Girl, 12, Settles Piracy Suit for $2,000

[morriswindgate]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...c_11&printer=1

The RIAA is a bunch of slimeballs that think they are above everything. I have always thought this is what they would do, and I also think that this is what is going to finish them off.

[Big Weapons]

They're totally crossing the line on this one. I hope that this WILL bring down the RIAA. Eventually someone will speak up... anything can happen in America!

[james8547]

Yeah I know RIAA are being a pain to say the least.

I don't know if it's just me but I heard a rumor going around that the RIAA site will get mass attacked. Denial of service or something. I don't know what good this will accomplish but I might do a ghost back-up, bring my firewall down, and let my system get an infect*mumbles*

[glc]

I'm not defending their tactics, but the laws are laws. Break a law, get caught, pay the price.

[Lespaul20]

I know that is the law, it's copyrighted, but a 12 year old, I don't think that should have been among there first, If you can honestly say you never had an ilegal peice of anything then I commend you. But there are too many people that are doing this and control is probabaly hopeless, I compare it to the drug market, cracking down may help, but to fully control who has them is almost next to impossible.

[mbossman2]

Hopeless enforcement is not a reason to not enforce the law.

[Force Flow]

It's times like this that make me wish I knew all the ins and outs of the law.

[raftero]

one of my daughters got cought shoplifting(along with some of her friends)when she was about 12,just some cheap cosmetics,she was just having fun--until she was caught!!!i'm glad she was caught then because she learned a valuable lesson.if she had continued uncaught she might have gotten into serious trouble,i realize it seems harsh but maybe it will teach her not to steal, even music.i personally think the punishment to he parents was a little severe but like GLC said,she broke the law.

[mr krinkle]

Technology has reached a point where once a song is released, anyone can
distribute that song to billions and no power on Earth can stop that from happening.

The music business and the RIAA fail to understand the simple facts. Apparently, they're out
of the music business and are now in the business of scaring money out of 12-year old girls.
If their product can no longer generate a profit for them, they should find new jobs.

The Gestapo would be proud of the antics of the RIAA

[mbossman2]

Originally posted by mr krinkle Technology has reached a point where once a song is released, anyone can distribute that song to billions and no power on Earth can stop that from happening. The music business and the RIAA fail to understand the simple facts. Apparently, they're out of the music business and are now in the business of scaring money out of 12-year old girls. If their product can no longer generate a profit for them, they should find new jobs. The Gestapo would be proud of the antics of the RIAA

so using your logic:

technology develops an invisibility cloak, you walk into a store, take whatever you want, you leave without paying, they go out of business: too bad for them?

C'mon, stealing is stealing, no matter what guise the manner of theft takes.

[morriswindgate]

What the people who say the law is the law have got to ask themselves is do we want to be like it is in some contries in Europe? Over the years I have read stories where the houses and computer equipment of software pirates were raided/ siezed not by the police, but by hired guns from the software industry. ANd this was like in Norway and Sweden!
The tatics that the recording industry is using is 180 degrees out from what they should be doing. This is because they first want to maintain total control over what is produced, second they have for years been in colusion with each other on pricing (they just dropped wholesale prices quite a lot), third they are trying to hold on to an outdated mode of distribution, and finally they know that if the consumer was allowed to purchase/access all the music in their catalogs, the current bunch of artists they have would sink to the bottom like stones in water.
It is a fact, many times studied, that people downloading music are for the largest part looking for titles that are not sold in the local top 40/latest bimbo/talking parolee music store.
The music industry should be instead looking to surplant the P2P netwroks with their own download sites that have reasonable prices (not the dollar a song BS which was done to keep people buying the actual CD instead of making their own), unlimited use of the downloaded product, their entire catalogs available, small sample files that can be streamed, and reliable software with no hiddeen BS spyware on it. They could also just farm this service out to others as a way to stimulate and spread the costs.
I really believe that the first company to do this will see it's total revenues skyrocket from it's previous ones.

[Confused]

Originally posted by mbossman2 so using your logic: technology develops an invisibility cloak, you walk into a store, take whatever you want, you leave without paying, they go out of business: too bad for them? C'mon, stealing is stealing, no matter what guise the manner of theft takes.

