Slashdot Mirror


RIAA Extends Legal Action

shystershep writes "An article at InfoWorld tells how the RIAA 'is filing 41 new lawsuits and sending 90 lawsuit-notification letters this week, adding to the 341 lawsuits filed and 308 notification letters sent since September. The RIAA has settled with 220 file-sharers as a result of lawsuits, lawsuit-notification letters and subpoenas. In addition, 1,054 users have submitted affidavits as part of the RIAA's amnesty program.' The RIAA also claims that its tactics are actually working -- to increase awareness and reduce online piracy."

41 of 600 comments (clear)

  1. clear by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 5, Funny

    The message is now clear: Online piracy has failed!

    1. Re:clear by Killean · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, I think the message is now "just share with people you can trust, not the whole world".

      Between my coworkers and I, we have enough music to last us the rest of the decade.

      --
      My new catch phrase is: "I NEED A NEW CATCH PHRASE, BABY!"
    2. Re:clear by turnstyle · · Score: 5, Insightful
      "Actually, I think the message is now "just share with people you can trust, not the whole world".

      Between my coworkers and I, we have enough music to last us the rest of the decade."

      You may want to reclassify them as "friends" rather than "coworkers" -- you might find that your employer is not inclined to remain your friend if ever confronted with this issue...

      --
      Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
    3. Re:clear by Simonetta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, I think the message is now "just share with people you can trust, not the whole world".


      This is so true. I now have an extra 80 gig hard drive nearly filled with MP3 music that I freely share with my co-workers.

      I'll often go to the library and just grab 30 CDs off the shelf, bring them home, and rip them into MP3 (while getting the song titles from CDDB). All lot of titles I haven't heard even once and about 2/3rds I just erase {the '1000 Accordians Play The Beatles' wasn't as good as I thought it would be). But, there's lots of incredible World Music that I would have never known existed without using this method.

      In a few years the RIAA will get its wish and people will stop trading MP3 files over the net. They will instead trade 100 gigabyte hard drives each filled with 2000 albums in 192kbps MP3 format with full titles and scanned cover art. With blank 4.7gig DVD disks hovering around $1 each and DVD burners nearing $100 (and sure to be increasing in quality), people will just trade whole genre collections on hard disk and copy the albums they like onto cheap DVDs.

      But that's not the real issue. Eventually people will get bored with non-interactive 20th century music frozen into song units and start exploring ways to customize pre-recorded music.

      The music industry will be the last to realize that people will actually pay money (some money at least) for music that they can remix at home and change the instrumentation, vocals, levels, and so other parameters. Something like you can do now with General MIDI files and classical music instrument synthesizers.

    4. Re:clear by Jardine · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So when should the RIAA start targetting libraries? They're obviously aiding dirty, dirty piraty scoundrels such as yourself.

      Thanks for the idea though. Section VIII of the Canadian copyright act makes it perfectly legal for me to go to the library, borrow a bunch of CDs, copy them for my personal use, and then return them. Distributing those copies would be copyright infringment because then it wouldn't be for personal use.

    5. Re:clear by The+Phantom+Buffalo · · Score: 5, Funny
      the '1000 Accordians Play The Beatles' wasn't as good as I thought it would be

      I just have to know, how good did you think it would be?

  2. Of course... by GearheadX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... this is what their records and statistics may claim. And as we all know the RIAA is a bastion of honesty, forthrightness and righteousness.

  3. I can't wait to see them.. by grub · · Score: 5, Funny

    If their previous lawsuits are any indication we'll see them suing:

    A 4 year old Eskimo girl.

    A parapalegic with Tourettes.

    97 year old twin sisters who still listen to their tube powered RCA radio.

    A man who has been in a coma since 1972.

    The Vatican.

    That crazy guy outside my office who plays a harmonica.

    The estate of J. Edgar Hoover.

    Some T-Rex fossils in the NY Museum of Natural History.

    Antarctica.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:I can't wait to see them.. by Skyshadow · · Score: 4, Informative
      - That crazy guy outside my office who plays a harmonica.

      Actually, that's not the RIAA's area. That's the ASCAP (I swear I'm not making that up -- it stands for American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers). They sue bars who have cover bands who don't pay for protectio... er, a performance license. If your crazy guy is playing anything remotely copyrighted, he'd better watch out or that wild paranoia may become justified.

      Article in today's Chronicle about them (I linked to it elsewhere in this thread, too -- it's my "Jesus, I'm not really surprised, but Jesus..." item).

