page: 1 · 2  |
 |  | nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD | Re: bah who needs a fair trial besides, laws are for the little people, not big corporations (eg, see Telecom Amnesty) | |
| | | 
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
 ·RoadRunner Cable
1 edit | Re: bah who needs a fair trial That's really a good point. If Congress effectively pardons big corporations for grossly illegal conduct, how can anyone be expected to respect laws - especially those designed to protect profits of corporations?
Rule of law must be universal, otherwise it is abandoned and government has no legitimacy. | |
| | | | | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10 | Re: bah who needs a fair trial Laws are made to be broken. Obviously, celebrities, politicians, police, and anyone of power need not apply. For the rest of us, justice is only as blind as your pocket book. | |
| | | | | 
cork1958
Cork
join:2000-02-26
Fruitport, MI
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·Charter Pipeline
| Re: bah who needs a fair trial said by jc100  :Laws are made to be broken. Obviously, celebrities, politicians, police, and anyone of power need not apply. For the rest of us, justice is only as blind as your pocket book. Couldn't agree more with that statement. You know money talks!!
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/ | |
| | | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10 | Re: bah who needs a fair trial and B.S. walks no doubt...(That B.S. being from the High Priced lawyer who gets you off on a technicality, pending you can write a large enough check). Otherwise, off to a that new home with the added security and "bars" on the windows for you. | |
| 
AnonProxy
Proxy of Anon
Premium
join:2001-05-12
ß | Yeah fair trial, evidence, due process.... all mere technicalities. You should pay what we say you should pay.
F' the RIAA and the MPAA and their oddly Nazi like tactics.
| |
| | Austinloop
join:2001-08-19
Austin, TX | Re: Yeah fair trial, evidence, due process.... You maybe unfairly demeaning Nazis. This is RIAA and the MPAA we are talking about. | |
| | | Jonbo298
join:2004-01-12
Council Bluffs, IA
| Re: Yeah fair trial, evidence, due process.... said by Austinloop :You maybe unfairly demeaning Nazis. This is RIAA and the MPAA we are talking about. I had to re-read that a few times to realize you were slamming the RIAA and MPAA more  | |
| | cornelius785
join:2006-10-26
Worcester, MA
| i keep thinking that the MPAA and the RIAA is the new face to the mafia. with their new front, they have a much large clientele base (average consumers, artists, actors, etc.), but now they can intimidate, extort, and sue anyone they please. even better for them is now they can freely use lobbyists to push their ideology onto the government and slip things into bills with ease with the hope that no one notices. | |
| | Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | if the MPAA and RIAA have their way, buying a DVD and then making a copy for the DVD player in your minivan so original doesnt get damaged would be illegal.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| | | 
fuziwuzi
Not born yesterday
Premium
join:2005-07-01
Atlanta, GA
| Re: Yeah fair trial, evidence, due process.... said by Kearnstd :if the MPAA and RIAA have their way, buying a DVD and then making a copy for the DVD player in your minivan so original doesnt get damaged would be illegal. It already is a violation of the DMCA, and you can be prosecuted for it.
--
***************
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image.
- Stephen Hawking | |
| | | elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
join:2006-08-30
Toronto, ON
| said by Kearnstd :if the MPAA and RIAA have their way, buying a DVD and then making a copy for the DVD player in your minivan so original doesnt get damaged would be illegal. If Bill 61 in Canada ever gets passed, it will be Illegal | |
| | | 
excop72
@pbtcomm.net
| said by Kearnstd :if the MPAA and RIAA have their way, buying a DVD and then making a copy for the DVD player in your minivan so original doesnt get damaged would be illegal. Ummm.... it IS illegal if it's a copy protected disk. I've never seen such a mess. Remember when you could actually back up your music and movies, record TV shows and keep 'em on tape... ah the good old days. Now, they SAY you can make a back up for personal us, but you can't break any kind of encryption or other copy protection. Gimme a break. Now you can't even use your favorite song as a ringtone unless you BUY it SPECIFICALLY for that purpose! | |
| | Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | however US Copyright Law allows for that backup copy to be made.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| | Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | if the companies get their way the new law in canada would be tame. it would be illegal to hum a copyrighted tune...
