Slashdot Mirror
How to Tell if the RIAA Wants You
codewolf writes "Wired News has an article on how file sharers can check a new online database to see if they are wanted by the recording industry.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has created a site where users can plug in their file-sharing user names. That name is checked against the list of those subpoenas filed in the Washington, D.C. district court.
The EFF also has an article on how to avoid a lawsuit from the RIAA."
Sounds like a great way to harvest usernames for future lawsuits.
-- "You can lead a yak to water, but you can't teach an old dog to make a silk purse out of a pig in a poke" - Opus
I have already done it. All you do is enter your name, address, phone number, and SSN and a helpful representative from the RIAA will contact you in 30-60 days to tell you if they want to prosecute you.
They make one huge point that I've been waiting for someone to make aloud: "Disable the "sharing" or "uploading" features on your P2P application that allow other users on the network to get copies of files from your computer or scan any of your music directories. We hate this option, but it does appear that it will reduce your chances of becoming an RIAA target right now." I see this as a foolproof approach because there is no way to defend oneself as a sharer, but downloaders may still claim rights to listen to the music; the approach has one obvious flaw, however, which I'd still like to see covered in some major media outlet: once everyone begins to turn sharing off, there is nothing to download and the system collapses. My bet? The RIAA recognises this effect and is just waiting for it to render P2P file-sharing dead...
How is the scene for people outside US.People in President blair's Britain,France,Germany?China,India,Japan,Israel?Ir aq?
Wanted : A Signature.
Just a quick straw poll, answer AC or whatever if you like (you will anyway)
How many of you does this annoy because you consider it a blatant disregard of legal process that the RIAA can just dive in and subpoena anyone they choose.
And who does it annoy cos you REALLY think it's your right to download as much IP as you can for free because... hey, it's digital, and it's your right?
Out of the two names i tried, bluemonkey13 and our famous munkeyspanker21, only bluemonkey worked...
Don't rely on this too much.
don't share any copyrighted files. What a great idea to reduce the risk of being sued! Why didn't I think of that!
"It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
It's easier to grab people's IP address there. Unless of course u happen to use networks that hides your hostname (for DOS attack precautionary measures).
Has the RIAA started it's "crackdown" on IRC networks?
Welley Corporation - SLM Scammers
Then again, I guess that's what happens when you keep your massive pirated MP3 bazaar collection on a private LAN server.
For users of Kazaa-Lite, where every user is called kazaa-lite-tk (or something like that), this won't help much. While 99% of lite users will be ok, there will be that 1 person who's gonna get nabbed.
Here, I pay extra on top of every blank CD I buy which goes to organisations such as the RIAA on the 'presumption' i may pirate music. By my legal and moral definition I have EVERY frikking right in the world to get what I pay for. I have paid the licensed owners of music for music that is downloaded and burnet to CD so I download it. I think anyone who doesn't 'get what they pay for' has rocks in their head.
Personally, I don't give a rats about downloading music for free, but I am PISSED that the RIAA has been given the right to harrass private citizens at will. I hope they (inadvertantly) supoena the asshats that gave them this power.
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
Just the username that identifies you on the given network. Just need to plug in any old text that gives you a unique name - /. stylee. Nothing to do with buying(?!) software or what not.
;-)
By the way, I'd lay off whatever drugs you're on - you have the coherency of Mr.Bush
Stop pirating music assholes. D'uh.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Want to avoid a lawsuit? Simple. Don't download copyrighted material that you haven't paid for and don't share anything unless you have the legal right to do so.
Not to burst your bubble but CDs have gone down in prices in most up-to-date stores [in Canada anyways].
I totally agree that the levy on CDs is a waste [specially since I bet more people pirate software than audio with the CDs].
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
I don't think they should be able to demand information without a proper court approved order.
On a practical level of how it affects me, I'm not that bothered because I only download movies anyway. If the MPAA join in then that would be different. I don't think I have a 'right' to download movies for free, but obviously I like being able to.
The court thing is a serious issue, the not being able to download movies when I'd like to would be an annoyance but not a cause for outrage.
Ahh , so this explains why i was modded offtopic..
Slashdot Sig. version 0.1alpha. Use at your own risk.
Maybe the RIAA is monitoring Web access to those databases to find out who they should be suing!
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
I don't know about other Slashdot readers, but up until a few days ago when Slashdot brought the word into daily use (and read the article!), I thought that 'subpoena' was stuff that floated in ponds. If anyone else doesn't quite remember 'subpoena' being in their day-to-day vocabulary either, this might help clear things up:
[a@desk,docs] dict subpoena
3 definitions found
From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]:
Subpoena \Sub*p[oe]"na\, n. [NL., fr. L. sub under + poena
punishment. See {Pain}.] (Law)
A writ commanding the attendance in court, as a witness, of
the person on whom it is served, under a penalty; the process
by which a defendant in equity is commanded to appear and
answer the plaintiff's bill. [Written also {subpena}.]
{Subp[oe]na ad testificandum}. [NL.] A writ used to procure
the attendance of a witness for the purpose of testifying.
(etc)
-Andrew
"Given the right to harrass private citizens at will"? Uhm, they are using the legal system IN THE WAY THE LEGAL SYSTEM WAS MEANT TO BE USED.
They are supoenaing (sp?) the details of those people who they have identified as being infringing, which is EXACTLY what people on this forum have been saying they should do.
Back when the RIAA was going after the networks themselves, the big shout on here was "They shouldnt go after the networks, they have potentially legitimate uses, they should go after the infringers", and now they are going after the infringers, the new cry on here is one of "privacy" and "harrassment".
So come on guys, why wont you jsut admit it, you wont give up until Copyright infringement as a crime no longer exists.
Why do I get the feeling someone from the RIAA and/or record labels are posting on here sometimes. Just a thought
the movie/television & software industry are compiling a database of filesharers that they suspect of illegal filesharing? Music is indeed a huge part of filesharing, but I'd hate to see the fans of television shows that never make it to DVD or video get busted just because they'd like to watch an episode that is no longer aired.
I always thought it wasn't the sharing of files that was illegal, but the downloading of them. I would still contest, to the death (or until they lock me up) that I can have any files I damn well please shared under Kazaa, Limewire, etc, it's when someone downloads them that *they're* doing something illegal. This is comparable to someone walking in your wide open front door and taking your backup cds...then *you* get sued for it. Utter bullshit.
--trb
definitely a blatant disregard of legal process. isn't it some kind of abuse of the legal system for them to file so many lawsuits? i think if joe bucket were to file lawsuits against each of his neighbors for presumed infractions any (sane) judge would throw them out based on sheer volume alone...
I don't think I have a 'right' to download movies for free, but obviously I like being able to.
:).
It's good that you have an idea where you stand. There's a big difference to me between people who are misinformed about what's copyrighted and what's not, and what they're legally allowed to do, and those of us who know but do it anyway
On an ISP discussion forum I'm on the subject of P2P trading comes up regularly anytime some 12 year old gets the idea in their head that our ISP is blocking or shaping "P2P Ports" when they don't get full speed downloads of copied files. Invariably someone comments about how they're violating copyright/infringing IP/whatever its called today and the most often used retort is:
"Yeah but I'm not doing anything illegal I'm downloading episodes of television shows, not music"
uninformed, indeed.
1. Breathe on to some glass. Does the glass fog up?
2. Place your fingertips on your neck just below the corner of the jawline. Do you feel a beating often associated with a lubdub sound?
If you answer yes to either of these tests, the RIAA wants you!
It's interesting that the press isn't stressing that YOU ARE SAFE if you disable sharing to others. The FUD here is that "if you use Kazaa you might be caught." Remember - people in other countries are not being targeted, so if you MUST download copyrighted material, there will still be plenty available from Kazaa users in Canada, land of sodomite marriage and soon-to-be-legalized marijuana, where the air blows cold but free.
The flag just makes more sense than the constitution. - Judas Gutenberg
Revealed! The algorithm for the online RIAA check form:
output = "";
username = ENV("uname");
if username {
output = "You are wanted by the RIAA. Please report to your local police station and turn yourself in.";
}
print "<HTML>";
print output;
print "</HTML>";
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
AFAICT, as long as you don't go to the US physicly you'll be fine.
:)
But the RIAA can tell your ISP, even though it's not located in USA, what you are doing. Maybe that will be enough for some ISP's to send you an email telling you to stop and that you are violating the EULA for the service. As most ISP's have a EULA for their services telling you not to use it for illegal purposes.
