Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Hires Artists, Then Sends In the SWAT team
cancan writes "The NY times is carrying an article about how the RIAA is hiring hip hop artists to make mix tapes, and then
helping the police raid their studios. In the case of DJ Drama and DJ Don Cannon, they were raided by SWAT teams with their guns drawn. The local police chief said later that they were 'prepared for the worst.' Men in RIAA jackets helped cart away 'evidence'. Just the same, 'Record labels regularly hire mixtape D.J.'s to produce CDs featuring a specific artist. In many cases, these arrangements are conducted with a wink and a nod rather than with a contract; the label doesn't officially grant the D.J. the right to distribute the artist's songs or formally allow the artist to record work outside of his contract.' " This is more of the shenanigans that we've previously discussed on the site.
This is an old policy. Frank Zappa was commissioned by some pig or other to do some sex tapes - get a girl and record heavy breathing, simulated sex etc - then busted him for breaching obscenity laws. I think it's because the police are so on top of all the other laws, and have little else to do. Also, they're less likely to get their asses kicked by a bunch of musicians.
If that's so, could the RIAA be hauled into criminal court for conspiracy to commit piracy?
Revive the Constitution.
This kind of action just becomes unacceptable.
At one point, the RIAA could have been negotiated with. That point has passed us by very, very fast. If it weren't illegal, I'm positive that most people would have taken up arms months ago and "settled" all the MAFIAA's court cases themselves.
The RIAA homepage needs to be slashdotted, repeatedly, and with no end in sight. Just like with the P2P networks, they'll feel the wrath of nerds with lots of bandwidth.
That the (maf)*IAA would resort to illegal tactics to catch people acting "illegally"...
Hmns... I for one welcome our new Alien overlords (a frontal lobotomy and rectal probe would be less painful than having to deal with the *AAs of the world). Fuck the corporations!
I drink to make other people interesting!
"And if there's one type of piracy I don't like, it's CONS-piracy."
Not as far as I can see from the article; the Slashdot summary seems misleading. As far as I can see from the article the RIAA had somebody busted that they had previously employed on a different project. I can't find anything in the linked article to suggest the set-up that the Slashdot article implies. Surely the RIAA does enough scummy things that we don't have to make things up about them?
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
It seems fairly obvious to me. Rap stars need to have "street cred" in order to rise into the upper echelons of rap stardom. That means a criminal record. Say you were a unscrupulous record producer who had a hot new talent on his hands. Say that the talent happens to be a squeaky clean wannabe thug from the 'burbs. Once your man has recorded a record all you have to do is plant some evidence/drugs and make an anonymous phone-call. Heck, if you're lucky those cops might be the trigger happy sort and you'll wind up with the next Tupac on your hands. (Not to mention the fact that your "client"'s contract probably cedes all royalties to the record company upon death...)
It sounds far-fetched, I know. However, one really does have to wonder if the majority of hardened criminals driving the rap industry are actually the sort that wears three-piece suits.
MAFIAA of course stands for the "Music And Film Industries Association of America". Anyone who thinks otherwise or wants to draw parallels to other criminal organisations should reconsider, and ponder his own disposition towards those industries rather than interpreting things into postings that aren't there.
Just to cover your bases, pal. Don't forget, revenue from legal action will soon become the major income base for those industries when their last customer is in jail, so I wouldn't call it beneath them to read this here, too, and try to pump some money outta that, too.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
These cats are private- no matter how much they imply it no matter how much they hint at no matter how much they wink and hold up a sign (but never actually say it) that says "we are a government agency" the RIAA's bullshit only carries the force of law if their regulations BECOME law. It's a trade association- nothing more. That is what makes the idea that they were carting out "evidence" all the more wrenching. I don't like it when these guys are co-opting the government. BTW, if this SWAT business is really true, this means that in a post-911 world we were able to spare a little bit (in this case a lot) of resources on a non-terrorism deal? WTF?
The RIAA homepage needs to be slashdotted, repeatedly, and with no end in sight.
Is this a joke? Somehow I don't think a bunch of nerds throwing packets at the RIAA website is going to help anyone. They're an organisation that deals with other *big* organisations who they already have other communication channels with. They don't need a fucking website. Get real.
