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.""

113 of 869 comments (clear)

  1. Perfect... by InVinoVeritas · · Score: 5, Funny

    Drop out of school so you can afford the settlement offer, which will severely hinder your earning potential, causing you to pirate more material because you can't afford it... lather, rinse, repeat.

    1. Re:Perfect... by CPT+Carl · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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
    2. Re:Perfect... by jozi · · Score: 5, Funny

      "lather, rinse, repeat."

      I finally figured out the mystery why programmers always use the entire bottle of conditioner when taking a shower... Thank you!

      --
      "If you can't live without me, why aren't you already dead?"
    3. Re:Perfect... by networkBoy · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's sad because it's funny.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    4. Re:Perfect... by ScoLgo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Why is pirating allowed if you cannot afford it? i learned that if you cannot afford it, you don't get it. Fricking commies..."

      Piracy, schmiracy. I don't see any eyepatches, parrots, or bottles of grog being passed around. On the other hand, copyright infringement isn't legal and the OP's statement doesn't make it so. But s/he's still correct - it's gonna happen. With every subsequent action, the RIAA continues to prove their irrelevancy in the modern world. They need to just die already...

      --
      "Michael, I did nothing. I did absolutely nothing - and it was everything that I thought it could be."
    5. Re:Perfect... by Karzz1 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, that and 2 bottles of conditioner a year is not a huge expense :)

      --
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
    6. Re:Perfect... by oirtemed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      except this isn't even a legal debt this is extortion... You OWE me or I'll take you to court. In a way I hope it lasts till I graduate from law school.

    7. Re:Perfect... by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's inspirational because it's sad.

    8. Re:Perfect... by twistedsymphony · · Score: 2, Insightful
      the RIAA continues to prove their irrelevancy in the modern world. They need to just die already...

      So very true, I propose we make a new group the "DMAA"; Digital Music Artists Association. Bylaws include that fact that the original artist are REQUIRED to own their own copywrites, if they have a problem with something someone is doing they can use the DMAA's force, but the DMAA is not allowed to act on anything without the artists consent.

      Also any member of the DMAA can not also be a member of the RIAA

      You want a group to help protect you and not rob you AND your customers blind... The RIAA wouldn't have a leg to stand on if the Musicians went and formed a new group altogether. Unfortunately I fear it would eventually fall into the same problems the RIAA has.

    9. Re:Perfect... by Moofie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I wonder if there's some sort of cautionary tale that should make people skeptical of organizations that attempt to re-define emotionally charged terms...

      Newspeak is doubleplusgood.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    10. Re:Perfect... by LordOfTheNoobs · · Score: 2, Funny

      Lather, repeat, and again, repeat once more, repeat a while longer, repeat a bit faster, pull back the repeat rate a bit, repeat, switch off and lather a bit with the other hand, repeat, lather, repeat faster, faster, Faster, and I'm spent.

      --
      They're there affecting their effect.
    11. Re:Perfect... by adolfojp · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's funny because it's inspirational.

    12. Re:Perfect... by MyNameIsEarl · · Score: 2, Funny

      We can always hope the REAL piracy happening off the coast of Somalia can help to change the terms we use. Certainly uploading a song can not be confused with killing and pillaging on the high seas, can it? On the other hand it might be to the RIAA's advantage, who would want to be associated with REAL pirates, with the killing and pillaging and such.

    13. Re:Perfect... by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny
      Brilliant! Kids don't have to party, drink, do drugs, have fun, or do anything but study all day! What a GREAT idea.

      You should let them know this. I'll bet no one in history has ever delivered that revolutionary message to college students or teenagers before. Just think of all the lives that could have been saved if a innovative thinker like yourself had been born in an earlier age.

      I'm going to go tell my daughter to not have sex or do drugs right now. If only I had thought of it sooner!

      -Eric

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    14. Re:Perfect... by watermodem · · Score: 2, Interesting
      There are some major issues that need discussion here.

      1) Entrapment! Entertainment being part of the culture - the insanely long copyrights (currently 130 years) deny legal access to culture to the in-mature young. (Sort of like holding drugs in front of addicts then arresting them when they use them.)

      2) Peer pressure is extreme in the college environments. I remember being shocked when the oldest son was in UCLA. Each floor had its SHARING SERVERS and everybody knew when the latest booty was there. - Again, we need to revisit what all these laws mean in a criminal and social sense.

      Are all High School and College Students to be declared DEFACTO criminals just like the justice systems assume ALL DRIVERS ARE SPEEDERS?

      Should the whole nation be declared criminal of something and put in jail?

      3) What does it say about Big Business when they are putting the nation's FUTURE (in this case a young woman from MIT who can contribute to both Firms and the Nation out of the talented workforce for downloading a $1 song?) Short sighted comes to mind.

      4) It reminds me of the the RIAA trying to put soldiers in Jail as they went off to fight the Iraq war. AMAZING comes to mind. Also, small minds in Hollyweed!

      5) This criminalization of life reached another stage in a LA suburb a few weeks ago when they banned smoking tobacco outside with a $1,000 fine. The fine for smoking a joint in public was about $50! A factor of 20 less. What gives?

      Anyway... we need to discuss appropriate fines and sentences for everything and behaviors of big business and big government in trying to make living life illegal and MAKING TAX PAYERS (not big biz which doesn't pay taxes) pay to convict and jail all these folks.

      Back in the mid-90s, the boys in the executive suites of the entertainment industry did liberally dust both sides of the aisles of Congress with gold. In return they got a massive extension on the copyright period. All at the same time they continue to cook the books on accounting. They still charge music artist for 'breakage' in their write offs. Ever seen an AOL or Earthlink CD damaged in the mail? As far as I'm concerned the entire lot needs to have RICO dropped on them cause it'll take the executives' treasury rather than the business'. No prisoners taken. Oh, and demand of your quaking Pub representative concerned about November to repeal the G*D* Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act.

      BTW... I am surprised that our immature young people have not taken revenge on the RIAA and MPAA. It says something about them when compared to the Riots in France or the Car Swarms in the Mideast. That, being they are basically good kids.... We need a way to change behaviors of them, society and business without wasting their lives and taxpayer pocketbooks!

      /end rant

      You may flame away on principle but think about the waste. Drug dealers, robbers and killers are not treated as bad as we are starting to treat people who commit more minor infractions.

    15. Re:Perfect... by ultranova · · Score: 4, Insightful

      or, not break the law in the first place. If you break any law, dont go crying that it might have messed up your schooling

      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.

    16. Re:Perfect... by ILikeRed · · Score: 4, Insightful
      They don't think of their son or daughter sitting in a dorm room at college downloading mp3s.

      They also don't think of their office parties or visiting relatives at nursing homes as infringing activities, but they are the same type of crime.

      --
      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
    17. Re:Perfect... by JabberWokky · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Yes, but this isn't the executive branch bringing somebody to the judicial branch who decides your guilt and sentence in a courtroom... this is a private organization acting as the police, judge, jury and determining the fine. How about if MADD started setting up DUI stops and fining people for their own coffers? How about if they suggested you sell your car if you couldn't pay the fine?

      I'm all for prosecuting people who break the law -- but in a court system, not by an under-the-table system that borders on (or may be) blackmail.

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    18. Re:Perfect... by grqb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Isn't that the definition of a settlement?

    19. Re:Perfect... by Crussy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

    20. Re:Perfect... by shaneh0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, I think it was lumped-in a long long time ago and he's just bringing it up. Besides, not all drugs are narcotics.

    21. Re:Perfect... by Pyrion · · Score: 2, Interesting

      An out-of-court settlement doesn't automatically carry the implication or admissal of guilt, it just means that one side doesn't feel like fighting the case. Most people settle, simply because an out-of-court settlement is cheaper than hiring an attorney and blowing all that time away attending court hearings.

      Furthermore, "guilt" of a tort crime isn't the same as guilt of a "real" crime; all you're really doing is addressing the plaintiff's grievances, regardless of whatever's codified in law.

