Very nice of them!

Author	All Replies
pianotech Pianotech Premium join:2002-12-30 New Castle, PA Reviews: ·Vonage ·Comcast	Very nice of them! So nice of the EFF to help people break the law. -- Composer, performer, pianist [text was edited by author 2003-07-26 09:50:39]
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-26 09:47:14 ·
lazarus_ join:2002-08-31 Resolute, NU	said by pianotech: So nice of the EFF to help people break the law. -- Composer, performer, pianist [text was edited by author 2003-07-26 09:50:39] Maybe you should have read the whole article before typing this.. They arent telling people how to not get sued while still breaking the law... "Either: Make sure there are no potentially infringing files in your shared folder. This would ordinarily mean that your shared folder contains only files 1) that are in the public domain, 2) for which you have permission to share, or 3) that are made available under pro-sharing licenses, such as the Creative Commons license or other open media licenses, and Remove all potentially misleading file names that might be confused with the name of an RIAA artist or song (e.g., "Usher" or "Madonna") from your shared folder. Or: Disable the "sharing" or "uploading" features on your P2P application that allow other users on the network to get copies of files from your computer or scan any of your music directories. We hate this option, but it does appear that it will reduce your chances of becoming an RIAA target right now. For instructions on how to do this for particular applications, EFF suggests (but cannot guarantee) the following links: " -- Dont copy that floppy.
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-26 11:55:40 ·
pianotech Pianotech Premium join:2002-12-30 New Castle, PA Reviews: ·Vonage ·Comcast	said by lazarus_: said by pianotech: So nice of the EFF to help people break the law. -- Composer, performer, pianist [text was edited by author 2003-07-26 09:50:39] Maybe you should have read the whole article before typing this.. They arent telling people how to not get sued while still breaking the law... "Either: Make sure there are no potentially infringing files in your shared folder. This would ordinarily mean that your shared folder contains only files 1) that are in the public domain, 2) for which you have permission to share, or 3) that are made available under pro-sharing licenses, such as the Creative Commons license or other open media licenses, and Remove all potentially misleading file names that might be confused with the name of an RIAA artist or song (e.g., "Usher" or "Madonna") from your shared folder. Or: Disable the "sharing" or "uploading" features on your P2P application that allow other users on the network to get copies of files from your computer or scan any of your music directories. We hate this option, but it does appear that it will reduce your chances of becoming an RIAA target right now. For instructions on how to do this for particular applications, EFF suggests (but cannot guarantee) the following links: " It it said "Make sure there are no infringing files on your computer," you would have a point. It said, however, "Make sure there are no infringing files on your shared folder. I see that as a distinct difference. -- Composer, performer, pianist
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-26 12:12:14 ·
SRFireside join:2001-01-19 Houston, TX	said by pianotech: If it said "Make sure there are no infringing files on your computer," you would have a point. It said, however, "Make sure there are no infringing files on your shared folder. I see that as a distinct difference. Not really a distinct difference at all. You can have copywritten files on your computer. I have made mp3's of all my favorite songs in my CD collection. Nothing wrong with that. The RIAA is after people sharing copywritten works on P2P networks to what the EFF is saying is completely legitimate and is not promoting any copyright infringement. -- Love Science Fiction? www.spacestationzoom.com
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-26 12:53:29 ·
pianotech Pianotech Premium join:2002-12-30 New Castle, PA Reviews: ·Vonage ·Comcast	It didn't say "copywritten files," it said "infringing files." I can have copywritten files on my computer and that are legally mine and not infringing. And it didn't say not to have infringing files on your computer, it said not to have infringing files in your shared folder. Soooo...basically what they're saying is to keep infringing files away from where they can bee seen. -- Composer, performer, pianist
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-26 12:59:03 ·
SRFireside join:2001-01-19 Houston, TX	That's splitting hairs. I'm sure the terminology was meant for defining any files that would be considered copyright infringement if shared will be called infringing files. Copywritten... infringing... it's all the same to the RIAA. To the casual, non technical, reader it would take up a lot more text and time to explain the difference so I can understand why they still use the term infringing files. The focal point was about what you can or can't share online. -- Love Science Fiction? www.spacestationzoom.com
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-26 13:11:23 ·
pianotech Pianotech Premium join:2002-12-30 New Castle, PA	I didn't see the words, "don't infringe" anywhere. Did you?