Notably, my ISP never asked me to sign a EULA, so I can probably do whatever I want, as long as I don't break any laws.
Pardon my spelling, I am from Sweden, a country know for their bad English.
They are supoenaing (sp?) the details of those people who they have identified as being infringing, which is EXACTLY what people on this forum have been saying they should do.
Yes, and a subpoena before this RIAA crap was something that could only be court ordered, not something a company or corporation could do just out of the blue. That is what's shitting people. It's giving law enforcement rights to a body that is NOT a law enforcement agency. The "slippery slope" thing here is what worries me. How small a change would it take before the RIAA is given not only the right to subpoena an ISP for names of users who they suspect of filesharing, but to send out fines without running through proper legal channels?
There are philosophical links to PayPal here. It's not a bank and is not under the same regulatory controls as banks, yet it acts as one and gets the benefits of being one. the RIAA is not a law enforcement agency and is not under the same regulatory controls as one, yet it acts as one.
Did you check to see if it's the same people saying both things?
I, for one, am happy to see that they are no longer attacking the networks themselves as much. If they would have succeeded on a larger scale, the only result is the crippling of the Internet as we know it. The Internet is designed to copy files, shutting down services that just facilitate what the Internet inherently does is stupid.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
The last "A" is RIAA stands for America. While the Americans are still the majority of the Internet users, it is changing quickly as more and more contries get their telecom act together.
RIAA can't subpoena Chinese, French or Russian users. And it is not even very clear if RIAA's sister organisations in their respective countries can, because laws are different over there (remember Sklyarov and how PDF encryption breaking is legal in Russia?).
So, I guess Americans can safely disable their shares and let the world feed the networks for a while. When RIAA comes to town in Australia, for instance, we do it the other way around.
Do you mean Bush or MiniBush?
Theft is wrong...it hurts everyone eventually.
BUT
I have a record album of Police Syncronisity (I know I spelt it wrong) and ACDC For those about to Rock. Both of those have unplayable first tracks on both sides...do to poor pressing/materials...they are warped.
I don't have a LP player in my car...infact I only have one in the house for the purpose of putting songs to CD.
So Riddle me this Batman...How am I supposed to get a copy of those 4 tracks that are unplayable on the albums?
Am I a pirate if I download those 4 songs to replace the ones I cannot play?...is the uploader a pirate for allowing me to get those 4 songs that I already paid for but cannot use?
I think the RIAA wants me to buy a few more albums/CDs/cassettes of the same recording so that I won't be a pirate...
OOOh but what if I get the clearance cutouts recordings at the discount store...or CDs at the pawn shop that are cheap because they don't pay any royalties...hmmm...am I a pirate then?
All RIAA is achieving is making itself unpopular with a certain class of people. Whether upset by RIAA or apathetic (or, admittedly not at /., even supportive) noone is going to buy more licensed music because of their efforts. They may achieve a reduction in file sharing (they will never eliminate it) but those that stop getting their music this way will just go back to taping what they like instead.
By the way, I'd lay off whatever drugs you're on - you have the coherency of Mr.Bush ;-)
Damn, I am not even on any drugs - merely high on life. oh wait i did share a litre of white wine with a few people at lunch and I did try an experimental cherry fanta. perhaps that's what led to my general incoherancy. But hell, that's the first time anyone has ever compared me to the great satan himself.
I used to have a better sig than this, but I got tired of it
> Uhm, they are using the legal system IN THE WAY THE
> LEGAL SYSTEM WAS MEANT TO BE USED.
No. the RIAA is not using the legal system at all and that is what's highly questionable. It is now able to bypass the legal system and directly order subpoenas by itself. That is inherently dangerous when a corporation who stands to benefit from legal action has been given the legal right to bring action against whoever THEY suspect, WITHOUT going through all the correct channels of the legal system that has existed in this country for hundreds of years.
Download and share music that can be legitimately shared. Frankly, I'm so pissed off at the media cartel that I don't want to even bother pirating their products, let alone buy them. Even commercial radio stations thoroughly suck these days.
Oh, no! You have walked into the slavering fangs of a lurking grue!
I'd be interested in knowing if any Canadian Slashdot readers found their user names in the database. Afterall, file swapping is NOT illegal in the Great White North.
I wonder how many drug dealers would respond if they saw an advertisement saying "Call the local police station and give us your name to see if you're on our current drug dealer watch list." Almost sounds like entrapment.
...which of course I don't know anything about personally *cough*.
1. Make your private server.... just you and your friends, people with broadband connections. Say 30 people with 1-200gb each = 3-6tb.
2. Download new stuff from public networks, but never be a big sharer, just one among the huge crowd of small traders.
3. Relax and realize the chance of getting into trouble is slim and none.
While the RIAA/MPAA might be moderately successful in cracking down on public networks, the network of friends they'll never manage to stop...
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
And if the RIAA manages to shut them all down they will still be traded.
The KGB couldn't stop samizdat. Now I know that the RIAA is more powerful and pervasive than the KGB, but even they can't stop samizdat like networks.
Avoiding prosecution by the RIAA is easy, use humanware P2P networking.
KFG
Here is a link to the subpoena issued for "munkyspanker21@KaZaA."
Note that this particular subpoena was sent to Time Warner. That means that although AOL users were conspicuously missing from the subpoenas so far, Time Warner Cable/RoadRunner users are being hunted down.
In the previous story there was some speculation that since Time Warner has interest in RIAA their customers might be off the hook... Doesn't look that way.
I've used Peer Guardian since the earlies alpha releases and one thing I notice is that despite having a Linux firewall and a ZA firewall on my PC, my PC still shows that I'm being scanned by these "IP cops" even when I'm not using any P2P at all. How can that be legitimate?
Does anybody with a better knowledge of network security understand how they can be scanning me even with several layers of security? And moreover, how can this be legal?
" Stop pirating music assholes. D'uh."
Gladly. "Music assholes" are the last thing I want to be pirating in the first place.
So do you friends a favor and swip their username.
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
They will need that too, plus your yearly income.
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
I choose to assert a right for access to a free-flow of information. Information that comes in different forms: text, audio, visual, etc. Just because one or two industries feel that they might lose money is no justification for trying to deprive me of the right I choose to assert.
" You act like pirating music is some heinous, horrible, despicable act. It's not. "
Historically, the term "piracy" has been reserved for those who copy and sell otherwise-available material.
It has not applied to those who copy and give away, nor for the bootleggers who copy and sell concerts and rare material that the record companies don't even want money for (otherwise they would be selling them too).
robandfab@millivanilli.com (Getting material for that new album)
captainjack@caribbean.pirates.org (If yer gonna be a pirate, expect to show up on such lists)
hrosen@riaa.org (oops!)
uday@saddam.iq, qusai@saddam.iq (now we know why they had to bomb that house!)
senatorhatch@senate.gov
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Specifically,
Has anyone loaded up a server with dummy files 3 or 4 mb in size, but with the same filenames as ones commonly shared by the "wanted" users?
I'd love to know if the RIAA is actually *checking* what's going around, or just jumping up and down pointing and going "Oooh! Ooh! Him! He's got a naughty file up for grabs!!"
mindslip
They're after "Username" at kazaa.com! I better flee to Uruguay!
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Isn't the username idea rather dumb anyway? What happens if you use the same username as 10,000 other people? Besides, your real name is not attached to your username in any way (unless your dumb enough to tie it to your real email account).
Note to moderators. Parent poster is a known troll. Check history before moderating.
How is that for an answer?
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
Uhm, they are using the legal system IN THE WAY THE LEGAL SYSTEM WAS MEANT TO BE USED.
Riiiiiight. You like just any old entity to be able to decide what information to get about you from your ISP just because THEY suspect you of doing them wrong, instead of going through courts?
You do by what you've just said. Cool. I'll just go subpoena your CC number. Thanks!
No need to worry, unless your ISP is comcast. The court documents doesn't list a name, unlike some of the other user names, but only the ISP.
Business News and Resources: www.usasource.net
Feedback to iTunes music service. If you'd like to be able to tell whether an artist is an indie or RIAA-affiliated, please send a similar note:
Greetings! I understand iTMS is in negotiations with independent artists at this time. Due to the RIAA's recent public intimidation tactics, I will not be purchasing any of their members' tracks in the future.