Taking up arms against them is also a ridiculously extreme idea. If you want to help remove the RIAA's power, here's a few ideas:
- Learn a musical instrument and join the free culture movement.
- Get a law degree and help out in legal battles against RIAA and any organisation (MPAA, patent trolls, etc.) doing similar things.
- Start an alternative RIAA that protects artists of copylefted music from distributors using DRM on their copylefted music. Sue the DRM distributors for the maximum amount.
- If you feel strongly enough to dedicate a few thousand dollars of your own, launch a copylefted media competition and make the thousands of dollars the prize for the best copylefted film/song/etc. (online film festival, music website, etc.)
Of course, there should be a comma before and after "criminal" in the posting above.
Just to cover my bases. For no other reason.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
nuff said
Anyone that can help cut down on hip-hop gets my vote.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
This is just some bull story.. The raid ofcourse could be real, (and I certainly aprove of the swat method, since there are enough stories about violent hiphop artists), but the story about RIAA having hired them is ofcourse pure bull...
This has desperation written all over it. It would be a sad thing, really, if it weren't so funny.
In fact, it would be really, really cool if the RIAA actually went nuts (and not just in the metaphorical sense). I can't see them simply fading away like we envision.
Like the mighty dinosaur, their time has come, too. The only way they can save face (so to speak) is to go out with a bang. Call me when the RIAA reps pick up semi-automatic weapons themselves, and start holding people hostage for $buxx.
Similarly, it's hard to make P2P distributions of a nuclear bombing -- maybe they could try that!
In closing, I'm expecting quite a show for the RIAApocalypse.
(I'm just glad I'm a few continents away, for the time being.)
Keep up the good work! SWAT teams should be arresting more hip-hop "artists" for crimes against humanity.
It reminds me of something....
Seems they also use Hollywood Accounting.
Be carefull, next time it's gonna be a MPAA bust, afterall DJ's are using hollywood's trade secret !
The RIAA has way too much power, just like our own government. You, RIAA, are PURE SCUM and the earth needs to be cleansed from things like you!
shot of a grave-looking police officer saying, "In this case we didn't find drugs or weapons, but it's not uncommon for us to find other contraband."
Or to put it another way, these people are completely innocent of all crimes related to drugs or weapons. Of course, by putting it this way, there's a clear implication that these people are somehow connected to the illegal drugs trade.
where's the contract? Nobody releases work for distribution without a contract. I seriously doubt they had a "wink and a nod" agreement to remix songs and release it, especially for profit.
Without a signed contract it's bs.
Though I do agree the RIAA is a bunch of douchebags for going all S.S. on them.
To
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Nas has confirm it, Hip Hop is dead.
Last year, he published his findings in a book called "Overkill" (page here, direct link to free copy in 2 MB PDF here).
Also, check out his blog at TheAgitator.com , and his posts at Reason's blog.
>Men in RIAA jackets helped cart away 'evidence'.
Uh, the defendant's lawyer is going to have fun attacking the chain of evidence there.
www.isoHunt.com
He went to the Baltimore School of the Fine Arts on a scholarship. His mother is like the poet laureate of Maryland or something like that.
Yes, this is a seperate mixtape apart from the agreed upon earlier releases. Depending on who those DJs deal with, they may have just figured they would do another mixtape, then discovered (with guns pointed in their faces) that that was not part of the agreement.
As something of a fan of hip hop, it's kind of scary to see that the RIAA is going to clamp down on mixtapes. mixtapes are where trends start. It's a vital part of the cycle of hip hop production.
If producers, rappers and DJs don't have the freedom of the mixtape to test-market beats or styles or even simply as a means to promote themselves or their labels, this is going to hurt hip hop on the national level. And it will drive money away from the RIAA, which is the opposite goal of the RIAA (at least, I think it is- it's hard to tell these days).
Even if you get caught, they aren't going to get alive again. And their money won't have done them any good six feet under.
Show these felons that the corp they work for may be faceless but they don't exist without actual people running them and that if they want to see what the world looks like when nobody bothers to play nice with each other, they won't like it one bit.
Shouldn't take too long for them to work out it's better for EVERYONE if people at least TRY to get along.