      --
      "There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge." - Bertrand Russell.
    22. Re:Perfect... by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think the issue most geeks have with the RIAA and these "settlements" is that the RIAA won't even listen to you when you tell them you didn't do anything and can prove it. You get a letter saying "pay us $X or we'll bury you in court costs with our multimillion dollar law firm" and they don't want to hear it if you think they're wrong because they know you're going to pay or lose even bigger.

  2. RIAA has some learning to do by liliafan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I haven't ever really understood what the RIAA hopes to achieve from all their lawsuits and extortion rackets, I mean all they are doing is alienating their core market the way they have been going recently I can't wait for someone to make a stand against them in court.

    I download music from the internet quite frequently, if I like the song I have downloaded I will usually buy the album if I don't like it I delete it, does this mean I am commiting a crime? In my case p2p has caused my to buy more cds than I usually would have if I hadn't of been exposed to certain artists and songs. Is this common I really don't know perhaps other people don't purchase cds by artists they like personally I like to support musicians I like.

    One great example my favorite group collective soul release an album entirely self financed, the day it was released I was able to find tracks on p2p which I downloaded and listened to constantly, until my next paycheck came through at which point I went out and purchased 5 copies of the album 2 for me 3 for various family members, I did the same with two of their previous albums, I own every single album they have release in some cases more than one copy of the album, it gets interesting when you consider I discovered this group through p2p in the first place.

    --
    GeekServ Unix Consulting Services (http://www.geekserv.com)
    1. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by immakiku · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by AviLazar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I can't wait for someone to make a stand against them in court.

      Anti-**AA lawyer "Your honor, I am making a stand in court"
      Judge - "What is your stance"
      Anti-**AA lawyer "To put restrictions on the **AA, a group who malignantly, vilely, evily, uncaringly, and in a mean spirited fashion sue people who pirate music/movies"
      Judge - "Isn't pirating illegal, and punishable by law"
      Anti-**AA lawyer "Well yes but..."
      Judge - "Whats your point son"
      Anti-**AA lawyer "The **AA do it malignantly, vilely, evily, uncaringly, and in a mean spirited fashion"
      -Dead silence fills the court room.
      Judge - "Get out"

      --

      I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
    3. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, in the US, it is often both. 17 USC 501 covers civil infringement, while 506 covers criminal infringement. Some infringement has been criminal since the late 19th century, so this isn't all that new.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    4. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by cascadefx · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I download music from the internet quite frequently, if I like the song I have downloaded I will usually buy the album if I don't like it I delete it, does this mean I am commiting a crime?

      Yes. You are breaking the law. Whether you get caught or not or whether or not it is a good law is a different question.

    5. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by Kadin2048 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Despite the handicap of not actually being the government, they seem to be doing fairly well for themselves in terms of getting whatever laws they want passed. Well, until recently -- seems people have started to notice in the last few years. But as a nation in general we pretty much let them push the DMCA right through without so much as a whimper in Congress -- hell, we don't even know who voted for the thing, the way it was done.

      Sure, they're not a government agency, but in many ways it would be better if they were; we'd probably have more control over them then, and they wouldn't be able to pour money into the political system in the way they do.

      But to say they're not "in" government, in terms of having their fingers pulling various strings, is a mistake.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    6. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by liliafan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you are thinking about buying a book, you can browse the subject you like in a bookstore, why can't we do the same with music?

      --
      GeekServ Unix Consulting Services (http://www.geekserv.com)
    7. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by squiggleslash · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I haven't ever really understood what the RIAA hopes to achieve from all their lawsuits and extortion rackets,
      Just "lawsuits". The only "extortion" they're doing is going around people who are guilty of copyright infringment against their members, and negotiating relatively cheap (compared to the fines you'd suffer if they took you to court) out of court settlements. This is usual, "out of court" is generally not refered to as "extortion" outside of the lunatic pro-piracy fringe, it's actually pretty usual and beneficial to both parties.
      I mean all they are doing is alienating their core market the way they have been going recently I can't wait for someone to make a stand against them in court.
      The RIAA's core market consists of the music publishers who are concerned about copyright infringement and the negative affects it has on their business. 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". They might possibly alienate the core market of their customers/members, only those whining about these lawsuits have been very careful to blame the RIAA for them, not, say, "Sony's representatives" or even "Metallica's publisher and its representatives".

      And it would be questionable even if they did. The RIAA is acting like a private police force, in some senses, only with relatively little power. Suppose it was the real police, the FBI perhaps, responding to complaints of copyright infringement. Then what? Would Metallica or Sony suddenly get the blame?

      If we use a more clear example of an unfair law: suppose a landlord tells the cops he doesn't want his residents smoking dope any more. Does the landlord get the blame for the bust? Rarely, it's generally the cops and the government who do.

      I download music from the internet quite frequently, if I like the song I have downloaded I will usually buy the album if I don't like it I delete it, does this mean I am commiting a crime?
      Possibly, and it strikes me as likely, unless you're vetting your downloads, that you're guilty of copyright infringement which can be a crime, but is more often a civil matter. The key is that the copyright holders haven't given consent for this. You may feel you're doing them a favour, but they either don't feel the same way, or feel that the net effect of the consequences of you being allowed to do what you do is negative for them. That is, the infrastructure you're contributing to may result in you buying more CDs, but it may be that the existance of the infrastructure means a lot of people don't, and that, overall, more people will end up buying less than can be made up for by people buying more. Who are you to say they're wrong? Or to force them to engage in your particular choice of marketing scheme simply because you happen to buy CDs.

      In the end, if a copyright holder wants to use free MP3s as a marketing system, they have that ability anyway. Look at most major band websites, and a great many have free downloads available. Hell, I recall going through most of Garbage's *videos* only a few months ago - free for viewing and listening to on their website.

      The current law says "If you create something new and wonderful, we'll give you limited control over how its copied and distributed so you have a chance to make money from it to cover the costs of making it." Nothing forces anyone to buy into that law. Listeners can act like works that rely upon the law were never invented and never listen to them. Music creators can always put music into the public domain, or else make use of the myriad of distribution systems available today, should they chose. There's little excuse for copyright infringement of the type we're talking about today. And, quite honesty, in 2006, if you're being sued for distributing someone else's work on a network that makes them available to millions of anonymous strangers, then you only have yourself to blame.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    8. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by Aardpig · · Score: 2

      Did she commit a crime? Was she found guilty of copyright infringement in a court of law? Was she even indicted for copyright infringement?

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    9. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by Surt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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
    10. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by MarkByers · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Any person commiting a crime must not be tolerated and the law should apply completely on them

      So if $evil_company makes a law that means it is illegal to breathe without paying them for the air, should everyone on the planet be punished? No!

      Sometimes it is the law that is wrong, not the offender. That's why laws are changed all the time. The RIAA has found a loophole in the law which allows them to get away with price-fixing, so it's the law that needs to be fixed. Soon.

      --
      I'll probably be modded down for this...
    11. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by Vancorps · · Score: 3, Insightful
      There are people in every country which do not care about the laws that govern them. Of course that all changes when it directly affects them but thats another story.

      The problem here is that there is too much product on the market to support a cd distribution system. P2P and iTunes services provide a fast and convenient way to both find and listen to new music. Every spent an hour and a half at a record store looking for a particular album? Lord knows I have and its annoying as hell. Of course the only reason I was willing to spend that time to find it was because I had listened to a few songs I downloaded. It is a weak justification but I am provided no alternative. The one exception is of course satellite radio; the last place I can listen to new music without being inundated with advertising.

      FM Radio wouldn't be so bad if they broke up their advertising so it wouldn't make it sometimes more than a minute between songs. There is nothing worse than enjoying a song, having it come to the end, and then hearing a loud ad pushing a product you couldn't care less about. You want more music, not just one song at a time.

      Back to the issue at hand, the RIAA has criminalized the issue and in the process alienated a lot of their customers. One need only to look at the top selling software to see that pirating does not hurt sales but in fact helps it. Think how much Windows was pirated in the past and how much other software has profited from having a computer that can run it. Music is obviously different since it only has one step, nothing to build off past works.

      The RIAA needs to stop wasting time and money on this and start working on an online distribution system that works without killing their customers. They want format change after format change, the only problem is existing formats are digital. My father repurchased a lot of his LPs on CD and has since converted almost all of his cds to MP3s which he will always be able to listen to. Why would he want to repurchase it ever again?