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| Anomaly95
join:2005-12-11
Phoenix, AZ | desperate much? Wow. This just reeks of desperation for holding on to their current business model. | |
| | 
TScheisskopf
World News Trust
join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ
 ·Sprint Broadband D..
| Re: desperate much? And when you look at record sales, and the top-heavy structure of all the major labels, then look at the quality of music they release(Oh sure, good acts come along, but that's generally a bolt out of the blue and they are as surprised as you are when it happens), you begin to see that suing world+dog is pretty much the only viable business model they have left.
Trust me: If an act breaks big and sticks around past it's time of option, it is in spite of the system, not because of it. This is one of the reasons a lot of successful acts negotiate their own record labels. Just to put some distance between them and the incompetence and feral creatures at the majors.
It's a bitter pill for a veteran artist to be told what to do on the next album by some wunderkind fresh out of college radio. Especially when it is well-known that said wunderkind signed Joe Booger and His Rockin' Snotballs because they used to play his frat parties.
The last thing to remember is that signed acts become pawns in power-plays within record companies. Those that win in those power plays, well, their acts win as well. Those that lose, their acts are usually jettisoned. A lot of promising artists go away that way.
Put it all together and you really have to wonder is they really have a business model. If they do, it's gotta be "Sell records. Or something, like maybe go to lunch." | |
| | | elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
join:2006-08-30
Toronto, ON
| Re: desperate much? The Record companies are there to sell records, it fattens their pocket book. The artist however will make his/her money when the tour.
Eventually the artist will realize they don't need the record company (option time) will release their music free (which you are already seeing), and continue to tour without the backing of a major label. | |
| 
milnoc
join:2001-03-05
H2Z | Conviction without proof? Doesn't that go against the principles of Justice?
By any chance does this lawyer work at Guantanamo?  | |
| | 
Chiyo
Save Me Konata-Chan
Premium
join:2003-02-20
Minneapolis, MN
clubs: | Re: Conviction without proof? I say we boycott the MPAA and their movies I personally haven't been to a movie in over 2 years and I don't ever download them. | |
| | | 
Matt
Gone playing Dragon Age Origins
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| Re: Conviction without proof? said by Chiyo :I say we boycott the MPAA and their movies I personally haven't been to a movie in over 2 years and I don't ever download them. You've missed some really good movies. Ouch. | |
| | | | | | | 
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| Re: Conviction without proof? said by Nightfall :...Don't download, don't watch, and don't participate in anything related to the MPAA. Then, they have no one to blame but themselves when they see their profits falling. Yea the problem is that RIAA & MPAA are so obsessed with labeling everything they don't like as theft (including ripping a cd to mp3), that any decrease in sales is immediately considered a result of copyright infringement.
And because they are who they are apparently they're the only voice allowed to be heard on the issue.
What I think is even funnier is, how the heck do they think copies of the films & albums are getting out to the P2P networks before they go on sale or arrive in the theater?
Hmm...inside jobs? Reviewers copies? They don't seem to ever bother to consider that angle. | |
| | | | | praetoralpha
join:2005-08-06
Mount Vernon, OH | Re: Conviction without proof? So not listening to their music, not watching their movies, and not downloading any of them = stealing.
Wow. Might as well turn myself in right now, since that's what I have been (or not) doing for the last year. | |
| | | | | | | | | | 
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
·AT&T Midwest
 ·Site5.com
·Comcast
| said by GlobalMind :said by Nightfall :...Don't download, don't watch, and don't participate in anything related to the MPAA. Then, they have no one to blame but themselves when they see their profits falling. Yea the problem is that RIAA & MPAA are so obsessed with labeling everything they don't like as theft (including ripping a cd to mp3), that any decrease in sales is immediately considered a result of copyright infringement. And because they are who they are apparently they're the only voice allowed to be heard on the issue. What I think is even funnier is, how the heck do they think copies of the films & albums are getting out to the P2P networks before they go on sale or arrive in the theater? Hmm...inside jobs? Reviewers copies? They don't seem to ever bother to consider that angle. The whole point of a boycott is to not give the RIAA/MPAA any ammo. Right now, there are a lot of people who cry out "Fuck the RIAA" and yet they freely distribute over P2P. Imagine if everyone just dropped P2P for illegal file sharing. Sure, the RIAA may say that ripping to an MP3 is hurting their business, but that wouldn't be the case. People would just not be buying.
