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."
Stop pirating music assholes. D'uh.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
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 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
Sadly, that is not how it works. The RIAA is after IP addresses, not usernames. They begin downloading a file from someone with K-Lite's username (or any other) and then check to see what IP they are connected to. At that point, they have enough information to go to the user's ISP with the same pretty little subpoena that gets sent to everyone else.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it doesn't seem like this would do too much good. I suppose, as another user suggested, one could simply disable the sharing of files, but then again, that just gives RIAA an easier win. Oh well....off to Gnutella!
-csa
Well in Australia right now we have quite a few watchdogs such as the ACCC (Australian Competition and Consumer Commision) which closely monitor attempted changes to the law that restrict the rights of consumers too much, for instance they stepped in the case of Sony vs. Stephens saying that modchips should be legal. We do have a Digital Agenda Act, which is similar to the DMCA, however I do not know if it is as loose in granting supoenas as the American legislation. I'm sure that if the RIAA tried to jump those measures, the ACCC would have something to say about it.
Just a little point of note: I live in Belgium, and I've yet to hear anything about the implications of these recent battles here, but I will note that three years ago, during the Napster era, the government here actually took matters completely into their own hands, and raided the houses of over 20 users of that software, taking custody of computers. I haven't heard any follow-up on those raids, but I'd take this lesson from them: if you live in Europe, or moreover, a country like Belgium with lax warrent and search laws, be cautious about how much your activity exposes you. And never forget, in looking at the battle between ISP's, etc. and the RIAA in the US, the level of cooperation in many of these nations between the governments and monopolies in major industries, particularly, oh, what was it? Oh yes, the Telecom/Internet industry...
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!
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.
from the RIAA:
Nowhere to Hide--Compliance is Now Worldwide
Because piracy is an international problem, RIAA has joined with the International Recording Media Association (IRMA) and other groups to combat this problem worldwide. (IRMA represents the world's leading replicators of optical media.) Recently IRMA launched the world's first Anti-Piracy Certification/Compliance Program for the manufacture of CDs, DVDs and CD-ROMs.
Similar to RIAA's domestic guidelines, this global initiative is designed to help manufacturing plants establish procedures to reduce publishing pirated material. It was developed with input and support from the IRMA Anti-Piracy Coalition, comprised of optical media replicators, and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), the Business Software Alliance (BSA), the Software Information Industry Association (SIIA), the Interactive Digital Software Association (IDSA) and the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI).
When IRMA announced its new certification/compliance program, Scott Bartlett, Sony DADC's Vice President, Customer and Industry Relations, emphasized the importance of the program saying, "It's the right thing to do. Writers and artists, whether recording artist or motion picture producer, have the right to be paid. We have a responsibility as a major supporter of RIAA and MPAA, and as a replicator, to be at the forefront of this program - to ensure that copyrights are protected."
also:
Buyer Beware--The Six Deadly Sins of CD Rip-offs
The packaging has blurry graphics, weak or bad color.
The package or disc has misspelled words.
The price is often way below retail value.
The record label is missing or it's a company you've never heard of.
It has cheaply made insert cards, often without liner notes or multiple folds.
The sound quality is often poor or inconsistent.
so logically... if you weigh the same a a duck.... you're made of wood.... and therefore a witch... and will be BURNED!!!
Americans are not the majority of internet users, by any stretch of the imagination: http://www.koehler-visuals.com/countries_online.ht m.
What source did you base your comment on? Of were you just making up facts?
Incidently, those numbers are from the end of 2001, grossly outdated in the Internet context. Here's a more up-to-date (for the most part) and way more elaborate list from the 2002 CIA factbook. It's also apparently more conservative, since the numbers quoted for the USA and Germany are both lower, significantly so for the USA (165 instead 185 millions). I doubt the number of users has fallen in either country in the last two years...
... I'd wager that copyright violation is more common here than in the USA, at least that's the impression I sometimes get from Internet boards: I've seen lots of youths and young people who say copyright violation is wrong (and act accordingly), while I don't think I've met any German computer user under the age of 25 who does not, on occasion, commit thought theft. On the other hand, broadband Internet access and flat fee services used to be rare around here, although that's gotten better to a point where I assume (I'm sure there's data) broadband usage is on about the same level as in the USA.
Anyway, it's fairly save to say that if every American user turned off the file sharing option, it'd have a tremendous effect on the global filesharing equations, even if there are more European than American nodes[1]. Also Europe seems to be heading a similar route with the EUCD - which would leave the Asian nodes.
[1] Which isn't necessarily true - there probably are more or less P2P users per 1000 Internet users in Europe than in the USA. Interesting question actually
Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
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.
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.
You're in error, at least in the U.S. The No Electronic Theft Act clearly covers copyright infringement as a criminal violation:
[*2] SEC. 2. CRIMINAL INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHTS.
(a) DEFINITION OF FINANCIAL GAIN- Section 101 of title 17, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the undesignated paragraph relating to the term 'display', the following new paragraph:
"The term 'financial gain' includes receipt, or expectation of receipt, of anything of value, including the receipt of other copyrighted works.'.
(b) CRIMINAL OFFENSES- Section 506(a) of title 17, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
(a) CRIMINAL INFRINGEMENT- Any person who infringes a copyright willfully either--
"(1) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain, or
"(2) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $ 1,000 shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, United States Code. For purposes of this subsection, evidence of reproduction or distribution of a copyrighted work, by itself, shall not be sufficient to establish willful infringement.'.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
somebody else already did. it's more efficient not to have to look through all of them though.
I didn't see a KazaaLiteUser@Kazaa either.
I did find a mike@Kazaa. The subpoena lists NINE copyrighted songs that his copy of Kazaa offered for download from his computer. That's like 2/3 of a CD. Keith Epstein, head of Mike's ISP, has to make the painful decision of whether or not to fight the subpoena.
It should be noted that the lawyer who sent the subpoena, Yvette Molinaro, is expecting email replies from the ISPs to dmca@msk.com, or phone calls to (310) 312-3297. This is all information in the public domain. I'm just pointing stuff out.
I trust your comment was in jest, if not:
Come on, this is the EFF. You should go out and take a look at what they have done to date to protect your online rights...
Here is what they are doing right now:
http://www.eff.org/Legal/active_legal.html
My suggestion for all is to follow the links on the EFF site to write to your congressperson and possibly make a donation to the EFF...
You do get a pretty cool T-Shirt