Slashdot Mirror
Few Takers For RIAA's "Clean Slate"
gbulmash writes "In the wake of the RIAA's highly-criticized "Clean Slate" program, a recent article about P2P United reveals that the RIAA has only had 838 takers for their file swapping amnesty offer. That's less than 1/1000th of one percent of the estimated number of P2P users worldwide."
37 Ben Dovers
22 I.P. Freelys
20 Hugh Jasses
C'mon people, they are trying to run a business here, not deal with cranks.
As to be expected, why would anyone volunteer for this?
202-775-0101 ....
- - - - - - -
"All hail the glory of the Hypnotoad."
And how many of them will be sued next year after lapsing back into their MP3 addictions? Hmmmm...
do they think that i'm gonna turn myself in and possible be closely watched etc. when I can just keep on sharing files with almost 0% chance of getting caught!?? heh! this is the funniest thing i've ever heard. i'm gonna take my chances and keep on sharing ... (using PeerGuardian - you can never be too careful) ...
Investing forum
I would have thought that it would have been more than this. There's a lot of P2P sharers out there, and surely some of them wouldn't understand the ramifications of what they were doing. Then they see this, think "that's good, I won't get into trouble now", and get a clean slate. 838 is ridiculously low.
... if it turns out that those swappers where actually swapping KaZaA!
The IT section color scheme sucks.
...according to news reports, 52 out of 261 of the people sued have settled so far.
On the other other hand, this bit of news is brought to us by the RIAA themselves -- a continuation of their FUD PR stuntery.
On the other other other hand, all this still makes the RIAA look bad.
Good night, and screw the RIAA.
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
I think that one in a thousand is actually a pretty high rate. Considering the rather dubious ground that the law-suits are actually resting on, and the fact that this dubious ground has been at least mentioned in a lot of media, I'm not at all surprised to hear that 99.9% of people are at least waiting long enough to talk to their lawyers before caving in.
All us "geeks" know better than to jump at the chance to prostrate ourselves before the RIAA, let's give the rest of the world a little credit for common sense too.
lysergically yours
People aren't falling for the RIAA's line of bullshit. It's somewhat reassuring to know that only 1/1000th of one percent of the p2p using public aren't stupid enough to completely open themselves up to litigation. I wonder what kind of legal steps the RIAA might take after this development, though (increasing, decreasing prosecutions), and what might happen to those unfortunate 800-odd folks who did fall for it.
Did the RIAA at least send them a t-shirt with a nice target design on it? (your choice of in the back, or on the front)
[on the other hand, maybe the signees are lawyers setting up some sort of a legal honey pot.]
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Holy hell, that's several times as many people that were sued! Why would so many people go for this, when there wasn't any legal action yet? And, if I remember correctly, those who were sued were offered this "deal". Why didn't these people just wait to see if they were going to get sued, and THEN take the deal?
But the offer only applied to Americans. What's the fraction of Americans that have taken the offer?
Let's stick to useful statistics here please...
So for the P2P United businesses to become quote legitimate businesses end quote, they should act like the RIAA and the RIAA's constituents.
1. Sue their own customers.
2. "Offer" their artists (perhaps the programmers in this case?) unconscionable contracts along the line of "You agree to assign the authorship rights of your work to us. You will bear the entire financial risk of the marketing and reproduction of your work. In most cases we will receive the vast majority of the benefits of your work."
3. "Cook" their books so that any profits generated by their artists/programmers appear in the vaguest possible terms, again avoiding any requirement to actually pay the artists/programmers.
4. Control their customer's access to new and old works. Make it difficult/impossible for their customers to legally obtain works that aren't on the "top 40."
5. Accuse anyone who complains (or offers an alternative) of profound moral sins such as stealing from the artists.
6. Spend profits purchasing lobbying power to protect the above system.
7. Attack any organization or entity that appears to offer alternatives to the customers or artists.
8. Require the artists under threat of financial ruin to use the above system.
Wow. That's a great way to run a business. I'm sure that the P2P networks would be loved by everyone if they adopted to above "business plans."
I've got a few other words for Amy Weiss, but they are not fit for printing.
I bet I could interest them in 20% of some soon-to-be seized Nigerian oil money. Or maybe they'd just like to verify their Paypal or Citibank user name and password / PIN codes.
It will be very interesting to the next move made by the RIAA. Their whole 'shock and awe' campaign seems not to have rocked the boat much.
It has been said, but I will repeat it...when the 'average' person believes mp3 trading/sharing to be legal/moral/whatever, then the RIAA can threaten up the wazoo with minimal results.
At my school, a recent poll showed that well over the majority of students felt that mp3 sharing was 'ok to do' even though a much smaller percentage actually participated in the filesharing.
Seems to me, all the RIAA has done thus far is made itself look like the big, bad, wolf to the non-geek person.
Unlike the leadership of SCO and the RIAA most people doing P2P music trading are not smoking crack.
If you don't like what I write don't be a CS and mod it down. Refute it.
Yea I can't spell. So what is your point?
In other news, 838 copyright infringement lawsuits were initiated by the major record companies. RIAA spokesman, "We're doing out part, we said that the RIAA would not sue Clean Slate suck... er... members. We have no control over what the record companies do."