Thus, will there be some sort of indication as to whether an iTMS featured artist is an indie or associated with an RIAA label? I realize you can't include "RIAA" as a warning label (as much as I would like this) without gutting your business, but providing some kind of positive indicator that an artist is independent of that organization could capture business from the growing number of folks like myself which are fed up with the RIAA's bullying tactics.
Thanks for listening!
Americans were the majority for a long time. I guess I haven't looked at the numbers for a long time. And as you point, theyr are still the largest group by far (the second country in the list is Japan with less than a third of the American users).
So, no need to be harsh. It was just a mistake, and one that doesn't even make the argument in the comment invalid, quite the contrary. The more users worldwide, the less the networks depend on RIAA subjects.
IANAL, but how will the RIAA prove that any copyright infringemnt has taken place?
I've had a few files available for download on Kazaa for a while now but no-one has downloaded any of them - I think my upload speed is too slow for people to bother. If I'm accused of copyright infingement, how can I be guilty if no-one has downloaded anything from me?
I assume the RIAA have downloaded at least one track from the people they are taking action against and will use that as evidence against them, but what offence has taken place? The RIAA are legally entitled to own a copy of the music, and it isn't an offense to allow them to take a copy. They would have to prove that people who aren't allowed to take copies had actually done so, and I don't think they can do that with the information they have.
Input error. Replace user and press any key to continue.
RIAA_can_lick_my_sweaty_balls@KaZaa doesn't match. Safe for now!
"Anonymous Coward" is for whistleblowers, not unpopular opinions.
Going after these sorts of user names (or even worrying about it) seems like a joke to me. They're completely useless made up handles, ambiguous, and can be changed in about three seconds. Even the tracking down of IP addresses has questionable risk, but really, "username@kazaa" or "kazaaliteuser@kazaa" or even, say, "joe21@kazaa" are pretty worthless information to identify someone.
Want to make some money, here's all you have to do:
Step 1: Buy a computer
Step 2: Use the P2P program of your choice
Step 3: Take a bunch of files that *YOU* have the copyright for or that are in the public domain and share them to the world.
Step 4: Make sure a few files are named something like b-spears.mp3, metallica,mp3 or harlanellison.doc.
Step 5: Document everything!
Step 6: Wait to get sued.
Step 7: Legal stuff
Step 8: Profit!
What about file traders in the UK? Now that America 0wnz our asses they can have us sent over to the land of the un-free for anything they like with no trial. If the RIAA wants to, can they have us? I cant wait to get rid of the current government here, we should have nothing to do with Bush, i would rather take my chances with this place being an enemy of America, atleast nuclear annihilation is quicker than spending the rest of my life in a foreign prison.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
I personally listen to almost 100% indie music and find that its harder to find good RIAA artists/songs than it is to find good indie artists. Certainly per capita the RIAA loses and badly.
You can try this site if you're new to indie music, indie rock in particular. They also have 128kbs streaming MP3s. Or you can pay a visit to a couple of the bigger and more popular indie labels like Matador or Jade Tree.
Yeah, its tough finding good indie music, but that's only because the RIAA and Clearchannel monopolies make it so. If you put in a little effort you might be surprised at what you find.
I hope the indie labels exploit these damn lawsuits to increase their profile amongst music lovers.
I use Kazaa lite....I haven't been much into file/music/p2p stuff since audiogalaxy....but i'm connected as the default Kazaa lite user, which is "defaultuser@kazaa"....wonder how many other people use that name....
1) The desire for fame.
2) The desire to make good Music "just for fun."
3) Music for contract. Like an ad, for instance. I can't see why companies would mind an ad being copied endlessly.
4) Writing for performances. You can copy a song, but you can't copy a concert.
Copyright Law does have a place, though. I'll give you that. (It's got some incredible flaws, but it has a place.)
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
INSERT INTO have_to_sue VALUES $handle_entered_by_user;
what a great way to collect more handles for people to sue. use a cron job to see what they share and file the complaints.
easy as onehundredtwentythree...
Privacy is terrorism.
3. Feel between your legs. Is there a slit?
If the answer is all three, then Hilary Rosen wants you!
I checked the username www.k-lite.tk_Kazaa_Lite@KaZaA and found out that I'm wanted! Should I call my lawyer?
How will the music worm work?
It will be distributed as an email worm. The user installs it by clicking on an attachment that arrives in an email spam. A large number people will do this knowingly, but many will be innocent "victims". Knowing users will thus have "plausible deniability".
Once installed, it will do the following:
1) Email itself to everybody in the user's address book, just like any other worm.
2) Install a hidden peer-to-peer server.
3) Identify every music file on the users computer.
4) Make all of them available over the web via peer-to-peer sharing.
5) Begin silently and automatically downloading music files to the user's computer and adding them to his music library, favoring additional titles by artists already represented in the user's library.
6) An internal list will of the downloaded files, and the worm will monitor their usage. Any downloaded file that is not played within a certain period of time will be marked for eventual replacement, in order to prevent the music archive from growing too large (say 20% above the size of the permanent library or 80% of available disk space, whichever is smaller). Any file that is played will be deleted from this list and permanently added to the user's music library. 7) Knowing users will be able to "order" specific music via a web interface by accessing a web site (actually located on the user's computer) via a web browser. The worm will silently edit the browser's history file to erase the record of this access.
How could such a worm be combatted?
1. Legal assaults on users would become difficult; there will be continuous trading of music over the net. Much of it will be entirely innocent; the result of the worm running on the computers of innocent "victims." This will provide a smokescreen for the activities of knowing users. It will be extremely difficult to prove that somebody is a knowing user, since the patterns of download to any individual user will be similar to knowing use. Many unknowing victims will accidentally add some of the downloaded music to their permanent libraries, because a lot of people do not keep careful track of the contents of their music libraries.
2. Virus scanning and firewall software could be employed, but many users do not keep their protective software up to date. Attempts to eradicate similar worms employed by spammers have not been particularly effective. And with the music worm case, many of the "victims" would actually be secret users, intentionally abetting the worm's presence on their computers.
3. The RIAA could distribute counter-worms, which would infect computers and delete music, or gather evidence of intentional trading. However, this would require the music industry itself to engage in an ongoing illegal activity. Moreover, it would be relatively unsuccessful in targeting the technically sophisticated knowing user, who would have a strong incentive to block such worms.
Say for instance, I bought a CD from Amazon. Is it legal for them to offer me a free download while I wait for the physical one to arrive? I mean, buying a CD is pretty good proof that I own it, right?
c-hack.com |
Ok, in reply to you and the other replies to my comment, i have this quote:
"The following user names were culled from subpoenas filed with the US District Court in Washington, DC." (taken from here which was reference in this slashdot story)
As you can see, the subpoenas were files WITH A COURT. Therefor the RIAA was asking the court to enforce the subpaenos, as happens whenever someone wants to issue a subpoena!
So, lets see, in this case the RIAA hasnt done anything extra legal, non legal, or unlegal. They went through the courts. Hence, they ARE USING THE LEGAL SYSTEM AS ITS MEANT TO BE USED.
Dear Students, Faculty and Staff:
I am writing to you about a problem that has many of us at the college deeply concerned. You may be aware that four Bentley students are the subject of subpoenas served by the Recording Industry Association of America which is seeking financial damages for illegally downloaded and shared music files. According to The Boston Globe, the RIAA has filed at least 871 subpoenas this month. These students now face legal action and potentially significant fines.
We have every reason to believe that the RIAA will not stop here. Every person who downloads or shares music, video or software in a fashion that violates copyrights is breaking the law and is subject to fines of up to $150,000 for each violation.
All of us know that file sharing and downloading are commonplace; all of us are familiar with the argument that "everyone does it." But the copyright violations that so often accompany these activities are illegal and now the industry whose copyrights are being violated is responding aggressively.
Please recognize that everyone using our campus computer network who engages in this form of file sharing and downloading is violating Bentley College policies, breaking the law and exposing themselves to potential action by the RIAA.
Effective this morning, the college has temporarily eliminated all bandwidth associated with the following file sharing applications:
aimster audiogalaxy edonkey gnutella
hotline imesh KaZaA napster
scoutexchange blubster
If you have downloaded any of the above applications on your computer, we urge you to delete them immediately.
In September, we will launch a campus-wide discussion about appropriate longer term approaches to what is a serious legal and ethical issue.
