Judge shuts down RIAA in music piracy case

[Sir Ricardo]

 

The only possible reason is because you want to "stick it to the man"

 

 

In my view, the reason people download free stuff is because it is free.

 

It allows them to get music for free, instead of paying for it.

 

It's that simple.

 

They get to avoid paying for something that legally has to be bought.

 

It's when they get called on this illegality that they come up with just a whole boatload of reasons......"it's right to stick it to the man"......"the record companies deserve it for X, Y, and Z"......"if the music were better I'd pay for it (sure you would)"....."everybody's doing it, why shouldn't I?"...(I hear you, Bro, it's a riot and we are all stealing TVs, why don't you take one too?)......"blah blah blah"....

 

Everybody knows what they are doing is illegal; it's how they "justify" it that cracks me up.

[Deeprig9]

Hey, "Real MC", I just heard about 15 minutes ago that Bela is playing his next show in ATL for $70 a ticket at the botanical gardens. I wonder why? Why does it go from $25 to $70? Gas prices? Or.... something.... else?

[The Real MC]

Anyone who says they want to "sample" the music before they buy it is bull{censored}ting.

 

 

I have purchased CDs I have auditioned in kiosks set up in stores.

 

You really need to stop generalizing.

 

 

If someone illegally downloads my album, I see that as taking $7 out of my wallet, and I'll beat your {censored}ing ass down for stealing from me. If you are bigger than me, or a black belt, I'll cap your {censored}ing knees and piss on your face. Stealing is stealing. I hope I'm in a successful position someday to track down 1000 people who downloaded my stuff illegally and beat the everloving {censored} out of them, and piss on their bloody faces. What do you think about that?

 

 

BRING IT ON...

[The Real MC]

There will be no twisting of innocent actions to fit the argument. I hear ya! -- like attamepts at unilateral establishment

 

 

And attempts at extreme generalizing?

 

You ARE a lawyer...

[The Real MC]

I'm glad you brought up my friend Bela. Do you know how he makes his money? Record sales. With what he has to pay production/travel/roadies and band salary, he breaks a little over even on tour. Bela doesn't carry Victor's bass cabinet into the venue and sound check Futureman's synthaxe. Bela has also been signed to one major label or another for the last 20 years. What do you think about that?

 

 

Open the accounting books under full disclosure, and we'll see about that...

[The Real MC]

I've had this argument 500 times with friends and it always ends the same, I win the argument and they change the subject.

 

 

Evasion is not winning an argument. That is the tactic I am seeing over and over, you people are putting your hands over your ears and going LAH LAH LAH I CAN'T HEAR YOU.

 

You have not won any argument. I will not engage in pointless discussion with trolls who are incapable of reasoning, make gross misjudgements of character, and are using anything to justify their flawed argument.

[Deeprig9]

Evasion, twisting the argument, placing blame on others. Classic manipulator tactics. Evasion is not winning an argument. That is the tactic I am seeing over and over, you people are putting your hands over your ears and going LAH LAH LAH I CAN'T HEAR YOU. You have not won any argument. I will not engage in pointless discussion with trolls who are incapable of reasoning, make gross misjudgements of character, and are using anything to justify their flawed argument.

 

 

YOU brought up Bela Fleck, ASSHOLE, and I'm throwing it back in your face. You don't like that, so you become what you claim to abhor. Go {censored} off, you idiot troll.

 

 

Yes, for the record, that is a personal attack on you.

[Deeprig9]

Open the accounting books under full disclosure, and we'll see about that...

 

 

I've booked Bela and I know what came in the door and what he spent and what the promoter got and what the door got and what the openers got, you can live in your little fantasy land snowcastle like a dumb little Barbie bitch or you can take me at my word. It's up to you, moron.

[Sir Ricardo]

I've booked Bela and I know what came in the door and what he spent and what the promoter got and what the door got and what the openers got, you can live in your little fantasy land snowcastle like a dumb little Barbie bitch or you can take me at my word. It's up to you, moron .

Girls! Enough of the personal attacks! You are going to get this thread pulled! So go get your Barbie dolls and play homemaker or something, and let this thread develop!

Yours, Ken:wave:

[Deeprig9]

I have no reservations, like Bordaine, about calling out a bull{censored}ter. This is a forum for good information through interaction, it's the nature of the beast. I may be harsh with my words, but words are nothing but crude expressions of thought, and my thoughts are crude. But I'm intellectually honest.