It was pretty clear to everyone that the "Clean Slate" program offered nothing to individuals. If you know the RIAA is coming after people, what's the difference between admitting guilt and just stopping?
Instead, the RIAA is just building a list of "admitted offenders" to do God-knows-what with later.
One thing the RIAA and company seem to have a hard time understanding is that there will always be another way of sharing content. Peer-to-peer file sharing is just a method out of hundred other. To stop filesharing you have to stop ALL traffic on the net and screen every mail delivered in the world.
Since I can burn my files onto a CDR and swap it with a friend instead, stopping P2P sharing through the various online services is not going to accomplish anything. Maybe they will succeed in stopping a promising communications protocol from being able to mature and start being used in other ways like in a distributed OS or other ways not yet used.
The only way to stop filesharing is to gain the trust and liking of the buyers so that they pay out of free will. RIAA has taken the opposite route which already has proven itself futile. One can only watch sadly when they destroy great technology for no good.
... actually has a computer at home? ... and how many are older then 5?
:)
sorry, couldn't resist
I think that one in a thousand is actually a pretty high rate.
Yes, but what they got was less than one percent of that.
In the metric system at least, 1% of "pretty high" is roughly equal to "quite low".
-- MarkusQ
Wow I didn't think there would be that many people that would actually fall for it. It is like going to a cop at a drug bust to ask if you can buy some of it.
the amnesty replies, half of which are probably fake.
Anyone who did do that would be pretty stupid and should probably deserve to be charged.
This is precisely the point. I know a lot of people who are somewhat uneasy about file sharing. Giving it bad publicity was probably their goal from the outset. Not that they're going to stop hardcore swappers who know several sites other than Kazaa, have each other's emails, know how to proxy sites, et c. but plenty of casual users will think twice about getting into it.
I'm sure that more than a few of those have been the notorious file sharer, Ivan Preseley Freely (I. P. Freely). Or Amanda HugNKiss and her roomate Hugh Jass.
Of course, the RIAA might actually want to keep the numbers down so they can argue more stringent methods are needed to curb filesharing.
personally meet the people who DID agree to settle. Then I promptly smack them in the back of their head and wonder why.
The other question is are these 838 people the ones that actually buy the things spammers sell ?
Seriously I am surprised anyone actually took this. Even if you were worried, and believed that the amnesty was worth something you could have checked for your name in the subpoena databases and if it wasnt there just stopped. Why expose yourself needlessly.
That is going under the assumption that ALL P2P useage is audio piracy... and that isnt true.
Thanks for spreading false information.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
the RIAA has only had 838 takers for their file swapping amnesty offer
I'd like to see the break down by name though. For instance, it would be interesting to see what percentage of them were named "D. McBride", "G. W. Bush", "B. Gates", "A. Coward", etc.
-- MarkusQ
I think that this statement comes from the "glass is 99,999/100,000 empty" viewpoint. I'm more of an optimist, and I prefer to look at it as 1e-5 full.
Dear CEO of RIAA, and all employees of RIAA, all supporters of RIAA and all stake and shareholders of FUCKING RIAA;
You malodorous little pustuled cunts, why don't you all shove Sonicare toothbrushes up your asses, only with krazy glue instead of toothpaste, and then let those tiny scrubbing brushes do their job?
Is the ONLY time you fucking pukes appear is to bash 12 year old girls coLLege funds? Or just piss on anyone meek anytime ? RIAA - you are a but a small worm, a lowlife, with no creativity, no originality and very little intelligence. YOU MUST FUCKING DIE
gahd - not enough sleep
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Isn't it completelly obvious to (practiclly) everyone that the extended olive branch was just a publicity gimmick? I say practiclly only because RIAA ends up shooting themselves in the foot again with more negative publicity. How many more times can one firm screw up before the snowball becomes an avalanche? Boycott RIAA is gonna go mainstream within months.
The real news in all this should be that things are going to get a lot worse before it gets better for RIAA.
RIAA Sues wrong person
P2P Music Sharing Remains Popular Despite RIAA
RIAA Sued For Amnesty Offer
I refuse to believe there are only 838 stupid people on the internet.
I guess the public-at-large is more savvy than we give them credit for. People saw the loophole in this "amnesty" offer glaring them in the face, and decided it wasn't a good idea. FYI, the loophole was(is?) that signing up only guarantees you won't be prosecuted by the RIAA; you're wide open to anyone else. And no one has enough faith in the RIAA to think that they would actually do something to protect you.
my $.02
-D
That's less than 1/1000th of one percent of the estimated number of P2P users worldwide.
The slashdot story perpetuates the same fallacy that the RIAA is constantly trying to promote, namely, that P2P == piracy. Not all of the P2P users worldwide need to be granted amnesty, because many have not done anything illegal. True, that 836 number is a tiny fraction of the number of pirates the RIAA estimates, but their numbers are skewed to help their cause. Still, ther are probably more than 836 people violating copyrights via P2P networks.
Don't forget that Friday is Hawaiian shirt day.
It's not really that funny is it?
