It won't matter DVD JOHN WON

[Greg12]

A judge has just decided that all ISP's must abide by RIAA requests to track users.

[FoxGarrison]

If anyone is trying to trace where the sons of Hitler's Gestapo elite went they need look no further than the RIAA.

[crahak]

Story on Verizon vs RIAA...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030121/ap_on_hi_te/downloading_music_4

That along with lawsuits at kazaa's parent company...

Anways, don't matter to me, I'm on dialup

[MOVIEGEEK]

Anways, don't matter to me, I'm on dialup

If this ruling stands it will apply to all ISP's.

[ChrisX]

A judge has just decided that all ISP's must abide by RIAA requests to track users.

This remains to be seen. Will the ISP's obey and are going to get the music pirates? I personally have doubts?

[crahak]

If this ruling stands it will apply to all ISP's.

I know, I'm just saying I'm not one of those guys who download "movies off kazaa of which I own the DVD of everyone of them", or music or anything. I'm on dialup, it does nothing to me

[FoxGarrison]

The ISPs would have to check every file that passes through their network to check for copyright violations. Would this also mean that because I'm viewing information on CNN I'm illegally using that information in a report or downloading it on a CD for distribution to defeat the purpose of purchasing an encyclopedia? Does this mean Britanica or Cambridge would be able to subpeona my ISP for copyright infringement because their sales are down and I'm using the internet for research?

Of course not!

Hence, the stupidity with the recent ruling. Just because I'm downloading an MP3 or an MPG from a file sharing network does not mean that it is illegal and that my name should be devulged to the RIAA for a supposed copyright violation. What if the MP3 or MPG was an original work from Johnny Six-Pack?

[SLK001]

Of course, the ISPs could also bankrupt the RIAA by requiring that the RIAA pay the costs of this "record gathering/keeping/submitting" (it is not a zero cost transaction). Also, the impact on the speed of the ISP will have customers screaming with dissatisfaction as the ISP "scans" all data streaming across its portals.

But this is a stupid ruling and will probably be overturned on appeal. This is equivalent to Microsoft be given permission to come into my house and search for illegal software - totally unprecedented.

[ChrisX]

As I said, “This remains to be seen" It is doubtful the ISP's would go this far invading individuals' privacy for the sake of copyright. An ISP doesn’t have the resources to catch the pirates and this isn’t their problem.

The whole court ruling is so ridiculous and unworkable. The Internet would be in chaos if the court ruling goes ahead. I don’t think this will happen as it would be so costly to implement and the RIAA would have to pay for it.

[johneboy]

How exactly will they prove anything even if they do scan the files you download
(which i know wont happen, i work for an ISP)
They going to come into everyones house, and check to see if you own the CD of the Mp3's you downloaded?
Last time i checked, you could download MP3s legally as long as you own the cd...

[johneboy]

also, not that im trying to promote piracy or anything...
Remember reading about prohibition in school?
why didnt that work out?
yea, same for this..
RIAA is fighting a losing battle, they will never win..
There best bet is to stop screwing people over by charging $15-$20 for a CD that cost them pennies to make, and has usually one or 2 songs on it that someone actually wants to hear.

[ChrisX]

The music CD is over and history. It is ridiculous to fork out so much money for music and the record industry won't reduce their overpriced music CD's.

Copy protected CD's will only makes things worse for the industry. Do they think I am going to pay a blank CD fee in Australia? They are looking into this proposal and I say no, not fair. What about legitimate CD backup of personal files?

The record industry is over. Time to download a song or listen to Internet radio.

[johneboy]

.... and another thing.. the record industry is always complaining how much money they are loosing because of P2P..
How much money are they wasting developing frivolous, simple to defeat, copy protection schemes? Or how about all the money they spend on ridiculous law suits?
I find it hard to believe any artist would complain.. even with people downloading there music, and not buying it, im sure they make a HELL of a lot more money then most of us.. Maybe of all this, we will see some real musicians come about.. ones who do it for the love of making music, and not for the love of the ridiculous amounts of money.
If the record companies wanna make some money, they should do what Sony is doing.. Sony wins both ways, they are a record label, and they make CD burners, and blank CDs.. so either way, Sony gets our money.

[twinegar]

Now would be a good time to stop loaning your car to a friend. I'm sure the auto industry will be wanting to protect there intellectual property also.

[johneboy]

ahhh.. do something about that location URL twinegar!
its messing up the tables

[delicious]

my thoughts are that if my isp cant even work out my billing, or deal with a normal phone call from me without passing me from csr to csr holding for over 45 mins, i'm sure a massive effort like this on their part would be almost impossible.

[johneboy]

my thoughts are that if my isp cant even work out my billing, or deal with a normal phone call from me without passing me from csr to csr holding for over 45 mins, i'm sure a massive effort like this on their part would be almost impossible.

