Re: Yeah right - dslreports.com

Author	All Replies
Transmaster Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus join:2001-06-20 Cheyenne, WY ·Qwest.net	reply to Jeff_B Re: Yeah right I can see one of the reasons why this person doesn't want her name released. This is one of the lamest excuses I have ever heard. Yes Kazaa does not share your files by default you have to let it scan your files, very dangerous if you don't have your exclusions set. but with all of the free players out their, Winamp, db poweramp, etc, etc this story just does not wash. She would have been better off batting her teeny-bopper eyes and crying, I didn't know, I didn't know....... Lord voldemort is controlling me by an imperious curse. -- low Brass Rules! Irish Terriers do to!!! [text was edited by author 2003-08-23 11:06:27]
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-23 10:58:38 ·
Omega Displaced Ohioan Premium join:2002-07-30 Cheyenne, WY clubs:	I agree, the defense is pretty lame. But at least someone is challenging them. why you would use Kazaa for a media player is beyond me.
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-23 11:04:12 ·
DataRiker Premium join:2002-05-19 Metairie, LA clubs:	reply to Transmaster "Kazaa does not share by default" kazaa does share by default
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-23 11:07:13 ·
SRFireside join:2001-01-19 Houston, TX	reply to Omega I think the defense is as valid as any other. Just because other people would do things differently doesn't mean this person did exactly as she said. The RIAA needs to realize they cannot just arbitrarily sue someone just because they 'suspect' copyright infringement. According to the RIAA you are guilty if you have the files and they are shared mode. Doesn't matter if nobody actually downloads files from you computer. That, if you ask me, is an even lamer offense. -- Love Science Fiction? www.spacestationzoom.com
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-23 11:12:24 ·
cableblows3 join:2001-06-17 Indianapolis, IN	reply to Omega said by Omega : I agree, the defense is pretty lame. But at least someone is challenging them. why you would use Kazaa for a media player is beyond me. maybe they don't have phonehome software like most of the others?
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-23 12:05:14 ·
91439306 15,000 Watts of Bass Power join:2002-10-16 New Milford, CT	reply to Omega It sounds to me like the case of the drug dealer: he had the scales, the raw marijuana, and $500 cash laying around, therefore he must be intending to sell. She has Kazaa, the MP3s and was sharing... nobody uses Kazaa just to listen to their own collection... a likely story, she has...not. -- Take care, Mark & Mary Ann Weiss Hear my Kurzweil Creations at: »www.dv-clips.com/theater.htm Business sites at: '»www.dv-clips.com '»www.mwcomms.com '»www.adventuresinanimemusic.com
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-23 13:34:02 ·
ravital Just Another Pesky Independent Nh Voter Premium join:2001-07-19 Merrimack, NH	said by 91439306 : It sounds to me like the case of the drug dealer: he had the scales, the raw marijuana, and $500 cash laying around, therefore he must be intending to sell. Hypothetical: There's a dead body in my driveway, a bullet went right through him and is unrecoverable, so ballistic tests are not possible. I own a handgun. A round is missing from the clip. They spread some fluid on my hand and prove that I've used a firearm in the last 12 hours, and nobody's fingerprints are on the weapon but mine. That still won't wash. The prosecution still needs to do their homework and actually bother to PROVE something, unless they want to look real stupid when the owner of the firing range where I practice, as well as the grounds keeper who remembers my jokes and the bar waitress who flirts with me, all testify that I was target-practicing on their premises at the time my neighbor heard the gunshot, proving me guilty of perforating cardboard. This is America, fella, we recognize the concept of reasonable doubt. -- That's no longer true; with enough money, you can fool all the people all the time.
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-23 15:25:25 ·
Boogeyman Drive it like you stole it Premium join:2002-12-17 Huntsville, AL	Very true, I like your analogy. And I am tired the way big businesses decide that its alright to screw the customers. The RIAA also seems to forget about the fair use laws, they should also have to prove that all these people have never owned any of the music they have, in any type of media. For instance, I own GTA Vice City. The game has some good 80's music on it, and anytime I want to listen to that, I just have to pop the game in and hop in a car and let the music play. Well, thats kind of a pain in the ass, so I just went and downloaded a few of the songs from the game. If I already own the "right" to listen to the music by owning the game, cant I also trnasfer said music to an mp3 and listen to it on my pc? Also, many years ago, when I was about 13 or 14, I bought STP's first album, about 4 years later, my cousins stereo decided it wasnt gonna let me have the cd back, so it got scratched when I had to take it out. So the other day I went and downloaded all the songs I liked off of that album. According to them, that is my "right" since I paid for the damn cd. Just because I dont still have the ruined disk or a receipt doesnt mean that I didnt own the stupid thing. Thats what the RIAA should have to prove in court. -- what doesn't this button do?
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-23 15:52:45 ·
Nightfall My Goal Is To Deny Yours Premium,MVM join:2001-08-03 Grand Rapids, MI ·Site5.com ·AT&T Midwest ·Comcast	reply to ravital said by ravital : said by 91439306 : It sounds to me like the case of the drug dealer: he had the scales, the raw marijuana, and $500 cash laying around, therefore he must be intending to sell. Hypothetical: There's a dead body in my driveway, a bullet went right through him and is unrecoverable, so ballistic tests are not possible. I own a handgun. A round is missing from the clip. They spread some fluid on my hand and prove that I've used a firearm in the last 12 hours, and nobody's fingerprints are on the weapon but mine. That still won't wash. The prosecution still needs to do their homework and actually bother to PROVE something, unless they want to look real stupid when the owner of the firing range where I practice, as well as the grounds keeper who remembers my jokes and the bar waitress who flirts with me, all testify that I was target-practicing on their premises at the time my neighbor heard the gunshot, proving me guilty of perforating cardboard. This is America, fella, we recognize the concept of reasonable doubt. Theres one problem with that and that is the people who the RIAA are going after ARE sharing files. Sure, if you are using Kazaa, you may or may not be sharing anything. The key is they are going after people who are sharing and they have proof of it. -- My Domain Nightfall's Hockey and Life Journal
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-23 16:08:07 ·
joebear29 join:2003-07-20 Alabaster, AL	reply to ravital said by ravital : said by 91439306 : It sounds to me like the case of the drug dealer: he had the scales, the raw marijuana, and $500 cash laying around, therefore he must be intending to sell. Hypothetical: There's a dead body in my driveway, a bullet went right through him and is unrecoverable, so ballistic tests are not possible. I own a handgun. A round is missing from the clip. They spread some fluid on my hand and prove that I've used a firearm in the last 12 hours, and nobody's fingerprints are on the weapon but mine. That still won't wash. The prosecution still needs to do their homework and actually bother to PROVE something, unless they want to look real stupid when the owner of the firing range where I practice, as well as the grounds keeper who remembers my jokes and the bar waitress who flirts with me, all testify that I was target-practicing on their premises at the time my neighbor heard the gunshot, proving me guilty of perforating cardboard. This is America, fella, we recognize the concept of reasonable doubt. Murder can be proven on circumstantial evidence. If the prosecutor had enough in your handgun case, he could get a conviction, even without the weapon. Now obviously, if you had an alibi that would come out early, and the prosecution would not waste its time. While the actual bullet would be nice, with modern forensics (assuming you actually fired it) I suspect the prosecutor could build a decent case. Regardless, you're mixing up apples and oranges. Reasonable doubt is the standard of evidence in criminal, not civil cases. The RIAA has a much lower standard of evidence then if she was criminally charged. As an example, that is why there was not enough evidence to toss O.J. in jail, but there was enough for him to loss the wrongful death civil suit.
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-23 16:55:50 ·
IndyMike @12.55.x.x	reply to ravital But we're talking CIVIL law here, not criminal. Perponderence of evidence is all it takes. But the jump from "she could have" to "she did" is what they better prove ...... otherwise ...... no case.
	to forum · permalink · 2003-08-23 16:56:31 ·
wtansill Ncc1701 join:2000-10-10 Falls Church, VA	reply to ravital said by ravital : This is America, fella, we recognize the concept of reasonable doubt. I would so love to agree with you. This is the RIAA though -- if they say it is so, who are we to disagree? <sigh> -- That which does not kill me merely prolongs the agony.
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-23 17:34:11 ·
ravital Just Another Pesky Independent Nh Voter Premium join:2001-07-19 Merrimack, NH	reply to joebear29 said by joebear29 : Regardless, you're mixing up apples and oranges. Reasonable doubt is the standard of evidence in criminal, not civil cases. The RIAA has a much lower standard of evidence then if she was criminally charged. Good point, I stand corrected. And to be honest, I was responding to someone's analogy of a drug dealer caught with scales and other paraphernalia... Equally a criminal case and not a civil one. Now to expand on your earlier point, sure, many innocent folks are serving time for crimes they didn't commit. I know the score, it's not evidence or truth or justice, it's the ability of an attorney (on either side) to persuade a jury. [I keep thinking of the policewoman from Milwaukee who was convicted on evidence that she owned a red sweatsuit when she claimed to own a green one. The smashing piece of evidence presented by the prosecutor: He held up a black and white photo of her jogging and told the jury that was a red sweatsuit, and they all nodded.] So as long as it's just a matter of the attorney's, er, gonads, that's all she needs to worry about, a better attorney. Wouldn't surprise me if she finds it difficult to afford one. And given the assault on civil rights that the DMCA represents (this being the law that is the basis for all those subpoenas), it wouldn't surprise me either if a good one offered his/her services pro bono. Maybe not on this case, but on the next one. In addition, since everyone so cleverly points out that this is civil and not criminal - not complaining, you understand, glad to see my error pointed out to me, but why do I keep hearing that filesharing is a CRIME CRIME CRIME all the time? Why do the DMCA and the NET Act carry criminal penalties? As long as we're on that subject, anyone care to explain this? -- That's no longer true; with enough money, you can fool all the people all the time. [text was edited by author 2003-08-23 18:04:24]
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-23 17:51:08 ·
JE Can I Taste It? Mmmm Premium join:2000-12-15 Brooklyn, NY	reply to ravital said by ravital : said by 91439306 : It sounds to me like the case of the drug dealer: he had the scales, the raw marijuana, and $500 cash laying around, therefore he must be intending to sell. Hypothetical: There's a dead body in my driveway, a bullet went right through him and is unrecoverable, so ballistic tests are not possible. I own a handgun. A round is missing from the clip. They spread some fluid on my hand and prove that I've used a firearm in the last 12 hours, and nobody's fingerprints are on the weapon but mine. That still won't wash. The prosecution still needs to do their homework and actually bother to PROVE something, unless they want to look real stupid when the owner of the firing range where I practice, as well as the grounds keeper who remembers my jokes and the bar waitress who flirts with me, all testify that I was target-practicing on their premises at the time my neighbor heard the gunshot, proving me guilty of perforating cardboard. This is America, fella, we recognize the concept of reasonable doubt. But if you're BLACK and this happened, you're GUILTY - no questions asked! This is America, fella, we recognize the concept of racial injustice, lol Thank you JE -- Like R&B and Hip Hop? Well, check out my station... It's called: Urban Hitz Radio! »www.urbanhitzradio.us
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-23 20:14:51 ·
Kearnstd Elf Wizard Premium join:2002-01-22 Mullica Hill, NJ	if she can afford Johnny Cochrain, then the RIAA is screwed. -- [65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-24 03:25:34 ·
L0GiX When all else fails, theres always L0GiX Premium join:2000-06-30 South Bay,CA clubs:	reply to wtansill said by wtansill : I would so love to agree with you. This is the RIAA though -- if they say it is so, who are we to disagree? <sigh> I so hope you said that with sarcasm. What a corporation says and tries to sue on is one thing. What's legal and truthful is another. If with the recent Enron, WorldComm, and other such corporate swindling hasn't opened your eyes to the corporate world then I don't know what will until your brought to court for miniscule items. Granted they have the government in their pocket along with as much cash to keep you in court until eternity, but I really hate to see someone make a statement like that. You may be saying in jest (as I hope you are) but there are tons of brain washed sheep out there that need to wake up and see that they are being lead to the slaughter house and they are happily going. So Sad. There are too many other things in this world and country to focus on and fix then waste precious resources over some industries realization that their business model is dead and is fighting viciously trying to scrap as much money as possible before the world just moves on to another way of doing things. Hence SCO. So at the end of this statement I really hope your joking in that statement of what RIAA states is truth rather then see them for what they really are. Sad sad organization trying to keep a industry alive when they could use the money to change it into something better for them and for us. --Write your representatives in Congress and let them know what your views on this whole thing. If they don't see the larger portion of their constituents are against it they will go with who will put more money in their pocket and the P2P Industry is just starting their special interests group--- -- Two most common elements in the universe: Hydrogen & Stupidity.