      ASCAP. Ass cap. Huh huh.

      --
      Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    2. Re:I can't wait to see them.. by Feztaa · · Score: 4, Funny

      I want to see that trial on pay-per-view.

      I'd just download it.

    3. Re:I can't wait to see them.. by The+Munger · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well here is the story of retiree Ernest Brenot, 79, of Ridgefield, Washington. He doesn't own a computer, nor does he know how to use one. The RIAA claims he likes Vanilla Ice, U2, Creed, Linkin Park and Guns N' Roses.

      Where the hell do they get these lists from? They can't have got something like that from ISP records.

      --
      Refuse to make a statement in your sig!
  4. Quick hide the first born by FiveNines · · Score: 4, Funny

    The RIAA are coming for the children!

  5. One person doesn't even use a computer! by jtnishi · · Score: 5, Informative
    The article on yahoo mentions one of the persons getting sued doesn't even know how to use a computer.

    These are getting seriously out of hand...

    1. Re:One person doesn't even use a computer! by laird · · Score: 4, Informative

      "one of the persons getting sued doesn't even know how to use a computer."

      It's pretty simple. To quote from the article:

      Brenot and her husband said their son-in-law briefly added Internet service to their own cable television account while living with the couple because Comcast Cable Communications Inc. said it would add a surcharge to send separate bills to the same mailing address.

      "There's a mistake in this case," Dorothy Brenot said. "We're innocent in all of this, but I don't know how we're going to prove it."

      It's a pretty simple situation. The son-in-law set up broadband access, billed to the Brenots. He then downloaded and shared tons of music (774 titles, according to the article), and the RIAA found him and logged his IP address. Then the ISP said that the IP address was assigned to the Brenots, so they are the ones whose name is on the lawsuit. IANAL, but this sounds just like the cases where someone gets a parking ticket based on the license plate of the car, even though someone else parked the car illegally. At least where I live, if you prove that the other person was the one that parked illegally, they pay the ticket.

      This is like pretty much all of the other "I didn't do it" cases. Someone was paying for a broadband account that someone else was using, so they got sued for what the other person did. This isn't terribly interesting except to journalists looking for a catchy, if misleading, story, since it's a pretty obvious situation -- I can't think of a way that the RIAA could _avoid_ these sorts of errors, since there's no way for them to know who's actually using the computer, just who's paying for the broadband connection, until they file the lawsuit.

      What _would_ be interesting is if the RIAA sued in a case where _nobody_ was doing any illegal file sharing. But so far, out of 382 lawsuits, I haven't heard of any case where that's being claimed. Of course, anything can happen...

  6. How many again? by Bagels · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Considering the number of filesharing users out there, 1,054 takers on the amnesty program is fairly pitiful, actually. What would be more interesting would be the number of people who have quietly dropped off of the networks due to the RIAA's threats... but new arrivals will probably mask any people leaving this way in terms of the overall filesharing "population."

    --
    --- Bwah?
    1. Re:How many again? by laird · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, according to Slyck, the population of FastTrack users is down about 1m users (it's current around 3.5M from peaks of around 4.5M a while back). Of course, slyck doesn't say how they arrive at that number, but since they're an active promoter of p2p, you wouldn't expect them to make the number artificially low. I'd call a drop of 1/3rd pretty substantial. :-)

  7. Season of Giving by Sonny+Yatsen · · Score: 5, Funny

    The RIAA has decided that the holiday season is a season of giving...subpeonas.

    --
    My postings are informational and does not constitute legal advice. Act on it at your risk.
  8. They are working by Cyberllama · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The number of people on the big file-sharing networks is half of what it was before the law suits. But as kazaa declines, edonkey and bittorrent grow. If they're stated goal is to destroy kazaa, then mission accomplished. But if they want to stop file sharing, they'll have to destroy the internet.

    1. Re:They are working by dollar70 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      There are plenty of other special interest groups working on that too. Software/method patents, copyrights, DRM/Paladium/Longhorn, and the looming H.R.3261 will all work together to ensure that the internet becomes nothing more than the consumer equivelent of an interactive-television commercial.

      First, they let the geeks do all the hard work in making it technically possible, then they attract attention to all the bells, whistles and general hype, they solidify the sale with the educational angle, then legislate it into a tasteless substance that no one in their right mind would ever swallow.

      But the public will have bought the infrastructure, hook, line, and sinker. It's like watching Jethro Clampet get excited over them fancy city folk fads.