Perhaps it's time the spam companies learned from the RIAA's bullying tactics. Copyright the "@" symbol (hey, despair Trademarked the :-(). Offer an amnesty program, where all you have to do is "opt-in" to be safe from their frivolous suits.
They would, of course, promise not to sell your email addresses, just share it with their "partners". Of course, the partners pay for the privelege of being one.
Dependable, Reliable Furnishings
mmmmh, porn...
Does someone wanna settle on behalf of all "default_user@kazaalite.tk" users? And the variants?
Seriously... why doesn't the RIAA just make the amnesty form into a business-reply card and put them in all the kids magazines?
That's less than 1/1000th of one percent of the estimated number of P2P users worldwide.
And yet, I'm sure they will somehow end up being taken for the same amount that the RIAA would sue all P2P users for combined, since they freely admit to illegal actions... Last I checked, an agreement made outside of legal context (ex: side betting, friendly wager, etc.) cannot be bound by the laws of the United States government.
Business \Busi"ness\, n.;
A scam in which all people involved perceive as beneficial...
It should be noted that of the 838, an astounding 773 had the name Hugh Jass, Phil McCrackin, Mike Hunt, Ben Dover, or Hugh Janus.
__ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
So I was going to go look for the number of employes the RIAA had, as I was betting on the fact that they probaly only have 838.
The interesting thing was, www.riaa.org is not coming up.
Thinking that this was just my internet connection, I travled to www.webperf.org for a 3rd party breakdown and I received a 130 second response time..
Damn, what a shame. *grin*
I'm guessing that the vast majority of P2P users are in one of two camps. Either A) They're still not aware of what exactly is going on (it's not like this has really gotten a lot of play in the mainstream press), or B) They're part of the "It's not going to happen to me" crowd.
Most of the people I know still download music without a second thought, and still don't consider this to be the horrible sin that the RIAA is stating it to be.
A third possibility is that some people, like the 12-year old who was sued, is still under the impression that by paying a subscription to KaZaA, they're in the clear to download music availible on that service.
In any case, it's still too early to tell if this is going to work or not. The more lawsuits the RIAA presses, the more coverage they'll get, and as evidenced thus far, it'll only drive the wedge between and the public further.
Matt
Does the name of this program remind anyone else of a line from the original Matrix?
...to which the obvious answer is...
Agent Smith: "We're willing to wipe the slate clean, give you a fresh start and all that we're asking in return is your cooperation in bringing a known terrorist to justice."
Neo: "Yeah. Wow, that sound like a really good deal. But I think I got a better one. How about I give you the finger... and you give me my FSCKING MP3s back?"
Unfortunately steps have been taken and are being taken to make sure most people cannot burn music files to CDR...
And really this has been the point to begin with--they don't care if some "technically savvy" people are able to trade music, but because the common stupid user can trade any music they want, they have to try to stop it. Basically if you use Linux of course YOU can burn music files... but have you tried burning music files on Windows?
I did, and so far they have at least blocked me from burning mp3 files to CD format through Windows--even when I used non-MS software. Basically the operating system blocked it by checking to see if the file was licensed first. This was particularly frustrating seeing as how I have mp3 files which I recorded myself... do I need software to create my own licenses for myself now?
Basically if only Linux users could trade or burn music, no one would care.
"he drew his sword Ringil that glittered like ice... and he wounded Morgoth with seven wounds..."
Declan McCullagh, Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: September 29, 2003
A newly launched peer-to-peer trade association has offered to sit down and negotiate with music industry lawyers, while it simultaneously denounced its adversaries as obsolete and "tyrannosaurical."
P2P United, a group of six peer-to-peer businesses, held a coming-out event Monday in Washington, D.C. The lobbying effort is designed to demonstrate to the U.S. Congress that peer-to-peer companies are legitimate enterprises that will abide by the law. The group is touting a code of conduct that promises to warn users of their software that copyright infringement is wrong, but does not offer to police the vast sprawl of peer-to-peer networks for illegal activities.
The members of P2P United that showed up at the event at the National Press Club included LimeWire, Blubster, Grokster and Streamcast Networks, which distributes Morpheus. (The other two participants are BearShare and eDonkey 2000.) Noticeably absent from P2P United is Sharman Networks, distributor of Kazaa.
"P2P United is here and intends to remain here as a presence in Washington to demonstrate not just with our words but with our actions that this is not a fly-by-night business," Adam Eisgrau, a veteran lobbyist who represents P2P United, said at the event.
However, other members of the lobbying effort at the event denounced the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)--which is targeting individuals in its legal efforts to stifle file swapping--in language rarely heard in policy circles.
"What the hell are these guys doing? Who do they think they are? For God's sake!" Wayne Rosso, president of Grokster, said. "This is absolutely reprehensible. I don't care what anyone says, but suing a 12-year-old girl is child abuse."
Eisgrau said the colorful language shouldn't hurt the peer-to-peer group's planned efforts to reach a deal with the RIAA. "If they're afraid of a few adjectives, even our willingness to talk with them won't save them," Eisgrau said.
"It is refreshing to see that P2P United is acknowledging that their members should be more active in educating their users about the consequences of illegal file sharing that is rampant on their networks, as well as the other risks these networks pose to personal privacy and security," the RIAA said in a statement. "But, let's face it, they need to do a whole lot more before they can claim to be legitimate businesses."