The issue here is that people want something for nothing. Sure, they spout off that everything the RIAA puts out is crap, but they freely distribute their work over P2P. That IMHO is crap. Those people are just talking out their asses. | |
| | | | | |
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| Re: Conviction without proof? said by Nightfall :The whole point of a boycott is to not give the RIAA/MPAA any ammo. Right now, there are a lot of people who cry out "Fuck the RIAA" and yet they freely distribute over P2P. Imagine if everyone just dropped P2P for illegal file sharing. Sure, the RIAA may say that ripping to an MP3 is hurting their business, but that wouldn't be the case. People would just not be buying. The issue here is that people want something for nothing. Sure, they spout off that everything the RIAA puts out is crap, but they freely distribute their work over P2P. That IMHO is crap. Those people are just talking out their asses. Yea I get the point Nightfall, the thing is though that while a boycott - a real one - would be great, it might not matter because ANY decrease in sales is attributed to piracy first over anything else. That's their MO.
Of course ripping your purchased CD to digital format isn't illegal but they like to toss that out there anyway for good measure.
The industry believes in their product and that it is all innovative, quality stuff. They won't ever say people aren't buying because they don't want the product. Their opinion is that everyone wants their product.
Clearly with the volume we see, there is demand, the question is whether folks are willing to pay for it or not and as you say many want something for nothing.
--
TheGlobalMind.com | Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | Trust the instinct to the end, though you can render no reason. Ralph Waldo Emerson
| |
| | | | | | |
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
·AT&T Midwest
·Site5.com
·Comcast
| Re: Conviction without proof? said by GlobalMind :said by Nightfall :The whole point of a boycott is to not give the RIAA/MPAA any ammo. Right now, there are a lot of people who cry out "Fuck the RIAA" and yet they freely distribute over P2P. Imagine if everyone just dropped P2P for illegal file sharing. Sure, the RIAA may say that ripping to an MP3 is hurting their business, but that wouldn't be the case. People would just not be buying. The issue here is that people want something for nothing. Sure, they spout off that everything the RIAA puts out is crap, but they freely distribute their work over P2P. That IMHO is crap. Those people are just talking out their asses. Yea I get the point Nightfall, the thing is though that while a boycott - a real one - would be great, it might not matter because ANY decrease in sales is attributed to piracy first over anything else. That's their MO. Of course ripping your purchased CD to digital format isn't illegal but they like to toss that out there anyway for good measure. The industry believes in their product and that it is all innovative, quality stuff. They won't ever say people aren't buying because they don't want the product. Their opinion is that everyone wants their product. Clearly with the volume we see, there is demand, the question is whether folks are willing to pay for it or not and as you say many want something for nothing. The industry believes that their product is quality stuff and people want their product because of how heavily it is being distributed on P2P. Before the P2P revolution, there was very little talk about piracy. I remember back in the mid 90s when I purchased a couple cds of pirated material from the back of a van after I concert I went to. Sure, it was illegal, but they had concert cds that I couldn't find anywhere else and still can't find today. Back then, you heard next to nothing from piracy groups.
When the internet hit, and even when napster hit, you started hearing about it. It wasn't until P2P applications were in full force that you were getting flooded with ads and talk about how piracy is a huge problem.
Piracy is a big problem right now. People obviously do want their product because people are willing to share tons and tons of music, movies, games, and other software online. If their product wasn't in demand, then there would be no sharing going on. That is why I don't subscribe to the comments from people who share saying the RIAA puts out nothing but crap. Well, then why are you spending time downloading and sharing it?
I know I am pretty much going along with what you are saying. Just venting my frustrations for the most part. | |
| | | | | | | |
asdfdfdfdfdf
@Level3.net | Re: Conviction without proof? I agree and share your frustration.
People are obviously addicted to this stuff and can't liberate themselves from it. There would be no issue if they could. People can delude themselves but the industry knows this. | |
| | | | | | | |
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| said by Nightfall :That is why I don't subscribe to the comments from people who share saying the RIAA puts out nothing but crap. Well, then why are you spending time downloading and sharing it? I know I am pretty much going along with what you are saying. Just venting my frustrations for the most part. Yep I'd agree there's some truth to that. In reality someone is out there downloading & sharing all this stuff, so clearly there is demand.
