VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4
1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 97
Thread
  1. Yes, I Know Roundabout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    ...in and around the lake
    Search Comp PM
    The RIAA has had to withdraw a 300 million dollar lawsuit they filed against a 66 year old pensioner for file sharing after finding out that she never used any file sharing software!

    The RIAA claimed that Sarah Ward shared around 2,000 songs over the Kazaa P2P application and filed a lawsuit at $150,000.00 per offending song. The lawsuit has now been withdrawn, but they told her that they reserve the right to re-file the lawsuit should they find any evidence. What makes matters worse is that her computer is Macintosh, which is incapable of running the Windows version of Kazaa!

    Six record labels including Sony, BMG and Virgin have withdrawn a 300 million dollar lawsuit against a 66-year old woman sculptor who, it turns out, has never used file sharing software.

    The RIAA said Sarah Ward was sharing 2,000 songs through the KaZaA P2P network exposing her, at $150,000.00 per offense, to $300,000,000 in penalties. But not only had she never downloaded a song, but as a Macintosh user, she couldn't even run the KaZaA software, which only runs on Windows.

    With characteristic bad grace, attorneys for the RIAA members reserved the right to harass the woman in future:

    "Please note, however, that we will continue our review of the issues you raised and we reserve the right to refile the complaint against Mrs. Ward if and when circumstances warrant," wrote Colin Zick, attorney for the record labels, the Boston Globe reports.

    Having attacked naval cadets, students, young children and now innocent senior citizens, the music business appears not to fear the consequences of its litigation. However, it can't afford too many more cases of mistaken identity.

    The RIAA should really check who they are targeting before filing a lawsuit. It is crazy that they can get away with suing young children, students and old age pensioners. With this case, either they issued a subpoena with the wrong IP address or the pensioner has managed to run Kazaa secretly on a Windows Emulator.
    Ethernet (n): something used to catch the etherbunny
    Quote Quote  
  2. "..Kill all the lawyers,kill them today.."
    Don Henley-Get Over It
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    The State of Frustration
    Search Comp PM
    The lawyers are only doing their jobs. RIAA is out of control. They seem to think their lost revenues is the fault of pirates. Could it be they are selling their product at too high a price?
    Hello.
    Quote Quote  
  4. I'm a Super Moderator johns0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    canada
    Search Comp PM
    Im sure glad the RIAA didnt come house to house checking peoples tape collections to see what music they copied from fm,they are turning into ruthless thugs that have no concern for private rights and only care about squeezing the last dollar out of us citizens that dont buy their products.
    Quote Quote  
  5. That is true, and that is why sales are going down, NOT because of Pirates at all!

    I won't put up with their crap and I won't support it!
    BOYCOT all members of the RIAA NOW!
    That is how you shut down the RIAA!
    Once the record labels learn it is the RIAA that is costing them profits because we refuse to buy their CDs if they Belong to the RIAA they will HAVE to withdraw and adandon the RIAA. And without members what is the RIAA, money grabing un-employed scum!

    You can live with out music, DO IT NOW!
    overloaded_ide

    Spambot FOOD
    Anti-Spam
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    The State of Frustration
    Search Comp PM
    You do not even have to live without music. I am sure the radio still works. And the majority of sales at concerts go directly to the artist you are watching.
    Hello.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member tumbar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    If you must buy a cd, purchase a "used" one and deny them a new sale! I personally have nor purchased a new one in 2 years...amazon sells used. they sound a look great
    Jim
    Quote Quote  
  8. Ya, that's kinda what I mean, you can live without BUYING music!

    If everyone stopped sharing the pirate stuff AND stopped BUYING new stuff for just 6 months or 1 year they would learn a lesson!

    Lot's of alternatives that ARE legal!
    Radio, TV, used Cd's, local bands, concerts!

    Who has to have a lousy $16-$20 cd??

    And why put up with all their LIES!

    Complete collection?? Bull, I looked at a $35 collection and half the songs I wanted by the artist was not even in the set! COMPLETE?? BULL, just another LIE!!!!
    overloaded_ide

    Spambot FOOD
    Anti-Spam
    Quote Quote  
  9. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Pgh Area
    Search Comp PM
    Overload,

    All talk. No one will boycott. Just gotta have the ONE new tune on that GREAT new CD.
    As long as everybody else won't buy, what's it hurt if I buy MY copy..