P2P United wouldn't give details on what kind of deal it would seek with the RIAA and other copyright holders except to say that it was looking for some sort of compulsory license or indirect payment system. One idea that's been floated is for Congress to levy a tax on high-speed Internet connections, with the proceeds split between the RIAA and peer-to-peer companies.
"It has been reacted to as if it were radioactive," Eisgrau said, talking about the suggestion of compulsory licenses. "That has to change. It is a legitimate set of strategies present in copyright law in many forms. It is a general subject that belongs on the table."
Eisgrau, who once worked for the American Library Association, said the idea was to impose "small levies which are spread widely and pretty invisibly" and noted that a previous copyright compromise in Congress resulted in a few cents "being attached to the cost of a blank tape."
NYTimes subscription bs required
MoFscker
I'm actually surprised that many people incriminated themselves.
www.samuraidreams.com - My Blog
www.samuraifiles.com - Get Some Videos Here
The confessed filesharers are nowhere near an impending campaign of surveillance and harassment! Many hundreds of thousands of repentant P2P users are dashing themselves on our walls as they try to sign up for amnesty! They welcome our benevolent reign over all intellectual property!
so... bash-2.05a$ echo "Suck my balls, you monkey-humping cunt-whore!"|rot13|mail -s cuntwhore amy@riaa.org
How many of the file swappers are actually under the age of 18, and thus not legally capable of executing a signed confession? What would a Notary Public have done if that 12 year old girl came in to get her confession notarized? "Can I see a driver's license please? Two forms of picture ID?"
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Well, I have 4 computers powering 8 CD-RWs... oh, wait, that's just one computer with a 32X burner... the RIAA has me all confused with their math!
Referencing A coupled cluster study of the 1 1A1g and 1 1B2u states of benzene and substituting reality for crap, inserting RIAA users and solving for responses we clearly see that the number of amnesty pleas was actually 1000 in every 10... Read the article Man!! and never match wits with a sicilian when death is on the line!!!
...only a very small amount of population are really that stupid, right?
I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.
Yes this is just the latest in a long line of self-serving propaganda. Stories of this ilk have only one intention and it's completely self-serving.
Scare the consumer into staying with an old business model. Only misinformed and gutless fall for this misguided and weak attempt and converting the masses.
What we as consumers are best exemplifying is civil disobedience on a virtual, grass roots level. Copyright infringement isn't stealing so it's hardly disobedience but it's an easy way to articulate the thought.
I have been downloading this and that since it was mostly ftps through napster and the like and from my experience the files available are just as plentiful than before. The RIAA propoganda is just that...pure bullshit meant to scare little kids and grandparents. I've yet to see the RIAA go after someone with the funds and knowledge to fight them. They're going after the easy marks and I'm not surprised.
Whne it's said and done it'll just be little kids and grandparents who buy the shitty music we are exposed to on a weekly basis.
Anyone who buys music is polishing the brass on the Titanic. It's going down and I'm loving every minute of it:D
You aren't free to do anything, until you've lost everything.
Or maybe they unlike most of slashdot are smart enough to realize that what they are doing is wrong (and I doubt that), illegal, and want to avoid the large fines that they could be charged with.
http://magnatune.com/
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
Yeah, I love getting stuff for free! Why the hell should I pay for movies, music, software, games, books, etc? Those are out dated business models, thus I should be able to have what ever I want for free!
Maybe they should go on tours to make lots of money, although like most people who mention how they support the artist by not buying their albums, I for one would never pay to see them.
Studies have found that 99,999 out of 100,000 Americans think the 100,000th guy is a dumbass.
-insert a witty something-
They are, however, offering to send undergarments with the aforementioned design
I looked at one or two of the subpoenas and the alleged infringements dated in Jun, Jul of 2003.
I asked my ISP how long they kept data for, and what was their retention policy. At first, they said none, but when I pushed they said three months, just in case.
Let your ISP know that your privacy is paramount, and NO logs should be generated! (but does this expose them because of safeharbor rules for ISPs?)
football? you mean that thing that american consumers watch religiously for the ads?
Just wondering....
I'm sure the RIAA will soon be issueing a press statement saying "Clearly, based on the small number of people who responded to our amnesty program, music piracy via P2P networks is not nearly as pervasive as we had initially thought. We now feel that there are, at most, only a few thousand people using P2P networks to obtain copyrighted works. It would also seem that P2P networks are not to blame for decreased music sales and lower profits that RIAA members have experienced over the past few years."
I mean.. that's what logically follows, right?
I am NOT a man!
I am a free number!
you mean that thing that american consumers watch religiously for the ads?
No, silly. It's a game us manly men play in which we put on padded clothing and tight pants, tackle each other, smack each other's hineys, and then go take long hot showers together. You know, manly stuff.
In the end it will be decided not in the courtrooms, but at kitchen tables across the country. We are heartened by the response we have seen so far.
This is precisely the point. I know a lot of people who are somewhat uneasy about file sharing. Giving it bad publicity was probably their goal from the outset.