      If they was a subscription based revenue stream then they should provide one, not force people to spuradically rebuy the stuff they've been enjoying for years. Until they realize this people will download illegal software. Might add downloading is in no way criminal, its the uploading part that is in question. Downloading is fair use, just like I can copy a tape and give it to a friend perfectly legally.

    12. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by e_slarti · · Score: 5, Interesting
      "...and she can go to court if she wishes."

      Just a reminder to those who might want to look it up in the dictionary:

      extort n. To obtain from another by coercion or intimidation.

      The threat and coercion being: Expensive legal fees or expensive settlement. For a person of limited resources, this is legal extortion. That's why some forms of torte reform are unreasonable and unworkable.

      And if the fee isn't paid the RIAA gets to file liens or even get the defendant thrown in jail. Also as a reminder liens affect credit ratings which affect loan rates which affect future income... the snowball effect of this really is huge.

      I would contend that the REAL piracy is a social piracy on the part of the RIAA. In my opinion, they're plundering our society for short-term monetary gains on what amounts to be bad business processes practices by the RIAA's members. I understand they want to make a buck (who doesn't?), but at what cost to society?

      My apologies to the Pastafarians out there for putting the RIAA in the same ball field as the Flying Spaghetti Monster. His wrath will be mighty and oregano flavored.

    13. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is generally incorrect.

      As the Napster case, and many other cases have held, downloaders infringe on the reproduction right. There is a question as to who is responsible for downloading, but the Marobie-FL case puts the responsibility on the person who caused the downloading to occur; generally, this is the downloader. In the rare case that someone hacked your computer and made it download files, it would be the fault of that person. But if you're just using ordinary P2P software, it's your own fault.

      Uploaders, OTOH, are liable for infringing the distribution right, by making the files available for downloading.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    14. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by nuzak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > 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.
    15. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 2, Insightful
      But let's accept that the grandparent shouldn't have used the phrase "guilty". Even so, here's what we have: a student, who has has all but admitted to illegal file sharing, is being offered a settlement to avoid being sued for rather more money than that (likely). Is this a bullying, stronghanded tactic by the RIAA? Sure. Is it extortion? Absolutely not. Unless you (ahem) think that people should be presumed guilty of extortion before it's proven in court.

      You're right - in this case. However, the problem is that the RIAA is adopting the same tactics against people who *haven't* all but admitted to being guilty. That combined with their threats to bleed people out of legal fees if they don't settle is certainly questionable. I don't think one need be a "lunatic" to see that as a threat.

      If the RIAA were carefully vetting their cases to at least convince themselves of someone's likely culpability, that would be one thing. They're not.

      Where's the limit here? Can I go to my neighbor and tell him to give me $3000 or I'll sue him because his tree is casting a shadow on my lawn? That wouldn't be extortion or anything, right? Because in some of these cases, the level of probable guilt is comparable. Not all, mind you, and maybe not even the majority. But the point is that the RIAA is making basically no effort to check.

      Aside from that, I agree with your sentiments regarding the specific case. You knowingly do something that has enormous criminal and civil penalties, don't cry to me when they bust you. Maybe the punishment didn't fit the crime, but you knew what the punishment would be...

    16. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by garyrich · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Back to the issue at hand, the RIAA has criminalized the issue and in the process alienated a lot of their customers. One need only to look at the top selling software to see that pirating does not hurt sales but in fact helps it."

      True, but you miss the point. Yes, it helps sales but they don't care about sales, they care about profit. Max profit comes from having everyone listening to the same music. P2P and other post modern music distribution makes that impossible. They need you to buy Madonna, if you buy Ayumi Hamasaki instead you have seriously screwed up their business. Their real business is controlling access to the listening public. you can't get people to listen to your music unless you go through them.

      If everyone listens to music that they like, the terrorists win.

      --
      -- your Web browser is Ronald Reagan
    17. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by Seraphim_72 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      How can you have "no hope" of defeating their lawyers in a crime that you didn't commit? If there was "no evidence" then you would have all sorts of legal avenues for reprisal, many of which could possibly lead to a large pot of gold.
      You obviously have never been through the "Justice" system. I suggest you look up the names of those who have been put to death and later found innocent. Try deathpnaltyinfo to watch people getting railroaded in almost real time.

      Sera

      --
      Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
    18. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by crabpeople · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah wow nice troll buddy but it more likely will go like this:

      Anti-**AA lawyer "Your Honor, These *.AA people are threatening lawsuits all up in here. They have no evidence. They should make their peace.."
      Judge - "Wow.. your right. Case dismisssed!"
      *.AA - " but but PIRATES!!"
      Judge - "Pirates sail the sea son, now take your extortion racket and leave town"
      *.AA - * whine whine lumbering dinosuar of the old world noises *
      Judge - "Thats it motherfuckers, you going down!!"
      *Judge pulls out sawed off shotty and jumps up on his bench*
      Judge - " Pistol grip pump motherfuckers!! "
      * *.AA lawyers head asplode *
      * Lawyer falls down, a crimson fountain coats everything in recently depreasureized blood. A leather satchel falls to the floor *
      Judge - "Well now you dirty slime-yer, whats this?"
      * Judge opens the satchel and a small white kitten tumbles out*
      Kitten - "mew!"
      Judge - " Those evil bastards, they were going to eat that kitten "
      * Anti-**AA lawyer steps onto the severed skull of *.AA lawyer crushing it to dust*
      Judge - " your kitten eating hording culture days are over. Set my people free! "
      * all the peoples of the world get together and share their collective culture and world peace is declared (also bu$h gets cancer and dies)*

      -FIN-

      --
      I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
    19. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 5, Informative
      Ah, I haven't seen anyone misread 1008 in the usual way for a little while. It's refreshing. Wrong, but refreshing.

      The key to 1008 in this context is that there has to be the use of a digital audio recording device or digital audio recording medium. The question is, what are those things? Well, we have some important definitions in 1001. Usually the sort of person who cites 1008 will always forget to have checked 1001, to make sure that 1008 actually says what it appears on first glance to say.

      (1) A "digital audio copied recording" is a reproduction in a digital recording format of a digital musical recording, whether that reproduction is made directly from another digital musical recording or indirectly from a transmission.

      (3) A "digital audio recording device" is any machine or device of a type commonly distributed to individuals for use by individuals, whether or not included with or as part of some other machine or device, the digital recording function of which is designed or marketed for the primary purpose of, and that is capable of, making a digital audio copied recording for private use, except for--
      (A) professional model products, and
      (B) dictation machines, answering machines, and other audio recording equipment that is designed and marketed primarily for the creation of sound recordings resulting from the fixation of nonmusical sounds.

      (4)(A) A "digital audio recording medium" is any material object in a form commonly distributed for use by individuals, that is primarily marketed or most commonly used by consumers for the purpose of making digital audio copied recordings by use of a digital audio recording device.
      (B) Such term does not include any material object--
      (i) that embodies a sound recording at the time it is first distributed by the importer or manufacturer; or
      (ii) that is primarily marketed and most commonly used by consumers either for the purpose of making copies of motion pictures or other audiovisual works or for the purpose of making copies of nonmusical literary works, including computer programs or data bases.

      (5)(A) A "digital musical recording" is a material object--
      (i) in which are fixed, in a digital recording format, only sounds, and material, statements, or instructions incidental to those fixed sounds, if any, and
      (ii) from which the sounds and material can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.
      (B) A "digital musical recording" does not include a material object--
      (i) in which the fixed sounds consist entirely of spoken word recordings, or
      (ii) in which one or more computer programs are fixed, except that a digital musical recording may contain statements or instructions constituting the fixed sounds and incidental material, and statements or instructions to be used directly or indirectly in order to bring about the perception, reproduction, or communication of the fixed sounds and incidental material.
      (C) For purposes of this paragraph--
      (i) a "spoken word recording" is a sound recording in which are fixed only a series of spoken words, except that the spoken words may be accompanied by incidental musical or other sounds, and
      (ii) the term "incidental" means related to and relatively minor by comparison.