But hey, saying the product is all crap and only supporting indie artists is what's en vogue today among a certain group of people and serves to demonstrate a level of intellectual superiority over all of us meager sheeple. ; )
For me, as I've said before I buy what the heck I want. It's pretty simple. I don't think it's all crap but there's a good bit I don't care for so I just don't buy it. But then again, I don't go out and download it either.
I go to concerts and support my favorites that way, where they make more money off of it anyway.
Now I recall back in the day I bought my share of "imports." At record shows. Fact was that there weren't very many live shows being released at the time, and this was a way to get at them. The way I justifed it to myself is that if they did release a real one I'd likely buy that too, but since they weren't the label wasn't losing anything.
Flawed logic perhaps but that was it.
I do have a fair amount of distain for the RIAA in general, I don't care for their methods or their rhretoric, and all the influence they're trying to exert on our legislative process.
I don't believe they're entitled to the blank media tax, I don't believe they are entitled to anything of that sort on any media, device or otherwise.
It isn't right to treat all of your customers as default criminals either, and the actions of the industry tend to reveal this. Frankly the various DRM schemes are pathetic at best and largely work to prevent a consumer from using their purchased copy of the work in legal ways.
I don't have an issue with performance funds, licensing in that regard is fine. However, it isn't right to try and change the law to support your vision for your industry which is contrary to how the world economy has evolved.
I understand your frustration, Nightfall. So please excuse some of my venting as well. : )
--
TheGlobalMind.com | Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | Trust the instinct to the end, though you can render no reason. Ralph Waldo Emerson
| |
| | | mobbo
join:2005-04-13
Denton, TX
 ·Verizon FIOS
| I don't go see movies much anymore because going to a theater is ridiculously expensive, unhealthy, and full of rude people. $8.50 - $9.00 for a movie (x 2 for my girlfriend)? No thanks. I'll wait until the movie is out on DVD and put it on the Netflix queue to watch on my 52" TV. | |
| | | 
Unit649
I B U, Who U B?
Premium
join:2000-01-22
Stockton, CA
·Comcast
| Agreed. Probably have missed maybe a good movie or 2, but most of the stuff they put out there as "entertainment" is just downright pathetic.
The fact that some people will pay "full price" (which is what now, $10 a head) for some of the pure JUNK that is out there really makes you wonder.
If I want to see something I'll buy the DVD when it comes out. No "must see it now" syndrome for me. I have never had a movie be so important that I had to see it NOW!
I'm sure with the costs of other stuff attendance is going to be affected. I'm also sure piracy will be blamed when its simply the fact that people can't afford to spend $20 to see pure crud. | |
| 
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
·Comcast
| WTF are they smoking? I say they have been ripping us all off and should pay all of us $250,000.00 - no evidence needed!
See what they say to that...
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera | |
| |
See 7 replies to this post | |
| |
See 22 replies to this post | |
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | The MPAA is infringing on 1,000,000 of my works. I'm entitled to a zillion dollars?
Proof? I don't need proof. | |
| | | | 
FLengineer
Premium
join:2007-06-26
Leesburg, FL | Re: The MPAA is infringing on 1,000,000 of my works. you forgot to ask them to leave the "memo" or "for" line on the check blank so you could write in what ever you want to. | |
| | Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | i copyrighted being an asshole, im so going to send them a bill.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
Dr Dongle
@bellsouth.net | Film industry reacts to RIAA case development apparently the MPAA and RIAA have never heard of "due process" | |
| | 
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA | Re: Film industry reacts to RIAA case development Yes they have. Let me quote from my handy RIAA/MPAA dictionary:
Due Process - The legal process for giving the recording and/or movie industries what they feel is due to them regardless of proof provided.
| |
| | | WangFubar
join:2003-10-02
Paradise, CA | Re: Film industry reacts to RIAA case development lol, Nice one | |
| 
nipseyrussel
Nipsey Russell, yo
join:2002-02-22
Philadelphia, PA | pernicious? given the two options - denying EMI another payday or allowing people to be found guilty in a civil court with no proof -which is the more pernicious??? | |
| | 
hayabusa3303
Over 200 mph
Premium
join:2005-06-29
clubs: | Here we go again. The bottomless pit both **aa will go to to get money. | |
| | 
chronoss2008
Premium
join:2008-03-29 | Actors are gay REMEMBER that the mpaa = actors.