So, one of the things I glean from this article is that the RIAA pays artists to make mixtapes, encouraging them to violate copyright laws? Nobody else is shocked by this? Especially amazing is the Mafia-like behavior surrounding it, secret agreements, payment under the table, etc. I thought things like that were only done in the movies, and even then not by self-styled "respectable" organizations like the RIAA.
Le français vous intéresse?
The problem with "free" and "copylefted" music is that it's usually pretty terrible, and most of the time it's just "make your own techno" which gets boring after a while.
I am a big fan of alternative, heavy metal, and melodic rock, and I never see anything like that out there as "copyleft." These people are either long gone, desperate for cash, or in the case of melodic rock, releasing only one or two songs for free.
My sister's "emo" bands are more download-friendly, she tells me, always telling people at the concerts to download their music. I guess they can get away with that, being more tour-based than studio-based. Many of them, she says, are not on major labels and don't get on the radio or MTV until much later in their careers. But to me, that style of music is just terrible.
I guess I'm just dated, being into the "whole album" concept rather than the rebirth of the "singles" concept. Even with my iPod, I'll organize it into albums and listen to the whole album in most cases.
I would not be upset to see him die. Preferably at high resolution, but I'll take whatever I can get.
There isn't even mention that the RIAA hired *these* same DJs.
Even if so, they do not say the projects for which this happened were RIAA sanctioned, explicitly or implicitly.
I think the leap of logic made is that RIAA sanctions this sort of activity, therefore it is hypocritical to punish it. The problem for them is that a DJ is, without their permission, and by extension without RIAA getting money for it, is duplicating and manipulating works that they have ownership rights of. Reproducing them and manipulating them for profit without RIAA getting a cut is fundamentally different from working with them and paying up. RIAA is within their legal rights and not overly deserving of the title hypocrite over this incident. Doesn't mean it is a smart move or that their other moves are not overstepping boundaries, but just that I can understand the difference between what they sanction vs. punish.
If the intended implication that 'maybe these DJs were authorized, but didn't get a contract to protect themselves', then it would be a boneheaded decision from the RIAA to do this to them. It would alienate a talent base that they obviously want to exploit (though the action probably alienated the talent base some, but not to the extent of turning down money for sanctioned work). Also, if they did commission the work, why wouldn't the RIAA have been distributing it for profit themselves? Ok, maybe it could be part of a move to do marketing for the original versions, but in any event if RIAA planned it all along, they ultimately screw themselves.
All that said, the particular case being discussed was handled poorly IMHO. First off the heavy-handedness of going in with SWAT over this made this a high-profile story (probably the whole point, a big 'don't fuck with the RIAA), but it turns into more RIAA looking like really bad guys, when they really could use some good publicity. This situation was at worst some people getting a little money from manipulating RIAA 'property' in ways they wouldn't have exactly done themselves and not really competing with RIAA, at best it was free marketing or, if the works were any good, an opportunity to discover talent to be exploited for money. You can bet most of these DJs are in it, in part, in hopes of a big RIAA company giving them a contract based on the works they put out. In order to prove yourself as a remixer, you have to remix something. In order to get sanctioned for rights to remix something, you have to remix in order to prove you are worth it. As long as the RIAA turned a blind eye to this, no catch22 existed, but if RIAA gets what they want and undiscovered talent stops doing it, the RIAA talent exploitation pool dries up.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
' Men in RIAA jackets helped cart away 'evidence'.
So these guys are now behaving like law enforcement agencies, going in with RIAA jackets and so forth? Their importance is way overblown. They're acting like ATF agents. What's next? Will they burn down a compound?
Wansu, th' chinese sailor
"R.I.A.A. investigators helped the police collect evidence and conduct surveillance at the studio. ... after the raid, a team of men wearing R.I.A.A. jackets was responsible for boxing the CDs and carting them to a warehouse for examination."
RIAA, the main benefactor, get's to collect, control and examine the evidence against the accused? Shouldn't that be the job of FBI? Sounds to me like they have a million dollar motive for tampering with the evidence to ensure conviction and collect the $$$$$$$$$$$.