    As all my music is Classic Country, easier to get at flea markets, and classical, and I have all I need of that, I don't buy 'em anyway.

    The rest will buy as many disks as they ever did.

    They got us by the short hairs.

    George
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Monroe, Mi
    Search Comp PM
    check out this email thats going around. i know A LOT of people who have this, and its not a hoax, this boycott is going to happen:

    For far too long, the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) has ripped consumers off with overpriced CDs, which now can't even be used on your computer due to [inefficient] copy-protection. They have even begun suing consumers who have resorted to downloading music instead of paying ridiculous prices for them. The time has come to change that and put the power back in the hands of the consumers, upon whom the recording industry depends. If there are no consumers, there is no recording industry, and it's time to show them that.

    For 8 days starting October 7th going through October 14th, there will be a boycott against purchasing music, in particular CDs. Please join us in sending a message to the RIAA that we will no longer stand for their ruthless monopolistic practices. Do not say to yourself, “No one is really going to do it.” This IS real, and people ARE doing it. The more people there are who participate, the greater the impact will be.

    For more information, please go to http://www.returnformer.com/riaaboycott.

    Please forward this message to as many people as you can so that they will also know about the boycott. Lets let the RIAA know that without us, they have nothing...
    Quote Quote  
  11. The RIAA and MPAA are just not follow aware of whats happening. On one hand you can be X-files about it and cliam that they are doing this to cover up their bad policies, but it's a lot of work. Far easier to believe that they really do think that sales are down because of P2P and do not truely believe that charge $18+ for a $0.10 media is the cost for lost sales.

    I remember when CDs first started coming out everyone asked why does the CD cost more than the tape? Well at the time you could play that off, only for collectors, new technology, etc. But it quickly become clear that it was just greed. People got pissed.

    Then the studioes started pushing one hit wonders. 1 good song and a lot of crap on a full CD. No singles (which were also over priced). Most people just stopped buying CDs unless it was something that they really liked, wanted. Top 10 CDs sell well it's all the other stuff that's really down. And the top 10 stuff is the easiest to find online.

    The whole thing is just silly. Now Kazaa is suing the RIAA (and they have a pretty good case). So will have to see what happens next.
    Quote Quote  
  12. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Pgh Area
    Search Comp PM
    8 DAYS?!?!?!

    What the hell good do you think that will do?

    Well, I'll put off buying that really cool new CD/DVD till next week. That'll show 'em.

    Just as stupid as the gasoline boycotts they kept calling for, we won't buy any gas on Tuesday, that'll show 'em!!!

    6 months might do it. I doubt you guys can do that, hell of a long time to go without the newest rendition of Snoop Dog's last "song"..

    Major problem is you won't hurt the centi-millionaires causing this shit. All you will hurt is the kids working in the Sam Goody's and NRM's and the like.

    Then there are the middlemen who warehouse and deliver the junk.

    Never happen.

    George
    Quote Quote  
  13. Originally Posted by sitlet
    The time has come to change that and put the power back in the hands of the consumers...
    im too young to remember a time when the consumer had any power other than choice of purchase.
    Quote Quote  
  14. The consumer has always had the power, problem is most are simple sheep and buy into whatever they are told.

    I have been boycotting the RIAA and it's members since 1995 and I have no intention of ever buying another music CD, ever...
    "Terminated!" :firing:
    Quote Quote  
  15. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Pgh Area
    Search Comp PM
    Mystic,

    You are right. The only power you have is over such a trifling thing as this.

    You do not NEED another CD/DVD. You can't say "Well, I just won't buy that studio's output.". They'll just buy out the other studio.

    Gasoline, electricity, nat'l gas, cable TV, you have no choice, nor power as a consumer, not even to conserve, as they raise the price to make up the profit shortfall.

    So to think you/we are going to bring the behemoth to its knees with an 8 day postponement is simply asinine.

    George
    Quote Quote  
  16. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Pgh Area
    Search Comp PM
    Thayne,

    Good for you. 100 million more and we'll sink 'em without a ripple.

    Things won't change till everyone over 18 starts voting the bums out who are into the pockets of the music industry, and other special interest groups..

    And, since I can't vote yours out, and you can't vote mine out, we keep re-electing our own bums and it goes 'round and 'round.

