scapegoat

Bad news for anyone against the RIAA's strong handed tactics. Just today a fedral judge has ordered Verizon Communitcations to disclose the identity of a Kazza user to the RIAA.

"In what is widely viewed as a test case, U.S. District Judge John Bates said the wording of the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) requires Verizon to give the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) the name of a Kazaa subscriber who allegedly has shared hundreds of music recordings"

With a ruling like this it could open the doors wide to the RIAA or simalar organazations to a wholesale crackdown on any filesharing activites. Verizon plans on appealing the ruling.

"Sarah Deutsch, [Verizon's] vice president and associate general counsel. "This is not a case in which we believe the court was right," Deutsch said. "This kind of decision could open the floodgates to copyright holders, sending numerous subpoenas to Internet providers seeking identities of subscribers."

See more informations on Cnet.com

Darksamurai

Pfft... my telephone company would turn me over for a couple of food stamps and a bottle of Thunderbird.

Still... Verizon is standing naked over a blender... I mean, you realize how many people are gonna ditch 'em if they start disclosing users?

__________________

FeRaL

How do they know he was sharing music? Coulda been his porn collection or his own homemade videos...

__________________

TheOutcast

Why doesn't the RIAA grow the **** up.

Suggested listening: NOFX - Dinosaurs will die
talks about how the record industry (dinosaurs) need to wake up to the changes.

__________________

Soulless

Maybe if CDs weren't 30 bucks a pop people wouldn't want to pirate music.
Bands make most of their money on performances anyway...
If it weren't for MP3s I don't think I would have bought half the CDs I own.
All this for something that only costs about a dollar to manufacture....
What that judge has done is basically to say that anyone can come into your home without a warrant and root through you stuff until they find something.....very sad...

Soulless

__________________

Cyphre

What's funny is hey, that could be my brother they're after for all I know! At least Verizon is appealing it...

But yeah, since blank CD's cost pennys on the dollar, they could very easily lower the price of CD's which would've prevented the whole mp3 sharing fiasco to begin with (ever since morpheus or whatever was before it). It would've only been a passive thing if CD's weren't 20 bucks a pop...

__________________

Miststlkr

i personal do not haveany MP3s on this, my only, computer. I can honestly say that the reason I haven't bought a CD in the past few years is that I can't even remember the last one that was new that was worth buying. I think I did buy a few classical CDs, but the were $3 each at Wallmart so I got a ton of them, but other then that, I don't think i have bought a new CD in over 3 years. adn i can assure them that it isn't because i have switched to "free" mp3 instead..

put out decent music at a price with less the 3000% markup and maybe people will buy. music today is focused at young kids, the ones that don't have the money to spend and rely on parents to buy for them, who, typically, don't approve of the music and/or "artist's" apperaence, etc. and therefor won't buy it for them. bad move. the Jap corps may have child marketing down perfectly, but the Ameri corps are terribly lacking in that area.

RIAA needs to wake up.

BTW, how do they get around anti-trust laws? just curious.

__________________

Cyphre

Something nice I found in the Times earlier today on the case. Course, I didn't read the article on CNET, but this was just something nice to hear after all this crap.

Verizon refued to comply, saying that the allegedly pirated material was on the user's personal computer, not on Verizon's network. And the DMCA's subpoena power, Verizon argued, applies only to alleged infringers whose pirated booty is on the provider's network (for example, when they're on a website operated by the provider on a customer's behalf).

Verizon's attorneys said the company would identify the user only if the music labels filed a 'John Doe' lawsuit against the person before issuing a subpoena. Once the lawsuit is filed, the alleged infringer would receive notice and be able to challenge any attempt to disclose his or her identity.

It's funny in the end of the article, hearing of the factions coming out of this. While Hollywood studios and music publishers intervened on the RIAA's behalf, numerous Internet service providers, consumer advocates, and civil liberties groups sided with Verizon.

