check this bs... more lawsuits

[xviddivxoggmp3]

Stupid move for the RIAA

Check out the link above to see a new attempt to prosecute people that use P2P and MP3s.
We need to organize and ban the musicians that support this initiative.

If the RIAA wants to cater to the consumer, then they need to realize a few things:
(1) The consumer is the one you want happy.
(2) The power of the consumer will overcome.

We need to start creating a redistribution of wealth from the artists that believe in greed and redirect it to the artists that allow free use.

If anyone is interested in helping this initiative check out the bands that allow taping page Bands That Allow Taping .

Down with the man. Bring big brother to his knees.

[setarip]

I guess I missed the part where you explain how it is legal for you to steal another person's commercial work product.

Would you be good enough to explain how downloading commercial products from a P2P setup yields a different result than shoplifting or picking pockets?

Should I be worried that you and those that share your views might move into my neighbourhood?

[Livewire]

Originally posted by setarip
I guess I missed the part where you explain how it is legal for you to steal another person's commercial work product.

I guess I missed that part where he was trying to explain RIAA trying to control our freedom on the network without having to have big brother watching over us. I never like someone telling me what to do and how to do it, all the while not giving me anything in return.

Is it legal to steal commercial products? Define stealing first, in the view of the consumer. The way I see it is this: RIAA is stealing from us. Stealing our freedom, stealing money from digital recording material sales (x% of proceeds to musicians Bullsh&&t) , and above all writing the laws in such a way that they have complete control over not only how we use thier products, but how long we can own it, how we cannot retain it for a long time (Degradation over time / Unable to retain copies) and as well as not being able to endorse thier products by re-distributing degraded copies of it to others who may wish to purchase it. So the next time you hear a song on the radio, don't sing it, don't tell your friends about it, and above all, don't record it, as the RIAA doesn't want you too.

I think that most people have to realize that these people (RIAA) are right.. if they don't want people to listen to thier music without getting tied up in thier control, then they shouldn't re-distribute material controlled by it. Maybe then P2P programs can have a hayday redistributing FREE and GOOD materials made by people like you and I, and all the while obsoleting the RIAA. See what they will do? Make an excuse and shut it down all because a few bad apples.

In the end, it still doesn't make it right. They need to address the issue with the individuals who are actually violating thier laws which were created by bribing judges and lawyers. Just because it is law, doesn't mean it is fair or right.

I buy CD's, DVD's, Rent movies and go to the theatre. If my money from endorsing the RIAA is being used to restrict my freedoms, I may agree with the original poster.

[gd_nimrod]

Originally posted by setarip

Should I be worried that you and those that share your views might move into my neighbourhood?

You're missing the point, the RIAA and MPAA are now so focused on bringing down criminals like file-sharers, that they even bring the FBI into this mess, instead of the FBI being involved with bringing down terrorism, homocides and drugs. Fighting piracy is a lost cause. Especially when some people just "evaluate" software.

[xviddivxoggmp3]

preventive messures

The only thing I'm suggesting is a preventive messure to prevent money from falling into the hands of people that create these machines of greed (e.g. RIAA, MPAA).

Would you be good enough to explain how downloading commercial products from a P2P setup yields a different result than shoplifting or picking pockets?

http://furthurnet.net/

The above link is an example of symbiosis. Musicians make more money off of allowing others to post live recordings. The reason why is they have a bigger turn out for there live concerts. That is unless you suck at what you do. ;0)

This is only good for audio. I'm still trying to think of a peaceful way to have the movie industry and the audience to have a mutual beneficial relationship. If you think you have a better way of working this I would love to hear it. I'm willing to try anything to prevent unjustified jailing or prosecution of anyone.

[Radio_Edit]

I think that the bottom line is. for the first time in history consumers have the power not to be raped by companies. if you give me, or i believe an overwhelming % of consumers out there a fair deal on a product. people would be much more inclined to spend there ever dwindling (? spelling) paychecks on them. Anyone remember when we were promised that the price of a cd would go down by half when cd's first came out. And some how, they are still at 16$ when they are printed on a media that is 1/10th as expensive to use. And if i remember correctly, a tape was around 8$. Thats a hell of alot of inflation. (Or is it just plain greed.)