      I could do more with a 56K dialup connection on a P120 with 16megs of RAM than I'll be able to do with a Pentium 7, 24Ghz with 16Tb of RAM and a connection speed at twice the speed of light.

      Most of the people will be content just to "oooooo" and "aaaaah" the blinky lights.

  9. Go ahead RIAA by homer_ca · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You might scare people into stopping downloading, but that doesn't mean we'll go back to buying your overpriced CDs. $11.99 is a start. Better yet, try $7.99 just like the old LPs.

    1. Re:Go ahead RIAA by Fryed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Better yet, sell things the customers want! They're getting closer to that, at least. iTunes, Napster 2.0, BuyMusic.com (or whatever that other one is), let people buy music on a per-track basis, which is exactly what I want. Sometimes I want a whole album, if it's buy a group I know well enough to be assured I'll like the CD. But I refuse to buy a cd from an artist I don't know that well, because too often I've forked over cash for a cd I thought would be good, but actually only the track that got radio play was any good. As things stand now, I don't buy cds from artists I've only heard one song from before, but with iTunes and friends, I wouldn't mind risking a dollar on a song I hadn't heard before.

      As soon as a service appears that will let me, for a good price (99 cents is good, but less is always better), download an mp3 with no restrictions on the number of times I can burn it to cd, copy it to my mp3 player, or copy it to other computers, then I will immediately start buying a lot of music.

      Would that be so hard?

  10. Congrats to the RIAA by Skyshadow · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Their tactics are working all right.. I haven't downloaded one bit of music put out by a major label in the last several months.

    Of course, it wasn't really the lawsuits that dissuaded me so much as the utter crap the labels have been putting out. But still, effective tactics are effective tactics. Why, I'll bet they could stop music piracy completely in 2004 if the tunes continue to be as gut-wrenchingly terrible as, say, Britney's last album (or any of those that preceded it, come to think of it. She sure is hot, though).

    On a related note, there's an interesting article in the SF Chronicle about how small local bars are getting hit with lawsuits because the bands they hire play covers of copyrighted songs. Wonder how far we are from surgical lobotomies for people who get copyrighted tunes stuck in their heads...

    --
    Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
  11. Re:Lawsuits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    RIAA has already said: if you file a single piece of paperwork with the court (e.g., motion of discovery [to see what their evidence is], motion to dismiss, etc.), the settlement immediately jumps by $50,000.

    Now, since they are settling everything for $3-5K, and since a good, federal-bar qualified lawyer is going to run $$$, and your downside hits $50K, well, who's the sucker going to be?

  12. The interesting bit... by madgeorge · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... comes in another year when piracy is down but so are profits. Funny thing happens when you develop an antagonistic relationship with your customers instead of following the age-old law of supply and demand.

    -madgeorge

    1. Re:The interesting bit... by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Anyone who thinks piracy is a victimless crime doesn't understand economics.

      I think most people understand simple economics pretty well. Most people figure that people should get paid for providing goods or services. If the vendors charge too much, people won't buy the product/service. When the buyer receives goods, they own the goods - they can do whatever they want with them. Nice and simple - unlike laws trying to turn the distribution of information into "property".

      People should get paid for providing goods or services. I don't see any reason why someone/a company should be paid over and over indefinitely for a single act of creation by anyone who touches the created work. If society (or an organization) wants to encourage creative thought, then it can subsidize such activity by the amount that it thinks such activity is worth.

  13. It's not nice, but it appears effective by laird · · Score: 4, Informative

    Based on the numbers that you can see on Slyck.com, after years of consistent growth, p2p usage is down substantially for the last few months, especially on the networks believed to be actively monitored by the RIAA, with the decline starting at the same time as the filing of the first lawsuits. And based on the announcements by Apple, Napster, MusicMatch, etc., digital music sales appear to be up substantially over the past few months as well. So while coorelation can't prove causality, it sure looks like the lawsuits are effective at making some people stop using the p2p file sharing networks, and might even be helping with digital download music sales.

    1. Re:It's not nice, but it appears effective by quistas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Rather than your point, which is that the RIAA's legal actions may be driving people to buying digitial music, couldn't you also argue that the decrease in p2p activity is due to people finally having access to a number of viable, legitimate, cheap online music outlets?

      I'm sure the number of people who stopped pirating music because they could sample it and buy it for cheap on iTunes is pretty significant.

  14. Great! by MacDork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So does this mean they aren't going to be charging me an extra quarter per blank cd now?