Any system admins out there who know where they are talking about?
Could this even be done?
I can see how the GOVTs Carnavore system works, its simply a filtering program that sits on mail servers, but how could ISPs see what your downloading without hooking up a similar filter to EVERY router on the internet?

[Felix_2000]

So the next version of file sharing appz will then have 128bit+ encryption so that every ISP will now the need the equavilant of the NSA computing power to crack everyones info and also scan it for illegal files as it passes through their network.


LOL these RIAA people really think they can win... they lose more money on Lawsuits then they do on filesharing... I bet all their lawers like to keep these stuff in the courts forever it'll make them more money...

Thanks
-=| Felix |=-

[davedaraveishere]

I can't see them being able to check every mp3 and mpg. there are probably just as many legal and illegal ones out there. are they going to employ people to sit and watch/listen to every file downloaded. Impossible without huge amounts of money and rising ISP costs.

Record labels need to change the way they work, either charge less for a cd/dvd, or create a way to supply mp3's and films and charge ie. subscribe to pay for downloads etc.

[sammie]

As I understand it they are paying companies to participate in the P2P networks and identify large "offenders". It is then typically possible to trace the connection back to your IP address. Given an IP address and a time frame the user was on line, many ISPs can identify the user. There are anonymimizer technologies out there and it is possible to disquise your IP, and certain P2P networks protect your IP better than others, but suffice it to say, it is possible to track back to you with a little cooperation from the ISP unless you take some pretty draconian steps. What I've typically heard is that unless you are running some sort of commerical operation, you will get a both smarmy and threatening letter "informing" you that you are participating in an illegal activity and inviting you to use one of their paid download sites. They aren't totally stupid and know they are on the verge of alienating their own customers. They want others (like ISPs) to do the actual dirty work of policing.

[sammie]

.... I've been looking back through my business school notes. There was a paper that was presented that proposed a paid model that actually made sense. There was a price per song where most people surveyed said it would no longer be worth their while to mess with P2P. That price worked out quite a bit cheaper than a current CD even with the work and hardware required at the user end, and yet still gave the record companies a larger profit than they had with vinyl. Just not the huge profit increase they had gotten used to with CDs. I wish I could find it again, but I don't even remember which journal it was in. But it was well researched and pretty damning of the recording industry practices, including some recent settlements about price fixing of CDs through large retailers.

Not trying to justify things by saying they are crooks so anything should be fair game. Just that there are business models that let let us do what we want as far as backing up and multi-use, in compliance with fair use, and still would give the industry a nice profit. If I'm not mistaken the article actually forecast a profit increase for industry, but I think that part was pretty hand wavy and that in reality it would mean an overall profit loss, and obviously a profit per unit loss.

[swolf387]

There best bet is to stop screwing people over by charging $15-$20 for a CD that cost them pennies to make, and has usually one or 2 songs on it that someone actually wants to hear.

Exactly. I would gladly buy the cd with only one good song on it if it cost around half what they want right now. I can't remember the last time I bought a cd, it is toooooo expensive. Bring down the price, problem solved.

[whytless physh]

I've actually bought _more_ CDs since I started using P2P like Long John Silver gone mad. I'm not going to fork out that much cash for something I've heard less than 10% of in total. I'm going to check out what *else* is on that CD before I sign my name on the LCD screen. If I don't like the rest of what I hear, it's gone before the bits get cold. I don't save 'em if I don't like 'em. If I do like what I hear, chances are I'll buy it. I gotta admit I do keep some because I have them on tape and, well, tape sucks now.

Now tell me why the record companies and the RIAA can't come up with something that would make this legal and cram enough money to choke a Republican down the Congress' collective throats! It would make them more BLING-BLING in the long run by cheaper production and distribution costs, a world-wide audience and, in theory, a *much* larger catalog of music for sale.

I'll tell you why; they'd have to actually produce QUALITY PRODUCT! Once you've seen the short guy behind the curtain you know the end is near. The RIAA, their cronies, packs of snarling lawyers, and paid-off politicians know the score. They can hear the drums of doom beating relentlessly outside their palatial estates. But. They. Just. Can't. Let. Go... MONEY MAKES THE WORLD GO ROUND

So they attack and attack and attack. And they lie, lie, lie. They blame piracy on their sagging sales. Forgetting, conveniently, that the economy is in the crapper and they released far fewer titles in 2002 than in 2001. They've also had some rather spectacular flops in recent times. They say P2P is raping them. I got a question for them: How much money do you loose when few of them were going to buy it anyway? In order to steal something, one must commit an act the deprives another party of possessing (i.e. ownership) a material item. They may be right about copyright, but not about theft and stealing.

So now the RIAA reaches out yet another tentacle (how many they got, anyway?) to ensnare its next victim; ISPs. Like some sort of alien brain sucker, they use the power of THE LAW to mind-control their prey into being COPS! What a bunch of CRAP! I think the other LEOs have enough power already.