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-24 05:36:13 ·
ravital Just Another Pesky Independent Nh Voter Premium join:2001-07-19 Merrimack, NH	reply to JE said by JE : This is America, fella, we recognize the concept of racial injustice, lol Proving once again, and on the anniversary of the March on Washington no less, that a mind is a terrible thing to waste. -- He who laughs last made a backup
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-24 08:04:19 ·
BrianDamage We Are The Hounds From Hell Premium join:2001-08-14 Rowlett, TX clubs:	reply to ravital I would only ask one question: What makes folks here think that what the RIAA is doing is pursuing civil cases? The one anonymous poster would be correct-in a civil case, PROPONDERANCE of the evidence is all that is required to prove one's case...however, it has been defined that copyright infringement is a CRIMINAL act. As such, proof beyond a reasonable doubt is required. If anyone disagrees, I would ask them to observe something the next time they put a DVD in their player to watch...at the beginning, you will notice the disclaimer, notated in very distinct red and white typeface, describing copyright infringement as a criminal action, not a civil one. What the RIAA is doing is saving face in lieu of being able to satisfy a legal prerequisite for being able to prove criminal actions. Also, bear in mind that in a civil case, even if one gets a judgement they think they deserve, there are really no processes in place for forcing a responsible party to ante up. It's the principle of the thing for the RIAA. I will not comment on this person's guilt. Maybe she's guilty, maybe not. But if she is guilty of something, it is up to the RIAA to prove it as such, and it is up to our legal system to adhere to the accepted standards of culpability of guilt as prescribed by due process of law. In short, the RIAA is on the losing end, in my mind. Just because some huge conglomerate's watchdog group believes this person is guilty does not make it so, and the legal system cannot or should not be influenced by the whinings of big business. -- "It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I'm wearin' milk bone underwear."
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-25 00:14:37 ·
ravital Just Another Pesky Independent Nh Voter Premium join:2001-07-19 Merrimack, NH	said by BrianDamage : What the RIAA is doing is saving face in lieu of being able to satisfy a legal prerequisite for being able to prove criminal actions. Right on the money IMHO. Not to mention, starting with a civil case where the rules of evidence are more relaxed, and obtaining a conviction based on such evidence, makes it easier to later prosecute a criminal case and use the verdict of the preceding criminal case as argument. -- He who laughs last made a backup [text was edited by author 2003-08-25 08:25:23]
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-25 08:24:44 ·
joebear29 join:2003-07-20 Alabaster, AL	reply to BrianDamage said by BrianDamage : I would only ask one question: What makes folks here think that what the RIAA is doing is pursuing civil cases? The one anonymous poster would be correct-in a civil case, PROPONDERANCE of the evidence is all that is required to prove one's case...however, it has been defined that copyright infringement is a CRIMINAL act. As such, proof beyond a reasonable doubt is required. Copyright infringement is both a criminal (no electronic theft) and civil (DMCA) offense. The RIAA can choose which it wants to pursue, and it chooses civil. That is its legal right, and I find criticism of it avoiding criminal charges at this time to be a tad disingenious, since I suspect the same people complaining of the RIAA avoiding the higher evidence standards of criminal cases would be the first to complain the RIAA was trying to throw people in jail instead of seeking monetary compensation if they were pursuing criminal charges. Regardless, the RIAA is pursuing civil cases and they have a very friendly law on their side. If I was a betting man, and one of these went to trial, I would take the RIAA in a heartbeat.
	to forum · permalink · · 2003-08-25 09:10:23 ·


Thursday, 26-Nov 17:18:08	Terms of Use \| Privacy Policy \| Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo \| feedback \| contact over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com. page compression OFF