Ignoring the RIAA

»www.personal.psu.edu/use ··· haha.wav

Well my ISP's support/headquarters is actually located in the same town as I am located in. (Frontier) So far I think my ISP has stood firm against these guys.

right it's called buying USED...something the RIAA tried to stop in the mid 90's with trying to make it illegal for used CD stores to operate. Ya that was killed, obviously. Also...yer analogy of a new car is bad....u can test drive it and in some cases keep it for a day or 2. Try that with a CD LOL U can't even perview em anymore

Libraries do not allow you to make copies of books (exception for passages for educational purposes).

Also is it really fair to compare the dissemination of knowledge through public libraries with entertainment?

Re: RIAA tactics

It's an unfortunate aspect of human behavior: some people just will not behave themselves until one "leans on them." Arguably, doing something is better than nothing. However...they most certainly cross "the line" when they start autonomously harrassing people. It's like that episode of "WKRP in Cincinnati" where Dr. Johnny Fever jumps behind the couch fearing the phone cops. Hmmm....RIAA cops... I also feel quite unsettled at the notion they somehow have a right (DMCA) to mess with the contents of my hard disk. mmmmff.

Re: lowering CD prices

Some have. It even has made the radio news to which I listen. I think it was BMG, but I'm not sure.

said by rchandra:

---

Re: lowering CD prices

Some have. It even has made the radio news to which I listen. I think it was BMG, but I'm not sure.

---

I'm still waiting to see the actual costs lowered. So far none of the stores I've been had any change in prices. I think something about the wording of the announced lower prices actually meant they lowered it in an area where it actually doesn't mean lower CD prices. Basically wholesale costs are lower, but the MSRP is still the same. Actually most places already sell at below MSRP, which is approximately $19.99.

All the announced price cut actually do was make the MSRP closer to $13 at those places that still sell CD's at $20. Technically the only change in price is a couple of dollars and still not at that golden price of $10 that most people say is their buying threshold.

Proliferation of the arts is a pretty strong reason for comparison. Remember the whole purpose of copyright law is to help support the arts.

You're so far of. Rather then telling people to read perhaps you should just bow out and say nothing. You only make yourself look foolish. No where in this thread did someone promote free music. It's a simple fact that people dislike the tactics the RIAA tried pulling regardless of wether you upload or download. Maybe it's you that should read.

said by ronpin:

---

And your NOT greedy for wanting free music???

---

I don't and never have downloaded music, I just hate the illegal tactics of RIAA, and they should be stopped by what ever legal means possible...I was a process server and researcher in the federal courts for 15 years, and it maddens me to watch RIAA abuse the system as they do...

Who says you are getting free music. We support bands through concerts. Until CD prices get reasonable, download for free. Once a happy medium is made then more will buy them.

said by rid0617:

---

What's even funnier is I can go to a library, check out a CD, burn a copy and return it.

---

Here's one for everybody, The only CD player I have is built-in to my laptop. It does NOT support 1x playback, so it has to record the CD that is being played back. If I listen to one song, by the time it is finished, the entire CD has been recorded...bummer.

LMAO!!!

Thats what the RIAA gets for bullying the world around...Maybe next time they will act civilized and quit gestapoing the world.

said by Omega:

---

This is great. The ISP's no longer have to bend over to the RIAA.

---

fixed

I don't like the RIAA one bit, and would love to see then all in bankruptcy court. I don't download music, and I don't buy CDs, at least not in the USA. I get mine from friends in China, and have them shipped to me here. You would be surprised at how many CDs are released there labled for sale in China only. At an average cost of $2.50 - $3.00 it sure beats buying them here, and raises a VERY obvious question.

this is what being an american is about! screw the greed.
the major issue is that what pennys of each cd actually goes to the group and the majority goes to these greedy fools.

as for the 50 isps my hats off to them and i wish that they prosper well except for roadrunner, earthlink (due to send jobs over seas), and aol just for blantenly overtaking many many systems

I am sure it costs our ISP's money to handle "orders" from the RIAA so now that they are not required by law to comply, why should they. I would not be surprised if certain ISP's have advised them to cease and desist all contact with them unless they have a court order. Time is money and money and more money is all our ISP's truly care about.

If you read the court decision it says they can't force ISP's to turn over the identities of users based on the DMCA. But existing laws DO force ISP's to reveal identities of users nonetheless for illegal activities such as stealing copyright protected materials via download. So this decision just means the RIAA will need to file an individual request for each criminal vs. a wholesale request. No big deal at all, just a little more paperwork.

Bottomline, the Pirates are goin' to jail. They can run, they can hide, but they are goin' to jail at the end of the day. No court is gonna allow Pirates to steal copyright protected material. The courts have made it quite clear that copyright law is valid and will be enforced. End of story. Do NOT pass GO. Do NOT get out of JAIL free.

"So if I think new car prices are unreasonable then I have the right to "aquire" one through other means???"