My impression was that some of the studios who belong to the RIAA have unofficially condoned the practice of producing unauthorized infringing mix tapes. Thus, you see these unlawful mixtapes in BestBuy and being reviewed in the New York Times as some of the best albums of the year. Apparently, there are a lot of artists who are mad that they are not making any money off of there music.
That being said, I think that there is a clear conflict between the 1st Amendment and the statutory prohibition/judicial case law against making mix tapes. I like to think of this in an artistic context, where I make an almost perfect copy of a modern painting still covered by copyright, and then paint "THIS IS CRAP" in big red letters over it, and sell it as my own work. This sort of artistic creativity should be protected by the 1st Amendment, and is exactly what the rappers are doing here with music.
The RIAA can go fuck itself. Mod me up if you agree.
I don't disagree with you, but that's why the copyleft movement needs more musicians involved!
Let's see... ...Iraq, Iran, AIDS, starvation, poverty, drug abuse, slavery, racism, religious oppression, sexual abuse, pedophilia, ...illegal mix tapes.
Somewhere something went terribly wrong....
Beat me to it. Nice one. :)
RIAA: Hey mixer, we want you to create mix tapes
Mixer: whats in it for me?
RIAA: We are going to raid your studio on Friday morning with SWAT, you will be famous
Mixer: How much will this fame cost me?
RIAA: You do this or we will just raid your studio and sue you for everything your worth
since you own recording equipment and are not giving us money
-- I am the NRA, enough said...
I hope you have a HDMI cable and your TV supports HDCP!
And how did these RIAA folks get so much power? I really don't understand how these self-appointed rulers of the recording industry got to this point, it's really gotten to a point of lunacy...
dB Masters
Not buying music isn't enough. If we (geeks who care about this stuff) just did that, the RIAA wouldn't even notice it. We need to compete with the established record companies.
How do we do this? We give "up and coming" artists incentives to copyleft their music:
- Competitions
- Community word of mouth
- Zero-cost web design
- Zero-cost artwork in the form of posters and CDs
- Zero-cost music videos
- Pro bono legal representation against any company that tries to distribute their copylefted music in a DRM distribution channel (there will probably be companies stupid enough to try this!)
- Ability to accept donations via an iTunes competitor that is integrated into our popular media players (eg. Amarok)
Aren't rappers the ones that are meant to have guns? They need to do the world a favour and...ahem... "bust a cap" in some RIAA people.
"Anonymous could not immediately be reached for further comment." - International Business Times
I am so sick of hearing people misuse "entrapment" as a defense.
To be entrapment, two important things must be true:
1. You must be "convinced" to do something that you normally would _never_ do. (And it's your burden to prove this)
2. The person doing the convincing must be an agent of the State.
That is what "entrapment" means.
I read the six page article on NYT (somehow I avoided nag registration) But, I don't get it, where did they go wrong? They're promoting and producing music right? Is it because they were selling music for a profit? I always though you could use a 20 second clip of anything in a remix as long as you are not for profit? Were they just ripping whole albums and then mixing the tracks? (ala Motown or Time Life) or wtf? I don't get it. Does the copyright / royalties belong to the band or the label or the RIAA? Was any of the stuff ASCAP / BMI? Is there anything in place to allow a legal remix of all materials all in one place? Or is that where the true problem is? Seems like if this is the end result, and they don't make it easier on producers or dj's that the whole scene should (rightly) move underground. I know there are some exceptions, like say Bruce Springsteen's "Born In The USA" he got sick of the government using it for propaganda. But then how does Cheech n Chong's "Born In East La" get validated as legit? What happens when two guitarists have a similar style and some licks actually overlap? Neither has heard the other? This is a very complex industry, and it's really high time for an overhaul of what is okay, and what isn't. Sometimes it is okay to copy stuff. Sometimes it isn't, you know that sweat on the forehead feeling when you know what your doing is wrong. I am not defending the RIAA, nor defending DJ Drama. But I think these are good questions. Then there is the question of cops with M-16's. Is that really needed in a music studio? Drug-dogs I can understand, music industry is filled with drugs, thank god nobody got killed on that raid. Seems like they would be better off with a Diesel Trailer and a search warrent. Shouldn't not for profit be allowed to use anything? Shouldn't for profit be allowed to use anything? What's the world coming to here?
