Slashdot Mirror
Inquiry Into RIAA's Piracy Crackdown Tactics
MongooseCN writes "Sen. Norm Coleman started an inquiry to check the RIAA's tactics on attacking online music swappers. He believes the RIAA's tactics may not be taking into consideration the damage they do to innocent people. It's good to know that someone remembered people in the US have Rights." As a former roadie, Senator Coleman doesn't oppose file sharing penalities, he merely wants to make sure the punishment fits the crime.
" What difference does it make how the RIAA determines that you are stealing the music?"
No music theft has occured in any of the cases/whatever that the RIAA is trying to drum up. What is allegedly involved is copyright infringement, which is a different thing from theft.
You're wrong on one count:
If "copyright infringement" is too many syllables for you, use a less loaded term like sharing. But please do not help the RIAA propagate its spin. It's doing fine on its own.
Send you ideas, thanks, whatever to Norm here:
m
http://www.senate.gov/~coleman/contact/index.cf
This is what I sent, short and simple:
Thank you for taking a stand against the ridiculously strong-armed tactics that the RIAA is taking against innocent people. $15K to $250K per song is "Cruel and Unusual"
moo
you are correct about the search enghine student, I was being vague; I apologize. I meant in the initial round of filings the sharers who were sharing 5,000 + music files there wasn't much leeway with.
unfortunately in the search engine case, there wasn't as much media hype because it simply affected only that one student. The tech world was pretty informed on it, however the 'mass sheep' were not for the most part. This case is completely different because it affects so many and is a big media story.
albeit [IMHO anyhow], the public would still be somewhat in the dark if TechTV and the like hadn't gone digging thru the legal system to find what suits the RIAA had brought up.
Fear Breeds Knowledge
I don't know whether this is funny or insightful.
:)
Both, I guess
And you know what, not a terribly bad idea
I'm not certain that I will immediately start stealing, BUT---given the 'powers that be' disdain for my rights, why should I give two hoots about the RIAA rights?
Already, I don't believe that there should be copyrights on music, and certainly not for more than a couple of years. I know that I should 'fear the law', but, unlike some of you slashbots, I don't believe that legal code=moral code.
As the RIAA practices become less and less reasonable, so shall mine.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
>Explain what copyright infringment is and why
>it's bad without using any concept of stealing or
>theft. I can't do it. I don't think you can,
>either.You cannot use the concept of paying
>people for their hard work if you enjoy the
>fruits of their labor, since not doing that is
>stealing.
Copyright ionfringement is creating a new copy of something which you are not allowed to do. That is, you gained something you should ne have been allowed to gain.
Theft has an additional part, which is that not only did you gain something, the one you stole from lost his copy of it (since there was not any copying involved creating a second copy).
In addition, copyright infringment works on non physical objects while theft works on physical ones (well, at least normally).
Finally, copyright infringement is limited in time, after a certain time (which is definately to long in my opinion right now), the copying IS suddenly allowed. If any copying would be stealing, how come it suddenly stop being theft just because the copyright expired, it is still the exact same copying.
It is also worth noticing that copyright infringment is NOT directly connected to money or value since even if there is no selling for money or other value transaction, it is STILL copyright infringement to to copy something you don't have the right to copy (even if someone holding the copyright for example is giving away copies for free which makes it very hard to claim the equality of theft in such a case, while it is still copyright infringement).
First, file sharing is not stealing, according to the US Supreme Court. It is copyright infringement, which is a different crime. Nobody is hijacking truckloads of CD's here. Get it right.
Second, This seems to be a case of making the Crime fit the Punishment. People who committed no crime at all are just as likely to be punished by the irresponsible and confiscatory actions of the RIAA as those who do. The industry's remedy for this seems to be to declare them crimainals anyway.
Bush got more votes, so Gore lost. Simple as that. Get over it, quit whining and move on.
How soon they all forget.
Gore won the popular vote - he had more ballots with his name on them.
Bush won the electoral college - he won more states.
'Sheep, thought I.' - Anthony Burgess
-72
-Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music.
I live in Saint Paul, MN. Norm Colemam was our mayor for quite some time. Having been involved with local politics here to some degree, let me tell you this:
Norm Coleman is a self-serving, deal-making, conniving snake-in-the-grass. I don't trust Norm (or as we say here, with a nasal east-coast twang: 'Naaam') further than I can throw him.
Whatever it is he's trying to pull, don't get yourself comfortable with the idea that he's fighting for you. Because he ain't. He's doing it for pure political gain.
Sadly, he defeated Mondale, who replaced a *true* hero, Paul Wellstone. Paul was a real fighter. Norm is a crook just like the rest of them.
RIAA's Hit List
Want of the majority out weighs the need of a few, eh? Everyone's out of the majority in one issue or another. If every minority gets killed, everyone dies.