Sincerely,
President
The RIAA went through the courts to get details on people who they already had evidence on, in order to prosecute them (see my reply to someone else in this thread). What the fuck do you want to do, hide when you do something wrong, because that is exactly what you are insinuating.
The RIAA had evidence, but in order to prosecute or to bring a court case against the infringers, they needed the details that the ISPs have. How else do you expect them to get these details apart from using the legal system, as they are the ones that need to bring the case as infringement is civil law.
Please see my other comment here
"Tired of being treated like a criminal for sharing music online?"
You may be tired, but it is theft, and you are a criminal. If the artists wanted people to share their music online, then they'd release it in MP3 format on the internet. Some artists do that, some don't.
If you have beef with the way that record companies go about their business, don't buy their records. I don't like the way some fast food joints treat their staff, but that doesn't give me the right to steal their product.
Last time I checked Hotline, which was about a year ago, it seemed there were all these Warez servers out there, often actually charging money for access.
They all had extensive disclaimers and anti-law-enforcement statements you had to click-through "agree" to before you could even browse the file lists.
In short, "No cops allowed; these servers are for backups of licensed software only; you are only allowed to download what you have licenses for; etc."
I wonder first whether this sort of thing has any legal value, and if so whether it could be used in other P2P contexts.
IANAL and maybe I'm just dumb, but it seems like prosecuting someone who had such a disclaimer would require arguing against the validity of click-through agreements, which would be against the interests of certain folks much bigger than the RIAA.
This Like That - fun with words!
Hmm what is this username that identifies me on my given network i wonder?
Umm, that would be the username you have to use when you connect to Kaaza, WinMX, Morpheus, or just about any other p2p network besides Freenet. They didn't mean the wifi network you're using.
You really don't sound like you have much of a clue at all.
But I don't see kazaauser@kazaa.com on there
No sig for you!!
Nothing immediately comes to my mind.
In science news today: A physicist discovers that all of nature's fundamental particles are actually very tiny rolled-up balls of unusually entertaining crap.
http://k-lite.tk Had a new version last I checked, it blocked RIAA IP ranges, and disabled the file list feature. That way, you can keep uploading, without being really worried.
Karma: Bad. Mostly because the only moderators that notice me are conservatives.
IP ??? I only download music !!!
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
Yes, type your screen name into a dialog box with your IP address hanging out. Then wait for the RIAA to subpoena logs from the EFF or their upstream.
Good plan.
You think that's paranoid? It's called intelligence gethering. Websites like Slashdot and the EFF have set themselves up as hubs for opposition to the RIAA. And on Slashdot, where you actually post your thoughts, they can track the mood, ideas, and strategies of the opposition. Folks, they'd be stupid NOT to watch this site. It's as old as Sun Tzu, people. "Know Thy Enemy".
Of course, they're still trying to figure out just HOW Natalie Portman and Hot Grits fits into piracy...
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Of course they can. With a little help from their copyright-affiliates in the said countries.
Every western country has a RIAA/MPAA equivalent and they dance to the tune of those who represent the largest media corporations: RIAA and MPAA.
I do not live in the US, but I received a cease and desist letter from US attorneys for breaking the DMCA by sharing deCSS code on my foreign server. Recently I have been probed and DoSed (one of my IPs is still being DoSed by malformed packets to port 1214; my ISP is investigating the matter) by sites that I strongly suspect are a part of the MPAA/RIAA campaign ("we'll sue thousands") that began in June. I fully expect to receive a cease and desist, or even a subpoena, from the local copyright fascists for sharing my files.
Personally, I'm much more bothered by the bypassing of the process. I'm a big advocate of the slippery slope theory, which is why I'm against gun control even though I think it would reduce the crime rate.
However, the occasional fear has bothered me. I, personally, only have mostly legal things shared out (unlicensed anime and anime music videos), but my roommates often have less legal things shared. It's kinda scary to think that the RIAA could just walk in and screw us all over.
Well, this finally did it--this pushed me over the edge I am now a card-carrying member of the EFF. If you've got twenty-five bucks to spare, you should join, too.
Face it--we're losing the war on copyright. We're losing it, and there's precious little we can DO about it. The EFF is one of the very few things standing between us and the removal of the right to own property.
There is a difference between the RIAA subpoenas and normal subpoenas. Normal subpoenas require a judge's approval. The RIAA subpoenas in the DMCA only require that a copyright holder show up at a court, pay a fee, and get a clerk of the court to rubber stamp it, with no review.
And the muscular cyborg German dudes dance with sexy French Canadians
You're not going to convince anyone in THIS place.
/., the EFF, et. al. calling it "sharing" or "swapping". It's neither. It's only sharing or swapping if you have the rights to it. Otherwise, it's illegal (with certain small exceptions).
I'll add one thing. I'm getting tired of
This is, of course, part and parcel of the language war, as both sides manuever to put the debate in terms that will win the public over. And both sides know it. The EFF is going to make this whole business sound as friendly and wholesome as possible ("It's SHARING! How can you be against SHARING, you greedy pig???").
And while people here keep screaming "It's not stealing! It's not THEFT!"....yes it is. When you take something that's not yours, when you don't have the legal right to it, that's stealing. I do wish people would have the balls to just admit that's what they're doing. Some do. Some will tell you they just don't give a fuck. Ironically, I think that makes them better people than the ones trying to justify what they're doing by putting it into a political or economic context ( usually either "music wants to be free or it's a human right, etc, or I'm too poor or the record companies charge too much and music is a human right, etc). At least the "I don't give a fuck crowd are just stealing. The excusers are liars AND thieves.
Oh well, I had too much Karma anyway. Sheilds up!
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
~~~
A little more complex than "legal process" vs. "I want it free".
Obviously you don't understand the difference between the civil and criminal court systems. ANYONE can issue a supoena against anyone else. Anyone can file a lawsuit against anyone else. It's all perfectly valid within the civil court system.
Yes, copyright violation is still currently a civil matter. I give the RIAA 2-4 more years before they convince congress to make it a felony punishable with life in prison.
You can come to Slashdot all you want and complain about what the RIAA is doing. But talk is cheap. If you don't support organizations working to change the laws, the RIAA will win out.
C - A language that combines the speed of assembly with the ease of use of assembly.
Here is a good quote from EFF's campaign site ( http://www.eff.org/share/ ):
;).
But there are more than 60 million people in the United States alone who use file sharing--more than the number of people who voted for our current President. If we all band together and stand up for our rights, we can change the law.
If everyone who used P2P voted on the basis to have it legalized, then they could elect their own president next time
The big huff is that they only have to file them with a measly clerk. There is no judical oversight. If that's what you call "file[d] WITH A COURT", then I've got some great "advice FROM A MAJOR STOCK FIRM"... That advice will be from the secretary, or possibly a janitor, but that's good enough according to you...
Nothing is illegial if it gets legalized... The DMCA and other such laws made this possible, but it should not be allowed. It's not strictly illegial, as congress passed the law, and the courts have upheld it so far, but it certainly violates many rights that Americans are accustomed to.
No, the founders of the USA did not mean for the legal system to be used to take away the life-savings of college students, just for sharing 3 MP3 files... Another case where congress' actions are in conflict with the constitution is copyright law, which is now being infinitely extended, even though that is explicitly disallowed. Since the congress decided that they can do that, does that make it right, or okay? Most rational people don't believe so...
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
hello?
Looking at your code, I see the RIAA is looking for alot of guys named "Linux 2.4.21" and "Solaris 2.8"
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Note to moderators. Parent poster is known to can the manham. Check history before moderating.
Block the bastards:
i nt ext.asp
http://www.simplyclick.org/uploadertest/pg2_pla
There are a lot of people (I won't say a majority, the proportion is a point not worth arguing) using P2P simply because they want free music. For those people, I have a suggestion - one that's legal and significantly socially healthier than hiding indoors and playing Russian roulette with the RIAA's lawyers.
Find your local music scene.
Find out which clubs or bars in your town (or a nearby metro area) host live music - many do on the weekends, some do several times a week. Check the local papers for lists of such places, or activities like festivals, open-air concerts, park celebrations, etc. Ask around, check with your friends, neighbors, people at the local watering hole. Hell, take a walk through a noisy section of town sometime on a Friday night and listen to hear which places sound like they've got a band going.