      So, in order for a computer to be a digitial audio recording device, it must have a digital recording function which is designed or marketed for the primary purpose of making digital audio copied recordings for private use.

      This is not the case, however. Ordinary personal computers are general purpose devices; their digital recording functions are the same, whether the data being recorded is text, music, speech, pictures, etc. Thus, it doesn't qualify for 1008.

      Similarly, in order for a hard drive to be a digital audio recording medium, it must be primarily marketed or most commonly used by consumers for the purpose of making digital audio copied recordings by use of a digital a

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    20. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by garyrich · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Just seems like an organization responsible for distribution would want to embrase a new distribution medium"

      People hate change. Corporations hate change even more. They have never operated in a "free market" and have no desire to. /. Has a high representation of people that Alvin Toffler would call "change junkies". In the rest of the world these type of people are very very rare. I didn't really understand this until I worked for a few years for a dow 30 company, the feeling that what worked 50 years ago should still work now is so pervasive that you breathe it with the air. As far as I can infer - that's how normal people think.

      The RIAA isn't even the record companies that they represent. They are paid to represent the industry as a whole. That interest is selling a million copies of the same thing to everyone. They make the most $$ when the record stores all sell the same 30 products. I could write a 10 page screed on the law of large numbers to prove that point, but frankly nobody cares except investors and economists. It's the mega-platinum sellers that subsidise everything else according to the current (obsolete) business model. It really will be a bit sad to lose that.

      Jaince Ian has written about how cool it is to be truly wicked famous. We are going to lose that as part of this transition. It's kind of like losing the romance of whaling. I don't miss it, but Moby Dick was a hell of a book. We did lose something.

      The RIAA can't stop that, but their clear mission is to stop it or die trying. They *will* die trying, and it won't be pretty. The Hillary Rosen's and Jack Valenti's will cash their checks, sangine that they have done the best they possibly could at something that had no chance of success and move on to the next gig.

      This industry is going to die. But it is going to go out kicking and screaming like every other doomed business model that used to work so very profitably.

      --
      -- your Web browser is Ronald Reagan
    21. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by Sabriel · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If she does not believe she is guilty she can take it to court. She was on their phone line with them discussing how to pay it because she knew she was guilty.

      How on earth did you get 'insightful' for this? Nowhere in the article is her guilt or innocence admitted or confirmed, so please feel free to share your hidden knowledge or psychic powers.

      She was on their phone line because SHE COULDN'T AFFORD TO TAKE IT TO COURT. What part of that INJUSTICE do you do not clue, or are you just being a shill or a troll? These idiots are suing infants and grannies, they don't give a crap about justice or innocence, only how they can exploit the system.

      (throws soapbox and walks off fuming)

    22. Re:RIAA has some learning to do by idonthack · · Score: 2, Funny
      Judge - " Pistol grip pump motherfuckers!! "

      Watch out, they'll sue you for violating lyric copyright.
      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
  3. This is ridiculous by dobedobedew · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Are any of you still buying RIAA label cd's? If you are, you are supporting this crap.
    This has to stop.

    1. Re:This is ridiculous by The-Bus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or... if you still like the artists but hate the RIAA, buy the CD used. No more money goes back to the RIAA and you still have the CD.

      --

      Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    2. Re:This is ridiculous by dr_dank · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are any of you still buying RIAA label cd's? If you are, you are supporting this crap.

      And when their profits fall, they play the victim card again and start cranking out ever increasing numbers of lawsuits. As long as they have legislators in their pockets and shyster lawyers that'll pressure settlements out of people, this will continue.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    3. Re:This is ridiculous by Thaddeus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You wouldn't have a problem with this if you didn't have anything to hide.

      Sorry, but you're wrong. All the RIAA needs is for someone to tell them (maybe your own ISP, erroneously) that your IP address was associated with an illegal music download. Doesn't matter if they got it wrong. Only way you can prove it is to go to court, at which time the court will order your computer seized to be scoured for evidence, and you will incur thousands of dollars in legal bills even if you win (unless someone takes your case pro bono). Alternatively, you can shell out a few thousand to the RIAA and it will all go away.

      --
      ^X^S ^X^C
    4. Re:This is ridiculous by bugbiteme · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It just seems obvious to me how these lawsuits couldn't hold up. When I turn on my laptop in just about any neighborhood, I can always find a handful of unsecured wireless networks. What's to stop me from getting on one of these and use a p2p client? I think this is how poor old Grandmas get busted by the RIAA for downloading the new Masta P album.

      OK, I guess if they seize my computer and find the stuff, they got a case, otherwise no.

    5. Re:This is ridiculous by quarterbrain · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're forgetting 4 very important letters:

      DMCA

      All the RIAA has to do is send a letter to your ISP saying that they believe you have infringed on their copyrights, and they must comply with their requests for your information as per DMCA. To do otherwise could financially damage your ISP, as they would have no legal leg to stand on if they refuse, and could also be held liable for your alleged P2P misdeeds.

    6. Re:This is ridiculous by codegen · · Score: 2, Funny
      All the RIAA needs is for someone to tell them (maybe your own ISP, erroneously) that your IP address was associated with an illegal music download.

      Maybe it would be interesting to either report the IP address of an executive of RIA or spoof the ip address. See how long it takes them to figure out they are suing themselves

      --
      Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
  4. Well college students pirate more often so by Shnizzzle · · Score: 5, Funny

    clearly, if the person is no longer a college student, he/she will be less likely to pirate music. Brillant.

  5. Okay... by eln · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  6. slashdotted already... by ToxikFetus · · Score: 5, Funny

    She might have to drop out of school just to pay for the webhosting bill...

  7. Unbelievable by Geldon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Unbelievable by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, in this case RIAA says they've got evidence of her infringing the copyrights of 272 different songs. If the RIAA opts for statutory damages (seems likely) they have a potential ceiling of $40.8 million. But it's more likely they'd get something in the range of $204,000 to $8.160 million. It is seems unlikely that the award would be any lower than the $204k figure, but the absolute minimum it could possibly be if RIAA won a court case against her would be $54,400. The law does not allow for a lower amount. And I seriously doubt that she could make the case for such a low number. The $204k amount is probably as low as the court will be able to go.

      So given that RIAA is willing to settle for a paltry $3,750, it is strongly in her own best interests to settle unless she didn't infringe at all.

      Naturally, if she hasn't got that much, then it doesn't matter how big the award is, as far as the RIAA is concerned. But it would hang over her, forcing her to try to discharge it in bankruptcy, or trying to pay it off for many years to come.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    2. Re:Unbelievable by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Meh. The greater problem is with the clients. The lawyers are just doing what they're directed to do, and it's not as though the organizations shouldn't be able to get representation.

      (Besides, from what I understand, there are relatively few lawyers involved anyway. It's regular employees or contractors who find infringers and offer canned settlements. It wouldn't usually get bumped up to a lawyer unless someone wouldn't settle.)

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    3. Re:Unbelievable by OverlordQ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yea, but the incident happened at 4:35 PM, and your car was seen in that space at 4:35, since I assume the Parking Garage (ISP) has a camera (logs) which show that your car (computer) was parked in that spot (IP addy)

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
  8. TFA by bwthomas · · Score: 4, Informative

    Run Over by the RIAA Don't Tap the Glass

    By Cassi Hunt

    Either since the day I visited my first aquarium or the day Goldie came into my family's life, our parents have told us not to tap the glass of the fish tank. It's cruel to Goldie -- I understand and respect that. I mean, heck, I am a vegetarian. But would we have many qualms over a little water perturbation if Goldie were, say, a bloodthirsty shark? I'd knock on that glass to the near-cracking point. And in that spirit, I decided to call up my new friend at the RIAA negotiation hotline again. (Hereafter I'll refer to her as Bowie, which means "yellow haired," as I'm pretty sure that's the case.)

    Last time I spoke with Bowie, the conversation was pretty much over after she named $3750 as the settlement amount. (I haven't actually agreed to settle yet.) So when I called her again, I asked -- again -- about how to negotiate that amount. I counted on the fact that self-important types wouldn't be inclined to remember a lowly pirate like me. Bowie didn't disappoint. She launched into her spiel about how the RIAA doesn't negotiate settlements. I told her that it was too much to ask for thousands of dollars from a college student who only makes just enough from term and summer employment to still come out a couple thousand in debt.