Now the consumer can finally force a company to be fair. I believe in compansation for your work. But i also believe that it is not my responsibility to put another CEO's kids thru college.

Just a view. take it with a grain of salt.

[rsquirell]

Without the "machines of greed" we wouldn't have professionally mastered media to copy. That said...ever since the first tape recorders were released to the public in the forties people have been using them to record music from the radio, records and tapes (as well as lectures, speeches, etc.) What did the producers of the devices intend we do with them? Soon another "machine of greed" industry grew up providing the users with means of copying all sorts of things ( VCR's, CDR's, DVDR's) as well as a host of assundry hardware/software to assist in this endeavor. The cost of copying often exceeds the cost of purchase (the first VCR I bought in 1978 cost $2,500...it was a "portable" panasonic (the "portable" portion weighed 30lbs you carried with a shoulder strap attached by cable to a huge camera on your shoulder) and I dare say most people in this forum have at least that much money invested in PC's, HD's, Burners, Software and whatnot.) If one were to do a cost/benefit analysis I'm afraid it would be much cheaper to just buy DVD's at the store...but that wouldn't be fun. This is a hobby...and we're doing it so that we can say "see...I did that." And doing it nefareously just adds to the thrill. But in reality...what the media industry is losing to us is chickenfeed compared to what they've already reaped in the stores.

[Radio_Edit]

RSQuirel....Power Brother. I think you hit the nail on the head. You cant give the people the power then get pissed off cuz we use it.

[Mechanos]

Some observations

For my purposes, I'm going to assume that most people affected by this are similar to me in their habits. That said, here are a few things to ponder:

The MPAA gets my money when I go to the movies on Fridays. That's 10 bucks a pop. Money well spent in my opinion (that is, when the movie is good, which I'm afraid is becoming a rare occurence). I also have a DVD collection that has all of my favorites, the ones I watch over and over and don't get tired of.

When I download a movie, I don't do it because I plan to watch it and show it to friends and rob the MPAA of their money. I pretty much download movies to have them. I download movies that didn't look attractive enough for me to be willing to spend money on them. I get the ones that, were it not for the internet, I wouldn't have spent the 5 bucks at Blockbuster on. So, are they really losing money on me?

Maybe the MPAA should sell CDRs instead. I mean, they claim that their profit margins are slim to begin with, so why not just make 20 cents for every movie stolen and burned? Hell, they could get creative and make them self destruct in a year. But for God's sake, it's stupid to run around with hammer and nails, to crucify a bunch of kids.

Kids don't spend much money to begin with, their parents do. Primarily on birthdays and holidays. That doesn't change with DivXs.

Don't get me wrong though-- I still don't think it's good to only download your movies. I say that you should buy movies you truly enjoy, and I put my money where my mouth is.

[rsquirell]

The media is trying to pick a scapegoat for the reason they're losing money these days. They're blaming everything but the lousy content of their movies they've pushed on us the last few years (dumb and dumberer...please!!!). It can't be their fault. And if they try to go back to the old formulas using the current crop of Star actors...well, I used to like Hunt for Red October until Alec Baldwin promised to leave the country if a capitalist won the election and George Clouney can't see why we'd want to stop nuclear proliferation after making The Peacemaker...geeze. Those guys are great actors...but after making their true politics known Hollywood needs to completely restaff to get unknown actors whose credibility won't be challenged in the mind of the viewer when they play heroic roles.

[admin]

Even with all this ripping/copying/sharing, DVD sales are still going strong, clearly the best selling media format in the history of all media formats. I can't see why the MPAA should complain about their profits at all, other than the fact that they are greedy. CD sales, on the other hand, are falling - IMO, mainly because of the high prices of CDs (especially compared to DVDs). And music will never be as popular or as reachable as mainstream movies. Movie ticket sales are also on the up (just think of the number of "No. 1 at the box office" movies in the last few years).

As for actors going into politics, I guess it is inevitable, unless you slap a law on them saying that they can't talk about it, which is against freedom of speech. The problem with actors, and other celebrities, is that everything they say or do will be reported in every media outlet, and sometime a simple statement meant to be said in private can get plastered as tomorrow's headline (and celebs don't have the same kind of training as politicians, as in when to keep their mouth shut, how to say things off the record, for example).

