 DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | I'm lost How does the RIAA know if the file is actually theirs unless they downloaded it and checked?
If they download it, the crime occurs (unless the RIAA can't infringe on their own work).
Someone mentioned a few months ago an example of an MP3 called something like In the air tonight. How would the RIAA know if that's the Phil Collins song or something else? |
|
 NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·Site5.com
 ·Comcast
 ·Callcentric
| said by Dogfather:How does the RIAA know if the file is actually theirs unless they downloaded it and checked? If they download it, the crime occurs (unless the RIAA can't infringe on their own work). Someone mentioned a few months ago an example of an MP3 called something like In the air tonight. How would the RIAA know if that's the Phil Collins song or something else? I agree. The RIAA should be working less on trying to convince the courts that just making a file available is infringement. Its a slam dunk case if they just go after the people responsible.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out how to do it either. Nothing is anonymous on the internet. Just connect to a torrent containing an album of music. Download the album to ensure its copyrighted material. Then just watch the peers list, record IP addresses, go after those people responsible.
That alone will keep the RIAA busy for quite some time. |
|
|
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Did the court rule that a portion of an MP3 is infringing? Meaning, if a person is seeding only 3% of an infringing MP3, are they really distributing the song? Title 17 talks about distribution of songs, but no mention of portions of songs. |
|
 cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:5
 ·Frontier FiOS
| reply to Dogfather
said by Dogfather:If they download it, the crime occurs (unless the RIAA can't infringe on their own work). You can't infringe on your own copyright. While the RIAA themselves may not own the copyright directly, the member company (Warner Brothers, Columbia, etc) would give the RIAA permission through membership. |
|
 44402812Hack The PlanetPremium
join:2006-08-28
Plattsburgh, NY | reply to Nightfall
I think this whole copyright infringement is BS! Unless, they are making money of the songs or are making them aviable 24\7 who gives a s@#t. I'll admit I have used and distributed cracked software and so have many people in these forums. If I was not able to get it for free I would have just never have used it. So the BS about them losing money to me does not hold water either. Yes, I'm a pirate so kiss my white naked @ss! |
|
 FLengineerCCNA, CEH, MCSAPremium
join:2007-06-26
Leesburg, FL
 ·T-Mobile US
·Bright House
1 edit | reply to cdru
said by cdru  You can't infringe on your own copyright. While the RIAA themselves may not own the copyright directly, the member company (Warner Brothers, Columbia, etc) would give the RIAA permission through membership. Then the point of "unathorized file transfer" comes into question. If the RIAA is "Authorized" to download the file then the file transfer was authorized. |
|
cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:5 Reviews:
·Frontier FiOS
| Incorrect. The RIAA is authorized to posess the file, so they couldn't be charged with copyright infringement. However the source that they downloaded it from, presuming some type of illegal P2P transfer, was not authorized to distribute it.
This is why that the majority if not all of the RIAA and MPAA lawsuits against P2P users have been against people who were distributing the files. People who downloaded, but not uploaded (e.g. from Usenet, ftp, etc) haven't been gone after because the penalties for distributing is far more then just possession of infringing works. |
|
