Record Industry Lawsuits

[lsyorke]

OK whats everyones thoughts on the RIAA lawsuits re:illegally downloading music. Supposedly they have sued a 12 year old, a grandfather(whos grandkids downloaded the music).
I know my DH has downloaded music in the past, but recently deleted the whole program and any downloaded music.

While I understand that this violates copyright laws, why aren't they going after Kazaa and the other internet sites that create this availablility?


What are your thoughts??

 

[crazyme5kids]

I don't know the details of this particular case, but aren't they going after people who set up sites that make the albums avalible to download? I don't think they are going after the person that downloads for their personal collection (not making it avalible to others). Am I wrong?

 

[lsyorke]

"I don't think they are going after the person that downloads for their personal collection "

Thats what I thought too and really never gave it much thought since DS only downloads a few for himself , but now I hear they sued this 12 year old. Maybe she downloaded huge volumes!

I guess I'll keep an eye on the news.

 

[jsmith]

In Colorado they are sueing people who just downloaded-not even tons of stuff-one is a resturant owner and the other a mom of two pre-teen kids.

 

[OhMari]

In the news, it says they made the mom admit that her daughter downloaded the music and her daughter violated piracy laws.

On our news last winter, the interviewed college students, with books that contained cd's that were all downloaded.

I also heard they are giving people clemency if they come forward now and they won't be prosecuted. Does this mean, they are going after every who has ever downloaded music. (Is this big brother watching you or what).

 

[HeyMickey]

The reason (as I understand it, anyway) that they can't go after Kazaa and similar programs is that these programs aren't actually in possession of any music. They just direct you to other users who have the music, and then you download from the user rather than the program itself.

What I want to know is, how are they coming up with the people they're prosecuting? Does the RIAA just lurk on Kazaa waiting to see a username with lots of songs and then trace that to the computer it comes from? I have to believe it's something like that, and not that they can look through the collection of songs you keep on your hard drive... that to me seems like a rather blatant invasion of privacy.

This whole thing is just ridiculous. The music industry needs to realize that times are changing. Nobody is going to pay $17 for a CD when MP3 and CD burning technology exist and you can get whole albums for the cost of Internet access and a CD-R. Recording artists are so overpaid that people just don't buy the "support the artists" argument, except in the case of lesser-known bands that really do need that support. IMO, the best way to deter illegal music sharing would be for the record companies to make their music available online, legally, for a small fee per song or a flat rate per month. Suing people might deter some or even most of those who share music, but music sharing will continue to exist as long as the record industry refuses to change their ways.

 

[Doug123]

Some have mentioned that they can't go after the websites because they don't actually have the music, just the means by which to get it.

How is it, then, that our president and his administration can successfully go after shops that sell bongs? The drugs aren't there, just like the songs aren't there. But for some reason, bongs that can be used to smoke pot are illegal and the software to pirate songs is not. Typical bs hypocracy.

 

[Carl]

Personally, I believe the record industry is making a big mistake. People are already angry at them for all the copy protection and heavy handed methods they use. Now, the public will really turn against them. I don't have any desire to either download the current music or buy CDs of it. As far as I'm concerned, there hasn't been any good music since back in the 60s.

 

[lsyorke]

Just a sidenote, I read that some group(sorry I don't remember which one, but they support people to people downloading)has paid the $2000.00 fine that RIAA settled for from the 12 year old. This group also gave her $2000.00 in downloading credit from another internet site.

 

[jfulcer]

RIAA has a list of 'popular songs' that they have an automated search for. Once they find someone who shares that file on their machine, they use the built in feature to look at all the files that a user has available. Once they have screens shots of that, a little subpeona to the ISP to find out who was using that IP address to connect and you now have a case. If you've downloaded a few songs and haven't 'shared' them out, you are probably safe.

<b>Originally posted by HeyMickey</b>

IMO, the best way to deter illegal music sharing would be for the record companies to make their music available online, legally, for a small fee per song or a flat rate per month.

They do have that. But did those college students that had books of burned CDs do that? Millions of people download Kazaa on a <i>daily</i> basis. Yes, I agree that CD sales at $17 is ridiculous (it is based on LP manufacturing costs to the best of my knowledge and not the pennies it costs to make a CD), and there currently is talk that CDs will drop to $9 or less apiece. There has been a drop in record sales in the past year, but that could be attributed to file sharing or the economy. No way to tell...

Will a $9 price tag stop people from downloading? Nope. This is a losing battle that they aren't likely to win, but will take enough people down in the process that maybe they can cause some people to think about it.

Ok, I'm off my RIAA soapbox. I agree with them and I don't. If there were a site to share <i>every</i> song, then I'd subscribe to it. And what about hard to find or rare recordings? Those won't be on the record company sites...

It'll be a problem for a long, long time.

 

[jfulcer]

Originally posted by Doug123
How is it, then, that our president and his administration can successfully go after shops that sell bongs? The drugs aren't there, just like the songs aren't there. But for some reason, bongs that can be used to smoke pot are illegal and the software to pirate songs is not. Typical bs hypocracy.

Because bongs have specific uses that are related directly to illegal drug use. If there were another legal use, the law couldn't touch them. (this is just my reasoning on it, take it with a grain of salt)

It's not illegal to listen to music. It's not even illegal to make a complition CD of all the music you own.

 

[Beauty]

Hummm I hope the Fantasmic Soundtrack isn't on their list

Seriously I guess I will worry about it if they sue me. I don't download on a daily basis but I have downloaded my share as have my husband and son.