For a small cover (or free, depending) at most of these places, you can get in, hang out with friends, have a few beers, talk to members of your-preferred-gender, and listen to the artists up close and personal. You might be listening to some neo-punk band of sixteen-year-olds. You might catch a really great jazz set. You might hear some grizzled-looking blue-collar fellas playing some mighty fine blues. You might dance to some eighties cover band.
And - here's the part for those interested in free music - a lot of these bands sell their CDs very cheap, and many give them away for free! Sometimes, musicians that aren't even performing will show up just to hand out some CDs of their stuff, to try and get some exposure.
Expand your horizons, get out of your house, have a social experience, spend time with friends, and get free/cheap music, all for little investment - plus, you get to support homegrown talent, instead of manufactured "talent". How can you go wrong?
Karma: Excellent, but still won't get you laid.
It's worse. Either you live in a crappy country, or you don't understand the legal system. In my country, even law enforcement has to get a court order for the kind of information RIAA is asking for. If the company sucks, they'll just give the info away, but if they have their customer's interests at heart, they will only give it away if legally required.
I plugged in a random name "joe" and got a subpoena. what are the odds.
You are an idiot. First of all, they don't need to identify the supposedly "infringing" user before they file a claim. That is what a John Doe lawsuit is for. This is why Verizon was fighting the RIAA, they wanted the RIAA to file a John Doe lawsuit.
Secondly, the RIAA had evidence??? WTF kind of crack are you smoking? They've been spamming the internet with bot created DMCA complaints. That is not evidence, that is fraud.
I support inde's.
The students probably don't have the money to pay off the RIAA... but the college certainly does. By enacting this policy, the college wants to separate itself from being liable. It wouldn't surprise me if the RIAA tried to find the "network providers" liable as well. In other words, suing the college for allowing P2P apps to be run on their network in the first place.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
assuming the validity of the search engine, this search engine is probably one of the best assets a malicious hacker could ever hope for >o). Not only are there address for areas in which people live, but now there are IP addresses of people who will forever be scared to use the internet (but will probably still do so for things like email,homework, and research).
on another note, the subpoenas also give insight into the monitoring habits of the RIAA. In the 120+ subpoenas i've examined (via this site) every one had a download time stamp between 3am and 1am. perhaps there is a window on opportunity in those 2 short hours, or maybe there arent any worthy users to persue during those hours. Of course the 75 subpoenas being sent out each dy would depricate or abolish the significance of thes two hours and reduce it down to 1 or none.
I was also thinking that the RIAA has to verify that the song is authentic. perhaps hashcode comparison? (to which variable bitrates and encoding schemes would hamper thier efforts) if they are manually verified then they must have the largest collection of pirated music in the world. =P
i can't wait to read about the first case of someone suing the RIAA for giving them a nervous breakdown from the scare they are creating.does anyone else see the similarities between:
a thousand monkeys at a thousand typewriters and the RIAA?
I'm pissed at the RIAA because they are abusing the legal process. This is all obviously FUD so they can shut down any competition and steal money from everyone (through media/internet/computer "royalties"--really taxes)--including those who don't want anything to do with their "products."
It's sad to see the EFF has joined their cause:
CDs prices raised since my governement decided to tax them, so I'm not doing anything else than download what I've paid for.
As of this point, it looks like the RIAA isn't subpoenaing (sp?) the default names that Kazaa and Kazaa Lite use. This may be a good way of safety through mundanity for anyone who wants to hide their sharing habits, since there's no way the RIAA can possibly press charges againt everyone who use the default name. Especially when a lot of the people who use the default names probably don't share or have legitimate rights to the music on their hard drives...
Most people using IRC for files are leechers. Not that thats a bad thing, but it limits the effectiveness of the RIAA targetting sharers.
Of course, there are fserve's; but xdcc's are much more common. I don't think its likely, at least at this time.
"The lesson to be learned is not to take the comments on slashdot too literally." --Vinnie Falco, BearShare
Napster?
AudioGalaxy?
Just when was this letter sent?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Yeah, it's sad when the only way to prevent getting completely screwed over is to stop participating in the internet. These sort of problems are the reason why the internet is slowly turning into a one way medium. There is no reason a person should be afraid to speak their mind and distribute their own creative works, yet the legal system has become corrupt, so we all suffer.
I guess I live a sheltered life, not having used windows much, and not really being a p2p fanatic anyway. I am confused i guess because the p2p client software I do use (legitamately of course - see higher posts) does not ask for a username. it seems crazy to me that any p2p sopftware would ask for a username if it aims to protect its users anyway. but judging by the responses i am getting to this thread it seems that windows p2p clients do ask for a username. i have no way to tell if this is the case, not knowing anyone silly enough to use windows' based p2p clients anyway. but as you infer, what the hell would i know anyway. I'm just a mac-using, java coding, frequent-flying, wifi-abusing no good sonofabitch.
I used to have a better sig than this, but I got tired of it
Yes, but that isn't all they have. They have your IP Address too, and that is tied to your real name. Go to http://www.showmyip.com to find out your external ip address.
Note that it shows the country your IP block is tied to if possible. Which means they can target US users only.
Then it's a relatively simple matter of finding out which ISP owns that IP block, and then they issue a Subpoena to your ISP to find out which customer was assigned that IP address at the time of infringement. And suddenly they have your real name and address.
The internet isn't as anonymous as you think.
IPv6 a nano-dime a dozen...
I'm dead sexy!
It's so obvious. (.test, I salute you!)
"...how to avoid a lawsuit from the RIAA."
You know, I was kind of hoping for useful, less painfully obvious ways to avoid the RIAA. I mean really. If we're using this program to begin with, it stands to reason we already know exactly what removing out files or not sharing would do.
I mean, where's the real info here? Like how you don't see any "defaultuser@kazaa" names on that email list. Or using the newest versions of K++ and Kazaa Lite that have 1st generation RIAA counter-measures. I guess if you're audience is the noob (or you're actually more afraid of the RIAA than you care to admit) then the EFF's basic lawsuit avoidiance steps will work, but forgive me for saying so, but I'd wager that most people know exactly what they're doing with Kazaa, rendering this meager info page utterly useless.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
No! The RIAA went through a clerk of the court. When anyone else wants to get a subpoena for any other reason, they need to go through a JUDGE and show actual proof, not just make an accusation. If the subpoenas were issued be a judge with the same standard of proof required for any other civil subpoena, I would have no problem with them.
"Do I dare disturb the universe?"
Here's one for you: don't break the law.
Or to shift it around a bit -- if the RIAA has the right to subpoena alleged infringers -- ISTM that you and I should have the exact same right.
So do we? Would an ISP cooperate if Joe Private Citizen said "Yo there, ISP, I think johndoe@isp.net is distributing my stuff!" Would it get the same notice if said stuff was a few images pilfered from a web page (which are equally copyrighted material)?? I doubt it.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
"see http://www.snopes.com/legal/privacy.htm"
Say nope to Snope. It's not an accurate site: they have their own axes to grind.
"You may be tired, but it is theft, and you are a criminal"
Just because it is illegal does not mean it is "theft". "Theft" has a certain meaning, and acts of copyright infringement, rape, pulling tags off mattresses, and other crimes do not meet it.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
You're score is "redundant".
You need a FREE iPod Nano
I'm not sure what the procedural posture of this matter is, but there is nothing unusual about attorneys issuing subpeonaes to obtain info relevant to a pending civil matter. I assume the RIAA has filed suit naming numerous John Doe defendants claiming copyright infringement. Once suit is filed, any attorney has the right to issue subpeonaes to obtain relevant info. There is no direct court supervision of this process in any civil case. Basically, you just sign your name to a subeona form and serve it with the witness fee.If the party receiving the subpoena objects, they are required to come into court and move to quash the subpoenae. Third parties rarely do this. The RIAA has been given no special rights as far as I can tell. It sounds to me like business as usual for a civil case in the US.
don't buy overpriced CDs. download music from soulseek or piolet.
---- oh no - it's the RIAA and their $100000000 fine. I'm gonna take that so seriously...
Copyright law is designed so that the originators of creative works can derive compensation from those works, right? No, the recording industry likes to take 90% of artist proceeds and stuff it into some hole and now wants to put a greater lean onto touring revenue.
The RIAA is of course whining about how it isn't gettin gits fair share of cash for these songs that are being downloaded. Now, the RIAA for the most part, has nothing to do with the creative process, and those corporate bands/singers that are puppets, can't really be called creative (say hi Justin) by any real stretch.