I beg to differ. Getting parents and everyone else to make sure they don't have ANY music in the house that didn't come on RIAA-issued media at full retail price, that's been their goal from the outset. The idea isn't to combat piracy - though it's nice PR spin - but rather to criminalize the entire internet-as-distribution-channel concept. Except of course for 'legitimate' artists (theirs) through legitimate online services (their licencees), natch.
People are already swallowing it hook line and sinker too. Witness public acceptance of the royalty-paid blank CD concept, which is predicated on the assumption that there is no competition to the so-called major-labels, and never ever will there be. All music must be theirs after all; even if music copying *is* occurring, there's no room for doubt about who gets paid. Once they manage to get the encryption keys built into the consumer devices, every startup label and DIY-band will have to pay the big bux to get a CD key in order to have their discs be playable in consumer equipment. If they aren't frozen out entirely. Just wait till all the 'legit' D/L sites become 'RIAA Preferred Partners'
Your post sure sounds like you meant to refer to yourself and not the RIAA. If that was the case I would agree with everything you said.
You are person #10 to notice this person's mistake! Your family and Slashdot fans must be proud. *blush*
Don't some people have a problem with P2P United's code of conduct that they put out today? In their code, P2P United members (like Grokster and Morpheus) will all warn users that copyright infringement is prohibited. In effect, they're saying to the public, you've been warned that up/downloading is illegal, and it's not our fault you disregard the code. So P2P shifts the blame from themselves to the user (i.e., you and me). It's kind of obvious why they're doing this--to score points in Congress by being able to say "we're not breaking the law, some of our users are"--and ultimately to cut a deal with the record industry.
Mod parent +5, retarded.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
...and there have been dozens upon dozens of copyright-is-now-obsolete technologies in the past, each promising to make it impossible for copyright holders to make a cent, and each time, content (I hate that word) sales, distribution and quality have improved, usually dramatically.
As just one example, music has been available for free on the radio for decades, and yet people still buy music.
Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
It's like an amnesty for any speeding you may have done in the past, if you promise not to speed in the future, and higher punishment if you do. Except that only makes sense if you think the cops have measured you speeding, just not issued the ticket yet. Otherwise, well you've already gotten away with it. Why turn yourself in, although you won't be punished for it - this time?
Personally I'd like a list of those people. I've got some penis enlargers, herbal viagra, pheromones and cheap mortages to sell, not to mention some Nigerian money that needs laundering.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Studies have found that 99,999 out of 100,000 Americans thinks that "the other guys" are the dumbasses. The 100,000th knows that is the case.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
P0rn
Your mother wants you to get off her computer, kid.
Basically if only Linux users could trade or burn music, no one would care.
Unless Linux became mainstream, in which case they'd be back to the situation where any Joe Schmoe can trade or burn music.
Therefore it is in the interests of RIAA to stop free OSes from becoming mainstream.
You make the mistake of thinking you can educate the fundamental stupidity out of people. You can't.
An older buddy of mine got scared, called, and said that he would stop sharing files. They told him to delete everything and that he would not be charged. End of story. They never took his name, number, sent him a get-out-of-free card, or anything.
Someone should repeat that expiriment and record the phone call, making sure that somewhere in the exchange validating information is provided by the representative of the RIAA. That phone call (if legit) could provide amnesty for anyone if posted to the Internet. All one would have to do is delete their MP3s and invoke the phone call as their defense.
The reason that it can be true that 1+1 > 2 is that very peculiar nonzero value of the + operator
WTF are you talking about? You create a new audio CD layout in Nero, you drag your MP3s onto it, you put in a blank disc, click "burn," and wait. If you're going to troll, it would help if there was at least a small grain of truth to what you post.
The audio CD-R I burned from MP3s a couple of hours ago calls "bullshit" on your post. (I even did this on a WinXP SP1 system, which is allegedly the most evil of them all.)
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
Why compare the number of takers for an offer only available in the U.S. to the number of file sharers worldwide?
It's like feeling really safe because the number of murders/year in your town is less than 1/100000 of the total murders/year worldwide, or something.
I am not surprised that nobody took the riaa offer. what is the point to this? Why should I tell them who I am? If they want to come after me they will do it anyways and i do not want to tell them who i am and where I live.
Of course we could find that those 800 plus the 260 supoenaed were wholly responsible for all the illegal fire sharing going on and the rest of us are in fact sharing open licenced product and band released bootlegs.
I know I am.
You are a colossal idiot.
... and Nero is an exception. I think this has to do with the dll files they are relying upon. Sorry but this is the direction things are going in, and yes I realize a lot of it has to do with the fact that MS would rather you use THEIR cd burning software in XP, but you don't think this has anything to do with RIAA?
You can burn things in Nero--good for you, but at least think before you post.
"he drew his sword Ringil that glittered like ice... and he wounded Morgoth with seven wounds..."
Incidentally, I can burn music CDs on Windows 2000 only because I figured out which update blocks it: Windows Media Player. Honestly I didn't read the EULA, but basically now I won't install wmp 7.1 or later.
This was a frustrating experience for me as I had to reinstall Windows 2000 3 times in order to figure out what was going on (I thought it was hidden in some other updates).
