RIAA Lawsuits

Amazing but true, the RIAA has gone completely insane. Not that this was unexpected, that organization basically wrote the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, greased the wheels of Washington to get it passed, and are now using its provisions — which specifically take a judge out of the subpoena process — to file for and receive (with no review or judicial oversight) hundreds of subpoenas, straining the court system and revealing the names and addresses of people sharing as few as three music files. In the name of stamping out digital piracy, the industry continues to use scare tactics and go after it’s own customers instead of providing better alternatives, ceasing its anti-competitive practices, fairly compensating artists, breaking the Top 40 radio stranglehold, and allowing fair rates for webcasting.

9 replies on “RIAA Lawsuits”

  1. Everyone change your username to the default username on P2P, something like kazaaliteuser@Kazaa, depending on what your using. It should make things harder for them.

  2. Are we sheep, there are 60 million people that are basically doing this and the RIAA wants to scare the majority by making an example of a few. If you want to hit back at the RIAA, simply go to you local record stores and tell the manager that until the RIAA backs off, you will not purchace another item from their store. If enough people were to do this, the big distributers would scream bloody murder at the RIAA. Also, any politician that has supported the RIAA efforts would go white if “we the people” voted in a block form against them no matter how much money the recording industry has.

  3. The only place the riaa has any feeling is in the pocketbook. If people refuse to buy the cd’s that the riaa companies make, they’ll sing a different tune.

  4. MP3 THIEVES ARE RUININ THE INDUSTRY BECAUSE ALL THESE LITTLE KIDS ARE GETTING HARD WORK FOR FREE AND TREAT IT LIKE ITS THE FLAVOR OF THE WEEK BECAUSE THERE GETTING IT FOR FREE. THEY DON’T UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH GOES INTO IT. I’M NOT SAYIN ARTIST SHOULD BE WORSHIPED OR IDOLIZED. THE ONLY ONE THAT SHOULD BE IDOLIZED IS GOD. BUT ARTIST SHOULD BE RESPECTED AS HARD WORKING BUSINESS TYPE PEOPLE. THAT LACK OF APPRECIATION IS KILLING THE ARTISTRY. ARTISTS ARE BEING FORCED TO COME OUT WITH MORE FREQUENTLY BECAUSE THEIR MATERIAL IS BEING DISPOSED OF SO QUICKLY BECAUSE PEOPLE DON’T APPRECIATE IT AS MUCH. THIS MEANS THERE SPENDING LESS TIME ON CREATING WHICH LEADS TO BORING RECORDINGS. SINCE MP3’S TOOK OVER, A NUMBER OF GREAT ARTIST SOLD OUT THEIR CREATIVITY TO FEED THIS DISPOSABLE MARKET. THAT MEAN WE MISSED OUT ON GREAT RECORDINGS. IT WILL BE VERY HARD FOR TRUE ARTISTS TO DEVELOP UNDER THIS SOCIETY THAT DOWNLOADS HARD WORK FOR FREE. I want to hear creative things. Their inspiring to me. I haven’t been inspired by a recording since MP3’s. That why I support the R.I.A.A’s actions to against you! And I’ll support your prosecution. If you do have stolen music on your hard drive you will be prosecuted.

  5. I think the RIAA should find another solution. Going out and suing your own customers isn’t the best way. Besides I’m sure some of us actually do buy the the artists CD, and copy the music onto the computer, and use the computer as your everyday CD player. Why? Because we don’t want keep opening and closing the CD tray and changing the CD to hear another great song. We buy their music, we listen to it how we want to. And now because we have an MP3 on our computer that makes us guilty. I think from now on I won’t buy artists CD’s anymore. I’ll just listen to it on the radio. There I’ll get to hear it and it’s for free.

  6. They’re not suing anyone who has an MP3 on their computer, they’re suing people who are SHARING over 2000 MP3 to other people. Of course you’re well within your rights to back up music you’ve bought to your computer. How do you think Apple came up with that “Rip. Mix. Burn.” slogan?

    I honestly am NOT “siding with” the RIAA here… I am on the fence, because while the RIAA IS an evil conglomerate that is doing some pretty damn far-out things, I don’t believe people would die if they didn’t have the latest Britney song, and if they believe so strongly in artist’s rights they should boycott the labels entirely and only download things that are already distributed online. Linus Torvalds (yes, that Linus) has recently expressed negativity in a NYTimes magazine interview about how open-source is being compared to sharing “things that aren’t yours to share in the first place.” And saying that “well, some people do become more interested in a band and then go out and buy the albums after downloading”…. Do you really expect industries to be happy with people policing themselves? That’s not a reliable system.

  7. I keep hearing about how much file sharing hurts the artist and stiffles creativity, nothing could be further from the truth, in the days before file sharing the bootleg market was the only way that new bands could be heard without support of the record industry. Without bootleg music Metallica would still be playing the Rocket Club in Tampa. The artists have never made a hell of alot of money from there albums, I think it is less than 2 cents per CD. The RIAA should put there energy into making there music distribution digital at a resonable price and I dont think there would be a problem.

  8. I must admit i have download a fair amount of MP3’s, but then again ive gone to a fair amount of concert, bought a fair amount of posters and own a fair amount of legally bought CD’s. I think if the RIAA made it clear for how money is distributed through the ranks and to see exactly how much is given to artists it would help the puplic not be so anti RIAA orientated.

Comments are closed.