    Bowie replied that the RIAA was oh-so-kind enough to offer a six month repayment plan. At this point, I was beginning to speculate on Bowie's hair color, and decided to switch tactics. I concisely and calmly explained how the situation was ridiculous: they weren't offering a settlement, they were issuing an ultimatum! Let us screw you over gently now, or with chains and whips in court. Surely there must be some flexibility for individual cases.

    Well, she replied, they do make allowances if something like a medical emergency comes up. Now we're getting somewhere. "And who would I talk to about a situation like that, because I'd like to talk to them now."

    "Me," she replied. Ever feel like your nose has just been flattened by something large and solid? I mean, besides the doors at 77 Mass. Ave. "But you're not in a situation like that."

    Oh, but I am. The Institvte has left me with severe bouts of p-set-induced insomnia and a case of stuck-to-desk-itis that recurs two to three times in a semester, then again just before break. And my wallet certainly takes a hit for it.

    But as much as I tried to argue that I was in as unique a situation as someone with medical expenses, there was no getting through. Bowie even had the audacity to say, "In fact, 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. You. Shitting. Me.

    There you have it, fellow Techsters: proof of the fantastic levels of absurdity to which the RIAA attack has sunk. The Recording Industry of America would rather see America's youth deprived of higher education, forever marring their ability to contribute personally and financially to society -- including the arts -- so that they may crucify us as examples to our peers. To say nothing of wrecking our lives in the process. I finally understand what the RIAA meant when they told me "stealing music is not a victimless crime" -- the victims hang for all to see.

    Please, RIAA -- if any competent representative happens to enjoy flipping through The Tech -- please tell me Bowie is a moronic tool who can't help what the Superior Gray Coverage Golden Blonde hair dye does to her mental facilities. Please tell me you actually care about the futures of the age demographic that buys most of your music (http://www.riaa.com/news/marketingdata/pdf/2004co nsumerprofile.pdf). Your evil pirates are people too, people who enjoy music and almost always still purchase it legitimately. Each has an individual life and circumstances that deserve consideration, if not for the sake of empathy for your f

    1. Re:TFA by Flunitrazepam · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'll continue to stand behind the glass, tapping away, wondering which of us is on display.

      Isn't that a lyric from the new Nine Inch Nails album?

      --
      1) Your analysis is based on bad assumptions so your result is way off. 2) You're a sick bastard for fucking a horse.
  9. Just in case, article text by Geldon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here's TFA (in case of an unlikely slashdotting):

    Run Over by the RIAA Don...t Tap the Glass
    By Cassi Hunt

    Either since the day I visited my first aquarium or the day Goldie came into my family's life, our parents have told us not to tap the glass of the fish tank. It's cruel to Goldie -- I understand and respect that. I mean, heck, I am a vegetarian. But would we have many qualms over a little water perturbation if Goldie were, say, a bloodthirsty shark? I'd knock on that glass to the near-cracking point. And in that spirit, I decided to call up my new friend at the RIAA negotiation hotline again. (Hereafter I'll refer to her as Bowie, which means "yellow haired," as I'm pretty sure that's the case.)

    Last time I spoke with Bowie, the conversation was pretty much over after she named $3750 as the settlement amount. (I haven't actually agreed to settle yet.) So when I called her again, I asked -- again -- about how to negotiate that amount. I counted on the fact that self-important types wouldn't be inclined to remember a lowly pirate like me. Bowie didn't disappoint. She launched into her spiel about how the RIAA doesn't negotiate settlements. I told her that it was too much to ask for thousands of dollars from a college student who only makes just enough from term and summer employment to still come out a couple thousand in debt.

    Bowie replied that the RIAA was oh-so-kind enough to offer a six month repayment plan. At this point, I was beginning to speculate on Bowie's hair color, and decided to switch tactics. I concisely and calmly explained how the situation was ridiculous: they weren't offering a settlement, they were issuing an ultimatum! Let us screw you over gently now, or with chains and whips in court. Surely there must be some flexibility for individual cases.

    Well, she replied, they do make allowances if something like a medical emergency comes up. Now we're getting somewhere. "And who would I talk to about a situation like that, because I'd like to talk to them now."

    "Me," she replied. Ever feel like your nose has just been flattened by something large and solid? I mean, besides the doors at 77 Mass. Ave. "But you're not in a situation like that."

    Oh, but I am. The Institvte has left me with severe bouts of p-set-induced insomnia and a case of stuck-to-desk-itis that recurs two to three times in a semester, then again just before break. And my wallet certainly takes a hit for it.

    But as much as I tried to argue that I was in as unique a situation as someone with medical expenses, there was no getting through. Bowie even had the audacity to say, "In fact, 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. You. Shitting. Me.

    There you have it, fellow Techsters: proof of the fantastic levels of absurdity to which the RIAA attack has sunk. The Recording Industry of America would rather see America's youth deprived of higher education, forever marring their ability to contribute personally and financially to society -- including the arts -- so that they may crucify us as examples to our peers. To say nothing of wrecking our lives in the process. I finally understand what the RIAA meant when they told me "stealing music is not a victimless crime" -- the victims hang for all to see.

    Please, RIAA -- if any competent representative happens to enjoy flipping through The Tech -- please tell me Bowie is a moronic tool who can't help what the Superior Gray Coverage Golden Blonde hair dye does to her mental facilities. Please tell me you actually care about the futures of the age demographic that buys most of your music (http://www.riaa.com/news/marketingdata/pdf/2004co nsumerprofile.pdf). Your evil pirates are people too, people who enjoy music and almost always still purchase it legitimately. Each has an individual life and circumstances that deserve c

    1. Re:Just in case, article text by InsaneProcessor · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't understand everybody's thinking here. Don't hire a lawyer (thief) and tell them you won't settle. Tell them to take you to court and then demand proof that you stole. Then ask for continuance after continuance for discovery. Petition the court to summons records from the RIAA that shows the evidence for thier claim. There is a hole in thier evidence chain. There always is. I found this to be true in a simular situation with DirectTV that killed thier case and it only took about an hour and a half to find it.

      Don't take thier crap and stand up to them firm. Even if you don't fully understand what they are doing, act like you are in control and they can't win. If you press forward this way, they can't win.

      --

      Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
    2. Re:Just in case, article text by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Believe me, she does not want to go to court. First off, she's probably guilty.

      Possibly. But the question is, can you prove it in a court of law with lawfully obtained evidence?

      There are plenty on guilty mob bosses and criminals out there who are probably guilty, but we live in a society that demands proof beyond reasonable doubt in order for someone to be convicted. And the methods used to obtain that proof cannot themselves be unlawful.

      How can the RIAA prove this student downloaded the files? Do they have this evidence? Has the student's ISP given it to them? Was this done in a lawful manner? Do they have evidence of the files residing on the students computer? Was this evidence obtained from the students computer in a lawful manner? Does the RIAA know for a fact that the files it believes were illegal copies were in fact illegal copies of songs to which it has copyright?

      The fact is, if it goes to court, and the RIAA presents its evidence, there's a good chance that they'll face bigger charges than the student.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    3. Re:Just in case, article text by MikeXpop · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Ask for a damned jury trial. No jury in the world is going to make you pay such exorbitant sums for downloading a movie here or there. People get that downloading "Ice Age" from TBP isn't worth $150,000.
      Not sure how it works in Massachusetts, but in New Hampshire jury trials aren't awarded for civil cases unless the damage is $25,000 or greater. And it's not $150,000, they've agreed to "settle" for around $3,000.

      And just because you're not rich doesn't mean you automatically get a public defender in a criminal case. The state is paying for these defenders, and they're going to make sure there is absolutely no way you could afford a lawyer otherwise before handing them over. It's kind of sad, but the state would suggest to her exactly what the RIAA did: Drop out of college.
      --
      Etiquette is etiquette. He kills his mother but he can't wear grey trousers.
  10. Re:MIT to community college? by dr_dank · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why not? An MIT kid would DOMINATE over there.

