Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Recommends Students Drop out of College
boarder8925 writes "An MIT student accused of copyright infringement has been documenting her struggles with the RIAA. Upon trying to negotiate her settlement, a representative told her that "the RIAA has been known to suggest that students drop out of college or go to community college in order to be able to afford settlements.""
Are any of you still buying RIAA label cd's? If you are, you are supporting this crap.
This has to stop.
The RIAA is suggesting she may want to drop out of college to pay the settlement IF she agrees to it, because she was complaining that she couldn't afford it. It seems like they're doing what most bill collectors do, which is suggesting you get rid of pretty much every unnecessary expense you have in order to pay them. Of course, what they consider unnecessary may not be the same as what you consider unnecessary.
To agree to the settlement is basically to agree that you wronged them in some way, and should pay them. Once you've agreed to that, how you actually pay the settlement isn't their problem. They may make suggestions, some of which you might find distasteful or even absurd, but the bottom line is they don't care how you pay a settlement you agreed to, so long as you pay it.
I can't believe that the RIAA would stoop to such a level. The scariest part is that perfectly intelligent people believe that everyone who is sued by the RIAA deserves it and is guilty. I wish that there was some simple way to explain to a lay-person how knowing the IP address of someone downloading music doesn't mean much in linking to an actual person. People assume that an IP address is like a social security number, that always links to a single person and always to the same person. This fallacy is one of our biggest problems in infroming lay-people about what the RIAA is doing. Maybe this bit of info will help people to see how evil the RIAA actually is.
Yes if you download copyrighted music, you're commiting a crime. Maybe it shouldn't be a crime, but it's a crime all the same. Yours is a weak justification of why the RIAA might want to not keep this illegal, but for the moment it still is illegal and so making a stand in court will probably not do any good.
I think the point here is that RIAA's methods are objectionable. From what I've read about them, I get the impression the RIAA is like the secret police in the way it works. People should be making a stand outside courts - like boycotting or setting up organizations to oppose RIAA.
I don't understand the problem. If you think they're evil, don't consume their products. Why the hell do people treat CDs like friggen crack? You DON'T NEED IT. Paid, free, physical media or downloaded, just stop. The artists are part of the beast as well, why respect them if they're willing participants as well? Don't even listen to it on the radio.
You can't simultaneously support something you find evil and retain a shred of credibility, so just stop. If you can't stop and are willing to break the law for your fix, I humbly suggest that you quite literally have a substance abuse problem and should seek professional help or a twelve-step program or something.
Hell, spend your CD money on booze and then join AA so you can sit around and blame the RIAA for your alcoholism.
I'm surprised the RIAA hasn't tried to re-introduce the concept debtor's prisions. That seems to be the timeframe they think they're operating in...
THIS SPACE FOR RENT Call 1-800-555-CARL
"Go and invest that $150,000 in your own business and you'll be much happier (and successful)."
Sure, because all businesses succeed (hint: less than 1 in 10 do). Or because it's easy to get financing for a business plan when you're 18 -- don't forget that student loans and other financial aid are pretty much guaranteed. Or because people at the age of 18 all have the skills to run a business.
That "education" you speak of so disparagingly is what gives us a workforce that innovates, that has the knowledge necessary for complex jobs... like in the fields medicine (practice or research, you pick), or engineering, etc.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
I have to agree.....
question 1. Did you download copyrighted material without monetary recompense inviolation of current civil law? (notice how I avoid the use of the words "steal" or "pirate", nor did I use the word illegal)
question 2. Are you not an adult, legally responsible for your actions?...
You see, I have many things in life that I need, like my house, which I need as much as this person needs his/her education. I could get a cheaper house, she/he could get a cheaper education. If I were to be hit with a lawsuit that would surely bankrupt me, I would be forced to sell my house (or give it up in other ways) As an adult, I am responsible for my actions, and if I take actions that endanger the stability of my life, and those things in my life that I consider important, I do so knowing that I may be called upon to live up to that obligation. College is not just a place to get the book knowledge, its a place to learn to be an adult. This is a big lesson.
You violated the law, you must make restitution. Either settle for what they want, or take your chance with the court, like an adult. No sympathy.
It's extortion when you haven't committed the copyright infringement but have no hope of defeating their lawyers.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
There's more you can do than just boycott RIAA labels. Here's some ideas:
1. Write your congressman - you can even do it via email. Follow this link for a really simple way to do that. Will they listen? If enough of you complain they will. (Don't be negative and say democracy doesn't work.)
2. When you talk to your friends, let them know this is going on. Believe it or not, a lot of people don't know about this issue. The more people you tell, the more this becomes an issue.
