Rather than a "congressional hurricane," senator Norm Coleman's hearing into the RIAA's sue 'em all subpoena campaign turned out to be, "an autumn sprinkle, states Billboard's Bill Holland.

"Despite initial rumblings, it appears that Congress may not revisit the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), observers say," states Holland, quoted in a Reuters story here.

"Some Capitol Hill veterans say that Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., who called the hearing, is now part of a growing group of lawmakers that sees no easy way to solve the conflict between the record industry and peer-to-peer services," it says.

" 'After studying the issue, I think Coleman now recognizes that the Kazaas are inherently conflicted,' says lobbyist Manus Cooney, formerly chief of staff of the Senate Judiciary Committee. 'So there's no real incentive for the recording industry to license them. At the same time, the Kazaas have no real incentive to develop the technology solution to identify illegal downloaders because they'd be liable'."

Lately, the traditional media have for the first time been fairly consistently reporting the other side of the story.

This lamentable (from the music industry's perspective) state of affairs was brought on by the RIAA's cold decision to drag anyone and everyone whose names turned up in its witch-hunts into court, relying on RIAA president Cary-Sue Sherman's skills at dissemblance to keep the masses calm.

As long as the villains in the piece could be painted as black-hearted scum out to steal the bread from the mouths of starving artists, the RIAA and its owners, the Big Five record labels, were on fairly safe ground - in the public eye, anyway.

But when their victims turned out to be children and senior citizens and (much worse) INNOCENT! - the media could no longer ignore it.

And it seems the hitherto invisible man Mitch Bainwol has at last emerged from the woodwork to show he's in the same league as Sherman and former RIAA boss Hilary Rosen, reality adjustor extraordinary.

"Cooney and other Hill vets say that Mitch Bainwol, the RIAA's new chairman/CEO, came across as informed and positive at the hearing when he announced that going forward, the RIAA will give prior notice to alleged egregious P2P infringers," says Holland.

What, if not informed and positive, should the public face of music industry be?

Moreover, Bainwol, too - the "consumate Washington insider" - is a Hill vet. So that his friends should sing his praises is hardly surprising.

"By law, neither Internet service providers nor copyright holders are required to give notice to a user whose personal information has been turned over to a copyright holder."

Whether or not the RIAA was morally obligated to tell people they were sueing them doesn't even merit a mention.

"The RIAA notification will alleviate some of the surprise or confusion the lawsuits have generated, allowing infringers to contact the RIAA to settle out of court and enabling those who feel they are innocent of wrongdoing to make their case," Holland continues.

That's OK then. We can forget about the 261 people the RIA terrorized before its boss - held up to the public eye - was forced to make a concession which should have been automatic from the beginning.

"We are trying to be reasonable and fair and allow these cases the opportunity to be resolved without litigation," Bainwol told the panel.

It would be more accurate to say the RIAA knows full well it's sunk if people start defending themselves. Remember what Lorraine Sullivan said here?

"[...] on Sept 9 or 10, I think it was, I heard about the summons from a reporter and it wasn't until a week later than I actually got it. And it's huge - the entire catalog of songs, and then about 10 pages of what they're accusing me of.

"Then attached is a letter saying, and of course I'm paraphrasing, 'If you'd like to settle, call us'. To me it was either deal with this huge, daunting summons and worry about it for months, or 'Pay us and we'll go away'."

Holland goes on, "He also said that lawsuits could be avoided if P2P network operators instituted meaningful disclosure notices stating that unauthorized uploading and downloading is illegal, used available technology to filter and block such activity and changed default settings for users so that they do not unknowingly upload material."

Ahhhh. So the p2p network operators are to blame.

"Hill veterans say that lawmakers have too much on their plate to reconstruct the DMCA."

Too much on their plate? What's more important than safeguarding the public interest against rampant corporate self-interest?

"There's another emerging factor in the lawmakers' response to the issue: They view the activities and business practices of Kazaa, the most popular program used to trade songs on the Internet, with growing suspicion. The hardball questions at the Coleman hearing were aimed at Alan Morris, executive president of Sharman Networks, the parent company of Kazaa.