Feel free to stop by and copy my car whenever you like. Its in the driveway.

said by rsa0:

---

Stop buying CDs...hit them where it hurts. They are fighting a loosing battle. If the prices would be reasonable, then I would buy, but now...they are GREEDY.

---

And not buying CD's helps the Artists that are getting ripped off by the RIAA how?

Not buying CD's means even LESS money for the Artists.

can you say owned?

.

said by ronpin:

---

...So if I think new car prices are unreasonable then I have the right to "aquire" one through other means???

---

Yes you can. It is done all the time every day all across America. It's call carjacking, or better yet, break into a car at the dealer. I've seen glass on the ground to tell me someone attempted to steal a car off a dealer lot.

As for me, hell yeah I'm going to keep downloading.

I have talked about this subject before and got battered for it. I guess if I don't agree with the RIAA that must mean I am stealing music.

The court said that the ISP's do not have to comply with the RIAA subpoenas. That the RIAA couldn't put multiple requests on one subpoena and force the ISP to give up there customers information. The DMCA made it easy for the RIAA just to file a subpoena without going through a proper judicial process. The RIAA didn't need proof of the infringement, only that they assume something was happening. The court found this to be invalid cause it would mean anyone can get a subpoena with showing any proof of anything.

Now the court did say that under current law the RIAA can sue people trading music but they have to go through a proper judicial process. Which means is that RIAA has to file lawsuits individually. It would be a john doe lawsuit cause the RIAA would first have to file a petition not just a subpoena with the court to get the ISP to reveal the name of the infringer.It also means that the RIAA would have to show proof that the person or the account holder is actually trading files. Doing all this is a lengthy process and will cost more money for the RIAA to sue.

What most people don't know is that most people who buy music are breaking the copyright one way or another. The RIAA applies many rules to that copyright and of course as music buyers we don't know what the rules are. The RIAA don't want us to know what the rules are regarding that copyright cause if we did most of us would never buy a cd again. Read the DMCA and the RIAA's policy on buying music and you will be surprised on what you can or can not do when you pay $18 for that cd.

What I said in the past and I will say it again, all the DMCA did was make it easy for the RIAA to accuse people without any proof and at the same time prevent someone from getting due process in the court of law. The DMCA prevents people from getting fair representation and the RIAA went along with it. I disagreed with the RIAA due to the fact they made it so easy to accuse someone without having any proof to back it up.

If someone is guilty or innocent of any crime they are still entitled to get fair representation under the current law. I thought we were a society of innocent until proven guilty not the other way around.

said by SRFireside:

---

All the announced price cut actually do was make the MSRP closer to $13 at those places that still sell CD's at $20. Technically the only change in price is a couple of dollars and still not at that golden price of $10 that most people say is their buying threshold.

---

When I used to live in Sacramento, I went to The Beat records because they sell them used. I would buy as much as $70.00 USD worth of CDs and LPs (yes, I still bought vinyl). I would buy CDs for as much as $8.98 USD, which I felt comfortable. I did see the prices of new CDs rise steadily throughout the 90s.

I was totally unaware that RIAA wanted to stop vendors from selling used CDs. I'm glad that didn't go through.:)

I download because I can't find that music in any online store or CD is way too expensive. P2P can be very profitable. Just charge $10/mo for using sharing program (ie Napster) instead of killing it.
Then they'll get pure $$$, no need for fast servers, Greatest uploaders will get priority for downloading. I don't mind paying that low monthly fee and many people will follow.

said by rid0617:

---

What's even funnier is I can go to a library, check out a CD, burn a copy and return it.

---

How great is that? My god, I never thought of that. Now I have a purpose for that library card in my wallet.

Thanks.

I never would buy a CD in the first place ...if I like a song or maybe two I would never buy the album ...I have a sh*t load of mistakes from the 70's, 80's & 90's that I look at the album and say why did I buy that piece of sh*t for one song ... my rule now is it has to have at least 4 to 5 good songs on it for me to justify purchasing it ...RIAA is looking to sell one or two songs for 13 bucks ...Downloading is a way for the people to tell the RIAA the party is over, the gravy train is leaving and it ain't going to work that way anymore... they should wise up setup like someone suggested earlier 10 buck monthly fee to swap whatever you want (at least they will get money) ... CD sales will not go away, so they make that money on top of the monthly sales ...

You are not entitled to legal council in a civil lawsuit. This is not a guilt versus innocence thing here. In civil court there is no "beyond a reasonible doubt" clause, it is a preponderance of the evidence issue.
If the Riaa sues you, unless you have a high dollar attorney and are willing to spend ALOT, you will lose. They are choosing to sue people that have downloaded many songs and will have ironclad proof showing those were offered for download.

Great. F!@# the RIAA and their tactics.
___________________________________________________________
Same thing I was thinking myself...

»www.boycott-riaa.com