In essence, by swapping files we take money away from the RIAA (money that it really didn't deserve to have in the first place, but that's just an editorial aside), and then the RIAA takes away more money from the artists.
Here's a simple solution, let the artists sue the RIAA for getting continually raped and having this crusade carried out in their name. I'm sure that any number of artists down on their luck would like their fifty million dollars from their platinum album back from the RIAA. They are the originators of the creative content and are thus in charge of the copyright (unless they were stupid with their contracts), it should be the decision of the artist who gets their money and who gets to be compensated for money lost from file downloading.
Hopefully the artists aren't totally stupid and just keep the suits to the RIAA, because suing their fans would be very much counterproductive (after all, would you buy a band's cd if they were in the middle of litigation with you). Just a thought.
pub music can still be a nice surprise, sometimes. always worth swapping the odd night of file searches for a night in a pub.
---- oh no - it's the RIAA and their $100000000 fine. I'm gonna take that so seriously...
"and on the other hand "I should have the right to download whatever I want off P2P, specifically stuff the RIAA owns"."
That is not even remotely applicable. No one is downloading from the RIAA. They are downloading copies of stuff owned by other p2p users, not owned by the RIAA itself.
"50,000 a day. I'd really like to see this for the people we have imprisoned in cuba."
No. These terrorists should not have joined the Taliban in the first place.
Don't cry for those thugs in the jug in Camp X-Ray. They have more rights than the average person imprisoned in "Camp Castro" that takes up the rest of that island. Rights to freedom of religion, rights to a trial eventually, and other rights. Even though there are similarities: you will get shot or killed for trying to escape from either of the two prison camps.
There are peer to peer networks for the sharing of legal music. In some cases they use digital signatures to ensure the files are legit. Here's the ones I've found so far:
- Furthur Network
-
konspire[2b]
-
Monotonik's BitTorrents - zip files with ~300 MB of MP3s
If you know of any others please let me know.Request your free CD of my piano music.
This is so tru
Corporate interests may be getting police powers, but I still have the right to bear arms; there's a reason we've got it.
my sig's at the bottom of the page.
VNV Nation || Praise The Fallen
Passive fields. January two thousand and twelve
A nation that stands alone
Cold voices, faces pale
Gathered unto their judgement day
Such pride remains unbroken
Such words remain unspoken
Just mothers to stand in vain and cry
Tears and medals in the rain
Shall I recall when justice did prevail?
No reason to be found why reason did fail
The all clear resounding
The way was clear to rebuild this land
Shall I call on you to guide me well
To see our hopes and dreams fulfilled?
On this day of our ascension
Stand your ground this is what we are fighting for
For our spirit and laws and ways
Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war
For heaven or hell we shall not wait
Shall I think of honour as lies?
Or lament it's aged slow demise?
Shall I stand as a total stranger
On this day in this stone chamber?
The all clear resounding
The way was clear to rebuild this land
Shall I call on you to guide me well?
To see our hopes and dreams fulfilled?
On this day of our ascension
On this day we praise the fallen
Stand your ground this is what we are fighting for
For our spirit and laws and ways
Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war
For heaven or hell we shall not wait
Shall I think of honour as lies
Or lament it's aged slow demise?
Shall I stand as a total stranger
On this day in this stone chamber?
PS: Fuck the RIAA.
" Yes, it is still theft"
No, it is not. It is copyright infringement, which does not meet the definition of theft.
"Don't do it!"
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
The reason I wrote this article was that a friend quite seriously told me that the money she paid to purchase Kazaa went to compensate the musicians whose music she was downloading. She had no idea she was violating anyone's copyright. I suspect people like her are not uncommon among p2p users.
Other slashdot users have repeatedly mentioned that their less computer literate siblings and friends who use p2p were quite unaware that any of the songs they downloaded were immediately made available for sharing. While you can usually disable this, most of the p2p apps are configured to automatically share by default, and I don't think they always make an effort to inform the user of that fact, or of its legal implications.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
Go away troll.
"The recording industry continues its futile crusade to sue thousands of the over 60 million people who use file-sharing software in the U.S.," Fred Von Lohmann, senior attorney with the EFF, said in a statement. "We hope that the EFF's subpoena database will give people some peace of mind and the information they need to challenge the subpoenas and protect their privacy." "
Statements like this show the EFF has no regard for copyright. Most of these people are guilty, but the EFF somehow thinks the RIAA is wrong for prosecuting them. What does privacy hae to do with anything. These people made public copyrighted works and now the EFF is defending their right to do so anonymously by hiding behind their ISPs? What next? Is the EFF going to defend the right to prank callers to be able to harrass people anonymously? And before you start complaining that a judge should have to sign each subpoena, that's just hiding behind beuracracy. In reality if a judge decides the method of collecting IPs is sufficient evidence to warrant a subpoena, the RIAA should be able to "batch" submit as many as they want using this method. The EFF isn't interested in justice, but instead they're trying to give people rights they don't have under the constitution.
Vote for Pedro
Mark my words, if Bakellende has his ways, in a few years Holland will be as prosperous as Argentina is now. Moreover, many of his "measures" dangerously remind me of the policies that Menem implemented in the early 90's in Argentina. Do you think that the country went down from one day to the next? Hell no, it took 10 solid years of the Menem destruction to be what it is now. When I hear Bakellende talk, it's deja-vu all over again.
In the meantime, they keep the public opinion distracted with Antillean criminality bullshit and beating the dead horse of Pim's murder.
It might be time to move again, but truth be said, the world in general sucks anyway...where's one to go nowadays?
The idea of artists bringing lawsuits against the RIAA sounds good, but wouldn't work simply because (a) the artists voluntarily signed the restrictive agreements, and (b) the RIAA is the industry advocacy body, not the organization with which the artists have signed the agreement; to use a very rough analogy, its like trying to sue AAA over the state of the roads. The RIAA doesn't take money from the artists directly, incidentally, but it is funded by the member record labels; thus, the artists themselves have no direct say in the RIAA's policies.
The only argument they (actually I shold say "we") have is claiming that collusion between the record companies (which has been found to exist) allows a trade practice which restricts the artists' ability to find a reasonably fair agreement.
No, IANAL, but I have consulted one over this, since it directly affects me. BTW, just about every record contract ever written gives exclusive distribution in a given territory to the record company, regardless of who owns the copyright; so the reason that this hasn't happened is because the record companies would simply prevent any releases by the artists who bring the suit (think Prince & George Michaels, to name but two). It would then have to be proven that the agreements are restrictive for the artists to be released from them, and then it would be doubtful if any major label would want to touch them again (the names above being multi-platinum exceptions).
I agree that suing fans is counterproductive to a degree, but look at it from the RIAA's view: which is better, offend the small percentage of the fan base that does share files (and who may not be prepared to pay for music anyway, so no loss), or enforce copyright stringently and maintain their grip on music distribution. To be realistic, the vast majority of music is bought and paid for, so its not hard to see why they chose this course of action from a business perspective. That doesn't mean I think it's right, though.
Good call about "puppet" bands though; who has their hand up Timberlake's ass today, I wonder?
http://www.denounce.com/riaa.html
Run piolet..it uses UDP packets instead of IP packets....good old RIAA cant track that!!
What are you gonna do? Kill Rosen?
Hmm, how about, if you're gonna correct someone's spelling mistakes, shouldn't you make sure YOU don't make any stupid ones yourself?
i have posted this before, but it was nested so deep i don't think anybody read it. if the sharing mechanism forces a searcher to be a pirate, then the RIAA would be implicated just for searching. see below:
(1) All users must register their filesharing client.
(2) The first thing the client does is upload a VERY SMALL "guilt file" to which kazaa, napster, or whoever wrote the client, has EXCLUSIVE rights. The user is now in cahoots before he ever downloaded anything. Before a client downloads any single file, he first uploads 2 "guilt files" to the sharing user. This verifies that the requester has implicated himself. So he is guilty but not to be punished.
(3) User must click "I Agree to Terms of Use."
(4) Term of use 1:
"I recognized that I have already violated a copyright just to launch this application. I understand that I will be sued, if and only if I decide to press charges against anyone on this network who violates my own copyrights on this network. I agree that the terms of settlement will be as follows: any spoils I achieve by copyright lawsuit, or by settlement, using this network, I agree to pay in double to kazaa, napster (whoever wrote the client). 75% of that will be returned to the original victim of the lawsuit." So it actually PAYS to get sued.