"Ranking member Sen. Carl M. Levin, D-Mich., all but called the company a suspicious, shady operation. He pumped Morris to reveal the names of the company's owners and asked for explanations as to why the company is partly incorporated on the tiny South Pacific island chain of Vanuatu.

"The island, Levin said, 'advertises itself as a tax haven and has been on a State Department nation list of money-launderers'."

Where have Holland and Levin been for the past year or two?

On the face of it, and according to Coleman's many and various public statements, the hearing was held because there's serious concern over whether or not the RIAA is abusing the subpoena powers granted under the DMCA; and, whether or not the powers in and of themselves shold be allowed.

After the hearing, Levin reportedly said, "I think they know very well that most of their downloads are violations of copyright."

Yes. They probably do. But that's not the point.

According to Coleman's many and various public statements, the hearing was held because there's serious concern over whether or not the RIAA is abusing the subpoena powers granted under the DMCA; and, whether or not the powers in and of themselves should even be allowed.

Neither question was answered, or anywhere near it. And if Holland is believed, nor will they be.

did anybody ever believe that Coleman would do anything about this. It is all smoke and mirrors, and politians are making it look like they care. THEY DONT. The only one that can help you is you so dont dl or buy any RIAA music. Soon they will be beggin you to dl thier music.

I watched the hearings on C-Span on Thurday evening. And it was obvious that the senators on the panel were not interested in anything to be said from those who spoke against the RIAA/MPAA.

I'm paraphrasing, but as the first panel of pro RIAA/MPAA witnesses were getting ready to leave, I believe one of the senators said something to the effect of "I wish everyone in the country could see this testimony and realize the moral implications..." Take that for what you will.

I also noted what Chuck D said in his opening statements (paraphrasing again) "It looks like we have fewer people in the room since some people are wanting autographs." (In reference to the appearance LL Cool J. And it was clear the panel was full of love of Cool J, but not Chuck D. The opinions they cponveyed, and the looks on their faces, said what was clear: We don't care who Chuck D is. He's against the RIAA.

If it's televised again, I urge everyone to watch at least some of the hearing. It's eye-opening to see how biased and uninformed the people who allegedly represent us are.

It's time to take the country back!!!

too much hope was riding on the coleman hearings. I even had a glimmer of hope but deep down knew they were blowing hot air. we need to defeat the DMCA in court. that's where our energies and hopes should be. then they would have no choice but to rewrite the law if the courst strike parts of it down.

UNBELIEVABLE!
So, I guess the next war will be! Vanuatu.
BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
First of all, isn't Coleman's website "illegal" and this is "OUR" LAWMAKER?!!!!!
HELLS BELLS!!!!!!!!!

Thank you Norm. Your apathy is refreshing.

Screw Congress. Satan has a special place in hell waiting to be filled with dishonest, rich, greedy, white men. I'll see you there. It's right next to the section for pirates (yarrr).

Do they have Kazaa in hell? If they don't, I'm not going.

Chuck has always been there... Dont believe the hype.

With November aproaching, a suggestion would be to get a list of Senators and Representatives to vote out of office... some on that list would be:
Orring Hatch (R - UT)
Barbara Boxer (D-CA)

greatscottpr...I thought the SAME THING!
I half expected Herr Carl Levin )(dummkopf that he is) to order Alan Morris taken into custody then and there for a summary execution under the Patriot Act. And, while we are on the topic of Herr Carl Levin, so now, he claims to know what people know and what they don't know? Herr Carl Levin is so verzögert, that he doesn't know which end is up.
And, Herr Reichfuhrer Bainwol (aka Itchy Bunghole), "Cooney and other Hill vets say that Mitch Bainwol, the RIAA's new chairman/CEO, came across as informed and positive "...informed? He could hardly get his microphone to work, that dummkopf !

And, I concur completely with hbkfan. There was NO attempt at truthseeking. It was a love fest with Uber Dummkopf
Herr Carl (UnterFurhrer) Levin, attacking or should I say amBUSHing Morris, in his own, pathetic version of a blitzkrieg.

It was a let's pat the RIAA on the back and promise to punish these evil "Piraten" w/ passage of new laws and DRM. Since we can't curse on the board, I think this phrase in German says it all :
Dies heißen sind Scheiße (i.e., Levin, Pryor, et al)

Ist hier meine Liste der Politiker zum heraus Wählen.
"BABS" BOXER
CHARLES (CHUCKED UP) SCHUMER
PATRICK (TEE HEE) LEAHY
ORRIN (OPEN) HATCH
"Herr" CARL LEVIN
JOHN "DON'T EAT YELLOW SNOW" CONYERS
HOWARD "I GOT MY MONEY FROM THE RIAA" BERMAN
KAY BAILEY "IRISH CREAM" HUTCHISON
THERE'S MORE..JUST CAN'T RECALL EM ALL RIGHT NOW.
Code has a list called good guys/bad guys on his site..
http://codewarrior.web1000.com/goodnbadguys.htm

This is a war. Our privacy, our freedoms are at risk. They don't like the freedom to speak our minds to millions on the internet without going through the corporate filter. VOTE, BOYCOTT, SPEAK OUT. The revolution won't be televised.

With the flag of youth for freedom and sustenance.
Unsre Fahne flattert uns voran.
Our flag flutters before us.
Unsre Fahne ist die neue Zeit.
Our flag represents the new era.
Und die Fahne führt uns in die ewigkeit!
And the flag carries us into eternity!
Ja, die Fahne ist mehr als der Tod!
Yes, the flag is greater than death!
VIVA DMUSIC REVOLUTION!
RIAA

As the recent rigged, stacked-deck hearings underscore, there is another offense that not only the RIAA, MPAA and all the other alphabet-soup lobbies for the multinational entertainment-media complex, but the entire industry itself, are all guilty of: Copyright malpractice. I'll explain:

According to dictionary.reference.com there are quite a few definitions of "malpractice" in various dictionaries, not necessarily exclusive to the medical profession with which the word is usually associated. The second definition, per the American Heritage Dictionary, is "Improper or unethical conduct by the holder of a professional or official position," followed by a third, "The act or an instance of improper practice." Per Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, malpractice is defined as "Evil practice; illegal or immoral conduct; practice contrary to established rules; specifically, the treatment of a case by a surgeon or physician in a manner which is contrary to accepted rules and productive of unfavorable results." (Simply substitute "RIAA" for "surgeon or physician" in this case.) And, per WordNet: 1: professional wrongdoing that results in injury or damage; "the widow sued his surgeon for malpractice" 2: a wrongful act that the actor had no right to do; improper professional conduct; "he charged them with electoral malpractices."

Recently, there has been a call in some circles for lawsuits against the news media for "journalistic malpractice," this in the wake of the Jayson Blair fiasco at The New York Times and other instances of "sloppy" journalism that made national headlines.

Given the flagrant, blatant perversion, misrepresentation and corruption of copyright law by the RIAA and its like-minded ilk, maybe the time has come for a movement to hold them all accountable for copyright malpractice. Which is defined here as:
- Using copyright law as a billy-club against the poor, vulnerable, weak and defenseless;
- Using copyright law to usurp people's fair-use rights and completely disenfranchise and enslave them;
- Using copyright law to effectively reduce our standard of living, our technological achievements and progress, and our entire civilization to the level of a primitive Third World banana republic (i.e. Zimbabwe, Sudan);
- Using copyright law to deliberately cause grave damage and injury, perhaps permanent, to our society in general;
- And many other examples too numerous to mention.

"There's another emerging factor in the lawmakers' response to the issue: They view the activities and business practices of Kazaa, the most popular program used to trade songs on the Internet, with growing suspicion."

Exactly. Did Kazaa really think they were going to win supporters when their entire business model is predicated on illegal activity? Kazaa is desperate for licenses because they can see the gathering storm.

But the question remains: Does this IN ANY WAY justify these gross violations of human rights that the proto-Stalinist RIAA has committed and have indicated that they will continue to commit, thereby dragging our "justice" system down to the level of the likes of Cuba, China, Zimbabwe, Sudan et al.? I'm sorry, but they've been allowed for too long to get away with murder. Or to put it in another way (for those of the "A pox on all your houses" philosophy), two wrongs NEVER make a right.

