's the story:

NewsHax wire -- In a hastily organized press conference this afternoon, the Recording Industry Association of America announced plans to issue 500,000 subpoenas to combat what it calls "the largest group of copyright infringers in the world": radio listeners.

A spokesperson for the RIAA said that it could no longer overlook the sheer numbers of people who listen to music without paying for it, and that the first round of subpoenas would target "the most egregious offenders". Experts call this one of the largest legal actions ever undertaken by one entity in this country.

The Association's legal strategy is to subpoena two or three persons who have witnessed the defendants engaged in the act of listening to the radio, and to use their depositions to attempt to recover some of the billions of dollars that the RIAA says is lost every year when these "scofflaws", as the Association calls them, blatantly steal music.

The president of the RIAA, I. Screwem, recently said in an interview with Rolling Stone, "If you look at it, the cost is staggering. Look at how many times some songs are played on Top 40 radio during one average day. Each time one of these people steals a listen, it costs us something like $3.00 in lost revenue from CD sales. This has to stop." The first cases could come to trial this winter, barring any unforeseen legal challeges.

Geez Oldster , Elvis , Jimmy Hoffa , and the easter bunny ? Halloween is only a few months away !
Now we have something else to fear !!!!!
WABBITMAN

gildb-
I found something interesting. If you check out http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/riaa/arcojordan40303cmp.pdf , and look at the bottom of the document, you will notice that the SAME attorneys that represented Harlan Ellison, in his copyright suit against AOL, are listed "of counsel" in the RIAA suit against this poor college kid.

Man, it's like a feeding frenzy of copyright attorneys in these cases.

sorry for transposing letters gilbd..
"With too much reading and too much writing...
My spelling gets frightening."

~code

Your doing great CodeWarrior

CodeWarrior you should read this and the one next on that page. I put the name of it below

upholding the legality of file-swapping services

Just found this:

RIAA, studios gain P2P legal aid

http://news.com.com/2100-1027_3-5068421.html

Great link gilbd! Thanks also for the kind words, I really appreciate them.
Yeah, the RIAA and MPAA are mad as hell about Judge Wilson's decision. They want to be able to shut the P2Ps down, and it's very understandable from their perspective why they want to be able to shut down the P2Ps.
Number one, the P2Ps arguably have deeper pockets than any individual they would sue for uploading, and it would be easier to get a judgment that they could collect on from a P2Per.
2) Number two, the attack on individuals was only undertaken en masse, after the ruling showed they couldn't shut the service down at the service level. Sherman and his cohorts are not exactly the brightest pennies in the cookie jar, but you don't get to be a big copyright attorney by being that stupid either. They know that suing regular folks is going to do far more harm than suing a P2P network, but I know what I think happened. Someone at the top at the RIAA said something like this..."We've got to stop this filesharing at all costs...whatever it takes. Get it done."
They have gotten feedback now that not only are people mad, and contacting congress, but are boycotting, and the boycott scares them. That's why they are resuming their attacks on the P2P networks legally. They want to end the sharing as soon as possible, and they know that these actions against individuals, are NOT going to stop sharing.
And, the RIAA's argument against the networks is specious. Trying to hold the network responsible for any and all infringement of copyrights which may occur, strikes me like trying to hold auto manufacturers guilty for drunk drivers that hit people, or hold auto manufacturers guilty for people speeding or overparking. It would go like this,
Representative of Ford, you are aware that drunk driving is enabled by the drunk person having a car aren't you? In fact, if there were no cars, drunk driving would almost completely disappear except for those driving horse drawn wagons, isn't that correct?
or You are aware that people routinely break the law by speeding while driving your vehicles, aren't you...and on and on ad nauseum. P2P networks don't copyright infringe, people do!

Well, anyway, a lot of this is going to play out as it does. We just have to do what we think is right to oppose the evil, and I am proud of everyone here, certainly including you, for doing that.

Thanks again,and keep that info coming!
~code

Yo Code ?

When it comes to AOL-TW, or at least AOL, they are, or at least were in the past, completely above the law.

They bought their way out of immense amounts of blatant criminal activity with falsely inflated stock, used that bogus "stock" to purchase and annihilate competitors too, like ICQ.
Heh, wonder how Miribilis feels now that they've found out what that stock is REALLY worth, eh ?

They floated the company like a ponzi scheme, cooked the books to make it look good, and then latched onto Time-Warner for no other reason than to let THEM take the financial hit when all those years of bogus accounting caught up with them.

But the worst thing they ever did, was deliberately and intentionally protect predators of children, stalkers, and all manner of scum by protecting their identity even in the face of a VALID indictment or subpeona for the conduct in question.

Precedents in question would be the case of Richard Lee Russell, State of Michigan vs AOL (Engler) and a hearing of the 104th Congress on July 24, 1995 - each and every time, AOL hid behind the "telephone" defense, which states that the provider is not responsible for content, even if they know it to be illegal.

Now, legally, that falls flat as soon as you reserve the right to edit, modify, or monitor the content, but of course, that's where the stock options come in, see ?

Over time, AOL has become a "safe haven" for every type of long-distance-harrassment slime, due to a dynamic IP system and the company policy of stonewalling any and ALL law enforcement agencies... most of which they outright lie to in the process (they told the FBi they only maintain customer data for 48hours, which anyone who's ever worked in networking can tell you is BS).
And so, while utterly failing to protect their customers from that kind of abuse, they shield the worst slime imagineable for just desserts.

Point of all this being ? they damn well BETTER not hand over the file-sharers, cause if they do, that will beyond doubt PROVE they could have handed over all those predators, and expose the fact that they lied to the FBI, USDOJ, and US Customs to protect them.
That would make them accessories to a massive scale of criminal activity, you see.

So if they hand over the file sharers, they're screwed - there's a LOT of very pissed off parents who'd go totally postal when they found out the company COULD have put a stop to things... and didn't.

We will see.

-user

Oh yeah, and don't forget about a half million violations of labor law by forcing volunteer staff to work at the same jobs as paid employees, something they bought their way out of once, but it didn't stick, so they're personally begging Bush to let them off the hook.

Think I jest ? not so.
http://www.suntimes.com/output/tech/cst-fin-emain16.html

I hesistate to use the word "evil" to describe a corporation, but believe me, AOL has as much claim to that one as the RIAA does.

-user

yeah, I know, AOL and people with whining copyright claims are both evil!
Something AOL used to do, was once people used their free hours, but then called them and told them they didn't want to continue with the service, AOL would just keep billing them, sometimes for six months (that was when you had to enter credit card info even for the free hours). I used to be a beta tester for AOL back when, :::HUDDER::::, I used to be a victim, er, "customer". Customers didn't know a lot of the tyrannical crap that was going on back then.

AOL/TM is evil. The big 5 is evil. This gov. is evil. Clear Channel is evil. The RIAA is evil.

You are completely right about AOL/TW.