    Reminds me of a friend who was born in Spain and took Spanish in high school. His halfwit teacher could't figure out how a guy with a last name of Perez could score near 100% on every test.

    --
    Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
  11. Bingo. by C10H14N2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Bingo. by mshiltonj · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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...

      breaking the law != doing something wrong.

      The law is a ass. -- Charles Dickens

    2. Re:Bingo. by EzInKy · · Score: 5, Insightful


      Hell, spend your CD money on booze...


      Funny you should mention booze. So do you also think Prohibiton would have been rescinded if nobody had broken the law?

      --
      Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
  12. Re:Why pay at all? by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because outstanding judgments can be listed on your credit reports. Since so many employers are now checking credit reports, probably not a good idea even if you don't care about your ability to get credit. Never mind whether you eventually want to get a mortgage or buy a car... even if you are issued credit, you'll pay for it many times over via an increased interest rate.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  13. Karma to burn! by Reverberant · · Score: 4, Interesting
    With apologies to a certain CIC: I earned karmic capital on Slashdot, and now I intend to spend it.

    1. Submit story to Slashdot, wait for it to get rejected
    2. Submit story to That Other Site, wait for it to take off
    3. Wait for another Slashdot user to submit story to Slashdot.
    4. Profit?
  14. Re:Best. Advice. Ever. by Red+Flayer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "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
  15. Re:thats nice by gonk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    She made a choice. Choices can have a lasting impact on life.

    robert

  16. Personal responsibility by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    She did the action in question. She is responsible for the penalties for undertaking that action.

    We all have to make hard choices every day.

    The last time I broke a speeding law, it was pretty bogus. I still paid for the ticket and took the classes. IMHO- that particular speeding ticket set up was unfair (basically 70mph /hill\ 55mph construction zone - cop at bottom of hill).

    She chose to download songs. She probably also foolishly didn't use programs like peer guardian. She also got unlucky.

    Yes- Riaa are weasels. But by now, surely we ALL know that if you download copyrighted material you are risking a 3kish fine (or being ruined in court if you tried to fight it).

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    1. Re:Personal responsibility by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Yes- Riaa are weasels. But by now, surely we ALL know that if you download copyrighted material you are risking a 3kish fine (or being ruined in court if you tried to fight it).

      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.
  17. Music industry == evil. by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Simple as that. They abuse there customers left right and sideways. I find it funny that they wonder why sales are going down. They blame it on piracy but the truth is concert sales are also dropping.
    1. Music is too expensive. I can buy a DVD of a Movie for the same price as a CD. Don't give the crap about how I will use the CD more then the DVD that has NOTHING to do with the cost to produce the product.
    2. I can not find any music I really want to buy. I have gone to Launch to see what new artists are out. Nothing really grabs me. I listen to the radio. Nothing really new there. The fact that concert sales are also dropping should make it clear it is the product and not the piracy that is causing the issue.
    3. I really would love to see the record companies get a real hard look from the government. Their accounting, business practices, and yes dealing in drugs. How many recording artists have died from drug use? How many of them have had drugs provided to them by employees of the the music industry? This will never happen. They Music Industry will hide behind "artistic" freedom and start screaming about how it is just like McCarthy in 50s.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  18. Evil by Britz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I never used the term "evil" seriously before, because the concept of good and evil is pretty alien to me (I am a moderate Christian from Europe). But suggesting to drop out of college to pay a settlement for some p2p music stuff... (stealing would be if the company looses something, which is not the case with copying digital content).

    I do think content producers (and software writers for that matter) need protection, but that?

    Ask yourself, if you worked your butt off for some software and someone who is not willing to pay for it and would not use it if they had to but copied it and offered it for share, should they be made to drop out of college to pay for the settlement?

    1. Re:Evil by jjohnson · · Score: 4, Informative

      She's not being made to drop out of college. She's being offered a $3,750 settlement, which is cheap compared to what it would be if lawyers and the courts got involved. Dropping out of college is something she might do so she can get a job to pay the settlement; she might also get a part time job, she might borrow it from her parents, she might sell a kidney. The RIAA doesn't care how she got the money, and phrasing it as "The RIAA wants her to drop out of college" is a misdirection that avoids the real issue: She incurred legal liability when she couldn't afford to, and now has to deal with that.

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
  19. Re:MIT to community college? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  20. WTF are you guys doing? by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 2, Interesting

    OK, I have been guilty of defending the business motivation behind the RIAA from time to time, but that shit is over.

    Are these fucks out of their mind? Drop out of school or go to community college? This would be horrible advice to anyone going to college, but this is a friggin MIT student. You know, the type of people that come up with some of the coolest shit ever. The type of people that helped develop the technologies the RIAA is exploiting right now.

    Did anyone at the RIAA think of what it would be like to piss these people off? I mean, this type of thing could not only unite the MIT campus into taking offensive action, but the whole lot of prestigious technical Universities as well.

    Plus, the run of the mill uneducated citizen can figure this one out. "MIT is where the smart people go. The RIAA says that they want this student to drop out so they can pay them. What the hell."

    I sure hope the PR guy for the RIAA drops his intestines when he gets this news.

  21. It's not a crime by MarkByers · · Score: 4, Funny

    if I like the song I have downloaded I will usually buy the album [...] does this mean I am commiting a crime?

    It's not a crime. It's perfectly legal to voluntarily give money to an illegal price-fixing cartel, although the morality is obviously questionable.

    --
    I'll probably be modded down for this...
  22. Re:How do we tell who is with RIAA by Dachannien · · Score: 4, Informative
  23. From the *AA's perspective.... by idontgno · · Score: 2, Insightful
    there is only one objective: get paid, either in a pre-lawsuit settlement or a post-lawsuit judgement, and thereby vindicating their perspective. The money, and the "points" the money represents, are critical.

    Like all "bill collectors", they want you to agree with them in this. "Paying me is the most important thing you can do with your money. A nice, expensive college is optional. Any college at all is optional. Food is optional. Paying me is mandatory."

    It's a strong negotiation position, that's all. If you make the mistake of agreeing without pushing back...well...remind me again, who's quickly parted from his money?

    I'm actually a little bit surprised part of the *AA's bill collector's spiel didn't start "Do you have life insurance..."

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  24. Blah by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The only "extortion" they're doing is going around people who are guilty of copyright infringment against their members, and negotiating relatively cheap (compared to the fines you'd suffer if they took you to court) out of court settlements.

    Oh, that's the ONLY "extortion"? Oh my, how mistaken I've been, the RIAA is just worried about doing justice, how heroic of them!</sarcasm>

    And, quite honesty, in 2006, if you're being sued for distributing someone else's work on a network that makes them available to millions of anonymous strangers, then you only have yourself to blame.

    Yes, the problem is when you didn't do it but the RIAA says you did.
    It's NOT justice if you have to spend thousands of dollars to prove your innocence.

    Another thought: Is that law good if it forces you to pay extra taxes to get a product that is under absolute control of a monopoly?

    I'd agree with the lawsuits if the RIAA didn't force people to buy only their products - I'm talking about forcing distributors and radio stations NOT to publish music from independent artists. If I bought an original CD and later I download one of the files in it (because it got scratched or something), I'd get sued by the RIAA anyway.

    And don't get me started into DRM.

  25. A simple matter of intimidation by wuffalicious · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I suspect, when it comes right down to it, the RIAA's policy as far as lawsuits are concerned really have nothing to do with enforcing the law. When you look at the pattern of their lawsuits, it almost seems that they intentionally avoid sparing anyone - be they children, old women who have never used a computer before, or people who more than likely had someone sneak onto their unsecured wi-fi network. These are people who are either obviously innocent, or don't deserve to be subjected to lawsuits that could cost them tens of thousands of dollars. At their worst, most of these folks a being nailed for a few bucks worth of music. The punishment doesn't particularly fit the crime, in this case, and the RIAA likely knows this. Frankly, the penalty for downloading copyrighted material is rather terrifying. The lawsuits filed by the RIAA are an attempt to capitalize on this terror. They're not designed to stop dedicated pirates. As many people have pointed out in the past, dedicated pirates will get what they want regardless. However, by creating an atmosphere where you just don't know who's going to get sued next, they intimidate your 'average Joes' into sticking off the filesharing networks. The fact that these lawsuits pretty much pay for themselves is an added bonus.