I think the RIAA is fully justified in protecting their copyrights. In fact, that is exactly what they should be doing. Gross violation of human rights? What human rights are being violated? The right to infringe copyrights? Oh, I feel so bad for the people who infringe copyrights and get caught. Life is soooo tough!

Why doesn't Kazaa try and filter copyrighted material? The reason is that their user base would drop dramatically and that means they couldn't charge as much for advertising. So Kazaa is making immense profits from other people's copyrights and they know it and so does everyone else.

Tod zu Tyrants.
Tod zu den Musiktyrants.
Sie (RIAA) sind falsch und Übel.

Congress may have failed us but...

We can vote next year.

We still have our boycott of music, which is clearly having an effect.

Also, we are seeing more and more musicians going independent and getting noticed thanks to the Internet. I foresee the day when the RIAA and major labels will be an irrelevant old dinosaur. I think that they can even see their days of control coming to an end and that is why they are suing. No doubt they are using lawsuit settlements to make up for their decline in CD sales, just trying to hang on. Still leeching off of those of us that just want to hear a good song! That is just so evil. I hope someone out there has enough balls to stand up to them in court instead of settling. I think that the case could be won, just on the issue of the due process of the subpoenas alone. When we win on that front and stick together and continue the boycott, their funds will dry up and the politicians will then no longer listen to them!

Es gibt KEIN Recht, von den Verbrauchern oder zum extort zu stehlen sie für Geld von den Gerichtregelungen!

I think the RIAA is fully justified in protecting their copyrights.


That statement is so true.. to bad the artist dont own thier own copyrights. Well except a few like our band we own ours and we say anybody who wants to share our music can. They are not protecting thier copyrights. What they are protecting is thier outdated business model, and forcing muiscians to rely on the record companys for promotions and marketing. They will eventually come around but it will take alot of people with them.
To all independent musicians make the fight your own make it personal incorporate it into you music. It will take hard work but if you love your music and freedom you shall reap what you sow. The time is now people to make your selves known to tell others of this fight. To hell with letters to congress, start writing letters to your friends and friends' friends. Dont call RIAA call a high school friend and tell them about. STOP SPENDING SO MUCH TIME ON PEOPLE THAT DONT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT YOU LIKE POLITICIANS AND RIAA, and start spending more time educating your friends and families. Educate people to the alternatives. Evertime i talk to people about this they have no clue who or what any of this is about.

Sie sind vollständig rechtes MrDude
(You are completely right MrDude)
-bulkeraser

Don't screw congress.. FIRE 'EM!! ..as I have been saying all along.. this is at least a year-long fight, folks! continue to BOYCOTT!! continue to EDUCATE!! continue to REGISTER family and friends.. then when elections come next year, we have the opportunity to change ONE THIRD of this garbage.. How bad does it have to get to get folks outta their computer couches?? If we wait until it reaches our virtual door step, it is almost to late.. :dissapointed:

BOYCOTT. EDUCATE. REGISTER. VOTE.
ARE YOU REGISTERED AND READY?

Why doesn't Kazaa try and filter copyrighted material?

Because not all copyrighted material is unauthorized, just a very small minority of it.

No one in the recording industry has made the smallest attempt to allow the consumer to designate between authorized and unauthorized music. THAT is what the real problem is.

Yo, bulk.. glad your here, buddy! We have a unique political system in the USA.. one I am proud of and willing to fight for.. with my life.. nah, with my brain and my vote. Martin Luther King proved that the vote is WAYYY more effective to change things around here than the bullet... So, if you are MAD AS HELL, and can't take it anymore.. don't. Get on the streets, folks.. get on the emails, the mailboxes, the dinner tables.. make Thanksgiving INTERESTING this year.. channel that anger to CHANGE.. at least here it is possible..

We are about a year away from the elections, and I think it's time we really research who to vote for and against.

And I also agree with ronnie71- our pleas to congress are falling on deaf ears. We have to take it to the streets, a nearly forgotten facet of this boycott. Congress no doubt knows by now where the public stands, we have to get the word out to the public. Post flyers, leave printed articles on waiting room tables, wear a boycott-riaa t shirt... anything to clue people in!