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-26 14:25:17 ·

ravital Just Another Pesky Independent Nh Voter Premium join:2001-07-19 Merrimack, NH	reply to pianotech said by pianotech: So nice of the EFF to help people break the law. Now then, now then, you know better than that. Here's a more complete quote from the "how not to get sued" link: "Make sure there are no potentially infringing files in your shared folder. This would ordinarily mean that your shared folder contains only files 1) that are in the public domain, 2) for which you have permission to share, or 3) that are made available under pro-sharing licenses, etc..." Note that they're not talking about infringing files but "potentially infringing" files, and that could very well include the stuff you bought and own legally. So saying "make sure you have no potentially infringing files on your computer" would have been overboard, as there are some 20 Mb worth of recordings that I own on my computer (and I don't even have a shared folder since I don't use P2P at all). As to helping people break the law: Do you implicitly trust the RIAA to only prosecute people with enough solid evidence that they may have infringed, or do you think they will just throw their weight around to intimidate as many people as possible? Looking at "potentially" above and at how American Citizens have been held in jail for months without seeing a lawyer, and without being charged with anything, because they happen to be brownish and have a funny religion, I don't think this is a climate where I can put my trust in the RIAA and accept that if they see what looks like smoke to them, there's got to be a fire. Many, many perfectly innocent people are going to get caught in this subpoena-fest. Now given that a subpoena, once filed, becomes a matter of public records, and innocent people are not going to travel to every city in which such a subpoena was filed, the EFF steps in and scans your user name for you against a database of PUBLIC records. Not only is there nothing immoral, sinister or illegal in that, it's a great service that they didn't have to offer, and they deserve to be applauded for that. I went to their page, entered the user names that I use most often, and they all turned out clean. This time. I'm not paranoid, but I don't feel relieved either.
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-26 14:43:43 ·
SRFireside join:2001-01-19 Houston, TX	reply to pianotech said by pianotech: I didn't see the words, "don't infringe" anywhere. Did you? Does it have to? It sounds like they are trying to give advice as objective as possible without taking any sides. These people aren't legal eagles who can word their articles to cover every little clause or detail that comes up. I know this because I use the EFF for when I wish to respond to legislation I don't agree with, and some of their form letter responses just don't do my stance justice. -- Love Science Fiction? www.spacestationzoom.com
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-26 14:43:51 ·
Kaltes Premium join:2002-12-04 Los Angeles, CA	reply to pianotech ""And it didn't say not to have infringing files on your computer, it said not to have infringing files in your shared folder."" - HELLO! What is on the _REST_ of your hard drive is not relevant to the topic of the EFF webpage in question. Now you are crying because the EFF did not lecture readers about how copyright infringement is wrong and they should never engage in it in any form whether by sharing on p2p or elsewhere in their computers?? Excuse them for assuming they were dealing with a sophisticated audience! - The other angle to your stupidity emerges once you realize the fact that ripping your music to your hard drive is not infringement. If you download files using p2p they download to a folder that is gasp shared as well, meaning that the EFFs advice to keep infringing files out of your shared folder is not synonymous with "Once you dl infringing songs move them out of your shared folder fast like a good leech so you don't get caught!" which is how you read it, because you are biased and generally incapable of putting 2 and 2 together. Hey piano, it is about time you just admitted that you aren't all that great and stopped blaming your lack of success on everyone else. This is called 'denial'. Get help.
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-26 17:22:27 ·
pianotech Pianotech Premium join:2002-12-30 New Castle, PA Reviews: ·Vonage ·Comcast	Kaltes, I know the business, having worked in it for some 20 years. I understand copyrights, which was why I made the distinction between "infringing" and "copywritten." You choose to pepper your posts with comments such as "The other angle to your stupidity emerges..." and so on. I could respond in like, but choose not to, because I realize that because you disagree with me does not give me any reason (or right) to assume that you are stupid and label you as such. I'm sure the reality of it is that you are a very intelligent person with a differing opinion. In any case, I would have preferred to have had a reasonable, productive dialog with you. It's a shame you are unwilling or unable to do so. -- Composer, performer, pianist
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-26 17:29:47 ·
ifarrell join:2000-08-10 Willow Spring, NC	reply to pianotech said by pianotech: I didn't see the words, "don't infringe" anywhere. Did you? Perhaps you should have this out with EFF if it bothers you. You obviously take every written word literally. Perhaps you should be a Lawyer for the RIAA, they are obviously need narrow minded people like you.