    What really gets my goat about this entire campaign is that it's done at great expense to many of its victims. These are people who are being subjected to lawsuits for no purpose other than to make an example to the rest of the country of just what happens when you mess with the music industry. They bear an unfair burden, under the law, to scare those the industry can't catch in the act into getting in line. I hope this madness comes to an end soon.

  26. How You Can Fight RIAA by vinn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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
  27. Re:Common sense by stlhawkeye · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I'm no lawyer, but anyone with common sense (and one who sits infront of a judge hopes the judge will have some, if any) would realize that dropping out of college is a non-logical choice.

    You would be surprised and a little outraged to know how arbitrary a judge's decision can be, as well as damage awards. Especially in the second tier courts. Whether or not you have to drop out of college is your own choice. If you have been tried by a court of this land and found guilty, you may be liable for damages, and in that case, you must pay them. That's how the law works. That you might have to sacrifice something very important to you is your own problem, and you should have thought of that before you broke the law. That's theory, anyway. In practice, it's hard to justify abandoning an Ivy-league education because you illegally copied some CDs, I agree. TFA says, "The Recording Industry of America would rather see America's youth deprived of higher education, forever marring their ability to contribute personally and financially to society -- including the arts -- so that they may crucify us as examples to our peers." No, they'd rather have you not pirating their shit in the first place. If you've done no wrong, don't settle. If you have done wrong, what are you bitching about?

    It will diminuish your chances of having a safe financial future, which makes you even less likely to be able to pay that fine. Having students dropping out of college or switching over to community college should NOT be considered as a valid option.

    But it is a valid option. It's a crappy one, but if you broke the law and don't think you can get out of it in court, then this is called a consequence. I know consequences are all but unknown in the current crop of college students, but they do occur. I agree with the general sentiment here this is shitty and that the RIAA is utterly unsympathetic and over the top, but at the root of all of this are individual people who made the decision to engage in illegal activity. They got caught and now they have to pay the piper. As much as I think the RIAA is being a bag of dicks about this, I have little sympathy for the people who put themselves in this situation.

    It's a tough issue. I despise the RIAA and the insanely stupid and short-sighted approach they take to their business, but I still can't get past the fact that we're rising up to defend people who unquestionable and admittedly and knowingly broke a law and are now pissed that there are consequences for it. Sorry. Zero sympathy.

    --
    "I have never won a debate with an ignorant person." -Ali ibn Abi Talib
  28. Re:MIT to community college? by Headcase88 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Are you sure they were "from Mexico", or just had Mexican descent?

    I mean part or my ancestry is Irish, would you assume I speak Irish? Or that I'm "from Ireland"?

    --
    "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
  29. Don't do the CRIME if you can't do the TIME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful



    Don't do the CRIME if you can't do the TIME.

    And did you know that "copyright infringement" gets you more time than theft ("grand larceny")? Do the first, get busted, go to jail for five years AND a $250,000 fine. Do the latter, get busted, and maybe go to jail for one to three years, and maybe pay a $10,000 fine.

    1. Re:Don't do the CRIME if you can't do the TIME by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 4, Funny
      And did you know that "copyright infringement" gets you more time than theft ("grand larceny")? Do the first, get busted, go to jail for five years AND a $250,000 fine. Do the latter, get busted, and maybe go to jail for one to three years, and maybe pay a $10,000 fine.

      So the solution is simple: hold up a record store, pay the RIAA with the proceeds, and keep the rest to yourself.

    2. Re:Don't do the CRIME if you can't do the TIME by cultrhetor · · Score: 2, Funny

      Let's pause for a moment and consider a few things: first, Anglo-American copyright law since the Statute of Anne (circa 1700) has been built on print. It arose from print, meant to protect publishers. Since subsequent recodification of copyright law under Queen Victoria in 1842, the law has also protected the idea of "originality" and "authorial substance"; however, its primary purpose has always been the protection of the entity responsible for publishing and distributing the information.

      Over ensuing decades, little has changed but the fines - the wording of copyright law hasn't changed much at all. The problem is that under its original framing, copyright law was designed to maintain the integrity of original content; however, with digital content, the integrity does not deteriorate. Our model of law coincided with the age of print - based on physical, concrete substance and actual space. Digital space is foreign to our current body of law - an entity such as the RIAA obtaining your IP address without probable cause violates rights to due process as well as protection from unwarranted search and seizure, especially when one considers that the RIAA is not a recognized law enforcement body, and therefore could never obtain a warrant - thus having no right to search. Would you say that your neighbors could walk into your house without your presence or permission, look around for something illegal, and then call the police?

      --
      "Tu fui, ego eris" - Virgil
  30. Re:Best. Advice. Ever. by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "In my experience, the number is closer to 6 in 10 if not more. "

    Your experience is obviously out of line with what the rest of the country experiences.

    " I've had 2 failures out of about 20 that I ran in my entire life, so I feel I'm ahead."

    Good for you. But that doesn't mean anyone else can also expect a success rate like that.

    "You can start a business for less than US$20,000 right now"

    Depends on the business. Some require far more capital than that.

    "That's funny because I've worked with medical research companies (two large ones in Lake County, Illinois) and I'm amazed at how many research doctors are foreigners with foreign educations"

    You'd be surprised, I think, with how few of them completed their educations outside the US. Not only that, but regardless of where they got their education, they still got an education. I know your point here is that the US system is broken, but your original point was that college education is not worthwhile.

    "On top of that, I travel the world at least 2-3 times a year, and I see more innovation outside of this country than I do here."

    This anecdote is worthless to the discussion, there's no need to toot your own horn so often -- frankly, your business success and/or world travel has no bearing on the merits of your theoretical arguments. I doubt that your 'extensive world travel' is anywhere close to exhaustive enough to make base assumptions about the level of innovation occurring worldwide and in different countries.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  31. There's one more possibility there. by Headcase88 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What if he downloads it, likes it, doesn't delete it, and doesn't buy the CD?

    --
    "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
  32. The funny thing is... by Ignignot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I know I'll be modded down for saying this - but what the RIAA is offering is quite a deal if you are actually guilty of copyright infringement. 4 grand is absolutely nothing in comparison to how much they could legitimately attempt to collect. At no time does she say that she didn't perform copyright infringement. She seems to be saying that it is unfair for them to punish her because it is inconvenient at this time. That's why they call it punishment.

    --
    I submitted this story last night, and it didn't get posted.
    1. Re:The funny thing is... by Ignignot · · Score: 2, Informative

      She owes whatever the law says she does, and a judge decides.

      --
      I submitted this story last night, and it didn't get posted.
    2. Re:The funny thing is... by robjob · · Score: 3, Informative

      Section 504(c) of the Copyright Act allows for statutory damages of between $750 and $30,000 per violation and up to $150,000 per violation if the infringement was willfull. If you figure each song is a separate violation, it doesn't take much to make up a huge number.

  33. It is extortion by snowwrestler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  34. Re:TFA (she's an asshat) by keyne9 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If one cannot afford to pay to mount a legal defense, you either pay, or you PAY. Innocence does not mater.

  35. Re:TFA (no, you're an asshat) by eaglej · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Way to go. You've picked apart, line-by-line, a lot of hyperbole and metaphor. Just to make this clear, the "shark" is actually the RIAA. When people talk about sharks in a context like this, they mean to bring up the images of a scary, ruthless predator. This is not really how all sharks actually are. I don't think she's actually going to "knock on the glass to the near-cracking point."

    Also, she's implying that she's a veggie because she's kind to animals, not the other way around.

    The woman with the hair dye is not her accuser, as you state. The RIAA is her accuser (corporations = people in court). The woman is a representative of her accuser, and it is perfectly reasonable to consider the possibility that she is a moron. The specific sentence you quote is in fact an appeal to those components of the RIAA which are not moronic - the author is assuming they exist and hence admitting the likelihood that this particular representative does not represent the intelligence level of her actual accuser.

