RIAA Finally Files Suit

[Gazorgan]

They finally filed some suits against P2P traders.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,96728,00.html

It took awhile to make sure they weren't suing any old ladies, children, females, minorities or anyone else not politically correct.

I'm willing to wager quite a bit that over 80% are white males. Most are between 16 and 34, in college, and generally own 100's of CD's. I mean you can't sue some cripple girl for d/l a song in BF North Dakota now can you?

I wonder if you can get your case thrown out if you actually own all the songs you have up?

MPAA is next I'm sure :P

[MOVIEGEEK]

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

[Solarjetman]

I wonder if you can get your case thrown out if you actually own all the songs you have up?

You know, I never thought about that. I do not think it is illegal to place the songs you own on Kazaa, its just illegal to download them from others. Anyone know for sure?

Ok, quick math here.

4,000,000 Kazza users
261 lawsuits

odds you are going to get a lawsuit: 0.06525% <-- be scared, very scared :P

[Roundabout]

Well, I can't tell you anything for sure, but believe that you would still have a problem if you owned the cd's, ripped them and made them available in your shared folder. The people that the RIAA are suing are being sued because they OFFERED the songs for download (thousands of tunes, not just a couple), not because they DOWNLOADED the songs. Makes sense, at least to them, because if you have downloaded and kept a song on your PC, but not offered it for sharing, it stops there. If you put it in your shared folder, millions can d/l it, spreading it everywhere. Doesn't mean they won't go after downloaders later, it's just right now they are concentrating on the "biggest violators", and ones dumb enough to allow that to happen, letting everyone see their share.

[thayne]

I wonder if you can get your case thrown out if you actually own all the songs you have up?

You know, I never thought about that. I do not think it is illegal to place the songs you own on Kazaa, its just illegal to download them from others. Anyone know for sure?

Ok, quick math here.

4,000,000 Kazza users
261 lawsuits

odds you are going to get a lawsuit: 0.06525% <-- be scared, very scared :P

No. If you share them you are distributing them, which is worse than downloading them.

[housepig]

I do not think it is illegal to place the songs you own on Kazaa, its just illegal to download them from others. Anyone know for sure?

illegal, because you'd be distributing copyrighted material that you have no rights to distribute.

and the "I didn't make any money off of it" argument, which has always been a last-ditch defense, finally got the coffin nails in the NET Act in the mid 90's, which explicitly stated that the distro, whether you make a profit or not, was illegal.

[ChrisX]

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

I don't use P2P to share my music and I don't have time for it.

[indolikaa]

The story I read very specifically mentioned that they were going after the ones who shared the most files at one time...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,96728,00.html

"The music industry says file sharing is a violation of copyright laws and blames the practice for a 31 percent decline in compact disc music sales in the last three years. The individuals sued Monday were sharing, on average, more than 1,000 songs each, the group said."

They'll go after the downloaders once they've tested these cases in court. Imagine how many thousands of people downloaded from just these very few people...

[tgpo]

I'm sharing my friend's music proudly!!! Come on RIAA, they are above you!!!

[mysticgohan17]

do they file suit against people sharing music that should be kept far away from the public
*sending Eddie Murphy-(My Girl Likes To) Party All The Time.mp3 to 500 people*

[ChrisX]

I have no sympathy for the RIAA and MPAA.

There is a story of a 12 year old music pirate from New York and she is in tears and in shock when her name is listed along with the 261 others being sued by the RIAA.

Check out: http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/5349.htm

She is very frighten and doesn't understand and thinks downloading songs is fun and to listen.

I know a lot of young children and specially teenagers don’t appreciate and understand copyright laws and this shows how vulnerable they are.

I blasted the RIAA and how on earth she be able pay big fines such as like $150,000 per song and this is obscene. I don’t think she even got $3,000 to the RIAA.

Keep away from Kazaa is the only way to avoid trouble with the record companies.

[i_am_dave]

I have a folder shared out on my network that contains about 20 Gb of MP3's I encoded from CD's I own.
Come and get me!

[zzyzzx]

[Roundabout]

Hmm...didn't take long for the RIAA to settle this one, did it? Think they might have been just a little worried about the PR nightmare from suing a 12 year old and her working mother?
http://www.msnbc.com/news/964154.asp?0bl=-0&cp1=1

[leebo]

Girl, 12, Settles Piracy Suit for $2,000

September 9, 2003 09:12 PM EDT

WASHINGTON - A 12-year-old girl in New York who was among the first to be sued by the record industry for sharing music over the Internet is off the hook after her mother agreed Tuesday to pay $2,000 to settle the lawsuit, apologizing and admitting that her daughter's actions violated U.S. copyright laws.
The hurried settlement involving Brianna LaHara, an honors student, was the first announced one day after the Recording Industry Association of America filed 261 such lawsuits across the country. Lawyers for the RIAA said Brianna's mother, Sylvia Torres, contacted them early Tuesday to negotiate.
"We understand now that file-sharing the music was illegal," Torres said in a statement distributed by the recording industry. "You can be sure Brianna won't be doing it anymore."
Brianna added: "I am sorry for what I have done. I love music and don't want to hurt the artists I love."
The case against Brianna was a potential minefield for the music industry from a public relations standpoint. The family lives in a city housing project on New York's Upper West Side, and they said they mistakenly believed they were entitled to download music over the Internet because they had paid $29.99 for software that gives them access to online file-sharing services.


Hey, I can kick any 12 year old girls ass! Come on bi-yotch! You think you can take take me? I'll kick the s*@t out of you, and your mommy too!

I heard nuns are next on the list.

Hey, the RIAA can sue me for every penny I have. All $1.32 worth. Oh wait. I just remembered I bought a gumball this afternoon.
OK, then all $1.12 worth of my empire. Take it, RIAA.

[mysticgohan17]

Girl, 12, Settles Piracy Suit for $2,000

this is a girl from the projects...this is real old, but **** the riaa. they have no shame

[MOVIEGEEK]

Some P2P group has offered to pay the fine:
http://news.com.com/2100-1027_3-5074227.html?tag=fd_top

[mysticgohan17]

And now, for a lighter take on the situation...

--------------------------------------------------------------------edit---------------------------------------------------

Box News Channel[/url]]Sahara was among millions of people sued for "humming", "singing" and "thinking about tunes without prior permission".

who saw that coming a mile away :P

By their standards, humming is copyright infringement.

[Roundabout]

Yeah, remember the story a year or two ago, where they sued the Girl Scouts for singing something like "happy birthday" (or a similar song). Talk about ridiculous. I believe they were told they couldn't sing or hum it.

[pyrate83]

You know, you would think that the RIAA would have more important things to do than look for people sharing music over the internet.

I mean c'mon, it's just music and a lot of the new music is just crap that should be downloaded. F**k paying $15 for a CD that only has two or three good songs. The RIAA is going to lose this battle...once agian.

[tgpo]

So why did the little girl get off with only 2k when all these other people have to pay 10k+

[pacmania_2001]

Because the RIAA looks a hell of alot worse off sueing a 12 y/o poor girl from the projects who didn't know what she was doing (quite a charity case) compared to the normal people they sue, poor college students who have no money and live with their parents.

[housepig]

So why did the little girl get off with only 2k when all these other people have to pay 10k+

because it's easier to demonize college-kid slackers and anyone of legal age than a 12 year old girl with a single mom living in a housing project.

another article is pointing to a growing backlash against KaZaa, as people who paid for the service are growing upset that they are not indemnified against downloading potentially infringing material from the service.

that's the problem with the "computer as media appliance"... usually if you're using a cable box or vcr to get something you aren't entitled to, it takes a bit more obvious premeditation...

who the hell reads EULAs anyway? even when I try to be diligent, I just skim 'em... it's like the "no brown M&M's" clause in the Van Halen tour rider...