BTW, Alec Baldwin said that he would leave the US if Bush is elected (a view shared by many on the left, although it is only a figure of speech, not a threat of action), nothing about capitalism (for which he has benefited from) - he is a long time Democrat, so while I don't think he should leave the country, he should have the right to criticize anyone he chooses, especially Republicans. If all actors were to stay of politics, then the Republicans would have missed out having Ronald Reagan as President. The same with Arnie wanting to be CA governor and Charlton Heston with his NRA presidency.

[rsquirell]

he he he...I hit a nerve. Well this is the rant area. Actually I have some familiarity with the personalities of the characters those two portrayed. I'm one who took down his black beret that had held an honored place on the mantle, removed the unit flash, and uncerimoniously chucked it in the trash once that general with the russian-sounding name gave it to every Tom, Dick and Harry leg that joined the Army. Perhaps that act had something to do with the thirty hunter-killer missions that beret had come to signify. Perhaps I'm reactionary...but it seems to me that those two didn't make a casual remark in passing which was blown all out of proportion. They were actively attending rallies and rooting for the enemy during war. If I ever see George Clooney depicting a special ops officer again I'll puke. I'm not against free speech...I put my life on the line to protect it...which is a heck of a lot more than those two have done. But what I think doesn't matter at all. It's what the public thinks. And I'm betting the public thinks they screwed the pooch.

[DVDFerret]

Oh, jeez here I go....

A lot of good points have been made here. First, stealing is wrong, but invading my privacy may cause internal bleeding or death.

We have to remember exactly what it is we are talking about here - money and power. The MPAA and the RIAA have a lot of money and power and they want to keep it. I think the reason that they are even making an issue of this is because the industry feels that they are losing power against the technology heavy weights that have given us such things as DeCSS, MP3, DVD2SVCD and DVD Shrink.

I've been known to pirate the occasional DVD (maybe 10), but I also own over 120 retail DVD's. And of those 10, I have purchased 3 of them, when the director's cut came out.

MP3's are a different story. I have downloaded more MP3 format files than I could actually find time to listen to for the rest of my life. However, if the RIAA came into my house and deleted all of them, I wouldn't really care. Most of them are the same worthless songs you hear over and over again on the radio- wishing someone would stab you in the eye with a skewer so you wouldn't have to hear "...oops, I did it again..." ever again. Which, by the way, how often do you hear now? Or, "...let me see that thong.."? Do you know why? Because these songs are crap and always were; fads that were just there at a certain time, meaningless, and in hind-sight, just plain stupid.
Should we scan everyone's computer to look for these MP3 files? What if you have the original retail disc? Should you still be punished because you made it into an MP3? I actually bought some CD's because I liked one song. Can I download that song from P2P since I did, at one time, actually buy it? Or do I have to physically posses the disc? The RIAA would say I need to actually have the disc. On a damn near disposable media?! That's stupid. I mean, really, CD's might as well be made out or chocolate-covered glass. They're not exactly durable.

I have put my money in to the pot. If I ride for free sometimes, I should be able to.

Secondly, this kind of thing can never be stopped. The MPAA and RIAA don't seem to know this- I do. Think, for instance, of the first personal computer. Ever since the first spreadsheet, word document, or game was created; people wanted to transfer it or back it up for safe keeping somehow. (Punch cards were first, but not really in PC's) Floppies came along and the world was great. For a while. Then came bigger floppies, the 3.5", the internet (Radio Shack let you get on it in 1985 with a local call), CD's, DVD's, Flash Media, CF's, etc, etc, etc.
Since then, really, nothing has changed. In the late 80's I copied Wolf3D for a friend of mine, he gave me another game. No one was there to arrest me or spank me, hell I was only 11. I have continued to copy things for people, trading, sometimes giving. But I always paid for stuff I really liked and encouraged people to do the same, even buying people licenses of software as gifts for the ones I knew they used, but didn't pay for.

I have paid my dues. I wouldn't exactly call the MP3's I have stealing either. If I went and took my neighbor's dog's load he dropped on the front lawn, would that be considered "stealing"? This is exactly what we are talking about here, crap. Crap music, crap movies I wouldn't buy, listen to or view more than once. Crap. Not stealing. Stealing crap really isn't stealling is it?