    The point of this story, which parent ignores, was the absolutely bizzare quote about how people should drop out of college to pay their settlements. I find it bizzare for two reasons:

    1. It's completely disgusting that any representative of the RIAA would suggest that. That's just wrong, for reasons that other posters have certainly pointed out.
    2. Why that's even remotely necessary in this case is beyond me. $3750 is pretty reasonable, even for a college student. Yeah, it hurts, but it's supposed to. I disagree with the tactics, the concept of the RIAA in general, and the copyright system, but given the situation, that's not that bad. It certainly wouldn't necessitate dropping out of school. The author of the article is right to try every possible angle to negotiate, but can she really say with a straight face that dropping out is even under consideration? Unlikely. If the RIAA rep really did bring it up, it goes a long way in comfirming author's assertion that rep is a moron.

    How parent got modded insightful is a mystery; the "insightful" poster seems to be reading at about a third grade level.

  36. Re:TFA (she's an asshat) by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Insightful
    But I find it horrifying that anyone would single-mindedly and without compassion process people like a meat grinder set to purée.

    No one said the penalty would be pleasant.
    You seem to be missing the difference between justice and law.

    Everyone knows that laws are hard and fast rules, but when you go before a Judge, it's to receive justice... as justice is a much more flexible concept than "the law".

    If you take justice out of the "Justice System", you lose almost all of the fairness present in the system. I mean, the Government has a Department of Justice, not a Department of Law Enforcement.

    Police States are all about law enforcement. I assume that this particular Democracy is interested in Justice, considering their rebellious roots.
    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
  37. Are you part of the problem? by X86Daddy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you're giving money to the RIAA cartel, then you're funding their legal bullying, and you're funding their legislation-purchasing efforts. This is simple to realize, and not some bullshit argument like buying weed from the neighborhood grower funds terrorism.

    I am not suggesting that you stop buying CDs! Although I do suggest that you do not purchase new CDs from the companies that contribute to this problem. In addition to boycott, there are other legal ways to make your point. Use RIAA Radar to see if an album is tainted; tell your friends about the service. Buy directly from small artists. Browse MySpace to find new stuff by indie bands. Go to Used CD stores. Tell people about how you spend money on music and how you will not spend money on music. Warn people about corrupt Sony CDs and whatever the next violation is. Tell people what copyright was supposed to mean versus what it means today.

    You may not topple the giant alone, but when the daughter of a senator learns about the issue and feels strongly about it, when an exec of a smaller music label makes *less* money with the cartel and drops out of the RIAA, when a cavalier journalist with CNN or Fox hears about today's story and decides to air it, you've made a difference.

  38. Another alternative to CDs by Phoenix666 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is to learn to play an instrument and make your own music. As a non-musician I always assumed that learning to play and read notes was a task on par with quantum mechanics, and that it required thousands of hours of lessons and matriculation to Juilliard. It took a lifetime of wanting to learn and 6 years of raging against the RIAA to finally pick up a guitar. And I've discovered that it's really, really easy to learn, and in less than a week of noodling around for an hour here or there you can pick up enough chords to play a large swath of rock 'n' roll. It's also quite fun.

    And as you play your happy little tunes you also get a great deal of satisfaction in knowing that you've become the RIAA's ultimate nightmare, an artistically and culturally liberated producer of music who will never again have need of their crap.

    --
    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
  39. Some Good Advice by mshurpik · · Score: 4, Informative

    1. Dropping out of MIT is a great idea. I did it twice.

    2. You will not go to jail for non-payment of a civil debt. However, they may find a way to withdraw the funds from your assets (bank account, car, etc.)

  40. downloading music is NOT illegal dammit by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2, Informative

    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.

    Last time I checked, downloading isn't a crime, regardless of what the **AA folks say. Uploading, however, is. This is why you can download freely from such sites as that russian mp3 site (disregarding any other international issues such as it's legal there, etc).

    If you'll notice, no one has been busted for downloading. They have been busted for sharing (distribution). That the part that gets you into hot water with the copyright laws.

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  41. Re:full circle by Cornflake917 · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's not funny because it's redundant.

  42. Re:Or just dont pay it? by Tweekster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes they are....and you can dick around for decades before paying anything signicant. Civil judgements in this country dont exactly have the biggest weight in the world. Particularly when you have no income to speak of, yeah. hell you could putz around deciding on a payment plan through the courts (cheaply) for years.

    --
    The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
  43. Simply put: WTF? by Drinkgreen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A more than likely very intelligent woman going to MIT is told to either go to a Community College, or drop out altogether, robbing the world of who knows what kind of potential,..... just so J. Lo can buy another necklace and Britney can buy Kevin another car?

  44. Noooo (was:Get a lawyer...) by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 2, Informative

    Shoot the lawyers.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  45. Debtors Prison by PhYrE2k2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    To put this into context for anyone who's thinking "huh?"

    Bad debtors were once jailed within 'Debtors Prison', being removed as functional members of society, until their debts were paid. Once this was proved to be ineffective, and as modern considerations on fair rights came to play, an effect coined as 'The Race of the Swiftest' occurred. Creditors would, upon learning of a company's misfortune, take legal action against a debtor and be granted a portion of the company's assets in compensation for their debts. While this was reasonably effective for such creditors, there was no remedy for those creditors who were not as 'swift' to learn of the insolvency soon enough.

    As a result of this unfairness, various governments introduced Bankruptcy, such as Canada's 'Bankruptcy & Insolvency Act' and the US's 'Bankruptcy Act' (Chapter 11). The intention of these is to balance all interests, while being fair. They are all, in one form or another, intended to (a) give an honest but unfortunate debtor a 'fresh start' by relieving of them of the burden of most of their debts, and (b) to repay creditors in an orderly and fair manner using the resources of the debtor (read: liquidate assets and distribute to creditors based on a fair order of security and distributed evenly within each class).

    Just in case debtors prison sounds confusing :)

    -M

    --

    when you see the word 'Linux', drink!
  46. More info on this case by schmiddy · · Score: 2, Informative

    I found some more info about this particular student and her case with the RIAA, if you're curious as to how these things pan out.

    Run Over by the RIAA (a previous article)

    Xanga site

    I thought it was interesting that she got busted for sharing on i2hub -- I was surprised when I heard of pending MPAA lawsuits against movie swappers on i2. I'm still not quite sure how the *IAA infiltrated I2, I presume they must have just paid off some undergrads to act as a proxy onto the network. It was a sad day when i2hub got shut down, it was the only cool I2 application if nothing else.

    Also, Kudos to MIT for apparently at least trying to delay giving up the student's name. I know that, at my Uni at least, the IT admins have no love for the RIAA lawyers, though there's not a whole lot you can do against an army of lawyers.

    --
    http://cltracker.net -- powerful craigslist multi-city search
  47. Re:MIT to community college? by triffid_98 · · Score: 2, Funny
    I mean part or my ancestry is Irish, would you assume I speak Irish? Or that I'm "from Ireland"?


    Of course. Hey, aren't you part of the IRA too?
  48. Re:Sorry, no. by curunir · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My problem isn't what goes into making you want it, but what goes into preventing you from wanting anything else.

    Music's impact on the human mind is quite profound. It can alter mood, attention span and many other brain functions. For many people there is a primal, subconscious need for music. This can even be seen in cultures that are not exposed to the marketing hype that consumer-driven societies are. You can point to the marketing (MTV, movie tie-ins, etc), but what I believe is more important is that all of this is preventing us from hearing non-corporate music. There's two ways to shut people up, either shut them up (in a free society, this can be quite hard) or you can simply yell louder than they're capable of talking (in free societies, this tends to be quite easy, since money translates quite well into elevating the volume of your message). The marketing, P2P squashing and everything else is not so much about getting people to pay for their product, it's about drowning out any chance for independent music to inform us of its existance.

    They know we'll actively seek music...we're conditioned as humans to do so. They're only concern is that they be the only type of music that we're able to find. That's where the DRM/DMCA/typical /. rants come in. These technologies are tools being used by the established media corporations to monopolize the channel between themselves and consumers in order to maintain the illusion that there is nothing else out there.

    --
    "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"