[OT] Did you know....

[Blockader7]

Sam: Hey, could I get a copy of that cool album from you?

Bob: Sure, just let me pop it into the CD/tape player and I'll get you a copy.

This kind of copying is what was being done before ther advent of computers and P2P programs. So how different really is P@P from doing that? If the companies are losing money from P@p then they should be losing money from friends without computers or P2P programs copying albums and songs with each other.

The truth is it's not different at all.

So those who do this should be arrested and put in jail for ten years without possibility of parole.


I'm not opposed to protect copyrighted materials, but what RIAA is doing is BS. There was a time when they were going after camps for violating copyrights for singing songs like "Happy Birthday" and "Kumbayah".

They say they're doing it on behalf of the artists, but the money they've collected has not gone into the artists pockets.

RIAA is nothing but a bunch of bullies that needs to be stopped before they get any further.

 

[pennywiz]

Both acts are illegal and should not be done; but violate rights of privacy to do it? Police are not allowed to go into your home without a search warrant, and even so can only search for the item(s) that the warrant expressly states. Are computer networks that much different? Are the files on your machine yours (or for your use on your machine) or public domain? I know I don't want anyone cruising around on my home or work LAN searching for anything that they deem was downloaded illegally. And right now the RIA has unleashed the hounds with the claim of 'Probable Cause,' which isn't good enough for me.

They aren't the police and your rights haven't been violated. You should be up in arms against the thieves that caused the whole problem in the first place. Without them, there is no problem at all.

 

[Tsyr]

They aren't the police and your rights haven't been violated.

Exactly, but wrong. The point is, they *aren't a legal law enforcement agency*. Vigilante justice, however just, is illegal. And that's what this is. And yes, rights have been violated. When you step into another persons home, or hack into their computer, you are violating their rights.

You should be up in arms against the thieves that caused the whole problem in the first place. Without them, there is no problem at all.

Not really... This specific problem is only one symptom of a greater problem... The problem is that this vigilante justice is allowed at all. These RIA folks should be charged with every bit of fury that is thrown at any other computer hacker. Not ignored by the law at best, protected at worst. If they were part of some law enforcement agency, and had a warent to do this, that would be one thing. But they aren't, and they don't, so it's not.

 

[Thaumaturge]

Okay, is there a LEGAL method to download and burn CDs? I stopped buying CDs when I realized I was paying $15 for a CD to get at most two or three songs that I liked. (Note: I have not now, nor have I ever, downloaded copyrighted music. Nor do I advocate such.)

i-tunes is a way for people with Macs to download music ("over 200,000 songs") for $0.99/song. I-tunes is coming to PCs (not player characters) "sometime this year".

C-Net has a good article about itunes.

Thaumaturge.

 

[EricNoah]

As always, this thread will only survive if it stays civil. Don't accuse each other of being thieves, gestapo, nazis, thought police, etc. The second this one goes astray the mods will put this one out of its misery.

 

[Zappo]

My two cents...

First of all, there is (still) such a thing as fair use, despite all the efforts by the RIAA and the like to put an end to it.
Average life of a CD is 5 years.
If I want to backup my CDs, I can.
If I want to record them on tape to listen in my car, I can.
If I want to download them to my portable MP3 player, I can.
If I have to break copy protections or download the songs from kazaa, I will.

More to the current point, it isn't the first time that the RIAA does something like that. It likely won't be the last.

They are breaking into private networks without any kind of authorization. This is so bad in so many ways that simple piracy pales in comparison. Unless a hard ruling is hammered down, we could very well find ourselves in a Cyberpunkish situation of anarchy fairly soon.

If the RIAA can break into my computer because it strongly suspects that I'm illegally sharing files, then tell me what prevents me from breaking into your computer because I strongly suspect you've got an illegal copy of a D&D article I wrote 10 years ago? Or something equally prepoisterous?

I'm waiting for the day when one of these hired guns inadvertantly does some serious damage to a corporate network. I guess that's what it will take for lawmakers to wake up.

If I were the RIAA, I would stop wasting money on doing illegal stuff and invest on readying a web service to sell any song instantly in MP3 format, at any time, to anyone in the planet, for a reasonable price (say between 1$ and 2$). I already don't download songs because I hate having to waste my time wading through the sea of garbage and low-quality reproductions in P2P networks... and I don't buy CDs because 90% of the time I just want one song. I can't count the number of times I've heard a good song on an internet radio service and I thought "Damn... if only I could pay a couple euros and get it, NOW, at CD quality... damn RIAA, why are you wasting time with your obsolete thinking?"

Use DRM if you must, as long as it allows for fair use. And if you can't do so, either screw DRM or make me pay substantially less, because then I'm no longer paying for a song which will last forever because I can backup it, but for a song which I can and will lose for a number of reasons.

 

[MarauderX]

I think the whole idea of it is a bit extreme. The RIA was up in arms when songs could be taped from the radio, but they only become stronger from it. And now the internet is to blame for their losses? Seems sorta like the same thing to me, only with more convience, but again let me throw a big IMO on that.

 

[ergeheilalt]

I'm a weirdo - okay, a weirder weirdo - when it comes to music. I usually have to see a movie with a featured song in it to be prodded into going to download a song.

So, this February I went to see Daredevil and was enthralled with the music (with Elektra, but the music as well). I got home and hopped onto my favorite peer to peer server and began downloading the songs. Much to my displeasure, all the songs had been "beeped", that is they had very loud dial tones randomly inserted into the song. This left enough of the song to get a taste, but not enough that it could be ignored entirely. It was enough of a pain that I was forced to open up the coffers for a CD ... the first CD I have actually purchased.

IMO, I believe that these crapped-up songs will be enough to prod many of the casual peer to peer'ers into buying the CD. Apple is launching their own campaign, selling downloadable songs for 99 cents. I have also found out that these dial tones are easily removed with software, one of them being Sampletude(sp?). Knowing how to use Sampletude is another issue.

 

[Tarek]

Hacking penalties

Actually, if the RIAA did indeed hire "hackers" to break into computer systems, they are both civilly AND criminally liable for their actions on a Federal level.

According to a number of federal laws passed in the 90's, hacking into someone else's computer or computer network is illegal, carrying a 10 year prison sentence and a $250k fine (IIRC). Unless you have a warrant, which is only granted to law enforcement agencies, which the RIAA is not.

Tarek