It seems that the RIAA is opening up a new salvo in its battle to stop music sharing, by sending out hundreds of thousands of instant messages ("millions" in the coming weeks) to users of Kazaa and other services, informing those people that they're "not anonymous."
Of course, no one is anonymous on the Internet anyway, because it's a relatively easy task to do an IP trace, get ISP information, and more. And sending instant messages with serious content like this wouldn't necessarily qualify as spam, either -- assuming that they're not just sending to an entire list, but have some kind of criteria.
Still, the "We're watching you" message seems to have sinister connotations for the future. What with the apparent carte-blanche permission for the RIAA and their bunch to hack servers that are sharing pirated music (a clear invasion of privacy if I've ever heard of one), this seems to be one more step in letting megacorporations manage the public's private lives.
Personally, I'm not against the push to impose restrictions on music sharing -- while the RIAA's charges for music are often high, it's still a product of supply and demand in some ways. And not paying anything at all is IMO wrong too, because music is still legitimate work. As I said to a friend recently, would you steal a Mercedes and then claim that the car is overpriced as your justification for taking it?
And in the mean time, I'm going to go download some music legally, at the new Apple music store.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Oh dear. Now if only everyone who received one of those messages emailed the RIAA, they would soon be flooded with messages and would stop sending them.
Incidentally, does anyone know the UK's laws on filesharing etc?
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
As a avid reader of Slashdot, I consider myself reasonably up to date on matters of digital privacy (and RIAA's violations of it), but the ever-increasing piles of bullshit RIAA can get away with are REALLY beginning to irk me.
The Mercedes analogy is flawed, because, oh, 95 percent of the price you pay for a CD goes to the music industry. One, MAYBE two percent actually reaches the artist(s). Legitimate? Try exploitation. I will NOT put up with that situation, and I refuse to offer RIAA an incentive to continue.
No, I prefer rewarding an artist/band directly, instead of lining the pockets of some pimpass record label owner. RIAA is a cartel of commercial monopolist leeches clinging to a hopelessly outdated business model, and needs to be disbanded ASAP.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Phoenix: Incidentally, does anyone know the UK's laws on filesharing etc?
I'm not sure we have any specific ones; there's all the usual copyright arguements though. Most of our laws are getting on a bit. The Offences Against the Persons Act was passed in 1861 and is still in force.
-------------------- "I am an almost extinct breed, an old-fashioned gentleman, which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-bitch when it suits me." --Jubal Harshaw
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Wraith: I'm not sure we have any specific ones; there's all the usual copyright arguements though. Most of our laws are getting on a bit. The Offences Against the Persons Act was passed in 1861 and is still in force.
It would appear from this and this (both from the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988) that downloading music from the net is a civil offence (they can sue you for the cost of the single, I suppose), but not criminal (as you can only be prosecuted for distributing, not obtaining or possessing).
Although I could be wrong...
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Cartmaniac: The Mercedes analogy is flawed, because, oh, 95 percent of the price you pay for a CD goes to the music industry. One, MAYBE two percent actually reaches the artist(s). Legitimate? Try exploitation. I will NOT put up with that situation, and I refuse to offer RIAA an incentive to continue.
Same with the car. 95% goes to feeding upper managment, and only a fraction of a precent makes it down to the level of the workers.
-------------------- Like A Bat Out Of Hell...
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
quote: It would appear from this and this (both from the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988) that downloading music from the net is a civil offence (they can sue you for the cost of the single, I suppose), but not criminal (as you can only be prosecuted for distributing, not obtaining or possessing).
..and bearing in mind the cost of a civil case I sincerly doubt they'd bother. Sounds good to me!!
-------------------- "I am an almost extinct breed, an old-fashioned gentleman, which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-bitch when it suits me." --Jubal Harshaw
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Actually, the Mercedes analogy is flawed for a different reason. If you steal a car, you've deprived someone else of a physical object which is now in your possession, and no longer in theirs. When you copy music, the person who had it originally still does have it.
A correct analogy would be that copying and sharing music is like having a Trek-esque replicator, making copies of your Mercedes, and giving them away for free.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Your analogy is dangerous in the sense that it can be applied to any IP. Books, medicines, practically any scientific endeaveur, patents, all don't have a physical manifestations that can be protected in the conventional sense of theft.
Making the case that music is overpriced and buying it in stores exploits artists is perhaps more valid, even when compared to the movie industry (which is sad). A CD costs $20 or more CDN, a DVD here costs $30. Thats just dumb, especially since most of the CDs I buy are movie soundtracks, it just adds insult to injury. Yes, its still stealing...but making the argument that copying any IP isn't stealing seems counter-intuitive.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
At any rate, the most powerful argument that file-sharing networks aren't damaging RIAA's precious economic stranglehold is that they led to a BOOST in music sales, not a decline.
-------------------- ".mirrorS arE morE fuN thaN televisioN" - TEH PNIK FLAMIGNO
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Cartmaniac: I will NOT put up with that situation, and I refuse to offer RIAA an incentive to continue.
No, I prefer rewarding an artist/band directly, instead of lining the pockets of some pimpass record label owner. RIAA is a cartel of commercial monopolist leeches clinging to a hopelessly outdated business model, and needs to be disbanded ASAP.
So everytime you download a song, you write out a cheque and send it direct to the artist(s)? Or is this just a nice crutch for your moral high horse to lean on?
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Cartmaniac: At any rate, the most powerful argument that file-sharing networks aren't damaging RIAA's precious economic stranglehold is that they led to a BOOST in music sales, not a decline.
Cite? Corellation, or causation?
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Arrrr mateys! Sure an' I'm a music pirate on the high seas of the digital sea, I am! Remember Amazon Women On the Moon ?
I'll buy an album after I make sure the thing does'nt suck on ice. I prefer the quality of the master CD as a rule, but one hit wonders are mine via Kazaa. ...and for legality's sake, I am not Jason Abbadon, but a undisclosed friend that is staying over and we all know Mr. Abbadon would never do anything to infringe on a record exec's hard earned profits.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: I'll buy an album after I make sure the thing does'nt suck on ice.
I usually do that by listening to a single or two that they play on that great already-free medium, the radio.
Why, I can get an impression of THOUSANDS of albums' contents, without ever breaking a single copyright law!
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