"I understand that for each file I have downloaded, I have, myself, illegally shared TWO files. I understand that I am pardoned of my offenses, so long as I pardon everyone who has offended me." ("Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.")
(5) Term of use 2: "I am not using this software as a third party agent." i.e. I am not a private investigator, lawyer, snoop, cop, stool pidgeon, etc., I'm just a joe using this client for his own purposes.) This term reduces the risk that RIAA hires a little kid to do the download and then films it as evidence.
Neat huh? I want to see it! Those laws (that the RIAA has democratically bribed our politicians for) would work against them SOOOO harshly here.
SWEET!
-The REAL Sam
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer
I may be wrong, since I haven't ever used KAZAA, but I find that most file sharing software has a handy feature that lets you grab a convenient list of every song or file that a person shares, or some way of indicating how much space the files a person shares take up. This feature is useless.
To solve the "problem" of RIAA litigation, all that needs to happen is for all filesharing programs to release a protocol-breaking upgrade which enables searching only by song title, rather than username. As well, it should completely disassociate the sharer's username from the search results. The IP address is still needed, but does not need to be reported through the client. If you make it more inconvenient for the RIAA to figure out who is sharing what files or how much music, lawsuits will decrease.
I keep hearing everyone jawing about how the RIAA needs to adapt its "outdated" method of music distribution, but no one on the filesharing side of things wants to adapt. These changes will slow the RIAA down, but one thing won't change... if you get caught sharing music, you really don't have anyone to blame but yourself.
All though my university years, I was heavily involved in music; I played in a couple bands, I accompanied chapel choirs, I was the accompaniest for the university choir.
Hardly any singers can read music, and most don't have a great ear.
But like Darius, they love the sound of their own voice, and believe their shit not to smell much. You can't judge based on CD's, because they have enough of an ear to stay on key if you have 2 guitars, a bass, and a kayboard "helping" them hear the melody.
There are less people in the world who can sing that commonly believed. And none of them have ever appeared on American Idol.
Hear, hear.
Not passing around copyrighted material that you don't have a license to copy seems to me to be a rather foolproof way to avoid getting sued. I know I don't have that particular worry.
However, I do have quite the worry that the continued insistence of the freeloaders that they're not doing anything wrong serves only to inflame the whole issue, and then I do have to worry about things like DRM obstructing real fair use, attacks on my online anonymity, and the legal machine suffocating legitimate P2P uses in the cradle out of fear.
I suppose that's what really bothers me about this whole music "sharing" thing. If people really feel so strongly that the very idea of copyright is immoral, maybe it's time they got the Constitution amended to that effect.
... the US is starting to feel like a puppet state of Washington too.
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
Right, that'll hold up in court.
If that's what you believe, I have no problem with that. My original post was directed towards the overwhelming volume of Slashdot posters who are angry at what the RIAA is doing, yet aren't doing anything about it.
Instead of leaving your door open, you put your stuff outside with a sign that says "free"...
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Evidence? You mean a list of file name scanned and filtered somehow in mass by an automated scanner? The RIAA's evidence is a file NAME stored on a computer, that is NO different then me writing down a couple of groups and song name on a piece of paper. We are talking about a court and lawsuits here worth 10's of thousands of dollars each here, not a bunch of people sitting around a card table thinking someone is guilty of something based on something they overheard near the water cooler. These are real lawsuits and real courts where real evidense should be required to proceed. There is NOTHING illegal about sharing out bogus files with bogus names and anyone can do it. It does not matter if it is not ethical, not right in your mind, and questionably stupid to do so but the point is again, it is not illegal to do it and nothing prevents anyone from doing it. You should not get prosecuted or have to defend yourself for thousands of dollars, lose you ISP account and have to put up with the strong arm tactics of the RIAA because of it. The simple fact that they have this power over you right now is simply amazing. A reply of "well don't have those file names shared out" is not a justification for what they are doing. I can walk into Walmart and put any merchandise down my pants and they can do nothing until I leave the store without paying for it. I can have a car that can triple the max speed limit in my state and never actually speed. A female with huge breasts can walk the city streets with high heels and almost no close at 2am and not get arrested for prostitution until solicated. I can buy all the papers and bongs I want and never get arrested for drugs. We can all sit around and guess what those examples above are going to lead to something illegal but until they are caught by REAL evidence, there is nothing you can do. Why can I not have a file named "Hotel Califonia" listed on P2P?
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
Thanks for the clarifications, it was all broadly speaking of course though. Of course the problem is endemic to the medium, really a single band would be hard pressed to distribute their music in an anolog (well, solid non-electrical sort of thing) form. Which why the internet is sort of ideal, but then again, people are clamoring for free content and not subscription services, and if you want to sell something then you'll want people to be exposed to it or have a name behind you. It's a great cycle that's been built up by the recording industry, a real give and take relationship that ends up being rather one-sided.
What about WinMX users? I haven't seen anything about them getting the letters.
Anyone?
what incentive is there to make music if any joe-blow can pirate it and not pay a dime?
Well, what incentive is there to make music if any joe songwriter can claim that your song is "substantially similar" to his in an infringing way and win in court?
Will I retire or break 10K?
You can copy a song, but you can't copy a concert.
It is possible to copy a bootleg recording of a concert. In fact, some bands permit this.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Do you have a pulse?
I am the unwilling control for my Origin.
But the RIAA says he doesn't "own" the music--only that he has a license.
An RIAA rep says he owns the record. This implies a license to perform it privately for the physical lifetime of the record. It's similar in effect to the typical software EULA condition that the license terminates when all copies in the licensee's possession are destroyed.
Will I retire or break 10K?
the service that the RIAA members perform is obsolete
CDBaby.com can sell a band's CDs over the Internet, but not everybody has Internet access from home. Some people prefer to shop in record stores such as Tower or in discount stores such as Wal-Mart. I don't think CDBaby.com has contracted with prominent big brick-and-mortar record stores yet.
listeners choose a more convienient channel
The most convenient channel for a good cross-section of listeners is FM radio in their cars. CDBaby.com can sell a band's CDs over the Internet, but Clear Channel's "independent" promoters must be paid to tell the radio-listening public that the CD exists. Most people don't have wireless Internet access and cannot listen to Internet radio during a commute.
CDBaby.com can sell a band's CDs over the Internet, but it doesn't provide access to music publishers' catalogs. Harry Fox Agency handles licensing of sound recordings based on copyrighted musical works, and I would imagine that it's harder for an individual to deal with Harry Fox Agency than for a large corporation to do so.
Will I retire or break 10K?
If you upload a copy of Photoshop to your server and post a link, who do you think would be prosecuted?
The authors of GIMP, when Adobe sues them claiming that GIMP is "a copy of Photoshop".
Will I retire or break 10K?
Option a) Only share non-RIAA music online.
This is really their worst nightmare, and the reason they want filesharing eliminated. The fear is that too much freedom of information could break their oligopoly (Along with MPAA types) on entertainment, possibly pushing the price of an album to less than $15 (gasp!) Even worse, people could start listening to music from independent labels who encourage the internet community (read: everyone, especially young people who like music, it just makes sense) to do their promotion for them.
Well, clearly this must be stopped.
If Sony and RCA had it their way, it would be illegal for non RIAA labels to produce music. And while we're at it, lets be serious, we can live without major label bands. Try it, go download something off the internet, something off of a mp3-friendly band's actual website, one you haven't heard before. You might like it. Fill your P2P shared folder with the like. Why be an unpaid distributor for the mega-corporates? This is how the revolution starts.
Waiting for ad.doubleclick.net...
John Howard is, alas, too busy licking Bush's boots (or somewhere else) to look where he's going. He's dragging the entire country with him, largely unwillingly I hope. I've certainly never heard ANYBODY say they like what he's doing, and I work at a newspaper...
We're being dragged into becoming another US state - well, except with no right to vote. The US passes a law, and what do you know... it's proposed and usually passed here. Ours are thankfully somewhat watered down (think DMCA) but often make up for it with an incredible lack of comprehension about the subject area and some really bad drafting.
As for "recent world events"... do we have a king or an ELECTED official? What I saw was our PM sending troops to invade another country without approval by the rest of the government or the populace.
I've been considering handing back my citizenship papers. I've got New Zealand citizenship as well, and I'm ashamed to be an Australian citizen right now.