Is RIAA/MPAA/BSA becoming the 5th branch of government?
Any step taken to eliminate hip hop is good...
What other laws are the "police" on top of? According to CNN Money [http://money.cnn.com/], Atlanta, GA, is listed as having a personal crime rate FIVE times the national average - and the "police" (Influenced by the RIAA) have the time and resources to bust people for selling unlicensed MIXES? It looks like some organizations need to have their priorities straightened, and perhaps that involves ignoring the RIAA when it comes calling for an entire SWAT team. "Guns drawn"? "Prepared for the worst"? What were the rappers going to do; bust a cap in they asses wit' a Mac book and some jewel cases? I don't think anyone is going to start a fire fight over a bunch of CDs; least of all a couple techies in a recording studio.
In Capitalist America, you listen to mixtape. In Soviet Russia, mixtape listens to you!
No, one key part of fascism is nationalism (I.E. the majority of the general public supports the actions), of which I hardly think the RIAA applies. However, I DO think a form of Mercantilism is involved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercantilism
MPAA ARE HITLER AND EVIL BLAH BLAH BLAH
enough of this psuedo-commie company bashing please. slashdot has gone badly downhill./
i want my culture back
you need us, we don't need you
signed,
the youth of the united states,
to be your doom in the coming decade
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
So evidence was carted away by RIAA staff who have a direct financial interest in prosecution, i.e. they can sue and make huge sums of money, and the act of criminal conviction also helps them with their other lawsuits by creating a climate of fear.
How on earth did the SWAT permit an interested party get involved in the collection of evidence.
This is what happens when you get big enough and the RIAA thinks you need to start paying dues.
If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
I don't know what else you would expect from this group.
First and foremost, what they are doing is entrapment and they have no ability to come into your office and take anything. ONLY the police are allowed to and then, only with a warrant (or with exigent circumstances, which only exists when there is a threat to health or safety... which clearly does not exist here).
The RIAA are a bunch of high bankrolled bullies who make it seem like they have a quasi-legal status. What they do to DJs is larceny and no less.
This is why you get a signed contract or some record of a discussion.
MEF
Look at the weekly soundscan numbers, no one is buying albums at stores anymore. I mean didn't Tower Records just go out of business? Meanwhile ITunes sells millions of songs everyday. Alternative means of acquiring music is the future, whether it be P2P filesharing, Itunes, or loosely organized mixtapes. Why go to Bestbuy and pay $10 for an official CD that an artist releases once every 2-3 yrs when I can go get a mixtape tape that that same artist releases every 3 months for $5 and often times the material on the mixtape is much better, especially in the case of Lil Wayne,lol
Let's raid RIAA.
Fascism, which Mussolini wanted to call corporativismo, or 'Corporatism' in English, is the binding together of Political and corporate power. Read Umberto Eco's "Eternal Fascism" or "Ur-Fascism and let's discuss what countries are sliding toward Fascism. This welding of state (SWAT team) and corporate (MPAA) power is characteristic of Fascism.
Think global, act loco
No, actually it's called blackmail. Entrapment is what cops do to thieves.
The RIAA does this thing enough times, they're going to kill someone.
The routine use of paramilitary police raids for nonviolent offenders gets people killed on a routine basis. Three cops are now on trial for murder in Atlanta because they raided a house, killed an innocent old lady, and then lied after the fact to establish a bogus justification for the warrant. Police in Virginia raided a dentist's house for records related to illegal gambling, and one of the cops violated the two first laws of firearms safety and shot him dead when he tripped with his fucking finger on the trigger.
The steady flow of federal dollars for "homeland security" has exacerbated a problem which was started by the War on Some Drugs: incompetent, ill-trained paramilitary police forces who are both encouraged to "prepare for the worst" and given access to powerful weaponry. The result is a bunch of corpses. Corpses of innocent people, non-violent offenders, and even cops. The nature of unannounced no-known raids turns non-violent, low-stress situations into violent and stressful ones, with predictable results. In many of these cases (like the aforementioned dentist), regular cops showing up, knocking on the door, and serving a warrant, would be sufficient to perform the desired search. But when a dozen cops burst through the door with guns drawn, people get killed.