  15. You missed the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I agree that the lawsuit's are stupid on the part of the RIAA, but why is suing a 12 year old file swapper any worse than suing a 32 year old geek who lives in his parents basement?

    Because the purpose of the lawsuits are a public relations war, and every time they fuck up (sue a 12 year old, sue a Mac-owning granny) they shoot themselves in the foot.

    Also because they are trying to change the term "piracy" to mean "sharing copyrighted material without paying the piper" away from its original meaning of publishing copyrighted material without a license. Funny, folks don't seem to cotton to equating a 12-year old downloading tracks with a criminal bootleg operation.

  16. Lets give the RIAA what they want... by dasunt · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Lets give the RIAA what they want.

    Don't download commercial music that you are not allowed to possess.

    Instead, try iRATE and get free, legal mp3s.

    You don't have to pirate music, and you can still kick the RIAA where it hurts (mindshare).

  17. Re:Why should I pay for music? by dameron · · Score: 4, Funny

    P.S. I'm a musican and I lost my hard work to illegal mp3 downloads. I sold only 400 CDs and my music was downloaded thousands of times and is all over mp3 sites. I give up....I'm $10,000 in debt and everyone is enjoying my creations.......this was my thanks. It's not the Major labels that are being killed, it's people like me. Cockroaches are the last to die.

    Well, Michael, you should probably stop touching children and concentrate on your music. That's very, very, very Devilish...

    -dameron

  18. Re:Congrats, RIAA by Carnildo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Considering that these "thieves" are a sizable fraction of their potential customer base, I'd be worried about lost business.

    To extend your example:

    If fifteen percent of the people entering your store shoplift something, do you just spend your time throwing them out, or do you consider that there might be something wrong with the way your business operates?

    --
    "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
  19. RIAA speaking for labels it doesn't represent by fatwreckfan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I find it disturbing that the RIAA is claiming it is acting on behalf of record labels that it doesn't even represent.

    NPR radio has a story about several record labels (notably Fat Wreck Chords, one of my personal favs) that had to fight for years to get their names removed from the list of labels the RIAA claims to represent, since they do not want to be represented by them.

  20. Change the law by MichaelCrawford · · Score: 5, Interesting
    While the United States Constitution allows Congress to enact copyright laws, it doesn't actually require it to do so. Sharing music files over p2p could be legalized tomorrow if you could just get enough votes in Congress to repeal copyright. You'd either need to also convince the president to sign the bill, or get a 2/3rds majority in Congress to override a veto.

    Stranger things have happened. The United States Supreme Court recently overturned the last of the sodomy laws in the United States, a decision that at one time would have been inconcievable to the majority of Americans, but the gay community worked together patiently to make homosexuality completely legal.

    Now, I want you to consider that there are over sixty million Americans practicing peer-to-peer file sharing. That's more people than voted for George Bush, and also more than the number of homosexuals in America. So it's not unreasonable that copyright could be repealed, or at least reformed.

    I discuss the background of copyright law in the US and what you can do to make file sharing legal in Change the Law, a section of my article Links to Tens of Thousands of Legal Music Downloads. The steps I suggest you take to make file sharing legal are to speak out, vote, write your elected representatives, donate money to political campaigns, support campaign finance reform, join the electronic frontier foundation, and to practice civil disobedience.

    It is my objective that all sixty million American p2p users will read my article by the time of the 2004 election. I've got a long ways to go to reach that goal.

    The article has a Creative Commons license. I encourage you to copy and distribute it. I'm also seeking help in translating it to other languages; a Romanian translation will be posted soon.

    Thank you for your attention.

    --
    Request your free CD of my piano music.
  21. Re:What's your point? by the_mad_poster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You shouldn't expect 12 year olds to have the same understanding of things as 32 year olds. If you're going to start doing that, you might as well just abolish the whole idea of children needing any guidance. Abolish driving ages, drinking ages, enlistment ages. No more juvenile courts or corrections centers. Don't hold parents responsible for anything or expect them to provide for the children at all once they're physically capable of working for themselves, etc.

    NOT a good idea.

    --
    Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
  22. I said it before and I'll say it again... by wrinkledshirt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The industry fucked up by not taking Napster and using it as a conduit for regular sales.

    I know too many people who love good music to risk buying crap at the store that they haven't gotten a proper chance to preview, but let's leave behind the idea that many people treated the MP3s they downloaded as the equivalent of ads when it came to determining what CDs they wanted to buy.