Maybe cut 'em up and mail them to the prime minister.
if i kill 2 people to establish the guilt of an unrelated third party, aren't i still guilty of the 2 murders?
it would be EXACTLY as effective as the laws that defend the RIAA.
if you're still in doubt, keep in mind that the "guilt files" need not be meaningless. they could actually be pretty decent stuff... art, essays, short stories, etc. (all copyrighted, datestamped, checksummed, etc) this would be stuff that clearly falls within the domain of copyright protected material. these files would be available for download-sale on the website of the software distributer, so that there's no doubt as to their intended commercial value.
now the RIAA wants to build a case. to snoop the network, RIAA illegally "pirate-shares" 5000 units of Software, Inc's intellectual property, (files which are available for sale online). the RIAA finds out that joe student illegally "pirate-shared" 2500 mp3 files, which are available for sale in the store.
good. RIAA builds its case, and shows up in court. their $million lawyer cries "we're just trying to make a buck. we bribed your legistlature for some laws, and now we want to see them enforced. please take this 21 year old's college savings away." the student says "i'm sorry, yes, i'm guilty, here you go, my life savings. i'll quit school and work at mcdonald's to pay off the rest." but then a third party stands up (the software company) and says "we'd also like to see the law enforced, since the same law obliges RIAA to pay us twice what it just took from that student. RIAA "pirate-shared" 5000 of our files while establishing his guilt." RIAA appeals and either (1) overturns their own law, or (2) suffers under it. if the law is overturned, GREAT! if RIAA is penalized double, GREAT. most of that is given to the poor student, who quits mcD's and resumes school.
i believe that this idea would blow the doors off the whole file trading dilemma, and put the RIAA lobbyists back in their place.
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer
This sounds more like a plan by the RIAA to get more Kazaa usernames to check up on. 'Just submit your username to see if it's not already on our list. If it's not, we'll follow-up on it and if we see that you've done a lot of file trading, we'll add yours as well.'
The Smart One: I'll take "Things you should know" for 200.
Alec: Since the beginning of time, this specific method was used to avoid being prosecuted by others.
The Smart One: What is not breaking the law?
Alec: Correct.
The Smart One: I'll take "Things you should know" for 400.
Alec: The 20th century is marked by the loss of this great leader and moral officer, which dawned an era of weak men and scared little boys who cried out for some sort of empathetic revenge due to their faces being barried in a surealistic existence, one which their brains try to forcefully merge with reality.
The Smart One: What is "Responsibility, son of Accountability"?
Alec: Correct. No.. wait.. someone is complaining, that must mean we are in the wrong. Okay, whoever said that our show is against constitutional rights, that's just not funny!
on the sixth day God created man.
on the seventh day, man returned the favor.
This would *NOT* hold up in court. IANAL, but I *STILL* know this wouldn't hold up. The original ToS/EULA is illegal. Contracts that require breaking of the law are not honored by the court system. When's the last time you've heard a mob-boss successfually sue a hit-man for not killing cousin Vito? Joe Distributor getting a court decision in his favor against Dan the Dealer for selling his stash and not giving Joe his cut? Hell, I can't even get the money from my ho's that way, that's why God invented the 'pimp-slap'.
:)
In all reality, if you had a EULA like that, you'd get sued pretty much right away by the RIAA/MPAA/whoever. I can't imagine a *LEGITAMATE* use for this software to save it from being shut down.
-Ab
ps. Screw the RIAA and nice trolling with ya
Nothing fails quite like prayer.
You ment to click "Funny" not "Flamebait" - moron.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
If you want to hurt the RIAA - hurt its members... Record Companies. If you stop buying new Records/Albums/CD's whatever format... http://www.boycott-riaa.com/membership.php The answer is simple - use your wallet. Whether you file share or not, DONT BUY ANY MUSIC FROM ANY RIAA MEMBER. If you must, buy it used. That way the money goes to a local merchant not the record company. If everyone stops buying music, then the music companies will have to change their tune. ha ha ha... Seriously - if no one buys new music - record stores/retial merchants will preasure the RIAA to stop its nonsense... Retail has far more power than the RIAA. Hell - get Walmart on your side and you've got it made.
This might be a good revenue opportunity to charge $5 a month for users to proxy through them, and there'd be no last-mile infrastructure. Just good bandwidth. Hmm...
Ouch! Stop him! He stole my thought. Make him give it back.
Cool concept. Reminds me of the book "Deathkiller". Or it could be something spies use: steal his thoughts and wipe his brain, although I always figured killing was much easier than wiping a mind.
We all reuse thoughts, and it rarely hurts anyone. I may use the phrase "thought theft" in a song. You may never hear the song, and my reuse won't hurt you. Thousands of people may share my songs on P2P networks, and that is good for me:
1. People are listening to my songs.
2. People are being injected with my ideas.
3. People will pay to see me play the songs.
4. People may order my CD. Yes, CDs are almost obsolete, but they are still a good method for those who do not have high bandwidth to transfer music without losing quality.
5. I will get paid for being on late night television, and have cameos in movies and maybe start an acting career doing commercials, and write a book, and write a column in a magazine like John Mayer telling how he wrote a song that nobody wants to hear while travelling between famous people's houses. And that is what dreams are made of.
---
Copyright was allowed in this country so that a creator would have a limited monopoly so creators would gain some benefit from creating and would have the incentive to do it again.
Now the benefits all go to corporations for a period of time formerly known as limited. Yes, they still expire, but I will not live to see the copyrights expire on works that were created by people that were dead before I was born. I do not have the legal ability to derive new creations from the work of the greats. The original copyright had a maximum of 28 years. That means people should be able to reuse the entire Beatles catalog without legal hassles. (Someone once said they wrote every song. Does that mean noone can create anything new? That explains today's popular music.)
I spend my life entertaining my brain.
No need to worry, unless your ISP is comcast. The court documents doesn't list a name, unlike some of the other user names, but only the ISP.
Any idea why?
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
Hmm, maybe you should think this through before moving your gun rack into your living room.
Be a leech, stay out of jail :)
And I can rent a house. The rental agreement is arranged by contract. If there's no contract, the tenant is TRESSPASSING! Tresspassing is a crime. But the CONTRACT makes occupancy legal.
:) :)
:)
:)
And that is what this amounts to. In essence, the software provider is saying, "it's legal for you to upload our files, as long as you don't sue anyone for uploading third party files to you. But if you act like an RIAA lawyer, and start suing network members, we'll nail you TWICE as hard as you sued them. and we CAN do it, because you DID upload OUR intellectual property in exchange for theirs. and WE didn't tell you to go out and do that, YOU CHOSE TO DO IT ON YOUR OWN.
Basically, to look for a legal example which [at least looks] equivalent: I can give you permission to tresspass on my yard, and still say "I won't sue you for tresspassing in MY yard, unless YOU sue my aunt bessie, or my cousin jim for tresspassing in YOUR yard. In THAT case, our deal is OFF, and i'll throw the book at you."
now, maybe a judge would look at this ball of yarn and say "you, software company, implicity gave permission to trade your files, and you cannot retroactively revoke that permission, simply because one of your users decides to persue their legal rights. that, because, you already gave permission to trade your files - and, at the time they were traded, you either defined the trade as a legal tresspass, or an illegal one. if it was a legal tresspass, you can't sue, and if it was an illegal one, the contract is null and void."
response (1)
if the judge said that, the response would work like this: if i agree to rent a room to a tenant, the tenant, stops paying rent, does the landlord still have to keep the tenant? because when he and the tenant made the agreement, the landlord defined the tenant's presence as a LEGAL tresspass. but if the tenant renegs on rent, tresspass status suddenly flipflops, and the sherrif throws my couch on the sidewalk. therefore, the legal status of an activity CAN -SOMETIMES- *DEPEND* on fulfillment of a contractual agreement.
comparable..?
response possibility (2)
change design: the guilt files are not at all mentioned in the contract, they are mentioned in the user interface:
*USER! WARNING! SUCH'N'SUCH-A-CLIENT WANTS TO UPLOAD ILLEGAL CONTENT FROM YOU! WILL YOU AGREE? YES/NO?*. What does the RIAA lawyer click?
lawyer clicks no: disconnect.
lawyer clicks yes: he's a "PIRATE," and so is the RIAA!!
now, how could THAT fail?
-Sam
ps
(thanks, it's nice being trolled..glad somebody read my ideas
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer