FBI arrests man over leak of Guns N' Roses songs

[Conquest10]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080827/ap_en_mu/blogger_arrested

LOS ANGELES - Federal authorities say they have arrested a blogger suspected of streaming songs from Guns N' Roses unreleased album, "Chinese Democracy," on his Web site.

FBI agents arrested 27-year-old Kevin Cogill on Wednesday morning on suspicion of violating federal copyright laws. Federal authorities say Cogill posted nine unreleased Guns N' Roses songs on his Web site in June.

The songs were later removed.

According to an arrest affidavit, Cogill admitted to agents that he posted the songs on his Web site.

"Chinese Democracy" is a much anticipated — and repeatedly delayed — new album by Guns N' Roses that is more than 10 years in the making.

Anyone else find the irony in federal agents arresting someone for what should remain a civil matter for leaking songs from an upcoming album titled "Chinese Democracy"?

[filmboss80]

After umpteen years, it seems the only way "Chinese Democracy" will ever be heard is if it gets leaked.

[MOVIEGEEK]

new album by Guns N' Roses that is more than 10 years in the making

Has Axl been in rehab that long or does the album have 100 songs?
Either way it doesn't take 10 years to cut an album.

[jagabo]

Isn't this the guy who recorded the loud music coming from next door? Maybe that was a different band.

[yoda313]

I have moved this to OFF TOPIC. This is news about music - not video. Thanks.

Moderator YODA313

[jagabo]

Video at 11:00!!!

[thecoalman]

Anyone else find the irony in federal agents arresting someone for what should remain a civil matter

I think once you start making songs avaialble that have not been released yet you've moved into the criminal realm.

[jagabo]

I think once you start making songs avaialble that have not been released yet you've moved into the criminal realm.

I disagree. It shouldn't be criminal unless someone is making a profit off of it. But the RIAA bought this law a few years ago.

[thecoalman]

This is little more than simply ripping a disc and providing them over a file sharing network. That's besides the fact he's in possession of material he or no one else has any rights to begin with, it's stolen material no matter which way you slice it. There's no argument anyone can make about that. The release of such songs have enormous potential to severely impact future profitability. His actions probably caused millions of dollars in damages. If you're a G N'R fan are going to wait until the songs are officially released and pay for them or are you going to go download them? Cats out of the bag now.

[Conquest10]

I disagree. It shouldn't be criminal unless someone is making a profit off of it. But the RIAA bought this law a few years ago.

I disagree. I still don't see why its a criminal matter. It does not involve actual physical theft so why is that word always used? Copyright infringement should be a civil matter.

[thecoalman]

Call it what you want but you have to consider the value of what is being disseminated. Without starting a debate over the value of disc and how much you're costing the music industry for arguments sake lets say you own a disc that has a reatil value of $10 and you give away a copy. This has cost the music industry $10. On the other hand if you have possession of a disc with the songs he had and it was the only one on the planet earth which is not too far off from the truth the value is in the tens of millions.

[jagabo]

Individual works of music, books, and movies have no value in digital form. The industry (and government) hasn't figured this out yet. In the future they will make money by providing services on top of the digital data.

[thecoalman]

So what you're saying is if I work on writing a book in a word processor for ten years it has no value? Would it have value if I typed or hand wrote it? What if I want to release my hand written book strictly in digital form? Still no value?

Get a grip. At face value your statement would imply that anything produced by an artist has no value.

[Conquest10]

for arguments sake lets say you own a disc that has a reatil value of $10 and you give away a copy. This has cost the music industry $10.

And there is where the problem lies. The potential of profit does not entitle you to said profit. That's what's wrong with business where they see 300 million people so that means they have a potential of over 6 billion in profit. If they don't make that, they lost it. How do you lose something that you never had?

If I wanted a new camera and I sold my Canon to buy a new body, you're saying Canon should have me arrested for costing them whatever I sold my body for?

So what you're saying is if I work on writing a book in a word processor for ten years it has no value?

Get a grip. At face value your statement would imply that anything produced by an artist has no value.

Pretty much. If no one else places a value on it, its worthless (in monetary terms). You can value it at any price you want but if people will not pay it what's the point?

You know how many millions and millions I'm losing everyday because people won't buy my stick figure drawings? You think I can use that as deductions on my tax return?

[Supreme2k]

Man, this is getting sooooo far into ROF territory (and maybe a litle adam, at his worst).

Yeah, copyright infringement is a strictly civil case. All of these numbers pulled out of asses mean nothing.