Anyway, I guess now that I think about it, you're right in as far as this probably isn't a music copying issue as much as it is an attempt to do away with Roxio... under the guise of copyright protection it would be hard to punish.
"he drew his sword Ringil that glittered like ice... and he wounded Morgoth with seven wounds..."
The RIAA Giver
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
... so...how much is that in elephants please?
... so, how many employees does the RIAA have again? ;-)
what the one where girls prance about wearing armour and helmets because there scared of being hurt, instead of playing a full contact game like real football (the one where they use there feet hence the name) or rugby a bit like fake football but without the wimpy armour and increased violence
Saying Apple is better than MS is like saying Botulism is better than rabies.
Or is it too uncool in the U.S. to go to the public library?
Amanda Huggenkiss
Anita Bath
Al Coholic
Hm, I'm sure I forgot some...
-uso.
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
The settlements, which do not include any admission of wrongdoing, require Internet users to destroy copies of illegally downloaded songs and agree to "not make any public statements that are inconsistent" with the agreement.
Dear World:
The RIAA is Mother.
The RIAA is Father.
{signed}
52 Signatures of Settlement
Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
According to research at an English university, 100% of Americans are dumbasses.
That's 838 more than I thought would sign up. I'm actually quite amazed by the number, the RIAA should be touting this all over the news.
If they take the clean slate route, then how are they supposed to continue downloading music they haven't paid for?
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
It's not a t-shirt, it's a pair of pants, and the target is on the back...
It'll be a cold day in hell when I sign up for any RIAA amnesty program! It doesn't matter how many P2P networks they shutdown, monitor for piracy, etc. They'll never get em all! They won't even come close. All they'll do is tick more people off. Speaking of which, it'll also be a cold day in hell the next time I buy anything created by a member of the RIAA. I'd rather be tied to a chair and thrown down some steps than see another penny of my money go to the RIAA.
I don't normally go out of my way to keep Windows Media Player up to date (it mainly gets used to preview AVIs I'm editing), but I have WMP 9 on one of my home machines...the one that burned the CD from MP3s last night.
Given that Roxio's CD-burning software hasn't been all that hot since version 4.something, maybe that's a Good Thing. (That's why you almost always see Nero bundled with CD and DVD burners now, instead of ECDC.)
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
How many spent more money on CDs this month than they spent last month?
Because it's that issue, and nothing to do with file sharing or any other indirectly related matter that's the RIAA's problem.
All the misery that they're causing, all of the PR gaffs that they keep making, it all counts for nothing unless people start spending more.
So, let's hear it, RIAA. You've built up an industry that controls the channels of distribution so well that you can apparently tell how many unlicensed CDs are being sold (or so you keep telling us when you lobby Congress to set you up as the Fourth Branch). I'm sure that you must have the figures that show how much your sales have increased since you started bitchslapping your own customers.
Let's see those figures.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Humm, from your writing style I am guessing you come from this site.
Go back to crying with your fellow clue depraved thieves about how the RIAA is "t3h ghay," you are sticking it to "the man," using what ever abusrd reasoning for justifying your stealing, and how evil the lables and the artists are for wanting you to pay for music instead of stealing it.
I doubt Nero is the only exception...didn't try cdrecord, but it should work.
FWIW, I just tried burning some MP3s in WMP9 (first time ever). The first time through, it didn't work...probably had something to do with my having turned off the built-in CD-burning capability. Turning that back on and giving it a blank CD-RW let it put an album's worth of MP3s on a CD. The process was a bit slower than Nero, but it worked just fine--no DRM roadblocks.
I hate to disappoint you, but sometimes there really isn't a conspiracy around every corner.
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
Hard to be when the insults are childish and use curse words after just about every other word.
For example, your "RIAA must die" bit is quite unoriginal and very redundant. The same can be said for your curse filled rant. The "very little intelligence" part pretty much applies to you, besides the intelligible part about the 12 year old girl and just about all of your post, you seem to have bought the propaganda that the RIAA was suing the girl and not her parents.
I could go on, but I won't. Hopefully you get the point.
Might technically be, but think about the logic behind this move before blowing it off as "plainly illegal - so what's the point?"
The government pays for these libraries to purchase CDs so they can be loaned out to anyone who asks for a library card. There's no real limit on how often you can check a CD back out after the first time you borrow it, and no restrictions on your personal listening while you've got it checked out.
Yet, if you copy it (allowing others to borrow the original, and possibly even saving the library from spending money to purchase a second copy to loan out), then you're breaking the law and subject to punishment by the government.
Hmm.....
Wouldn't the CD be the property of the taxpayers whose money goes to the library lending it out? I'm not sure exactly how that works, but I work in a public library and could find out if anyone's interested in knowing. It seems to me, though, that library materials are the legal property of the taxpaying public. Just my $0.02 worth...
Help protect civil rights from abuse by the TSA - visit TSA News Blog.
http://www.tsanewsblog.com
Strange because the burning engine in WindowsXP is licensed from Roxio
Ahh... good question. If they are, spam loses all profitability when they get sent to jail. This could mean the end of spam!
Error 666 - Satanic SCO code found in your Linux kernel.
Yes, but with CDRs you wouldn't have near the amount of sharing that happens now. The RIAA knows it won't stop all sharing, but certainly you can see where making sharing more difficult would be in their best interest.
I find it quite unlikely that the RIAA is going to succeed in stopping a promising communications protocol. If a legitamit need comes along that P2P will fill, someone will jump on it. It's not like the concept is somehow going to disappear.
You cannot stop sharing because there will always be people who will want to get something for nothing. This is like saying that the only way you will stop car theft is to gain the trust of buyers so that they pay out of free will.
In addition, to quote someone else who posted on this topic, "Would you look down upon a grocer that prosecutes someone for shoplifting even if they actually buy things from time to time?" I can just see that now, "Your honor, I was just taking this food to see if I like it, this helps them because I come back later and buy more of the stuff that I liked...besides their stuff is over priced and their chain is responsible for clubbing baby seals." To the RIAA these people are not buyers, they are thieves. Just because you distrust or dislike a vendor does not justify stealing their stuff. Likewise not being able to afford the stuff is not a justification either.
You may not approve of their methods, but the RIAA has every right to attempt to prevent/stop the wholesale theft of their material. In fact, lately the RIAA has been doing the right thing, that is going after people who are sharing the material. These are people that are clearly doing the wrong thing, unlike the grey area of downloading the material (i.e. you may actually own the album).
This is because the quality (audio) of radio sucks, and you don't get to listen to the song you want when you want. Plus with radio the RIAA gets money for each song played.
It does not make sense to compare radio with file sharing. File sharing results in perfect copies. With file sharing none of the money goes to the RIAA companies.
I think the RIAA has much to fear from freely available perfect digital copies of content that is extremely portable, costs nothing to reproduce, and is extremely easy to reproduce. After all, why would people bother to pay for CDs if they can get the -exact- equivalent for free?
Never before in history has this been possible.
Maybe I'm living in the past... my CD burner is 12x but you have no idea how frustrating it was to find an error telling me to go get a license for my music when I had just burned a CD a month ago (this whole incident was some time ago). And then reinstalling windows so many times (and I don't care what anyone says, installing windows takes me longer than Linux)
But if the post about Roxio licensing Windows CD burner is true, I have NO idea why I was blocked from burning CDs. They even told me to select an item from a menu that didn't even exist, so I knew it had to be something Windows was doing. Maybe it makes sense if WMP updated a dll which was used by my burning software (considering that this Roxio-Microsoft relationship is true).
On a side note, I didn't know cdrecord worked on Windows. cdrecord has always worked for me
"he drew his sword Ringil that glittered like ice... and he wounded Morgoth with seven wounds..."
dont do the download music shit to my computer scene, buttfucking retard. music created in the past decade or two doesnt interest me, and the shit i like is mostly not available anyway.
so piss off and fuckoff.
and look at you and your fucking RIAA supporting ass. you probably support software patents and criminalization of various other things.
too bad when something isnt fucking novel its not worth protecting. but wait, fuckheads who cant produce anytihng novel, such as yourself, generally bitch and fucking whine to criminalize casual behaviors to feel good about being a complete fucking loser. it aint so bad, is it loser?
your boyfriend needs another round of anal sex. oh, wait, you are a sexless supressed fucking lame ass nerd, not even up to getting assplay yet.
go rub one off on a shitney smears pic, fuckhead.
After all, why would people bother to pay for CDs if they can get the -exact- equivalent for free?
Convenience: the exact reason people buy Linux distributions when they can download ISO images on-line. The same reason iTunes can sell a "free" mp3 for $.99
Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
I think many people buy the boxed sets because they want to support their distro, or are in a rush (i.e. need it right now). Others do it because they don't know they can get it online, have very low bandwidth connections, or they want support. I think very few people with highspeed broadband purchase the CDs out of convenience. The fact that Red Hat is getting rid of the in store boxes should be a good indicator for how often the boxed sets are purchased. Another indicator is seeing all those out of date boxes on store shelves and in bargain bins...
The point is, is that there is some perceived value in addition to the convenience of purchasing the CDs. Even so, I'd be willing to gamble that the vast majority of installed linux distros were downloaded for free.
I'm interested to see how well the online offerings work. However, once all music is digitally distributed, the convenience factor might be greatly diminished. Unless of course they cripple the tracks in some way to prevent distribution, however I don't think that would go over so well.
The fact that Red Hat is getting rid of the in store boxes should be a good indicator for how often the boxed sets are purchased.
Well, that and the fact that retail store shelf distribution is obsolete and fantastically expensive.
Even so, I'd be willing to gamble that the vast majority of installed linux distros were downloaded for free.
It's possible. I'd be willing to believe that a significant number of them were purchased, however, especially when they are used in businesses.
I'm interested to see how well the online offerings work.
They seem to work fine for now, it's just that nobody is actually using it because they have concluded, incorrectly, that distributing something on the Internet automatically reduces its value to zero. The contrary is actually true: the fact that it is available on line increases its value.
However, once all music is digitally distributed, the convenience factor might be greatly diminished.
It's almost assuredly going make more and better music available to more people more often and less expensively.
