Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Court Urged to Hear File-Sharing Case

Posted by michael on from the oh-lord-hear-my-plea dept.

gollum123 writes "AP reports that: A disparate group made up of dozens of state attorneys general, labor unions, retailers, professional sports leagues and others urged the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday to hear a claim brought by the recording and film industries against two Internet file-sharing firms. In legal briefs filed with the court, the petitioners stressed the justices should take the entertainment companies' case and finally resolve conflicting lower court rulings on file-sharing, said Steven Marks, general counsel for the Recording Industry Association of America."

1 of 12 comments (clear)

  1. Non-superstars hurt? Is this a joke? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The artists' documents argued performers, particularly non-superstars, are hurt by losing potential sales royalties to file-sharing."

    Is this some kind of joke? Almost all of the filesharing that occurs is of "superstars," with the primary loss of money being that of the RIAA. Lesser known artists, the ones who the music groups won't advertise for, actually get their music out there and are able to have people come to their concerts. How exactly does this hurt them?

    This crap of trying to get us to symphatize with the poor, unknown artist or set worker with five kids is worse than "think of the children." The people screwing those workers and unknown artists over is the RIAA, not the people going to their concerts.

    "In all, 41 state attorneys general also submitted briefs. They argued file-sharing programs pose risks to consumers, such as identity theft and being unwittingly exposed to spyware and child pornography, Marks said."

    This crap also makes me sick...why don't they just ban the whole damned internet, along with e-mail and web browsing?