    Think on this instead. You're already on Napster, downloading music. You've just found out that you can also buy concert tickets there. Or, there's a neat service that, for 5 bucks, will dump a huge selection of thematically-related songs onto your computer in a conveniently located spot for burning to a CD. Or, there's a spot for getting T-shirts, posters, sweaters, stickers of your favourite band. Or, there's a spot for buying 50c's autobiography or that Rolling Stones concert on DVD. Or, there's a spot that lets you buy the CDs themselves, since sometimes people want the jackets and lyrics and higher-quality music.

    Never mind the ad revenue that could be generated by having such a flourishing community that you're at the center of and controlling.

    Feel free to add to this list. On top of it all, you put yourself in a situation where you're working with technology, not against it, and you've got GOODWILL going with your customers.

    Imagine that.

    --

    --------
    Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...

  23. The solution is really very simple... by bechthros · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...and has been practiced for years by record stores, that is, stores that actually still sell vinyl records (primarily DJ shops). You open the package. You take the record (or cd's in a used cd store) out of the package and place it in a turntable or cd player behind the counter. You hand the customer headphones. Customer listens. If customer likes it he buys it, if not he hands you a different CD to listen to.

    File-sharing isn't as popular as it is because people want to *own* the music. It's popular because people just want to hear what it sounds like before they buy it. If I wanted to actually *own* those songs it sure would't be in mp3 format (80% data loss), and without any liner notes, catalogs, or stickers.

    I mean, when you buy an $8 t-shirt at wal-mart, you get to try it on first, right? When you want to buy a $10 book, you get to browse it at the bookstore before you buy it. Why should an $18.99 CD be any different?

    Try-before-you-buy has always been my reason for using filesharing for music, if I hear a CD I like I buy it, that is if I can even find it at the store (thanks again RIAA).

    But the RIAA will never pursue this method of both reducing piracy and meeting the consumers' needs, because they have zero interest in one of those two things. Guess which one. I maintain my opinion that the RIAA is terrified of file-sharing not because of any loss of profits to them (they're doing just fine, thanks) or to their artists (who they've been ripping off since the '20's), but because it means the average music consumer will no longer be satisfied with the STINKING, VOMITOUS, VILE, REPUGNANT, DISGUSTING, MALODOROUS, REPULSIVE SHIT being passed off as "popular" music by the RIAA. People have no option if they want to hear good music but to turn to the black market, for in this case the black market happens to be the only free, or even fair, market around.

    All that could change if the music stores let you listen before you bought. For some reason, though, I'm not holding my breath.

  24. Re:As a record store owner, by smallfeet · · Score: 5, Funny
    Knock!, Knock!

    "Excuse me sir but I just moved into town and I am required by law to let all my neighbors know that I am a convicted music pirate"

  25. Sharing with friends/coworkers by crucini · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Which raises a question. If you were nailed by the RIAA, and forced to choose between a multi-million dollar settlement and betraying your friends/coworkers, which would you choose? Before getting too heroic, remember that life after bankruptcy might not be fun. Do you know how your friends/coworkers would answer the question?

    Even if you're a tight-knit secretive ring that knew each other from childhood, all it takes is one ring member participating in p2p.

  26. Re:Lawsuits by El · · Score: 4, Insightful

    who's the sucker going to be?Obviously: a lawyer... somebody who can do their own legal work for free. I wonder if the RIAA checks first before serving papers?

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

  27. How to share files and avoid the RIAA, MPAA, etc. by pherris · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Long story short: Get off the Internet and on your own wireless network (kinda like the old days of BBSs). It's a decent solution considering the low cost of 802.11b cards (both PCMCIA and PCI) and routers. The great difficulty for the "powers that be" to track you down makes this a much better choice than over the 'net. Unless the RIAA/MPAA starts sending out trucks with RF detectors you should be safe. Here's the quick step-by-step:

    1. Build yourself a XPC or something that size.
    2. Toss in the needed parts including a 200G HD and a PCI 802.11b card.
    3. Post notices around the dorm/building/whatever with the SSID and quick instuctions.
    4. Enjoy.

    While the selection of files in the beginning will be low I'm sure it would take little time for it to become quite varied.

    The other solution is to buy a cheap 802.11b router, hook up to the LAN and bury it behind some sheetrock. The campus IT dept could spend years looking for it (if done correctly).

    Of course this information is for educational purposes only yada yada yada ...

    --
    "And a voice was screaming: 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'" - HST