Business isn't willing to pay for products, innovation and careers, so we get brands, mortgage commercials and layoffs.
... and Nero is an exception. I think this has to do with the dll files they are relying upon. Sorry but this is the direction things are going in, and yes I realize a lot of it has to do with the fact that MS would rather you use THEIR cd burning software in XP, but you don't think this has anything to do with RIAA?
I have few doubts that you actually know what you're talking about. I have burned audio CD's from mp3's with almost every CD-burning utility available on the market, all in Windows XP, with all the updates and service packs. I've used Nero, Easy CD Creator (versions 4 all the way up through 6), Windows Media Player (just this past weekend, version 9, in fact), and a couple other that aren't popular enough to even mention. It has nothing to do with DLL's. If you can't burn an audio CD in Windows, obviously you're dumber than the vast majority of the "song-stealing" public who burns their CD's without any problems.
"It's better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it." ~ Christian Slater, True Romance
Hello, I'm one of the chief advisors to the department of cybercrime. I'm considered an expert in my field and have been involved with hacking and cybercrimes on the information super highway for many years now.
Well it's reassuring to see that there is only 838 P2P users in the USA.. and now they all turned themselves over to the authorities. They had it coming! No wonder the RIAA was going broke with all those thieves stealing songs on the Internet!
I'm working towards more laws to stop stealing music online. There should be a law that says your puter will get blown up if you download illegal stuff. ISPs can encode the header of each IP packet that gets sent on the Internet and route it through the FBI or CIA headquarters where the supercomputers (CRAY or whatever) can check the packets for legality before passing them onto the recipient. If the packets are illegal, then the CRAY can send a 1000 Amp signal back through the wires to the offenders phone line or DSL or cable modem, and it will completely short out the CPU circuits and destroy the puter. I'm going to make this recommendation to top level management at our next meeting..
WMP will not ever tell you to "obtain a license" for your media unless the media you already have is DRM'd.
There is a slightly annoying box that pops up at some point which tells you that you should check your music for legality before ripping it, but that rarely pops up.
Please don't post random bullshit about "why WMP sucks." There's already enough FUD out there about it.
Also: Roxio did not license burning tech from Microsoft, it was the other way around. Please make at least a minor attempt to get your facts straight. WMP even says that some portions were licensed from Roxio.
If you find yourself constantly reinstalling Windows, you have problems. An exception can be made in the case of W95/98/SE, but if you have NT, 2k, or XP, you should never have to reinstall unless you start fiddling around with OS core components that you need to stay away from until you've developed an appropriate level of maturity. Understand that if you fiddle with core components in Windows, something WILL crash, and you WILL have to reinstall.
This signature does not exist. It has never existed. It is all a figment of your imagination.
I wish I had a screen shot to show you, but unfortunately I'm not willing to reinstall windows just to prove it! And I never said "Windows Media Player sucks" I just kept it updated. I was originally using wmp 9 beta which was fine. It was after wmp 9 officially came out and had an update when I started having this problem:
1) Drag mp3 file over to CD layout (Easy CD Creator 4.05 to be exact--with patches)
2) System pauses (I discovered this pause depends on how big the mp3 file is because I have some personal recordings which are quite short)
3) Message window pops up saying something about "how to obtain a license" from some menu item (which didn't exist).
Of course I went through Roxio first to figure out why magically I was having this problem only after being able to burn CDs a couple months earlier. I still have no idea how to get rid of this problem AFTER installing wmp, so I really don't know what you mean when you say I shouldn't have to reinstall my operating system. It was the only way to replace or undo whatever wmp had done--uninstalling wmp did NOT fix the problem.
I can understand people getting upset about me posting a poorly thought-out reason behind why Microsoft would put this in their update... but believe me when I say I'm surprised about how people are reacting to this. I naturally assumed I wasn't alone.
"he drew his sword Ringil that glittered like ice... and he wounded Morgoth with seven wounds..."
And they called me a troll...
I don't believe you. At least I'm willing to admit things I don't know. But I KNOW you didn't use Easy CD Creator 4.whatever on Windows 2000 running wmp 9 final version with all the updates, because that's when I had my problem.
Sorry for jumping to the conclusion that MS wanted to start snuffing out Roxio... I still think that's what they were doing which is why Roxio decided to make a deal.
"he drew his sword Ringil that glittered like ice... and he wounded Morgoth with seven wounds..."
I detailed what happened to me when I tried to burn a CD here:
t ml
http://angelo.freeshell.org/computer/docs/drm.h
"he drew his sword Ringil that glittered like ice... and he wounded Morgoth with seven wounds..."
I don't believe you.
Then you're an idiot, as well as being wrong. I never said I used it on Windows 2000 (although, now that I think about it, I DID), I said I used it on WinXP.
"It's better to have a gun and not need it than need a gun and not have it." ~ Christian Slater, True Romance
Very funny. I burn mp3's with WMP every week without any license challenges. Try this Mr. Uber hacker:
Select the mp3s you want to burn
Right click (requires two button mouse)
Burn to CD
Click slightly confusing button labeled "Burn"
Bask in your leet hacker skills, bypassing the imaginary DRM in Windows.