Not exactly sure what this last thing is about, but they have a copy of the district court order online: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...acy.framedurl.
(I don't know what's up with that URL...looks like they forgot something at the end)

__________________

chris200177

I agree with everyone here. The RIAA needs to get their heads out of their butts and realize that mp3's are the way of the future. Why do you think we have CD burners? Instead of shelling out $20 for a CD with only a few tracks that you like, You can just download individual tracks as mp3s. You can make a full CD with only your favorite tracks on it. Maybe if they cut the prices on music CDs, We might concider going legit and just buying music CDs off the shelves. But until they do, it's strictly mp3s for me. I believe that some bands even encourage mp3s, because it's practically the only way they can be heard, and if a person likes what they hear, then he/she can buy their CDs. I think the RIAA is going a little overboard over this mp3 stuff. It's not like we're downloading full albums, because that's just wrong. This is a little theory of mine, but I think that mp3s were first made as a business tactic to get people to buy their music by distributing a sample of a CD, usually as one song, available for free, because we all would like to know what to expect before buying the CD. It is our right as a consumer to know just what exactly we are paying for, instead of just buying blind. Now is that so wrong? Again, I do not know if this is the actual use for mp3s, I'm just assuming. Well, I had my say in this. Peace everybody!

__________________

Cyphre

Well, technically mp3 is just 'mpeg layer 3' a way to compact the size of sound many times better than the previously used .wav file.

Now I'm just waiting for the RIAA site to get hacked again...that was some funny stuff...

__________________

Miststlkr

guys, I know i'm no admin, but it might be waise to watch where you go with this... bashing RIAA is one thing, saying that you do certain (currently illegal) things is quite another...

i'm not trying to be a prick, just looking out for everyone's intrests.

__________________

OMFG_dude_WTF

OK this issue has me so pissed off right now...lol, but I need to bring up a few issues.

Did they bust the guy for downloading or just making the content available to others?

If they busted him for just giving people access to the copyrighted material(which the RIAA would get the IP legitly just by doing a search for it), his defense could be he did not know he had his whole hard drive or mp3 archive folder shared as many people are still dumba$$es about. They can't get him on stealing the mp3's that way either.....mostly due to "Sony's" and others mp3 computer equipment/software packages readily available to make and use mp3's..(it's funny ....the guys fighting this crap are the same A-holes that make it possible to produce mp3's)There then could be a counter suit. And if we wanted to sue "them" again for FRAUD, for selling(and still selling) the equipment that created the problem in the first place.

Now if they busted him because he downloaded them......here's the cool part(sorry for yelling it but I have to)........

HOW THE HELL do they know who is downloading what. For crying out loud people.....think about it. They must have servers running these music files out on all the file sharing networks in order to get the IP address for each time they are hit. That is the only logical way to find the pirate using this method.

That would be entrapment.......or FRAUD for serving files then sueing for a cash settlement. Wake up people. They have found their new buisness plan, and it is illegal as hell.

Kinda like child porn......if cops put it out on the net for people to download....then busted them for it, that would be entrapment.....am I right?

The RIAA will not stop till they are dead, and they might as well be holding up picket signs that say "Down with America!" After they get laws changed in their favor we will no longer live in a world with internet or personal freedoms. Corporations will take over our lives completely(not to say they haven't already LOL).

Next thing.....
Is there any other area of telecommunications where the service provider has been instructed by a judge to monitor the activity across it's lines without a subpoena? Telephone conversations can't be recorded without one. How is this any different?

Again more on what I said in the first issue......
OK Sony hates piracy and they complain about it and threaten to sue but at the same time manufacture the verry tools for piracy.
CDR burners, DVD burners mp3 players. They even bundle the tools to make mp3's so if you ask me they are commiting entrapment. here are the tools to make mp3 and play it but if you use it to play Sony we will sue you. It is called a conflict of intrest!

I used to buy music CD's.....until I saw the greed when they shut down Napster. Music sales were up 8% when Napster was still alive but on it's last leg. The publicity then caused the Napster clone wars. The RIAA bit the hands that fed them. Now they are paying the price. Paying the price so bad that they are spending what money they do have left to bribe the government to change laws in their favor.

The music industry also did not factor in the falling economy, and crap/clone band music before making the piracy accusations.

Another thing.......if you own the album.....especially one that has been out for years and you had bought it like 3 or 4 times due to scatches, breakings, and theft......and you download one of the songs on your lunch break at work to listen to, cuz your copy was at your house.....is that stealing? Would that give the RIAA an excuse to hack your buisness' computer and or network, and then shut you and your company out of buisness?....HELL NO! That is what they want to be able to do.