Riaa-lover.. that's right.. keep postin'.. you serve to teach us the bloated arrogance of the corporations in this current garbage culture.. the rest of us are well-served by your ability to gloat.. folks, if this pisses you off.. DO SOMETHING!! Fire off a dolla to this site! Don't waste your time flaming the arrogant.. doesn't work. Take the anger and build a revolution!!

"I hope someone out there has enough balls to stand up to them in court instead of settling. I think that the case could be won, just on the issue of the due process of the subpoenas alone."

There is already at least on defendant challenging the subpoena process, so this issue will be heard by a court of competent jurisdiction.

"What they are protecting is thier outdated business model, and forcing muiscians to rely on the record companys for promotions and marketing."

I don't agree with this statement. No one is "forcing" musicians to do anything. You want to make music? Go with an indie and do it. You want to be a "star"? Sign with a major label and prepare to get raped.

But I will say this: You want the RIAA to fall then don't buy their product. It's that simple.

Downloading RIAA music and then whining like a pussy when you get caught is not the answer. That is for wimps and losers.

"the rest of us are well-served by your ability to gloat"

I'm gloating? I'm telling it like it is, bro.

"No one in the recording industry has made the smallest attempt to allow the consumer to designate between authorized and unauthorized music. THAT is what the real problem is."

The recording industry? Wouldn't that be the job of the people in charge of the P2P program? Maybe I am not understanding the question?

How do you recommend that the recording industry allow the consumer to designate between authorized and unauthorized music?

COPYRIGHT REFORM!!!!!

It's the only thing that is going to solve the problem that we have, not only with the RIAA's lawsuits, but with the monopoly both the RIAA and MPAA have over our entertainment industry.

~goingnova

Riaa-lover.. Yes, you certainly are telling it like it is..
Good news from the moneyland.

well RIAA is saying all downloading is illegal and thats not the case.

And yes they are protecting their business model. They have a system that is controlled by them from production to publishing rights to distubution. There are a few exceptions but not many of artist who did it on thier own.

goingnova.. good to see you. copyright reform is political.. achievable only by newly-elected congresspeople.. REGISTER. VOTE.

Another interesting thing is that most of those in power who've been screaming "tort reform" with respect to all the class-action lawsuits against the tobacco, fast food, asbestos and other pertinent industries, have been ABSOLUTELY SILENT with the need for tort reform (as well as copyright reform) viz-a-viz this issue.

Well, it was just about a week or so Corn NoMam said he was hearing more complaints on this issue than the WAR ON IRAQ! That's cuz the streets are _REAL SPECIAL_!!!! Talk to your bank tellers and grocery checkers, PEOPLE THAT TALK TO PEOPLE!!!!
TELL THEM THE RIAA IS TERRORIZING 12 YEAR OLD CHILDREN!!!!!!
Go

RIGHT ON! FIGHT ON!!!!!!!!!

ONE MORE THING RIAA!
KISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
MYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
ASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!

JAZZMARY2U-
I think a quote that CodeWarrior used in an email to me was apropos...
"Each time a man stands up for an ideal.
or acts to improve the lot of others. or
strikes out against injustice, he sends
forth a tiny ripple of hope."
-Robert Fitzgerald Kennedy

CodeWarrior to me, is sending out those ripples for me and others, whether he is here or not,
-bulkeraser

Message to the RIAA

An informed populace is your enemy.
Rational thought is your enemy.
The future is your enemy.
The way we withhold our money from you is your enemy.
But more importantly, look in the mirror RIAA, because, you are your own worst enemy.

Here's a special message for Deutsch speaking RIAA stooges.

RIAA , bitten Sie um Nahrung, und Sie haben nicht. Wir boykottieren Sie. Die Leute zerstören Sie.

A bit off topic, but there's been something bothering me in this whole situation: WHY HASN'T ANYBODY CHALLENGED THE RIAA'S 501c(3) STATUS?
For those of you unaware of what 501c(3) certification is, it's basically designed as a break for charitable organizations - qualified non-profit organizations are exempt from income taxes if they are granted 501c(3) status...
The strange thing is, the RIAA, who admits to controlling at least 90% of all american pre-recorded music, is on the books as a 501c(3) organization.
How? I'm not sure either...