When we stop treating them nice perhaps they shuld get the message. | |
| | EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA
| Re: Actors are gay No, the MPAA represents the studios and the media conglomerates who own them- Disney, Columbia (Sony), Paramount (Viacom), Warner Bros. (TWX), Fox (News Corp.), and Universal (GE). They'd go up against the actors too if they feel the studios interests are at stake. | |
| |
thecapn2000
| said by chronoss2008 :REMEMBER that the mpaa = actors. When we stop treating them nice perhaps they shuld get the message. Paramount Pictures Corporation;
Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc.;
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation;
Universal City Studios LLLP;
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures; and
Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.
Not actors...the MPAA is composed of corporations. | |
| | praetoralpha
join:2005-08-06
Mount Vernon, OH | No, MPAA = big corporations.
Screen actors guild = actors. Which reminds me that I think that they will go on strike sometime this summer, mostly over the same things that the writers did. | |
|
yeahyou
@comcast.net
| Thoughts.. First.... what is a record? Are those the thin black discs the aliens left?
Second.... This IS after all Amerika and I know a police officer who says it really IS guilty before being proved innocent because "we" (cops) don't go around arresting people for something we don't think they did! If "we" (the cops) arrest someone and they say "hey man I didn't do it" are we supposed to take their word for it and just let them go because we presume they'r inocent?
The RIAA (and the IRS) are the closest things we have to the Gestapo in the modern world. These organization can take everything you own, your kids, your house, your job, everything without a care in the world. They have unlimited resources while the little guy on the street has to pay tousands in legal fees. | |
| |
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| Re: Thoughts.. said by yeahyou :
Second.... This IS after all Amerika and I know a police officer who says it really IS guilty before being proved innocent because "we" (cops) don't go around arresting people for something we don't think they did! If "we" (the cops) arrest someone and they say "hey man I didn't do it" are we supposed to take their word for it and just let them go because we presume they'r inocent?
Regardless of the twisted view your police officer friend has, it is still innocent until proven guilty in criminal cases. Being arrested just means that you are being charged with a crime. You are detained for awhile and possibly brought before a judge who decides whether you are free to go pending trial (with or without bail/bond) or whether you should be locked up pending trial. If you are charged with shoplifting a CD, chances are you'll be home before your trial starts. If you are charged with shooting ten people, chances are you will be seeing bars for awhile.
That said, copyright infringement cases aren't criminal. They're civil. This means that "beyond a reasonable doubt" doesn't apply and instead becomes "most evidence points to".
Also, "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply to media coverage. If you get arrested for possession of child pornography, you'll be branded an evil individual who likely would lure kids to an awful fate. Even if all of the evidence proved to be fake and all charges were dropped, your public stature would be seriously compromised because of the media coverage. "Oops, we goofed! He's really a nice guy" doesn't sell papers. "Evil Child Porn Viewer In Your Backyard!" does.
said by yeahyou :
The RIAA (and the IRS) are the closest things we have to the Gestapo in the modern world. These organization can take everything you own, your kids, your house, your job, everything without a care in the world. They have unlimited resources while the little guy on the street has to pay tousands in legal fees.
This, I agree with you on. Fines for copyright infringement were set when copyright infringement only meant CD duplicating warehouses, not home users with a P2P application. There should be a commercial copyright infringement fine rate (what the current fine rate is now) and a noncommercial copyright infringement rate. if the latter were even 20x the purchase price of each song, then being caught uploading 1,000 songs would result in a fine of about $19,600 (20 * $0.98 * 1,000). Nothing that will bankrupt most people (especially if a payment schedule is set up), but something that will seriously deter them from repeating the situation. (For comparison, the minimum fine for 1,000 violations right now is $750,000.)
--
-Jason Levine
Support a children's charity. Buy a calendar. Shooting For A Cause
Jason's Toolbox | PCQandA.com | |
| | | | old_wiz_60
join:2005-06-03
Bedford, MA
·Verizon FIOS
| said by yeahyou :
First.... what is a record? Are those the thin black discs the aliens left?