Greed will be their downfall.......to bad we all still pay an RIAA tax on each CDR, DVDR, Cassetes, and equipment we buy. Was any of that money given to "the artists". I think not.

Other possible scenarios.......
They may be involed in an Enron type fraud fiasco and need to blame the loss of all of their soft money being sent to the government under the table .....just a thought.

A few months back the Gnutella network creator apparently commited suicide by shooting himself in the chest. He was like 26 yo. OK so how does that make any difference you ask........here is how.........I was about to close the story when i noticed that his death was 10 days before the story had even hit any news stands/sites. He was already buried(or cremated) by that time........why the 10 day delay. Maybe the RIAA had him assasinated and with the governments help had it covered up to look like a suicide. People have killed over greed before...a bunch....so it could be a possibility. 10 days though....fishy as hell to me.



Sorry so long....but I had to get it out. I have reported most of these ideas to the ACLU already, as have many others.

__________________

OMFG_dude_WTF

Almost forgot a rough but logical idea to rid of the RIAA for good.

There are millions of us who oppose their ideas on changing laws in their favor and their greed.

How about we all gather together(millions of us) and form an old fashioned lynch mob......LOL

__________________

Miststlkr

OMFG.. i think you need to lay off the pills man

I can see several of your points, but i think you may have gone a bit overboard... oh well.. we all do at some point.... when you oficially go nuts, i'll be the first to wecome you to the party

__________________

Cyphre

Well, your points are things I avoided because you would've had to read the entire report.

They're going after the guy for making the media available to others on a network, but as far as I read there is no pursuit of a cash settlement...the report simply states that they want to tell this user that what they're doing is illegal. Verizon isn't complying with the RIAA's requests (which I think is hilarious because my dad works for Verizon...Go Verizon!!) as the standard laws state that they at least need a 'John Doe' subpoena or whatever so the person can fight to not have their identity revealed. THEN and only then can they give a subpoena, but I think it was the RIAA's attorney saying that it's going against the initial iteration of the DMCA...as in, it's going against the original purpose and wording of the DMCA.

Now, the reason the whole mp3 ripping software and the like never come into play is because mp3's are just a file type, it's SHARING that's the problem. Because they are files, they are so easily copied and transfered to computers. mp3's themselves are not a crime as people do have the luxuries of mp3 players or good sound systems on their computers. It's not a crime to make mp3's or use them, but passing them along is an entirely different story. Just because the companies against this whole thing have software to make mp3's doesn't mean it's a hypocrisy.

It does require a subpoena to have an ISP monitor someone's activities....which is why they're trying to get a court order for it (at least there is one now...).

Sony and other brands who make computer hardware are not only completely separate divisions of the larger company. Sony owns a lot of crap...like Columbia/tristar and a few other movie studios. They also have a music publishing group, and all that crap. Burners and mp3 software had a different initial purpose in the companies' eyes...later used to 'illegally copy' all sorts of things. It's kinda funny looking back though, where quake 3 didn't even have copy protection on it.

Obviously the music industry could not blame their own stupidity in the fact that they've been producing nothing new in the music market so sales have dropped as a whole. I bet if they somehow took a consensus, they'd find that the most traded mp3's were things they've never heard of (other genre's like trance or underground things which are most often only obtainable online as an mp3). The economy has been doing badly for a while now, though it may only be tech stocks and blue chips since it's all the computer related corporations that are doing badly.

In the concept of getting a 'backup copy' of some CD you bought, nobody can really factor that in because anyone can claim anything and when you buy a CD, you're not exactly buying rights to that publisher's music, only what is on the CD itself. So in league with the windows CD which is horrid'y expensive that you'll never be able to make a backup copy of.

Well, in the market of entertainment, there really can't be any fraud unless it deals solely within the company itself...such as a company not giving enough of the profit margin to the entertainer. Unless of course there was some sort of tax fraud or somehow pulled what enron did...but that would've been apparent by now because nothing gets past the IRS.

The RIAA is too stupid to pull an assassination...come on, you know better.

Time for your happy pills, OMFG...

__________________