    George
    Quote Quote  
  17. Originally Posted by gmatov
    Thayne,

    Good for you. 100 million more and we'll sink 'em without a ripple.

    Things won't change till everyone over 18 starts voting the bums out who are into the pockets of the music industry, and other special interest groups..

    And, since I can't vote yours out, and you can't vote mine out, we keep re-electing our own bums and it goes 'round and 'round.

    George
    gmatov,
    You have it backward,it's the corporations who control America(and most other countries).If you buy a companies stock,service or product then you are contributing to the problem.What baffles me are people who don't like a companies product,(ex.Microsoft),yet buy their stock.I haven't purchased a CD in 2 years(and it was an oldie) and cashed out my 401K.
    We the comsumers do have control whether a corporation that sells luxury items(music,video,autos,electronics,etc) succeeds or fails.
    Quote Quote  
  18. RRIA seens dont understand that the people they are taking to the courts are the consumer that buy its products.

    The thing is clear, RRIA is trying to cut the piracy, ok, that's right, but the piracy isn't any internet user.

    IF the music and films companies follow that way, is going down and down in their selling.
    Quote Quote  
  19. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Let's face facts. It's easiest to blame someone else for your problems.

    Now it's P2P.

    A few years agao it was CDR's . That was what, 5 years ago? Do any of you remember the cry raised for pefect copies of CD's made by CDR's? You should, you do realize that every blank CDR (and DVDR for that matter) you buy has some $$$ that goes to the RIAA to offset illegal copying. Yep, it's true....

    Before that was DAT. In the US it's a dead horse, explicitly killed by the RIAA. I remember being in Asia in 1984 and seeing DAT units built into stereo's. You could get a dual Deck with DAT/Analog units in it. Relatively cheaply I might add. Unfortunately you could NOT get them in the US. You can now, but the whole thing was killed, damaged, overpriced, tarrifed, and generally made hard to acquire; All direct results of $$$ lobbying efforts of the recording industry.

    We won't go into price fixing, but you have to start in the 1940's for the track record on that account.


    Now the real problem for the RIAA is it can see it's death on the horizon. The technology, business model, and desire exists to make it totally obsolete. Not to mention a few multi-platinum bands that have no record label. Any performing artist will tell you: You make your big $$$ touring, not selling albums. Very few artists can make a living just selling albums. The Recoding industry makes money on Albums and not on touring. Now it's possible for a band to record and release songs/albums without a record label, and make a LOT more money at it than bigger bands.
    To Be, Or, Not To Be, That, Is The Gazorgan Plan
    Quote Quote  
  20. Originally Posted by johns0
    Im sure glad the RIAA didnt come house to house checking peoples tape collections to see what music they copied from fm,they are turning into ruthless thugs that have no concern for private rights and only care about squeezing the last dollar out of us citizens that dont buy their products.
    Interestingly, it has always been my contention that files swapped over the internet are no more or less legal than than songs taped off of FM. When a song is recorded from a good FM source and digitized with a good sound card, and then compressed to a 128kbs mp3, the sound is virtually indistinguishable from something that was ripped from a CD and compressed and made available on the internet. One process constitutes fair use, the other is a crime, but the end result is substantially similar: A user has a recording for "free". Now the RIAA could certainly make a good circumstantial case against you if they had evidence of your downloading. But, to make a criminal case (or a civil case stick), against someone with recordings from a house-to-house search, they would have to prove that you did not obtain the recordings through a "fair use" method like I describe above. Since I have never used Kaazaa or other p2p methods to obtain music, they would have a very difficult case against me (in particular). I have pulled substantial amounts of music from my FM tuner, the library, friends. At some point, the RIAA is going to accidentally run up against a good fair use case in courts, and the s*** will hit the fan. To date, they have avoided all fair use cases... even though their web site says it is illegal to rip a cd to your hard drive... because they fear horrible consequences should they lose.

    You simply cant take someone's music and make it available to everyone (unless, of course, you are a radio/tv station and have paid the royalty). I wonder what kind of royalty a radio station pays to play one song and broadcast to 4 million people?

    My advice is to not download music. Figure out some other way that is more in line with classic "fair use" doctrine and stick it to the RIAA... legally!
    Quote Quote  
  21. Member SquirrelDip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Quote Quote  
  22. Member Nolonemo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Search Comp PM
    Obeck, making a copy of your cd to keep in your car is fair use. Making a copy of your friend's CD to keep in your car is not fair use. The latter is analogous to downloading.