[HKSblade1]

In my view, the reason people download free stuff is because it is free. It allows them to get music for free, instead of paying for it. It's that simple. They get to avoid paying for something that legally has to be bought. It's when they get called on this illegality that they come up with just a whole boatload of reasons......"it's right to stick it to the man"......"the record companies deserve it for X, Y, and Z"......"if the music were better I'd pay for it (sure you would)"....."everybody's doing it, why shouldn't I?"...(I hear you, Bro, it's a riot and we are all stealing TVs, why don't you take one too?)......"blah blah blah".... Everybody knows what they are doing is illegal; it's how they "justify" it that cracks me up.

This is exactly the problem. The freeloaders ( not down-loaders) and pirates think they are helping the artist by stealing the songs they want. F'k the RIAA they say. All the while, screwing the artist they say they support

Workmanship of the music itself has lost all sense of value thanks to file sharing and theft which most people still think is legal

One band I read fought back after their album was torrented. They opened a shared folder of their own. Linked it up and added some nice content to their file. F'kd peoples registries, added over 1000 pron links, button style viruses. Sony had one that was supposed to target mp3, mpa, wma and all other media files and delete them.

One guy on a blog said he got fired for pron on his laptop after d-loading a movie file of Jackass. Was eating lunch at work. Fiddling with his laptop and all this pron just popped up. Co workers saw it and reported him. He was fired for "sexual impropriety" Good one for the RESUME.

I lmao at that one and was immediately attacked by the pirating clan. Ideas like this are going around and bands and movie sites are adding some extras to the downloads. Some start running program routines after 10,000 keystrokes, mouse clicks. Dude boots up one day and his drive is formatted!!

The pron industry is getting heavy into their own "extra files" for hosting torrents. I heard they had one that deleted video and pic file including psd. Guys over at an Adobe forum were pissed off that files they had for work just disappeared

If all this is from the media creators adding their own junk files to torrents, they have every right IMO. Pirates are going to have to watch out for what they steal

[The Real MC]

YOU brought up Bela Fleck, ASSHOLE , and I'm throwing it back in your face. You don't like that, so you become what you claim to abhor. Go {censored} off, you idiot troll. Yes, for the record , that is a personal attack on you .

 

 

I was using Bela as an example of the content provider failing to provide consumers what they wanted. You twisted the argument by trying to bring up Bela's profit, which you seem incapable of providing proof through disclosure of accounting records. Britney makes tons of profit too, but she is a talentless lip syncer who cannot even lip sync to her own backing track at the last MTV MVA and consumers are sick of her crap.

 

I have known too many booking agents to take them at their "word"... either put up, or shut up.

[The Real MC]

If all this is from the media creators adding their own junk files to torrents, they have every right IMO. Pirates are going to have to watch out for what they steal

And they better tread carefully, because government and armed forces use bittorrent for legitimate and national security purposes. When the Sony rootkit fiasco was uncovered, they got a firm warning from the government to back off.

[HKSblade1]

Then maybe the Govt needs to set up their own servers for illegal trafficking. If the govt has a problem with shutting down illegal torrent sites or adding some "extra" files as a form of users protecting themselves from thieves, then the works of artists, movies, and software co is soon to be over.

[fetishfrog]

I was using Bela as an example of the content provider failing to provide consumers what they wanted. You twisted the argument by trying to bring up Bela's profit, which you seem incapable of providing proof through disclosure of accounting records. Britney makes tons of profit too, but she is a talentless lip syncer who cannot even lip sync to her own backing track at the last MTV MVA and consumers are sick of her crap. I have known too many booking agents to take them at their "word"... either put up, or shut up.

 

 

Tours typically run at a loss and were often factored into record contracts as such. Labels would provide tour support in the form of disposable cash (for buses, crew, meals, hotels, etc.) in exchage for a recoup against record royalties and merch sales. There are notable expections (Dave Matthews, Grateful Dead, etc) but it wouldn't be surprising at all to see Bela's numbers be less impressive than expected. With much of that disposable cash gone, tour support dries up quickly, and ticket prices/merch prices soar to make up for it.

 

Britney's last record went multi-platnium, not exactly a failure. Not her old numbers for sure, but I certainly wouldn't mind going multi-platnium.