The RIAA (and the IRS) are the closest things we have to the Gestapo in the modern world. These organization can take everything you own, your kids, your house, your job, everything without a care in the world. They have unlimited resources while the little guy on the street has to pay tousands in legal fees.
The RIAA and IRS can't hold a candle to CIA, FBI, or Homeland Security, the true Gestapo organizations. Neither the IRS nor the RIAA can take you away without trial and beat you to death in Gitmo just because they "think" you know something. | |
| nutcr0cker
join:2003-04-02
Chandler, AZ
| Atleast someones following the shruibs footsteps The democrats under NOOBAma finally decded to continue trampling on the freedom of Americans in the shrub tradition.....Is that the spare change nobama promises....the new policy.....both republiCONs and DemocRATs would screw the American people....Maybe Americans deserve a Bush followed by NObama or McBush down with the rat pack....the rats might aswell hand over 2008 elections to McBush on the pretense of spare change. | |
|
FLengineer
Premium
join:2007-06-26
Leesburg, FL
 ·Vonage
·Comcast
·T-Mobile US
·Embarq
2 edits | DTV sued me True story here guys, no lies and no examples.
I used to build computers for family members and friends, after a while it turned into friends of friends of friends, people I didn't even know. Well one guy had a strange request a couple years back. He asked for a computer with 2 serial ports, lol 2?? what for? He also asked for a device from whiteviper.com. I was interested in what this was and looked into it. It was for pirating DTV. Looked like too much of a hassle for me so I never tried it. I did build this guy's computer with an "unlooper" from this website.
A few months later I was sued for $68,000 total including 5 state and 6 federal crimes. I was charged with pirating and stealing federal communications and stealing television services.
Am I guilty of piracy and theft because I bought this device and resold it to someone else? No, DTV threatened and after 2 months of me saying back off, I sent a C&D letter and it disappeared.
Bottom line is yes I bought a device that can be used to pirate DTV but, No that is not why I bought it, DTV had evidence that at one point in time I had in my possession the ability to commit a crime, but since they could not prove that I actually did commit the crime I was not charged with anything. This is our legal system at it's finest, and a great example of why these big corps can't be allowed to guess about anything. | |
| | Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
·Comcast
·Embarq
| Re: DTV sued me  I am Lucky I did not get caught in the same dragnet you were caught in. I am surprised that Direct TV did not use the same methods against Computer Manufactures at they used against companies selling Smart Card Reader/Writers. If Direct TV demanded the names of all customers that purchased computers that included integrated Smart Card Reader/Writers I would have been one of the accused. Yes I owned one of those computers that included a Smart Card Reader/Writer. I remember reading an article in a video magazine stating that Direct TV was suing companies that sold Smart Card Reader/Writers and unloopers demanding their customer lists. Direct TV then sent demand letters to consumers that bought those components accusing them of piracy and demanding that they send those devices to Direct TV along with a check for $3,500.00 whether or not they were used for pirating Direct TV's Signal.
Please see this article in the register at this URL: »www.theregister.co.uk/2003/07/17···techies/
and this Amicus Brief posted on DirectTVDefense.org at this URL: »www.directvdefense.org/files/Tre···rief.pdf
It is clear that Direct TV the RIAA and MPAA are using the same tactics that organized crime uses. EXTORTION. Unfortunately we live in a country where an individual can be bankrupted defending themselves against false accusations in a civil matter. It is time that the Legislative Branch of our Government pass laws protecting victims of Corporate Dragnets. The Legislative Branch should create a law that would require that the accuser use due process before making a claim against the accused. If the accuser proves that the accused was engaging in illegal activities the accused would be given an opportunity to cease and desist before the accuser could demand monetary damages of the accused. | |
| 
David
No,there is another.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
clubs: | if they need no evidence of a crime Then I shouldn't have to provide any evidence of my innocence. Two can play at this game!
 | |
| |
copsinfo
@bellsouth.net
| Re: if they need no evidence of a crime WHOA WHOA WHOA!!!!
Wait a minute with this stuff about cops...
Do I like the police? no and I don't work for them either but from what I know about law it goes this way...