(i'm probably being watched right this moment)

Well, this court decision is complete hogwash. There would be fire, flood, hail, dogs and cats living together... MASS HYSTERIA! Think that SQL-Spammer WORM caused the net to slow down? Try having every freakin' packet sniffed and decoded by what I'm sure will be a court-mandated clusterf**k. It will be overturned in appeal because the RIAA may be pretty damned rich, but some folks that rely on the net for their livelihoods are very wealthy indeed.

Just My 1.9999999999999 cents

[ChrisX]

"A judge has just decided that all ISP's must abide by RIAA requests to track users". How the RIAA are going to do this? How dare the RIAA get in someone's computer.

There are millions of Internet users worldwide and the ISP isn't interested in giving out info due to privacy.

The music and movie industry is just too greedy and they won’t update to the digital age. It is time for them review their industry and forget about physical CD’s and DVD’s.

If they want to make money on their music and their movies they have to reduce their prices and relax their copyright laws.

What is wrong with annual “one fee, no condition or limit” music and movie membership online? They should create their own websites for the purposes of subscribing their Mp3 and DivX files to download on a yearly fee of $100.00.

The music artists just as well go direct to the online providers to satisfy the needs of the consumer online. It least the providers wouldn’t have to worry about copyright if they own the recording.

Music CD is over. Time to download a song or listen to Internet radio.

[bemax]

The way it works is that RIAA has people who cruise the p2p sites and look for users with a lot of content available for downloading. It then ties the IP address of that user to an actual person by asking the ISP for the users name and address. If you don't have a large shared volume of music/video, you won't be a target. But if you d/l a lot and share with others, you could be a target. The ISP only needs to tie your IP address with your name and address.

They don't have to monitor the downloads and encryption won't help. If you have a lot of content to share, you could be a target. If they scare the users with a lot of content off the web, then p2p falls apart. No content, no problem.

Now do you see what RIAA is up to? They are going to make life miserable for a few big p2p users and try to scare the others off. By definition p2p has to be open to sharing and anyone can see what you have to share. If you are sharing copyrighted material, you are a potential target.

--Bemax

[davedaraveishere]

I just don't think it'll work, it might stop a few, but everybody who buys a pc these days has a CDRW drive in, and cd's are so cheap.

They need to change something. I don't think the music industry is dead, it just needs a major reform or it will be. People can buy a CD and copy it in 2 mins literally now Labels can be downloaded and look nearly as good as the real thing with proper labels and software and printer.

I don't think it can carry on as it is, but it'll never die. Inmagine the world with no music. Lets face it people are not going to make it for free!

As my Doctor always says, preventative is always better than cure. I think this applies to this siuation, they are going about it in the wrong way.

D

[johneboy]

The way it works is that RIAA has people who cruise the p2p sites and look for users with a lot of content available for downloading. It then ties the IP address of that user to an actual person by asking the ISP for the users name and address. If you don't have a large shared volume of music/video, you won't be a target. But if you d/l a lot and share with others, you could be a target. The ISP only needs to tie your IP address with your name and address.

So, lets say i record 3 min of me singing (the horror).. and make 500 copies, and rename them all name of popular songs...
They going to download, and listen to these files first to verify that they are indeed the actual song?
Furthermore, for those who used napster towards the end, might remember how songs were renamed so that the filters installed, wouldnt block them..
So lets say i share 500 real songs, but renamed them to some cryptic name consisting of names and numbers, then set up a website, with said which number letter combo = real name of song?

[MOVIEGEEK]

So lets say i share 500 real songs, but renamed them to some cryptic name consisting of names and numbers, then set up a website, with said which number letter combo = real name of song?

And Zip it and encrypt it.The RIAA would have to hire the NSA to decypher.

[bemax]

If you take your own music and change the names and post it, what good do you do for P2P? Again RIAA wins because no-one will be able to d/l the music they want because there will be so many fake postings that the users won't be able to find the real music. If you have a code system to figure out the real name, the spies at RIAA will be able to figure it out too so you will still be a target. If you encrypt the files, how will the other users be able to listen to the music? If you post the key, the RIAA can get it.

You're missing the point: In order for P2P to work, people have to post content that can be used by other people. Some of those other people could be RIAA spies. Since as a host you can't tell a spy from a legitimate user, you have to be careful what you post.

RIAA doesn't care if you rename a bunch of garbage as music files and fill the internet up with fake files, they want people to stop trading music for free. Their scare tactics could work. We'll have to wait and see.

[sammie]

First, they already did. They nailed a kid who posted his book report on Harry Potter. I took a lot of work to convice them to lay off the kid, and they were less than apologetic that they had fingered a person incorrectly.

Second, as bemax pointed out, if you are tricking them with garbage that hurts rather than helps. They are already doing that flooding the networks with blank or damaged material. Less than sucessfully, but you're still doing their job for them.