    Recording off of the radio? Don't know about that.
    Quote Quote  
  23. Originally Posted by Tommyknocker
    The lawyers are only doing their jobs. RIAA is out of control. They seem to think their lost revenues is the fault of pirates. Could it be they are selling their product at too high a price?
    Also here in the uk there are now about 30 digital music channels on sky tv this must also have an effect
    I dont buy music cd,s now in protest at the RIAA even though they are not in this country..
    Quote Quote  
  24. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Pgh Area
    Search Comp PM
    Moviegeek,

    Don't have time for a long rebuttal, now, but you do make the same point I do but seem to miss it.

    The corps control the world because they have the resources to "buy" the votes in all the lawmaking bodies to make what they deem illegal, or against their interests to, indeed, be illegal, and impose penalties on you/us.

    My point was that as long as they "own" the votes, your interests are secondary, nay, tertiary, or don't count at all.

    And, until the lawmakers are thrown out of office, it will continue. Need I say that means it is guaranteed to continue, as there will never be a voter's rebellion, we are all enamored of our "Native Sons" to throw any of them out. And, when we do, it is only to elect the "powers that be"s other choice.

    You have no more say in who gets into office than has the man in the moon.

    George
    Quote Quote  
  25. Yes, I Know Roundabout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    ...in and around the lake
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Gazorgan
    Before that was DAT. In the US it's a dead horse, explicitly killed by the RIAA. I remember being in Asia in 1984 and seeing DAT units built into stereo's. You could get a dual Deck with DAT/Analog units in it. Relatively cheaply I might add. Unfortunately you could NOT get them in the US. You can now, but the whole thing was killed, damaged, overpriced, tarrifed, and generally made hard to acquire; All direct results of $$$ lobbying efforts of the recording industry.
    I have a DAT (Digital Audio Tape) recorder that I got from Sony years ago. It still works, but it's virtually useless. I still have some blank tapes, I bet hard to find on the market now. You're right, the format was legislated to death. One of the things they did to be sure that it wouldn't be a viable format was the inclusion of SCMS on every recording (Serial Copy Management System). With SCMS, you could make one copy of an original tape, but you couldn't make a copy of that copy. It doesn't matter if the original happened to be a copy of your own works, music or otherwise - you could not make a second copy from the first copy. Absolutely stupid. Of course it was bound to fail. Sales of the DAT's sunk and the product line was cancelled.
    To tell the truth, I was happy to see them die, I hated working on them. They had all kinds of tape path problems (skewing, tearing) and we saw so few for repair that I could never get good at repairing them. Just enough to be an aggravation.
    The whole idea of limiting what you can do with your source material is ridiculous. Every time the industry comes up with a copy protection, someone finds a way to beat it within days. And you could always grab the analog stream as a last resort, it might be "good enough" to make it as an MP3. So they will never be able to stop copying, no matter what they do. Period. It's a losing battle on their side, they just won't throw in the towel yet. Someday, they will be forced to, but they will prolong that day to as far into the future as they can make it.
    Ethernet (n): something used to catch the etherbunny
    Quote Quote  
  26. Originally Posted by Nolonemo
    Obeck, making a copy of your cd to keep in your car is fair use. Making a copy of your friend's CD to keep in your car is not fair use. The latter is analogous to downloading.

    Recording off of the radio? Don't know about that.
    Thats not exactly true. There is a body of evidence that supports the idea that you can copy pretty much anything you can physically get your hands on for your own personal use. Further, the RIAA claims that even ripping to your local hard drive is illegal. Further still, the RIAA is only prosecuting people who make songs available on the internet. It is not at all clear that downloading is illegal. My point was that there is a vast amount a grey area that the RIAA wont even touch because a ruling against them would be costly. If you stay in that grey area... instead of making your whole library of songs available on the internet, then you beat the RIAA.

    Lets say I download a song. And I tape one off the radio and compress it. And they sound *exactly* the same to me, and the right judge or jury. How can the RIAA claim harm? To a great extent, if it is legal to digitize it from the radio and compress it, it is going to be very difficult for the RIAA to claim harm for any other method which produces a comparable recording... as long as i dont give out my recording to the world at large (the radio station paid a royalty to give it to me). You see how sticky things get?