 

Anyhow, you've failed how to explain how the new, download heavy system, is going to provide all the up-front, disposable cash a label provided, and all the benefits of said cash.

[The Real MC]

Then maybe the Govt needs to set up their own servers for illegal trafficking. If the govt has a problem with shutting down illegal torrent sites or adding some "extra" files as a form of users protecting themselves from thieves, then the works of artists, movies, and software co is soon to be over.

 

 

Sabotaging torrents has unintended consequences besides govt, such as the Adobe forum complaining of their legitimate work disappearing. That is economic damage in the form of lost labor.

 

There is no justification for sabotage tactics if they are causing economic damage. None.

 

So if the works of artists, movies, and software is to survive, they will have to adapt.

 

Look around you. Gov't has adapted. The software industry has adapted. Retail has adapted. Services have adapted. Your own artists keep telling you to adapt but the industry refuses to accept it because they don't want to abandon the monopoly they own on distribution channels. None of you have acknowledged or disputed this fact, you choose to evade it with your manipulative tactics.

[The Real MC]

Anyhow, you've failed how to explain how the new, download heavy system, is going to provide all the up-front, disposable cash a label provided, and all the benefits of said cash.

 

 

I already have - CUT FRIVOLOUS SPENDING

 

"LAH LAH LAH..."

[fetishfrog]

I already have - CUT FRIVOLOUS SPENDING "LAH LAH LAH..."

 

 

Cutting frivolous spending is a good idea but it doesn't actually generate cash, just stretches your cash farther. Label, in response to the cash crunch caused by delcining record sales, have undergone merger after merger and downsize after downsize, effectively cutting frivilous spending. In spite of this, they continue to suffer from the cash crunch. So, again, WHERE'S THE MONEY GOING TO COME FROM??? It's not going to fall from the sky when you cut spending.

 

Also, a side point...all of the mergers and downsizing that have resulted from the decline in record sales actually exacerbate the 'diversity in music' issue you complained about earlier. Declining profits mean less investment in riskier projects, so all the music gets homogenized, and you bitch about it, not realizing you're indeed part of the problem.

[fetishfrog]

Look around you. Gov't has adapted. The software industry has adapted. Retail has adapted. Services have adapted. Your own artists keep telling you to adapt but the industry refuses to accept it because they don't want to abandon the monopoly they own on distribution channels. None of you have acknowledged or disputed this fact, you choose to evade it with your manipulative tactics.

 

 

The industry tried to adapt by implementing various copy protection schemes (good ol' DRM) like software companies but everyone bitched and moaned and cracked the schemes and there you have it. Perhaps record companies should begin requiring a dongle purchase or challenge/response sequence with every download. Everytime you want to listen to your iPod, you need to enter a password tied to that unique download to authorize its use. Is that what you want? That would be adapting like the software companies and government. I'll bet though, that the overwhelming sense of entitlement that every illegal downloader wears like a badge of honor will justify a variety of insane reasons why this too, is bad.

[The Real MC]

The industry tried to adapt by implementing various copy protection schemes (good ol' DRM) like software companies but everyone bitched and moaned and cracked the schemes and there you have it.

 

 

That's not adapting, that is counteracting. The software industry learned copy protection doesn't work and dropped it altogether. They learned this back in the 1980s. Here we are in 2008 and you still don't get it. This is why you are called dinosaurs.

 

 

Perhaps record companies should begin requiring a dongle purchase or challenge/response sequence with every download. Everytime you want to listen to your iPod, you need to enter a password tied to that unique download to authorize its use. Is that what you want? That would be adapting like the software companies and government. I'll bet though, that the overwhelming sense of entitlement that every illegal downloader wears like a badge of honor will justify a variety of insane reasons why this too, is bad.

 

 

I work in professional engineering using DRM schemes such as dongles and other miriad authorization schemes. For many reasons, they are an inconvenience and they cost the company money. Better solutions have come along and we have embraced them. They're out there, so quit hiring firms to sabotage innocent victims and put your resources into finding better solutions that do not alienate your customers. I want to see this succeed as much as you do, but it is going in the wrong direction.

[The Real MC]

Cutting frivolous spending is a good idea but it doesn't actually generate cash, just stretches your cash farther. Label, in response to the cash crunch caused by delcining record sales, have undergone merger after merger and downsize after downsize, effectively cutting frivilous spending. In spite of this, they continue to suffer from the cash crunch. So, again, WHERE'S THE MONEY GOING TO COME FROM??? It's not going to fall from the sky when you cut spending.

