Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Sues a Child
dniq writes "You may remember the previously posted story about a case against a mother, which was dropped by the RIAA right after her lawyers moved to dismiss the case.
Well, guess what? The RIAA has brought a lawsuit against the mother's daughter - now a 14 year old girl - and moved for appointment of a guardian at litem."
Agreed. What's all the fuss about? Kid is stealing music, kid must be stopped from stealing music. What is everyone else suggesting, kids should be able to help themselves to stuff? Hey - Johnny - go steal me a Ferrari 360 Spider.
The word "theft" covers *removing* something from a person, and to remove something, he had to have it in the first place.
...
You know I've heard this bullshit a lot on Slashdot so I thought I'd check the authoritative source - the dictionary. It quite clearly states, in many definitions on dictionary.com, that theft includes not only property but also theft of services. There is no limiation that theft must be of a thing and that the person must be deprived of said thing. This newspeak definition of "theft" has only been invented in the last 10 years by self-justifying copyright violators. It is theft. Get over it.
Please learn the differences. Then you'd be able to sound like an intelligent person and not just an RIAA marketing guy.
The most basic intelligence would cause you to refer to a dictionary before claiming that someone else was misuing a word
you suck pirate
1) This arguement does not stand because once the person downloads the song, the copyright holder is deprived of the income the downloader would have paid for the song.
2)Income is a thing. Theft also incompasses services. If you wish to play with strict interpretation: The original poster wished to know when he became a thief. A thief is one who steals (To take (the property of another) without right or permission) and as you said, it is intellectual property.
3) I will not bother to debate this point. It has merrits. But, the original poster asked whence he became a theif. I gave an answer.
4) Not two people. One person , or group of people individually, taking both stated positions, which happens all the time when these two subjects come up. Repeatedly, the same individuals will decry violations of the GPL ( copyright infringement), then decry a group of people enforcing their copyright.
5) I know the language. I also know the arguements used by both sides and have my own opinions. I did not confuse anything.
I find your ad hominem attacks and condescension to be telling of you.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
This isn't a hypocrisy, because we've found a way to use this system so that we can ignore it.
Except you haven't. If you wanted to *ignore* copyright law, there would be no GPL, because Public Domain would be perfectly sufficient. If you wanted to ignore all aspects and just keep credit, the BSD licenses are sufficient.
The GPL is not about "ignoring" copyright law. That's what the folks who use GPLed code in non-GPLed applications are doing, and the GPLites are always frothing about.
The GPL is about politics and agenda.
...and in other news, two children aged 16 and 17 were sentenced for having killed their stepmother. Being a underaged doesn't make you any less guilty, and I'd event contest whether a 14 year old should properly count as being a child in front of the law.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
People who download music in quantity probably have wider tastes than their purchasing power allows
In my last job I was given a paltry 18Gb of stolen mp3s
Most of it is not to my taste, however I have discovered some new artists whose music I have purchased and the collection is great for people to hunt through at parties, especialy if they like Nordic heavy metal from around the turn of the century.
Also its worth noting that mp3 sound quality is excrement compared to cassette tape so I still need to buy the original WAV files if it is going to be played more than once.
I hope the bitrate on pay for download files is better than my collection of 128kbps files, anyone who professes to love music when listening to these is actually seriously addicted to a particular kind of phasey distortion and for true happieness should probably buy a couple of the very cheapest realistic guitar combos and wire the output of one to the input of the other and listen to everything through this with the volume set to 12. Reducing the eardrum area by poking a knitting needle through it may help also.
Seriously though hasnt anybody else noticed how crap mp3s are?
Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
Now suppose a musician, a producer, a team of sound engineers, cover artists, a couple talent scouts, and the management to put them all together each contribute a little bit towards a great new album they expect you to pay for, but then you go and download it for free with LimeWire. How is that not theft, too?
They can "expect" all they want, but expectation does not create an obligation. A waiter, for example, can reasonably expect his customers to leave a tip, but refusing to tip isn't theft. Someone who cleans your windshield when you're stopped in traffic might expect you to pay him for it, but if you don't, you haven't stolen anything, you've only shown him to be a sucker. He has no right to demand payment unless he arranged it with you beforehand.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
Never mind the "artists are hurting" arguments.
Never midn all those economic arguments.
The fact is that the $CONTENT industries have been displaying an incredible amount of arrogance during the last 5-10 years by BUYING
legislature to pass assinine legislation that would fly in the face of logic; remember the law that would ask for every hard disk to check if it was copying copyrighted stuff??? and thus attempt to dictate to the whole society how it should use it's computers???For this alone, the $CONTENT industry needs nothing less than a good whacking, and what better way to deliver it by having, WE, THE PEOPLE deliver the blows in the form of not paying for it's content?
Let this be construed as showing the croporate world that the people's will is always supreme!
Yes, it's called "The Doctrine Of Origional Sin". They are Fundamentalist, not unlike the Talaban.
Please mod me 1 or troll. It's where the truth is these days, even on Slashdot. Beware the power of moderators everywh
Fedex is not liable for damages to your home caused by a delivered package. Neither, then, are the people who, acting under God's (Allah's, Buddah's, Cthulu's, Ghandi's) command, deliver these opther packages which are, in and of themselves, nothing more than a vast source of energy. The recipients should be happy that these people are giving them so much free energy, what with the price of oil these days.