3. This stuff is making the mainstream news. When you see this issue come up in a newspaper, write a letter to the editor about it. More people read letters to the editor than articles in the paper. Tell people the ideas in this message to get them to not support RIAA.
4. Complain on artist websites and give artists bad press. Not planning on buying the latest Bruce Springsteen CD? Why don't you write him and tell him you're not doing it because he's on a RIAA label. Big artists are not "victims" of decisions by their labels.
5. Buy indie labels and let people know you're buying indie labels.
6. Buy a t-shirt about this. Here's some to choose from:
#1, #2, and #3
Your other alternative is to not give a fuck like everyone else. Everyone has to have their issue and maybe this one isn't yours. Hopefully I've given you some ideas for getting involved about something though.
----- obSig
> The only "extortion" they're doing is going around people who are guilty of copyright infringment against their members
You misspelled "accused". Glad I could clear that up for you.
Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
When a person is sued they can either a) pay a lawyer to defend them or b) pay the plaintiff to settle the suit. The RIAA makes it clear that they will do whatever it takes to make sure a is greater than b.
This is extortion.
Why? Because it does not depend on whether the person has actually done anything wrong. Instead the RIAA wields a side-effect of our justice system (cost) as a weapon against whoever they please. Whether they can prove anything makes little difference, it is simply a matter of cost.
Consider this: although piracy can be prosecuted as a crime, the RIAA never follows that path. They always go civil. This way they can neatly avoid the solution of a court-appointed attorney, and they do not have to deal with the police and DA, who have a pesky habit of actually evaluating the merits of cases before going forward. By keeping it civil the RIAA is free to file against whoever the hell they want, no matter how slim the evidence.
By initiating lawsuits against those who willfully, without the consent of the copyright holders, infringe copyrights, it's hard to see how they're "alienating their core market".
How do you know that the defendants are in fact willfully infringing copyrights? They never have the cash to make their case and fight it out in court. From my perspective it's pretty alienating to know that I could be taken to the cleaners for thousands by an industry association, even if I did nothing wrong.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Allow me to clarify --- if someone accuses you of downloading copyrighted material, you are risking a the fine; regardless of anything so sticky as the truth of wether or nor you actually did it.
The RIAA doesn't need to prove anything. They just claim it, demand a settlement, and strong-arm you into settling. They are never obligated to prove a damned thing. And since it's a civil matter, they know it's cheaper to settle even if you're innocent.
I could claim you're a child molester, but since I have no basis to make the claim, it would be unfair to tar you with that brush (this is a metaphor, not a personal attack, I'm sure you're a perfectly nice person around children).
What if someone who legitimately has NOT downloaded material is accused by the RIAA? They're expected to settle out of court, accept responsibility and blame -- or, they spend a godawful amount of money defending themselves.
People hate these suits from the RIAA because they are brough forth without evidence, without any objective 3rd party, and a whole passle of cranky lawyers. I've said before, the RIAA is effectively acting as their own court system without supervision. And, they can effectively do any damned thing they want to any poor schmuck whose ISP was strong-armed into giving up their information.
The fact that there are no checks and balances on the way this is done, means it's a situation that's just rife with chances for abuse. Oooh, the latest Brittney SPears album didn't sell well? Fine, we'll just make up a couple of people to sue and recoup our losses. It would be no different from the complete vapour trail they provide now.
Any situation in which your accuser seems to automatically be able to force you to settle for thousands of dollars, or be bankrupted in court, is completely broken.
Now, it sounds like the person in this article may have actually downloaded stuff. But if, and I can guaran-f'in-tee I've never downloaded music, I was accused of this same thing, I'd be left with the bullshit choice of settling and accepting guilt, or fighting it and paying through the nose.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Sera
Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
Yeah, and on that note, we should also hang all jaywalkers ! Sure, it may seem rough, but jaywalking is against the law, and anyone who breaks the law is a black-hearted subhuman scum and deserves to lose their life ! Down with this silly idea that the punishment should be in some proportion to the crime ! I say: death penalty for everything !
Doing otherwise might mean that some corporation doesn't get quite as much profits than it might have gotten in some alternative reality, and that is much more important than some antiquated concept of "justice" or "fairness". Only an unpatriotic terrorist communist hippie in his drug-induced haze would disagree !
Hmphhh... To think that the punishment can be too harsh... What's this world coming to ?
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress -J Adams
If the party is guilty. The RIAA is leveraging it's finances against people who obviously cannot compete in court and have no chance of proving their innocence. The RIAA even has a policy of no negotiations (from TFA). So in this way it is extortion.