I can agree with that, but I think the RIAA is making a big mistake and this will only hurt them. It is only going to take a few little girls in housing projects and the RIAA is going to have a public relations nightmare if the major news organizations decide to run with the story.

Downloading is only one portion of the problem. There are bootleg CD's created in this country and others being sold worldwide.

I wonder what other countries (England, Ireland, Germany, Japan, Canada, Isreal) to name a few are doing about the problem of CD coping and downloading to protect their artist.

We have a international membership here. What are some of the other countries doing?
Chas

[mr krinkle]

mbossman2 surely you can see the difference between downloading some music off of the Web and shoplifting Cant you?

If a person Records hours of his/hers favourite music from a local Radio station and Shares it with Friends is that Theft?

[RayH]

The downturn in the economy has nothing to do with depressed CD sales because people need them more than food!

[mbossman2]

Originally posted by mr krinkle mbossman2 surely you can see the difference between downloading some music off of the Web and shoplifting Cant you? If a person Records hours of his/hers favourite music from a local Radio station and Shares it with Friends is that Theft?

How is it different? convince me.

But 1st lets look at the definition of stealing:

steal
v. stole, (stl) sto·len, (stln) steal·ing, steals
v. tr.
1) To take (the property of another) without right or permission.
property of dictionary.com


Now as to the recording off the radio...if you record something for your own personal use, the "fair use" doctrine comes into play, it is the same issue as if you record a TV program to time shift it to view at your leisure. If, however, you record something and then distribute it to others, then you are in violation of the owners copyright (see definition of stealing above).

[Confused]

Originally posted by mbossman2 Now as to the recording off the radio...if you record something for your own personal use, the "fair use" doctrine comes into play, it is the same issue as if you record a TV program to time shift it to view at your leisure. If, however, you record something and then distribute it to others, then you are in violation of the owners copyright (see definition of stealing above).

If I burn a song to a CD for my own personal use, I'm still having a hard time differentiating how it was accquired.

I just don't see the difference. Blue Suede Shoes by Elvis is the same if I record it off the radio or download it. It is still the same song by same artist and it is for my personal use.

I know legally I'm probably wrong, but that is the very reason the RIAA doesn't want me on a jury if one of these go to trial.
Chas

[Prew]

They aren't going after people who download a song or two, they are going after people that make available hundreds of CD's and songs to anyone with a modem. Something needs to be done- you can go to Kazaa and pretty steal any program or song that you want.

If you download every Metallica song ever written on Kazaa, and then make available all of these songs to everyone with a modem- isn't that more of a crime than just going into Best Buy and shoplifing the CDs? Just because you don't leave your house doesn't mean you are exempt from theft laws.

[mr krinkle]

mbossman2 many bands encourage downloading there "Some" of there music off of the Web..Go to
some Music web sites and check it out,So if Primus ow whoever
encourages us to listen to there music but also says not to Turn around and sell it how can you say that is theft?

Sorry but I see no differance between what you call theft and what you call the "fair use" doctrine
..Its a very Fine line the RIAA has crossed. IMO of course..

[pam123]

The Boycott the RIAA site is here : http://www.boycott-riaa.com/

CDBaby, the site for independent artists, is here : http://www.cdbaby.com/

You can put the RIAA out of business.

[mr krinkle]

pam123 thanks,Action (money) speaks louder than words.

[Prew]

Its a welfare mentality. You shouldn't have to pay for anything. Shouldn't have to pay for healthcare, rent, food, college, music, computer programs, and get over when you can- I don't think this way though.

If you can't afford to buy a CD - get a job or get a better job.

[azscary]

What I don't understand here, is why the RIAA went after a 12 year old girl instead of Kazaa who sold her the access to the music? Is it because the 12 year old is less likely to afford a cadre of attorneys??

