Slashdot Mirror
LimeWire Sues RIAA for Antitrust Violations
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes to tell us that in a recent court battle, Arista v. LimeWire, LimeWire has filed counterclaims against the RIAA for 'antitrust violations, consumer fraud, and other misconduct.' From the article: "LimeWire alleged that the RIAA's 'goal was simple: to destroy any online music distribution service they did not own or control, or force such services to do business with them on exclusive and/or other anticompetitive terms so as to limit and ultimately control the distribution and pricing of digital music, all to the detriment of consumers.'"
So you are suggesting that someone go out and murder employees of the RIAA?
The system works. We just don't use it. If there is anything wrong with the system is that it requires American citizens in order for it to run properly.
So this is why 2 american presidential candidates were arrested trying to gain entry to the 2004 debates?
oh please!.. the 2 reigning parties have essentially made it impossible for new parties to form.
ross perot had 2 billion dollars at his disposal. Unless everyone else has that kind of money no.. the system does not work, and how dare you try to pretend otherwise.
And this is why the majority of americans dont vote.. they know it's essentially communist china here with a little potpurri on the grungier and more totalitarian aspects.
after all.. as long as corporations do it instead of government the constitution doesnt apply.. at least according to the judiciary.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
It's hardly over. You haven't backed down from your initial comment that employees of the RIAA should be murdered. In fact, you have tried to pass it off as a joke, then you tried to back it up again, then you began with the ad hominem attacks against me, and now you continue to do so by calling me a troll.
if there are nonviolent or even fully legal ways to neutralize the threat they represent to the public then i'm all for it
If "dumb" was too strong a word for you, perhaps you'd like to offer alternative suggestions to "murdering RIAA employees" which you claimed may exist but were either too lazy to actually give such alternatives, or more likely, you are simply incapable of contemplating anything other than what your brutish mindset first presents.
I'm not asking you to back down from your murder comment. I am asking that you elaborate your position because it is so far out of whack with anything resembling a reasonable position that you are either severely developmentally stunted or are trolling. Which is it?
Let's sum up then.
You believe that the top brass at the RIAA needs to be killed. You believe this because you feel they are "terrorists and racketeers" that are "similar to hezbollah (sic)" who are out to "subvert the intent of our forefathers" and the Constitution of the United States. You further believe that the calling for these deaths is a joke and that I missed the humor in it.
I believe that murder, and especially vigilantism, is an uncalled for method of dealing with legal issues. I also believe that joking about murder, especially in the context of actually calling for the deaths of certain groups of people, is beyond the line of acceptability.
I am chanting nothing. I am simply interested in why you think that murder is the proper method of dealing with the issues that the RIAA poses. Though you claim to be receptive to alternative solutions, your initial call was for violence against these people. That says a lot about who you are and your lack of either experience or education.
So you do not actually believe that the top 7 leaders of the RIAA terrorist cabal should be murdered?
Then what are you trying to argue? For a joke, you've taken a pretty strong stand calling for exactly the things that you claim to be joking about. You either 1) believe that these people should be murdered, or 2) that these people should not be murdered, or possibility 3) these people should be subject to some sort of vigilatism. Or you believe that this is all a joke and have no ill feelings towards the RIAA.
Your "rational conclusion that violence is probably necessary" in the face of the threat of the RIAA flies in the face of your claim that this is just a joke. You try to differentiate "violence" against members of the RIAA and "frothing demand for...war". There is no difference between these two. Calling for the deaths of the RIAA leadership (top 7, right?) is just as idiotic and irrational as frothing for a war.
So is it a joke and you don't want someone to murder the RIAA leadership, or are you serious in thinking that the RIAA leadership should be eliminated?
I believe that now we have a clear answer on one point. You actually believe that the leadership of the RIAA should be murdered. This is what you originally posted (and weren't joking) and have continued to post throughout this entire thread (also not jokingly).
I didn't think someone would seriously take that position. I'm flabbergasted that someone who claims to be a pussy liberal has such a tendency towards violence.
If anything Hezbollah is exactly the group people violently opposed to Corporate Facism gone wild want to emulate, rather than deride. Also note, that unlike the RIAA, Hezbollah is widely regarded (especially now) as heros in much of the South Lebanon and amongst the Palestinian people, whereas the RIAA is regarded as a heroic body by exactly no one, as far as I"m aware.
I'm with you on the violent revolution being a viable response to fascism, however, that's dead on.
You claim to be courageous, yet you also have already claimed that the murdering should be carried out by someone else. Someone like you who has so much to lose should be exempt from any action which would cause you loss. Is this not what you wrote earlier?
Is that not cowardice? Calling on others to do something that you are not willing to do yourself is perhaps less cowardice than hypocrisy.