Interview with Student Sued by RIAA

TinoMNYY24 writes "Jesse Jordan, owner of chewplastic.com, was on CNN this morning discussing the RIAA settlement. You can read a poorly spelled transcript of the interview. Jesse is one of the two students at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute that were sued by the RIAA."

Comments

Settlement

[stanmann]

Ok, no discussion there of the settlement, ie how damages where determined, who will end up paying(students or someone else paying for them). Why they agreed to pay vs fighting.

Is he nuts?

[japhar81]

Does this kid have some burning desire to pay money to the RIAA till the end of time? He says first that he doesnt have the resources to defend a case, but then he follows it up by saying, yeah, I'm bringing the search engine back up.

Don't get me wrong, the RIAA is wrong, but why ask for a second ass-raping? You just know they'll come after him again. He settled once, odds are he'll settle again (or so I would guess).

Fallacious argument

[FallLine]

I believe everybody that does so should be prosecuted for aiding criminals. What we have here is somebody being prosecuted (or intimidated to be prosecuted) for creating a generic tool that, in some cases, can be used to commit copyrights infringements.

You can kill people with a gun, but I haven't seen any lawsuit against S&W for creating a tool that can be used to commit a crime. ...

I know that these students don't have the resources to fight this through courts, but boy, how was I hoping for some one of them to figh this.

I am quite sure if you actually read the complaints against these students that you would discover that they were NOT being sued for creating the tool. They were being sued for actually RUNNING them and for the specific INSTANCES of piracy across that INSTANCE. There is a huge difference between creating a tool and using a tool. If I merely create a tool, especially one with an arguable general purpose, then it may well be used in ways that I cannot reasonably be expected to anticipate before it is recieved by users. However, if I RUN the TOOL, then I can see at least see HOW it is being used and take action based on actual OBSERVATION before it gets out of control. I'd say the difference is analogous between that of manufacturing a gun and that of placing a bunch of guns on your doorstep across the street from the local elementary school (which there is strong legal precedent for, btw).

Furthermore, unlike your analogy of the gun manufacturer, I am quite certain that if you were to analyze the usage of these search TOOLS (not to mention the websites run by the same students) that you would discover that the overwhelming majority was used for piracy and not legitimate use. Certainly you won't deny that there are millions of hunters in this country (not to mention people that use them for target practice, collection, and self-defense). Although I am for an outright ban or much stricter controls on guns in the US, even I will make this distinction clear.

Although my allegations may not be proof--the only way to settle them is by going to COURT--you cannot reasonably declare them to be unreasonable assertions before hearing the case and seeing RIAA's evidence.

You can make a photocopy of a book, and while it's true that Xerox and other companies have been threatened I haven't heard yet of any paper company being sued for creating a medium that can be used to infringe copyrights.

Kinkos and others have been sued successfully for copyright infringement.

Is Ford liable for you running your car against a 80 years old man crossing the street?

No, but many people would hold liable the owner of the car if they left their shiny new red Ford Mustang with keys in the ignition and a big sign saying "take me for a spin" in front of some middle school (or especially if they lent their keys to their friend's drunk son).

Re:Hillary Rosen should have died in the Holocaust

[JCMay]

Look, the RIAA are whores. The music industry has had a free ride for some time, giving musicians 10% or less of the profit they've generated solely because the industry is so huge it can afford this monopoly.

Wouldn't that make them pimps?

Re:As we have known all along

[DunbarTheInept]

Hey, idiot. I use file sharing to find out what's out there, and then buy the stuff I like from the artists I like. Thus I can find out about people who aren't part of the RIAA, and support artists directly. I buy MORE CD's than I otherwise would - because file sharing lets me preview what's out there even if it's not popular enough to make radio airplay.

And *that* is what the RIAA is so worried about. The new technology cuts out the middleman. And they're the middleman. Their entire industry depends upon information about what music is available being a scarce resource they control. The SIX TO SEVEN HUNDRED PERCENT markup the RIAA enjoys when they sell a CD for $15 is an inflated profit only possible because artists can't sell direct to the customer. Until NOW, that is. Recording labels are a thing of the past. The music economy SHOULD be based on the following model now that the technology exists to do it: step 1 - band records in a studio. 2 - band puts up work on a site that pays the artist per-download. 3 - band (if any good) becomes popular and well known, WITHOUT NEEDING A MIDDLEMAN. 4 - profit.

Re:Outrageous!

[TinoMNYY24]

I agree with the other response. You people come in and just post whatever you decide to post without even reading the damn articles. Shut up unless you have something educated to say. "Nike Sued Because Woman Tripped and Fell While Wearing Nike Shoes" Slashdot Anonymous Coward: NIKE SHOULD BE PUT OUT OF BUSINESS BECAUSE THEIR CEO TRIPPED THAT LADIE LOLKTHX!!! Read, think, post.