Slashdot Mirror
Investigating the RIAA's Billion-Dollar Claims
zrosener writes "I've put together a site with a lot of information on the cases. I created
diagrams and explanations of the file sharing systems these students created
that the RIAA is suing them for - and how they are functionally and
technically very similar to Microsoft's tools built right into windows,
and how they are dissimilar from Napster's." Good detective work.
Tuition's high enough these days--there's no need for RIAA to go after these kids' with lasers strapped to their lawyers' heads... I wouldn't mind paying for SACD-quality recordings, if only I could buy them easily and efficiently (read: online, one click at a time).
Well, I haven't been able to read your site, as the server of course has been slashdotted, but I gather you have collated a list of similarities between the software in questions, and (legal) software which has already been out for a while.
Given that you made the effort to prepare this work, I suggest that you take it the final step and send it to the lawyers in charge of defending the students against this lawsuit by the RIAA, or if they have none yet, try to get it to their hands.
Oh, one more thing. You might want to send it anonymously; you never know, you might be sued next. (I'm only half-joking).
Pete Wilson, Ex-Gov California claimed a billions for all the Illegal Aliens syphoning off California's wealth before his cronies could get to it. It was tossed, this will be too. However it does tend to make people think twice, while they will win, the RIAA will make them drain their bank accounts for legal fees. Defense funds will form and they too will suffer. The idea is to make everyone in favor of trading suffer somehow. Even if they lose this time the next time there will be fewer willing to donate. The Artists need to understand the the Record companies are not their friends. The make more without the even if they don't have a gold record
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
Comment removed based on user account deletion
There are a lot of problems with Albini's article. One is that he lists a fairly good selling band as example, a poor selling band (and there are much much more of them than ones that are in Albini's words "hits") would end up costing their company money (only 10,000 copies sold, still quite a few, and the company is in the hole $700,000), even though the band ends up with their advance and publishing money (they do get publishing money, in Albini's case the song writers get $.07 per song per album sold minus ascap fees, if we assume 10 songs then the writers are getting $150,000). So really the bottom line assuming entire band write all the songs should read $400,000/(number of members in the band). Another thing that Albini's rant quite starkly portrays is that touring looses money, in this case $875.00. Thats right you go on the road (and work very hard) you end up with less money at the end. Thus the idea that the recordings should be free and people should only be paid to perform simply doesn't fly. What Albini was trying to say here is that Big Record Companies (eg Warner, Sony) are a rip off, and Small Artist Run Places (in this case specifically Touch And Go, I think he was pissed about the Butthole Surfers going to Warner) will make the artist more money. Ask Albini what he thinks of Shawn Fanning or the like getting rich on the backs of Slint, Low, Big Black, The Pixies, or even Bush and he will tell you another story.