If you get pulled over by the police they ask you some questions first because they have to try to communicate with someone before anything else. If you take off after getting pulled over then you have commited a crime duh but if your asked questions like, do you have any drugs or open containers in your car and you so no I don't then they have to rely on what they can see from just looking at your and your car without searching you or your car. Now if you have beer breath or a big bag of weed sitting on the passenger seat or a bunch of empty beer bottles in the car then it's different... that translates to probable cause and a search of you and your car can be made I think.
If your walking down the street and the police stop you and ask you questions thats one thing but again they need probable cause like you carrying a big ass bag of weed like an idiot or a gun etc. otherwise they might detain you in both situations but being detained is not the same as being arrested. Being arrested measn you are being charged with a crime and must be arrested in order to answer for that charge but being detained is simply something done when you might fit the description of someone they are looking for or you are near the scene of a crime and they think you know something because they saw you running away when they pulled up lol.
Cops can't just drive up and charge you with something random they have to talk to you first and have evidence or probable cause that you did something or know something about a crime that was commited recently. | |
| | | | Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| and even worse teh RIAA/MPAA are smart enough to use federal courts so the ruling is valid nationwide.(where as if they used a California court, in theory the ruling would be void outside the state)
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| While my opinion of the $AAs is not printable : And I also do not download or buy their junk (since the last few items I bought were of poor quality) so I have performed what a few people have tried to point out must be done, boycott (which means I must be a pirate because I do not buy).
But a good percentage of the posts here makes one think that the *AAs have right on their side. Poor grammar, F this and F that, and a few other items lead one to think that many of the folks here are not really interested in justice but in an agenda (on both sides of the fence). I am sorry, while the pros and cons of poor grammar and cussing have been beaten to a pulp in other posts, the fact is, despite their normal speaking mode, most folks tend to side with the well written message and not the one that looks like it came out of the gutter. Unfortunately, as we saw 6+ years ago, well articulated speeches did not mean honest, but people still were sucked in.
I know if I were a judge and this site was one of my main pieces of information, I would tend to rule on the side of the *AAs, despite what I believe about them.
I do not know if the educational level of board posting has sank over the years or if I just remember the better ones from when we had to compose off line and upload the text due to the connect cost. It is sad that many of the posts look like they come from 12 year-olds instead of adults.
Oh and as a side note, I have been reading some stories from the 30's that are set in Chicago, Illinois that talk about the various gangs and the turf wars that went on. Interesting how I see similarity the events in those circles and the events in the circle of the 'personal entertainment media', just no apparent shootings today. Read up on the history of Chicago politics both legal and illegal and see what you think.
Yeah, I know this posting will not be popular, but at least make a readable response that is reasoned and not looking like it was typed in by someone in a drug haze while being beaten with a 2X4. There are grammar and spelling checkers out there, all you have to do is use them (even the one in DSLR is better than nothing).
And no, I do not claim to be an English major, so I do make mistakes.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
| | Desdinova
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD
1 edit | Re: While my opinion of the $AAs is not printable : Without intending to spin the topic TOO far out of its intended orbit, I do feel compelled to share some thoughts on your thoughts (or put more accurately, share my opinions on your opinions ).
First off, I sense a bit of hypocrisy here. First you state:
"...lead one to think that many of the folks here are not really interested in justice but in an agenda (on both sides of the fence)."
Fair enough. I can infer that you eschew folks who act emotionally instead of rationally when confronted with a situation that would probably benefit from the use of logic. However, you contradict this position by implying you'd do the same thing that you accuse others of doing:
"I know if I were a judge and this site was one of my main pieces of information, I would tend to rule on the side of the *AAs, despite what I believe about them."
Okay, I'm not here to bash or flame, but the writer in me feels compelled to defend ALL language and ALL its uses regardless of whether I agree with said use. The purpose of primate grunts is to communicate, end of story. Because we have the ability to compare and contrast disparate pieces of data, we often share information on several levels at once. Commensurately, we have the ability to glean same from someone communicating with us. If someone spouts out a stream of four letter words (or five or six letter words) that you find objectionable, you've learned as much from the delivery system as you have from the data delivered ("This person probably comes from a social background different from mine and has developed emotional defenses that they cannot articulate with an advanced vocabulary and must instead wield a verbal club...").