[Force Flow]

Help The RIAA Kid: As most of you have seen this afternoon on CNN Headline News T.V. broadcasts, we are helping out the 12 year old kid sued by the RIAA. Normally, we do not get involved in this type of stuff but this is a special case. First of all, we firmly believe people should pay for their music, but this situation has extenuating circumstances. We are raising the money to help the 12 year old girl sued by the RIAA by raffling off 400 chances to win a nice water cooled computer. This raffle is not about who is right or wrong, we don’t really care about that. What we are trying to do is help a 12 year old catholic school honor roll student who comes from a low income, single parent household. The $2000 fine from the RIAA for downloading music could easily break their household. We have a few things around here to put together a kick ass computer. The money will go a long way to help the kid out, you’ll feel good about yourself and to top it off… ONE OF YOU will get a nice computer for a mere $5, the odds are pretty damn good too ( only 400 chances to win ). This way, we have helped out and everyone is happy…..even the RIAA will be happy because they’ll have their money, that is what is important to them. This is a win-win-win situation.

from hardocp.com

[azscary]

I sent em $15. I already had a PayPal balance I had nothing else to do with and 3 chances out of 400 to win a system is decent odds. LOL

I have a friend that could use a new computer.

[Strider]

It seems to me going after a 12 year old in this matter is a little tough and wrong, but that's the RIAA for you. It's my opinion that the RIAA is going about this in the wrong way, for they should be embracing technology not trying to fight it. Let's face it, the CD is going to become obsolete just like the LP did, so why doesn't the RIAA think of something clever? They could change formats, by this I meaning changing formats from mp3 to something that is a little harder to copy. They (RIAA) are also going to have to realize that there are going to be people who will be able to copy this new format. They should become passive and not make to much of a stink about it, unless it's a flagrant violation of copyright infringement. This is where they got themselves in trouble in the first place, for they should have just kept their big mouths shut and lower the cost of music would be a good start - but that is a different subject. Just my .02 cents.

[Force Flow]

The problem is that the RIAA likes a fat wallet. Not much short of an all-out legal battle is going to put a stop to that.

[pam123]

Originally posted by Prew Its a welfare mentality. You shouldn't have to pay for anything. Shouldn't have to pay for healthcare, rent, food, college, music, computer programs, and get over when you can- I don't think this way though. If you can't afford to buy a CD - get a job or get a better job.

Now why is it the RIAA companies get indicted, repeatedly, for price fixing and a 12 year old is the major lawbreaker ?
There is a welfare mentality but it's not her's.
Keep walking people, the cheaters are the ones threatening the $100,000.00 lawsuits.
What we've all been living under is the misuse of copyright by the ones with the money and the influence.
Remember Janis Ian's comment after 40 years in the music business - I make my money from touring.... . I have never received an account from a record company that didn't tell me that I owed them money - .
Deby peonage is alive and well in the music business.
The current shakeout is long overdue.
For the first time the RIAA companies are getting hit, usually it's the musicians and the buying public.
If you can just stick it out we may have a new popular music industry that gives both the buying public and the musicians a fair break.
It sure isn't what we've got now.
Don't fall for any, "legal" arguments from the otherside. They may be "legal" but in no way is what went before just or ethical.

[pam123]

Originally posted by azscary What I don't understand here, is why the RIAA went after a 12 year old girl instead of Kazaa who sold her the access to the music? Is it because the 12 year old is less likely to afford a cadre of attorneys??

Because a judge told them they couldn't.
They appealed but it looks like they won't win that one.
Essentially, file trading is perfectly legal and what people trade is not the problem for the software service.
Unlike Napster there is no one to sue.

As for the 12 year old, they can afford the lawyers and she can't.
You got it right.

[FLG]

How do they find out who downloaded songs? i just want to protect myself.

[Prew]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by pam123
[B]Now why is it the RIAA companies get indicted, repeatedly, for price fixing ]

Huh? I can't think of once.


"What we've all been living under is the misuse of copyright by the ones with the money and the influence."


Yep- just as I thought- nothing but typical class envy- in other words- they are rich so the we are entitled to their money, music, etc. They should give away the music because they have so much more money- I disagree- just a philosophical disagreement I guess. Nothing personel- I've read your other posts- just disagree on this one.