In closing, I am ecstatic that the MPAA and RIAA have decided to go after P2P, because I don't obtain downloads from P2P. In fact, I hope they take all the friggin' AOLers and MSN people and give them a public flogging or the gas chamber because these are the idiots that use these services most (clogging up OUR internet); not the true technophiles, not the hackers, not the l33ts. Not the people that were installing SIMMs in their boxes while Orrin Hatch was trying to figure out how to get his 8-track player to record to his tape deck. This is ours, not Orrin's, not Bush's, not the RIAA or the MPAA. The digital revolution is ours, not the technical illiterates in Washington, and not The House, or Congress- full of the over 65'ers. Ours…

[shiny#3]

Setarip:
"I guess I missed the part where you explain how it is legal for you to steal another person's commercial work product."

Dear setarip:
I´ve read most of your tips and advices
on problems in the digital video world.

All of them are admirably precise, helpful,
and the skill you´ve gathered shines
bright through every sentence.
And on top of that sometimes they
also show your sense of humor.

Therefore , your opinion is of a certain
importance to many in this forum.

All this makes me wonder how you can
publish such a "strange" statement as above!!!

1. Downloading music is NOT an act of
theft!!!! It is a violation of copyrightlaws.

You are not going in a store and grab
some CDs , do you?

I find it totally correct to arrest a shoplifter and to sue him, once he is spotted in action!!

But scanning your transfers in a network is a harsh thing to do.

That is like grabbing your postman and searching your post just because you might intend to do, as you say, a shoplift!!

I also did P2P when I was looking for music that is not available in my favorite music store ( e.g. karaoke version of love me tender by Elvis)
or bootlegs of U2 that have never been published!

Merley the fact that I was running my
client as a supernode encouraged
one of those stupid music industry employees to contact my ISP.
The result was a friendly letter that I was doing a no no and if I proceed they regretfully have to cancel
my flatrate account.

Downloading unpaid music is still not legal, I admit that. But see how it came to that copyright law enforcement that threatens also the rights of normal users.

The music industries profit grew year by year.
But they have also gone through let us say not so profitable years , due to bad world economy terms. If you have less money to spend , you´d rather buy some food or send your children to school than spending it on the new Madonna album.

Here is the failure in thinking.
The music industriy does not count
its real customers it counts all the downloaders and regards them as possible customers.
How many of them would go to a store
and buy their music and how many would rather ask a friend to copy it??

The musicindustry has had a minor
growth of profit in recent years, yes
, but instead of looking at the real reasons the blame it to the downloaders and regard them as music pirates as if they were copying a brand product and reselling it. That is music piracy .... when you gain profit out of it!

Many other economy branches have gone through bad times too ,

but instead of making the sold products more attractive by lowering prices or improving quality, and lowering production costs as all others,

the musicindustry rather spends money in doubtful studies who else is to blame and in new lawsuits and their
reenforcement.

What I want to say is:
The damage done by these so called musicpirates does not justify the methods used to track them down
nor the punishment you have to expect
when you are busted.

They cheat on their customers, so is it not sometimes just fair to return the favor??

You disagree???? One example.

Three years ago a friend of mine bought himself a very expensive
standalone music cd copier of SONY.
Not long after that he came to me with
a cd he just purchased and said:
" Hey *#§%&, can you help me?
My Sony denies copying that Michael Jackson CD!!!"

I did scan it and had to tell him that
it was copyprotected with "key 2 audio" produced by the DADC company.

Funny, isn´t it?

A company sells you a copier and the music to copy. A 100% daughter of the same company turns your expensive piece of hardware into an expensive paperweight by disabling its
most important feature of making digital copies.

On top of that they poke fun on their customers by founding a new company
in a ridiculous attempt to camouflage
their strange buissenesshabits.

Can you imagine my friends face,
when he learned what a funny trick
Sony played on him??

Be honest!!!! Somtimes it is fair to return the favor!!

[The Edge]

Slighty OT:

I also did P2P when I was looking for music that is not available in my favorite music store ( e.g. karaoke version of love me tender by Elvis)
or bootlegs of U2 that have never been published!

"…I know the industry is formally opposed to that kind of thing [bootlegging] but I'm not. I don't have a problem with it at all." -- Paul McGuiness"

U2 manager does not mind bootlegging. P2P is perfect way of sharing these bootlegs for all to enjoy.

Edge