    My solution still means an end to P2P sharing, but preserves a whole bunch of fair use rights that achieve nearly the same goals.
    Quote Quote  
  27. DAT is used exclusively in the broadcast arena. Analogue tapes have now been phased out and CDR isn't a reliable mastering medium, so DAT and Hard Disc recording are the only acceptable media for recording music/speech for radio/TV broadcasting.

    The same copycode management system is found on all domestic digital gear - standalone CD recorders, minidisc recorders, DAT machines - it's just disabled on professional models.

    Oh and in the UK, it is illegal to copy a CD onto any other format without a license from the MCPS. You don't buy the music as such, you only buy a license to listen to that particular CD in the home environment (ie. less than 6 people able to listen at any one time). This was tested 2 years ago when Paul McCartney took an online storage company to task for allowing people to store copies of their own CD's on a company server. He won substantial damages (many millions) and the company went out of business.

    All copyrights are essentially corrupt in that they allow people to earn over and over for the same piece of work. The rest of the world doesn't work like this, so why should music/film/literature? Imagine a builder building a house and then getting a cut of every sale on the property for the next 75 years! It's crazy.
    Quote Quote  
  28. Yes, I Know Roundabout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    ...in and around the lake
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by energy80s
    All copyrights are essentially corrupt in that they allow people to earn over and over for the same piece of work. The rest of the world doesn't work like this, so why should music/film/literature? Imagine a builder building a house and then getting a cut of every sale on the property for the next 75 years! It's crazy.
    Unless you're the government. They collect tax on a car every time it's sold until it lands in the junkyard. Then they collect tax on the parts when parting it out...and then it gets melted into a new car and the process starts all over again. Same goes for houses - transfer taxes are charged every time it's sold. The government loves it when things are sold, they get their "cut" every time. But I agree with you about copyrights - I believe they used to be 20 years then became public domain. They keep extending it and extending it, until it becomes a joke. They may as well say the copyright is forever, because essentially it has become so.
    Ethernet (n): something used to catch the etherbunny
    Quote Quote  
  29. Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Pgh Area
    Search Comp PM
    Please refer to the above.

    I DID say if you have deep pockets and can influence enough legislators you can do pretty much as you wish.

    This applies to the copyright laws, originally, if the other above is correct, 20 years, extended numerous times to, now, what, 75 years after the holder's death? Basically, in perpetuity?

    Charlie Chaplin's grandkids are the controllers, and collectors of royalties of works done in the 1930's?

    Elvis' daughter still collects royalties 28 years after his death?

    Keep voting them back in, boys 'n girls. Soon enough there will be nothing in the public domain.

    Do you know that "Happy Birthday To You" is not public domain? Every time it's sung in a chargeable venue, a royalty is paid.

    It is, what, a 100 year old little tune?

    Cheers,

    George
    Quote Quote  
  30. Член BJ_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Happy Birthday to You, the four-line ditty was written as a classroom greeting in 1893 by two Louisville teachers, Mildred J. Hill, an authority on ***** spirituals, and Dr. Patty Smith Hill, professor emeritus of education at Columbia University.
    The melody of the song Happy Birthday to You was composed by Mildred J. Hill, a schoolteacher born in Louisville, KY, on June 27, 1859. The song was first published in 1893, with the lyrics written by her sister, Patty Smith Hill, as "Good Morning To All."



    Happy Birthday to You was copyrighted in 1935 and renewed in 1963. The song was apparently written in 1893, but first copyrighted in 1935 after a lawsuit (reported in the New York Times of August 15, 1934, p.19 col. 6)
    In 1988, Birch Tree Group, Ltd. sold the rights of the song to Warner Communications (along with all other assets) for an estimated $25 million (considerably more than a song). (reported in Time, Jan 2, 1989 v133 n1 p88(1)


    In the 80s, the song Happy Birthday to You was believed to generate about $1 million in royalties annually. With Auld Lang Syne and For He's a Jolly Good Fellow, it is among the three most popular songs in the English language. (reported in Time, Jan 2, 1989 v133 n1 p88(1)
    Happy Birthday to You continues to bring in approximately 2 million dollars in licensing revenue each year, at least as of 1996 accounting, according to Warner Chappell and a Forbes magazine article.
    "Each problem that I solved became a rule which served afterwards to solve other problems." - Rene Descartes (1596-1650)
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!