 

 

Cut frivolous spending, do I have to spell it out to you?

 

Where are the majority of entertainment resources located? NYC, Los Angeles. Areas with extremely high cost of living.

 

When cost of living skyrocketed in Silicon Valley, many high technology industries fled for more favorable environments so they could afford to compete.

 

The same thing happened in any state and city with rising costs.

 

High Technology companies adapted.

 

Now you must do the same.

[slight-return]

And attempts at extreme generalizing?

 

 

Actually, no - its specific to posts #56 and #62

 

 

 

You ARE a lawyer...

 

 

While I do work in the IP field, no, I am not a lawyer

[slight-return]

Evasion, twisting the argument, placing blame on others. Classic manipulator tactics. Evasion is not winning an argument. That is the tactic I am seeing over and over, you people are putting your hands over your ears and going LAH LAH LAH I CAN'T HEAR YOU.

 

 

I think it does bring up an important point to the discussion. We certainly do see it in thread

 

such as in

 

 

"I download all the time!!!

 

authorized stuff though" [quoting - sight return, anoher thread]

 

"authorized" meaning you legitimately paid for it.

 

When, if fact, the nature of "authorized" was...authorized

 

Authorized meaning that I have been given authority (that's what "authorized" means) to make copy of the work

 

 

Since you seem remarkably capable of referencing exact sections of copyright law that define distribution vs reproduction, you would be so kind to share the search resources and techniques at your disposal. Otherwise I am playing against a rigged deck with the dealer holding back the cards.

 

Even though in a prior post- you ref to the US copyright website page

 

It was already tested in court - reproduction by a library (a non-profit entity) of a copyrighted work to replace a damaged copy. See http://www.copyright.gov/

 

That actually contains a link to the text of Title 17 right on the very website

 

 

to this

 

Well, one way they are different is the explicit authorization of the copyright holder tha obviates the legal question - slight-return

 

you respond with

 

You're still equating copyright for profit with personal backup for non-profit use.

 

Even though I made no mention of profit (although you did Personal backup is non-commercial use, there is no profit to be gained or lost.

 

 

I mention

As to if duplicating phonorecordings for personal archival reasons (or if multiple "listenable copies would be considered archival) is a fair use...I dont believe that's been fully put to legal test

 

Yet, later, you request

Cite me case law where they have successfully convicted an individual over personal backup. [Post#48]

 

You declare

 

It was already tested in court - reproduction by a library (a non-profit entity) of a copyrighted work to replace a damaged copy. See http://www.copyright.gov/

 

but then you later state you don't have the resources to declare that

 

IANAL (I Am Not A Lawyer) and I do not have the resources to research case law.

 

 

 

And misquote the page you ref (which is on fair use in general and even disclaims "Copyright Office can neither determine if a certain use may be considered “fair” nor advise on possible copyright violations.") as you state

 

It was already tested in court - reproduction by a library (a non-profit entity) of a copyrighted work to replace a damaged copy

[Post#42]

 

Yet the cited webpage states

reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy

[ http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html][/url ]

 

 

 

In (well, at least, there may be other areas) posts, 41,51, and 55 I remind the thread that "fair use" is a case by case affirmative defense...and that went on to be completely ignored

[The Real MC]

In (well, at least, there may be other areas) posts, 41,51, and 55 I remind the thread that "fair use" is a case by case affirmative defense...and that went on to be completely ignored

 

 

I also remind you that no one has uncovered any case of successful criminal or civil copyright infringement involving personal backup.

 

No, we're not evading, are we...?

[slight-return]

I also remind you that no one has uncovered any case of successful criminal or civil copyright infringement involving personal backup. No, we're not evading, are we...?

 

 

as I stated earlier

 

As to if duplicating phonorecordings for personal archival reasons (or if multiple "listenable copies would be considered archival) is a fair use...I dont believe that's been fully put to legal test

 

 

 

You, however, did assert

 

It was already tested in court

 

 

 

and

Ever hear of "fair use"? It is an exemption to copyright law and is designed for backup for personal use. The US Supreme Court affirmed our fair use right years ago.

 

 

Yet didn't cite the caselaw nor did you address fair use being an affirmative defense handled on a case by case basis

 

[you, also, haven't adressed the other points in Post #98 -- yet you mention evasion]