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-26 21:27:52 ·
pianotech Pianotech Premium join:2002-12-30 New Castle, PA Reviews: ·Vonage ·Comcast	said by ifarrell: Perhaps you should be a Lawyer for the RIAA, they are obviously need narrow minded people like you. Thanks for the suggestion, but musicians make lousy lawyers. -- Composer, performer, pianist
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-26 21:36:15 ·
The Truth7 join:2003-05-24 River Grove, IL	sry buddy, i'm a musician too and guess what. Musicians should be paid based on the performance they promote to the consumer. Single's should cost no more then a buck a piece and they should be readily available for the songs that are popular. Why aren't they? Cuz the fucking record industry would rather say buy the whole cd, even though the rest of it is crap for the average 15 bucks. There's no competition in this field either. Its not like record labels are going to price war with eachother, they banded together and charge the same avg price. Thats why there was a class action law suit against them which they LOST. They're not offering any way for the consumer to justify the current price scheme. Thats why there's people sharing these files, and sharing your music. If most of your music is crap, noone's gonna buy your damn cd, point blank. Thats how it should be too, its called competative advantage. Just bs scare tactics by a company thats started their own death. I really hope they realise that by sending out all those subpeona'a and screwing all those people like that, they're going to piss off a large amount of today's youth and they aren't going to buy the crap anymore. You think this is going to make the people buy their cd's? Ha! The people getting sued, are going to tell their friend and family to stop, that the record industry can piss off. If your going to go on your whole "i'm a musician" play, well guess what, i am too. Its simple economics, quality=consistent demand for your product. Quantity without quality=diminished demand.
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-27 00:01:02 ·
ravital Just Another Pesky Independent Nh Voter Premium join:2001-07-19 Merrimack, NH	said by The Truth7: If most of your music is crap, noone's gonna buy your damn cd, point blank. Here is where your argument fails: The fact that a particular piece of music is bought by many people and downloaded (legally or not) by many others is not an indication of the quality of the work. The difference between the shrink-wrapped CD from the store and the P2P-downloaded material is not that the CD is garbage and the d/l music is the greatest work of music ever recorded. The difference is that the CD is 90% garbage that the consumer doesn't want and the d/l music is 100% garbage that the consumer wants. Okay, probably not 100% garbage, but this principle that "lots of people want it = high quality music" is simply not true. I mean, isn't that how RIAA labels have suckered all of us for years to begin with? "top 40" and "Platinum" and "Best selling" all of a sudden are the marks of quality? If music proves anything, it proves that different people have different tastes, and what's garbage to you is the most beautiful music to someone else. said by The Truth7: they're going to piss off a large amount of today's youth and they aren't going to buy the crap anymore. While we're on the topic of "today's youth" and different musical tastes and garbage music and all that, I'm sure there's a few young folks out there who dig Jazz or classical music, but do you think you can find a lot of those kinds of music on an average day on Kazaa or any other P2P network? So if you can't find any Bach or Beethoven or Keith Jarrett or Charlie Mingus on P2P, does that mean they're garbage? [text was edited by author 2003-07-27 02:32:53]
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-27 00:53:32 ·
Nascaracsan Premium join:2003-05-16 Palm Desert, CA	reply to pianotech Can you say STING? Maybe its a sting operation setup by the RIAA.. By looking up your name, aren't you admitting to filesharing? Couldn't the RIAA subpoena the names, from this site, as evidence of admission of guilt? Seems to me that filesharing is no different than recording off the radio or TV. As long as you don't profit from those recordings..... Didn't the RIAA or someone have the same reaction when the VHS/Beta recorders came out? Nas =^.,.^= "Drive it like you own it"
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-27 05:31:00 ·
pianotech Pianotech Premium join:2002-12-30 New Castle, PA Reviews: ·Vonage ·Comcast	reply to The Truth7 Re: Very nice of them! said by The Truth7: sry buddy, i'm a musician too and guess what. Musicians should be paid based on the performance they promote to the consumer. Single's should cost no more then a buck a piece and they should be readily available for the songs that are popular. I agree with you 200%. A buck is actually the highest they should be. .75-99 cents would be about right. That said, the artist deserves that 79-99 cents if the song is downloaded and kept. I think the CD model has been dead for several years now except for classical works where you have entire symphonies. -- Composer, performer, pianist
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-27 08:34:06 ·
wtansill Ncc1701 join:2000-10-10 Falls Church, VA	said by pianotech: said by The Truth7: sry buddy, i'm a musician too and guess what. Musicians should be paid based on the performance they promote to the consumer. Single's should cost no more then a buck a piece and they should be readily available for the songs that are popular. I agree with you 200%. A buck is actually the highest they should be. .75-99 cents would be about right. That said, the artist deserves that 79-99 cents if the song is downloaded and kept. I think the CD model has been dead for several years now except for classical works where you have entire symphonies. So in your estimation that $0.75-$0.99 should go to the artist in addition to the royalties already charged on blank CD media that are there specifically to compensate the artists for supposed losses attributed to downloading? I'm sorry, my argument would be that I've already paid for that privilege via the up-front royalty fee. Additionally, there are many, many folks who never D/L music, and who only use the CDs to back up data, create family photo albums etc. These folks never receive a dime's of value from their royalty contribution. Why is it that you only see "theft" as a one-way venture? -- That which does not kill me merely prolongs the agony.