Personally, I pay more attention and give greater validity to the posts that are the most emotional. That doesn't mean that I agree with them, just that I read quite a bit in the poster's intense response to the issue in question. The fact that they choose words I might not doesn't dilute their message any more than if they chose to post in a language I can't speak. Rather, I need to translate the sounds into a meaningful state (to me) and look beyond the tools (words) and try to see what they tried to build (the idea).
Okay, warbling screed mode OFF *grin* And yes, while I disagree with the thoughts in your post, I applaud your eloquence in its form! Bravo! | |
| | | 
tomj1225
Premium
join:2001-12-17
Allentown, PA
·RCN CABLE
| Hollywood Obviously piracy is not affecting Hollywood movie ticket sales, since they are flat with last years sales. I like the one person who commented that if you have been boycotting the movies, you're missing some great films. FACT: Movie ticket sales IF they were down, which they are not, would be down because the product they are putting out is CRAP. Plain and simple CRAP. I mean come on, I went to the theaters the other day and was torn between such inspiring films as You Don't Mess With The Zohan, Love Guru, starring Mike Myers, and the Get Smart TV show remake. I mean we're not talking War and Peace here. I don't think Meryl Streep is in any of those films, and neither is DeNiro. Once hollywood starts putting out a good product, maybe sales will go up. | |
| id_deleted
join:2003-05-01
Salt Lake City, UT
1 edit | What if you could legally get nearly any mp3 for free? What if the recording industry screwed up, and their greed resulted in a huge mistake? What if they decided to broadcast radio stations signals playing over the public airwaves digitally to attract more listeners?
They DID and its called HD Radio. The audio quality rivals CD material and far surpasses any mp3 you may have bought from iTunes. There are no subscription fees.
US law protects your right to record any radio station broadcast over public airwaves for personal use.
You can use specific HD Radio receivers and software to automatically record every song played on your favorite HD Radio station to individual high bitrate mp3 files. Set it to record in the morning and when you check back at night you will have hundreds of properly labeled mp3 files to choose from.
We should actually thank the RIAA for screwing up so badly, it never even occurred to them that the only reason people don't record analog FM radio is that the audio quality sucks so badly and there was no way to distinguish the song title and artist correctly. With HD Radio that situation would obviously no longer apply. | |
| | | |
|
|
MPAA: Evidence? Who Needs Evidence?
Copyright control organizations are shake down artists.
The copyright control agencies are use to having the right to sue, without evidence of violation of copyright law. All a copyright control agency has to do to make a claim, is to have one of their inspectors (shake down artists), state that they witnessed the violation. Under copyright law it is up to the accused to prove that they are not guilty. One of the problem of copyright law is the lack of a provision to allow the accused to resolve an accusation of a violation without being required to pay monetary fees. The copyright control agencies are use to being able to send a demand letter to a small business threatening to sue the business into bankruptcy unless the business owner settle by paying whatever fees that the copyright control agency demands. Most lawyers would tell their clients to settle or wind up paying exorbitant legal fees. The solution to this problem is to require the copyright control agencies to give an accused one opportunity to cease and desist engaging in the accused action without paying monetary damages. All the government needs to do is change the copyright law. Don't hold your breath.
The sad part about our legal system is that in the event one is involved in a civil suit and does not respond the case will be found in favor of the plaintiff (accuser). If the accused asks a lawyer to defend them the first thing the lawyer will require is a retainer. Unless the lawyer wants to make a point against the plaintiff, the accused might be asked by the lawyer for $5,000.00 to $10,000.00 as a retainer. The lawyer might charge the accused $300.00 to $400.00 per hour plus expenses for their services. The lawyer will deduct their hourly fees from the retainer. Once the retainer is exhausted the accused will be asked for more money. If the accused is lucky and retain an ethical lawyer the lawyer will not pad their clients bill, which is called over billing. In the event the accuser asks for what in legal land they consider a small amount, like $3,500.00, an ethical lawyer will advise the accused to pay up or risk all of their assets defending their innocencs. That is why many of the accused in these situations pay up and keep their mouths shut even though they are not guilty. So what we have here is legalized extortion where the winner is decided by the person or persons that have the deepest pockets, like big corporations.