XxShadowxX - this was something that CodeWarrior brought up way before the hearings, and emailed Coleman, but nothing came of it, but you are right about it, and we NEED to keep bringing that up!
-bulkeraser

"How do you recommend that the recording industry allow the consumer to designate between authorized and unauthorized music?"

Ever since mp3.com started posting tens of thousands of songs for free downloading by the general public, the majority of the music online has been authorized for downloading.

Now suddenly a small percentage of it is "illegal."
How to identify it? First, the RIAA must acknowledge that music freely authorized for sharing does exist.

If they ever do that, get back to me and we'll talk about how.

RIAA-Lover: "Why doesn't Kazaa try and filter copyrighted material? The reason is that their user base would drop dramatically and that means they couldn't charge as much for advertising. So Kazaa is making immense profits from other people's copyrights and they know it and so does everyone else."


RIAA-Lover is dead on with his response. Kazaa is only our ally because it is in their best interest to be and they will dump on their users in a New York minute. I would recommend some sort of open source file sharing software if you want to share files. The ultimate goal here is to dissolve the "money grubbing corporations" like the RIAA labels and Kazza is just as guilty as the after mentioned.

Bulkeraser - who should we contact about this? The IRS directly, perhaps?
I did alittle more research into this, and there is no way in hell the RIAA meets the requirements for 501c(3) status.
The biggie - they're not a charitable organization (duh)!
Also, they're in the private sector, give "political contributions", and are definately a for-profit outpit - all big no no's for a tax-exempt organization
Furthermore, imagine the back taxes the RIAA would have to pay if (hopefully WHEN) they get caught...

lol..This is ridiculous. that's like asking librarians to validate that no one has used the xerox machine at the library to copy copyrighted works without the copyright holders written, prior, express permissions, before they let said patrons
borrow books. it is NOT kazaa or any p2p software's legal duty to become the copyright police, and even the obscene
DMCA does not mandate that. this is getting to be a crazy discussion. People should learn what , if any, ANY business has to other businesses which are not customers of theirs.

That's like making auto dealerships make sure that everyone who buys a car has paid all their taxes, or restaurant employees to run a background check on patrons to make sure they have never committed misdemeanors. I will never understand where people get some of the loony ideas they have about what legal duties a business has. Kazaa is not in the copyright enforcement business any more than the library is, or Kinkos is,
or Xerox is. Geeeeeez Louse. I gotta run before my head explodes...where's the duct tape?

XxShadowxX - I believe it would not be out of line to send a letter of concern to the IRS, or for that matter, to the FBI for further investigation into the obvious/apparent violations of the
RIAA with regard to their official filing.

A carbon copied letter could be sent to both agencies.
Where Do You Report Suspected Tax Fraud Activity?

If you suspect tax fraud you should report this activity to your nearest Internal Revenue Service office. This information can be communicated by phone or in writing to your local IRS office. You can contact the IRS by phone at 1-800-829-0433.
or to the FBI
send an email on their webmail
https://tips.fbi.gov/

RIAA YOU ARE BUSTED!!!!!!!!!
THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL YOU CAN QUALIFY FOR A 501c(3) STATUS?
BULKERASER SAYS: For those of you unaware of what 501c(3) certification is, it's basically designed as a break for charitable organizations - qualified non-profit organizations are exempt from income taxes if they are granted 501c(3) status...
The strange thing is, the RIAA, who admits to controlling at least 90% of all american pre-recorded music, is on the books as a 501c(3) organization.