If I sell my CD to a used CD store, then they sell it, then the guy sells it back, and they sell it again, the music label can't sue anyone, even though they've "lost" three (or more) sales.

In this case, there's much more to determine before they can even press charges. Where did he get the songs? -or- How did he obtain them? That's the thing about digital media: copyright is somewhat a gray area when factors such as origin and distribution rights are unknown. What if the guy was a potential distributor who got screwed by the label, then distributed it during contract negotiations? certainly not a job for the gest--, FBI.

Maybe a little far-fetched, but better than lumping people like that in with terrorists and such.

As far as "potential earnings", Conquest and jagabo are correct about the book thing. I'll go one step further: If I build a chest of drawers in my garage and then someone steals it, [i]there's[i/] a criminal offense, but no copyright offense. On top of that, I can't claim a million dollars in damages because it's a "one of a kind". (well, I can, but it will be laughed out of court.)

[thecoalman]

If I wanted a new camera and I sold my Canon to buy a new body, you're saying Canon should have me arrested for costing them whatever I sold my body for?

No and you can do the same thing with a CD, DVD or any other media.

You know how many millions and millions I'm losing everyday because people won't buy my stick figure drawings? You think I can use that as deductions on my tax return?

If you think you can sell your stick figures for one million dollars you certainly have the right to place that value on them and demand it before releasing them. The value of these songs is debatable but is unquestionable they have the potential to amke millions if not tens of millions.

I'll rephrase the question for you... if Stephen King spent ten years writing his final materpiece does it have value? Of course it does and probably a hell of lot more than what the Gn'R songs are worth.

[MOVIEGEEK]

I have to side with a criminal matter because it potentially can cost the band/record company millions of dollars which is grand theft.
Besides if it was only a civil matter then these bozos could file bankruptcy and never have to pay a dime*,you can't file BK on criminal fines.
I would like to know how he obtained the songs.

*Chapter 7

[Noahtuck]

The release of such songs have enormous potential to severely impact future profitability.

Not if they SUCK!!!!!!!!

His actions probably caused millions of dollars in damages. If you're a G N'R fan are going to wait until the songs are officially released and pay for them or are you going to go download them? Cats out of the bag now.

I doubt that it cost them/HIM any enormous amount of money....
And i won't do either, DL or BUY them/it.....

They were going down hill fast with use your illusion I & II... and when axle bought out the last few members to have total control over the name and band.... and he was the only original founding member... it was no longer "Guns N Roses"....
He is so full of himself..... it has not taken this many years for no reason!!!
If it don't bomb, it's only because of the millions of mindless sheep buying it just for the sake of the name, because the band no longer exists.....

:P

[adam]

This is a criminal matter simply because the legislature included this exact type of activity in the definition of criminal copyright infringement, as opposed to civil copyright infringement. Copyright infringement moves from civil liability to criminal liability if the infringement is done willfully and it falls into one of three categories. The first is that it is done for commercial gain...probably not applicable here. The second is if the copying and/or distribution exceeds a certain threshold (1 or more in 180 day period with value exceeding $1000) which may or may not be applicable here. The third one is the type that very clearly applies to this situation, and it is when you distribute or make available, a work being prepared for commercial distribution which has not yet been released commercially. 17 USCS 506(1)(c).

The most shocking thing about this article to me is that G N' R is making an album. I had no idea.

[jagabo]

This is a criminal matter simply because the legislature included this exact type of activity in the definition of criminal copyright infringement...

I already pointed that out.

[Noahtuck]

The most shocking thing about this article to me is that G N' R is making an album. I had no idea.

Are you serious dude ?!?!?!
This is the MOST infamous album that was never released
10+ years and delayed numerous times, release date set... oops, nope... delay, repeat, ect ect ect

Years ago i figured i'd believe it when i see it

But i don't consider axle rose anymore than axle rose with a bunch of new players....

[adam]

This is a criminal matter simply because the legislature included this exact type of activity in the definition of criminal copyright infringement...

I already pointed that out.

Thanks for pointing that out.

[thecoalman]

Years ago i figured i'd believe it when i see it

Kiinda like the soon to be released Duke Nukem?

I used to be fan back when they released Appetite and it's still one of my favorite albums of all time. I saw them as an opening act for Aerosmith at a local venue during the summer when that album was first released. Summer of 87? Long time ago. Oh well, another act flushed down the drain. They could have been one of the greats.