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-27 12:00:35 ·
pianotech Pianotech Premium join:2002-12-30 New Castle, PA Reviews: ·Vonage ·Comcast	said by wtansill: said by pianotech: said by The Truth7: sry buddy, i'm a musician too and guess what. Musicians should be paid based on the performance they promote to the consumer. Single's should cost no more then a buck a piece and they should be readily available for the songs that are popular. I agree with you 200%. A buck is actually the highest they should be. .75-99 cents would be about right. That said, the artist deserves that 79-99 cents if the song is downloaded and kept. I think the CD model has been dead for several years now except for classical works where you have entire symphonies. So in your estimation that $0.75-$0.99 should go to the artist in addition to the royalties already charged on blank CD media that are there specifically to compensate the artists for supposed losses attributed to downloading? I'm sorry, my argument would be that I've already paid for that privilege via the up-front royalty fee. Additionally, there are many, many folks who never D/L music, and who only use the CDs to back up data, create family photo albums etc. These folks never receive a dime's of value from their royalty contribution. Why is it that you only see "theft" as a one-way venture? I don't see theft as a one-way venture, I see it as a two-way venture. Labels rip off consumers, and they rip off the artists. Furthermore, the "royalty" on blank cd's is wrong also, because as you said, people who use cdr's for things that have nothing to do with music are paying it. Plus, that is only distributed to major acts who have contracts with major labels (read, the RIAA), not independents like me. So in consideration of everything I just said, why should I not receive 79-99 cents for a song? I'm independent, have no label, and could care less about the RIAA. -- Composer, performer, pianist [text was edited by author 2003-07-27 12:28:32]
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-27 12:13:13 ·
wtansill Ncc1701 join:2000-10-10 Falls Church, VA	said by pianotech: I don't see theft as a one-way venture, I see it as a two-way venture. Labels rip off consumers, and they rip off the artists. Furthermore, the "royalty" on blank cd's is wrong also, because as you said, people who use cdr's for things that have nothing to do with music are paying it. Plus, that is only distributed to major acts who have contracts with major labels (read, the RIAA), not independents like me. So in consideration of everything I just said, why should I not receive 79-99 cents for a song? I'm independent, have no label, and could care less about the RIAA. -- Composer, performer, pianist [text was edited by author 2003-07-27 12:28:32] Ok, I'll bite. What genre of music do you produce? Where and how is it available? I frequent events such as Celtic festivals, Native American pow-wows, Renaissance Fairs, Irish Pubs (Seamus Kennedy is a favorite) and such, and purchase CDs at those events in direct support of the artists who produced the works. I've also purchased CDs or simply donated money to various street musicians (New Alburado, for instance, creates a blend of Chilean, Andean, and Peruvian music -- I ran into them performing live outside Luray Caverns, of all places!) If you have something I'm interested in and I can find it for purchase, I'll happily support your endeavors in exchange for a chance to enjoy the music. The one thing that these have in common though, is that I'm able to hear the music before I purchase it, so I know what I'm getting and whether I like it in advance. -- That which does not kill me merely prolongs the agony. [text was edited by author 2003-07-27 13:00:10]
	to forum · permalink · 2003-07-27 12:56:28 ·

And Still More Filesharing News > Very nice of them!

Can you say STING?

Re: Very nice of them!