RIAA HOW CAN YOU BE SO DECEPTIVE?!!!!!!
HOW CAN YOU CONTINUALLY ABUSE OUR COUNTRY BY ATTACKING 12 YEAR OLD CHILDREN!!!!! YOU ARE TERRORISTS!!!!!!!!
SHAME ON YOU!!!!!!!
TELL EVERY GROCERY STORE CHECKER....
THEY WILL SEE THIS BIG BAD WOLF FOR WHO HE REALLY IS?!!!!!!!!
OMG!!!!!!!!!! HOW DARE YOU!!!!!!!!
HOW DARE YOU MAKE THE CHILDREN HOMELESS!!!!!
THE IRS SHOULD ATTACK ALL YOUR ASSES AT ONCE!!!!!!!!!
INSTEAD OF THE INNOCENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey GreatScott (sorry - didn't catch the rest of your handle) - give credit where credit's due Bulkeraser didn't bring this up, I did - the likes of which CodeWarrior actually mentioned a long time ago...
Anyway, here's some interesting reading material I found on the IRS' web site:

"The exempt purposes set forth in IRC Section 501(c)(3) are charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and the prevention of cruelty to children or animals. The term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erection or maintenance of public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening of neighborhood tensions; elimination of prejudice and discrimination; defense of human and civil rights secured by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency."

None of which the RIAA falls under, of couse

Well i did get something out of watching the senate hearings,that boxer dog of a senator don't get this families vote no more. As for orin don't think much can be done about him cause of his churchs vote in utah !!! but what i think is a buzzard yanked off on a rock and the sun made him HATCH !!!!

flibbertygibbet, gosh have not heard that term in years. Don't forget, we need to get rid of Grey Davis Tuesday! Also, anyone who has not done so, please sign the eff.com petition. It has slowed down and I already sent it to everyone I know.

"Kazaa is only our ally because it is in their best interest to be and they will dump on their users in a New York minute."

Exactly.

"it is NOT kazaa or any p2p software's legal duty to become the copyright police, and even the obscene
DMCA does not mandate that."

Yes, I understand. My point is that as long as Kazaa is a business predicated on illegal activity they will continue to be viewed as an outlaw organization by the US government. They want to be seen as legitimate, but that will never happen if they continue to do business as they are doing now. And the RIAA will continue to sue their users.

And the apologists on this board will continue to whine about poor Lorraine Sullivan who knew exactly what she was doing when she downloaded copyrighted material and thought she could get away with it. Guess what? She got busted! Ha ha ha ha!

"Now suddenly a small percentage of it is "illegal."
How to identify it? First, the RIAA must acknowledge that music freely authorized for sharing does exist.

If they ever do that, get back to me and we'll talk about how."

Suddenly? I don't think so. You say RIAA music is a small percentage and I'm sure you are right, but that is the music that everyone wants to download. That is why we have the hubub that we have right now. Check bigchampagne - RIAA music is the music of choice for the masses.

You have the solution and you are holding out? You little devil.

XxShadowxX: the last posting about the RIAA and the exempt purposes for them being a 503c(3) is one of the most hillarious things about them yet. they need to be put six feet under by the IRS if they are indeed perpetrating a fraud. and to mention all those good charitable deeds the 503c(3) requirements compared to the outlandish and brutal mudslinging legal tactics these shysters are doing is a real disgrace. these charaters have friends in the senate, so they probably know how to camoflage themselves as per the above staus. it's definitely worth the try to see them sweat, or even better to see them buckle under . the DMCA policy is a disgrace to the 60 million plus the RIAA is willing to sue and the senate is turning the other cheek about it. so much for "fair use".

Let's see... the recording industry has been around at least 50 years... it's been illegal to listen to music for, oh, two years now...

Yeah, I'd say that's suddenly.

Listening to music? That's the first time I've heard copyright infringement via file sharing characterized as "listening to music". Tell it to the judge.

I wasn't talking about file sharing.

Since I don't listen to RIAA music and it's the only thing illegal to download, my choices are endless and my risk is nonexistent. Authorized music only. No judge involved.

I call sharing my own copyrighted material my fair legal right. Still no judge involved.

I also call it promotion.

Hey RIAA Trolls!

TALK TO DA HAAND!

Talk to da BACK of my HAAND!

.. seems to me guys that we hadd this 503c(3) discussion on these boards before. I thought that the Riaa was a trade organization, and as such, registered as a non-profit. Therefore the non-profit status applies, right? It is the members of the Riaa, the labels themselves that are a profit making entity, correct?

RIAA-Lover.. keep postin' You are delightfully bloated, imho..
"Tell it to the judge".. Yeah, the judges your cronies just "bought".. How wonderfully Scrooge of you.

.. Right on, gdZiemann.

LOL@jazz
i think you and some others are NUTZ lol.
but im happy to be associated, i hope you feel the same...
as to code, he waited till we were all growed up lol-i like to think......
Keep it up, bulky one, and jazz, you, erm, go girl!
;p

hell, i will.......
~time flies~

concerning the bottom line.. OT but I think it's relevant..
where does the money the RIAA gets to keep from these lawsuits get posted. I mean, let's assume that out of 2,000 bucks, they get to keep 500.
Is that accounted for in the general fund as a profit? In the legal fund as a loss of 1500? In the "shrinkage fund" as a profit ?
I'm thinkin that when next quarters figures come out, they will say that sales are UP, not only because of the Xmas sales drive, but also because this money from lawsuits will be used to artificially inflate the bottom line. But they'll say sales are up because dl'rs figured that it was better to buy than risk a lawsuit, or some such other bullshit.
I know it's not a lot of money. The average lawsuit has been settled for 3,000 I read somewhere.. so 3,000 times 64 is just under 200K.. not even one tenth of one percent of the gross revenue from 1999.
oh.. and what's with all the german on lately? I don't read or speak it, so I can't really enjoy the jokes if that's what they are. Could someone translate?
ttmmm

For exemption requirements concerning 501(c)(3) status:

http://www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=96099,00.html

"To be tax-exempt as an organization described in IRC Section 501(c)(3) of the Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for one or more of the purposes set forth in IRC Section 501(c)(3) and none of the earnings of the organization may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate at all in campaign activity for or against political candidates."

That's the first paragraph on the page. Additionally:
"The organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, such as the creator or the creator's family, shareholders of the organization, other designated individuals, or persons controlled directly or indirectly by such private interests."

And

"An IRC Section 501(c)(3) organization may not engage in carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities. Whether an organization has attempted to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities is determined based upon all relevant facts and circumstances."

Here is the publication concerning obtaining and keeping tax exempt status:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p557.pdf

This message is soley for RIAA-lover

No matter what you say, and no matter how right you THINK you are....
guess what?

there's about 63,000,000 people out there who think you are a jackass and think that you and your RIAA can kiss every last one of their asses. So if you think that you posting here makes you look smart, just remember that for every person here there's a million more out there that agree with them.

Go check out that article by have2beAnonymous

Your precious organization seems to be unable to sue people on a p2p network.

Oh no! Ha ha ha ha ha

RIAA Lover,

I agree with you that in principle the RIAA (and others) should have a right to protect their copyrights. You are also correct in stating that nobody is "forcing" musicians to sign away their copyrights in their contracts.

However, I do feel that copyright law itself has allowed the big content holders (i.e. RIAA affiliates) to establish what amounts to a perpetual monopoly on most recorded music. Copyright law was suppose to give an incentive for artists to create, while still allowing for those creations to eventually enter the public domain. Thanks to intense lobbying by Diseny, MPAA, etc. the copyright terms now last for 95 years (corporate copyrights) and the penalties for infringement are way out of proportion to the crime. I think that before the RIAA can be rightous about copyright infingement, they need to realize that the copyright laws themselves are unfair and unjust

Waiting on a politician to change things is like trying to tech your dog to speak....oh wait that would be easier

....teach your dog to speak( darn keyboard)

That's why I say KEEP demanding to your Congressmen & Senators that they REPEAL the DMCA!!!

Too much on their plate?!? BULLSHIT!!!

They're trying to dodge the issue, and somehow try to "save face" with the RIAA & MPAA!!

It's time that the practice of file-trading be declared COMPLETELY LEGAL...REGARDLESS of whether or not the majority of the material is copyrighted by RIAA members!!!

DeanSB2000

"Why doesn't Kazaa try and filter copyrighted material? The reason is that their user base would drop dramatically and that means they couldn't charge as much for advertising."

....And the next obvious assumption would be that the onus would be on RCA, Zenith and Panasonic to manufacture TVs that filter out networks that broadcast copyrighted programs, in order to prevent viewers from watching/taping footage that they have no authorization over?

But that would risk driving away viewers and thus losing the ability to pay for expensive television advertisement.