The RIAA instigates enough of these raids, the RIAA are going to kill someone. For copyright violation. It's just a matter of time.
This is truly what Fascism is, the binding together of corporate and governmental power. The corporations prosper and the power of their capital is fused with the power of the state to govern. Viewing fascism as corporations serving the government is only half of the story, the other half is that that power of the state is made available to corporations. This is almost a textbook example of the latter.
Think global, act loco
It's all about control. The RIAA's mission is about controlling the distribution channel. These individuals had gotten successful enough that they became a credible threat. The RIAA can't allow them to continue being successful. So the RIAA sent a rather thuggish message
The truely disturbing element of all this is that the law enforcement folks allowed the RIAA representatives to play a pseudo-law-enforcement role. The defense attorneys should petition to discard all evidence that's come in contact with the RIAA representatives. At a minimum, the evidenciary chain of custody has been broken. The RIAA has a substantial interest in the outcome of the case, and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the evidence. Law Enforcement officers are specially trained to be impartial. They're directly accountable through the courts. They're held to a higher standard. They're an element of "due process." The RIAA is none of these (though they pretend to be law enforcement on TV.)
After reading the article, it all seems like a publicity stunt to me. The SWAT team/police were probably invovled unknowingly. Notice in the article, after posting bail, they immediately go to a radio station to promote their upcoming (I believe officially licensed) mixtape.
Like terrorizing some ten-year-old about their music collection?
If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!
RTFA, the summary is incredibly misleading. The RIAA didn't hire these guys "off the books" and then bust them, these guys were creating bootlegged mixtapes and their volume was big enough that they had some small distributors getting them into national retail chains. If you're moving enough volume that Best Buy is purchasing your discs and you are making substantial money in the process, you *should* be paying a royalty back to the original artist. These weren't a couple of guys who distributed some mixes to their friends, mixtapes were an incredibly lucrative business for them.
...The example you gave: "a policeman is selling drugs undercover and approaches you with an offer and you buy" is (most likely) NOT entrapment. The reason being that an "average person" would NOT buy drugs in such a situation.
To be considered entrapment, the officer would have to "convince" you to do something you normally would not do. That means threats, coercion, whatever. So if he points his gun at you and tells you to buy the drugs, THATS entrapment. Or if he suggests that he knows right where your beautiful 7 year old daughter goes to school and 'suggests' that you buy the drugs, again, entrapment.
But if he stands outside of, say, a Narcotics Anonymous meeting, and casually and quietly announces that he's got things for sale and you buy them, that's not entrapment, it's just stupidity.
Another common anecdote i've heard is "A cop can't sit outside a bar waiting for people to drive away. That's entrapment." No, it's not.
but you're right about what the GP said. While this RIAA/SWAT thing might be "entrapment" as in 'setting a trap', then yes, he's right. But in nearly every case when someone misuses "entrapment" they mean the legal definition.
It's much easier to say **AA, RIAA, *AA (if you want to glob correctly), ..AA, etc., than to come up with a name that represents all the member companies of the RIAA. When we speak of the MAFIAA, RIAA, or MPAA, we're not only referring the the lawyers; we're referring to the industry they represent as a whole as well. You can just consider the 'AA organisations to be the legal departments of their respective companies.
Unless you know of a better name that describes the music or film industries as a whole (although we are using MAFIAA to describe them quite well), we'll just continue using **AA et al. thank you very much.
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
This is entrapment ( though not in the *legal* sence since they are still a commercial entity ) and wrong.
This entire indstry needs to be taken down.
Forget 'free music', they are corrupt to the core.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
1) We all know the RIAA is scum.. they represent themselves, not the musical talent upon whom they feed (damn vampires).
::sigh:: you're NOT still reading this.. are you?
2) The thought of guys running into a building wearing jackets with RIAA emblazoned across the back just makes me laugh.... loudly! (I bet they all have shiny gold RIAA badges too!)
3) If these RIAA douche bags would take just a portion of the money and time they spend persecuting music consumers and would put it towards treating the TALENT with more due respect, they *might* just gain a little respect of their own... but alas.. it was not to be.
4) At some point their actions are going to cause a point of critical mass... at which time they might finally realize that they're starting a war that they are destined to lose. Such has been the destiny of self-serving totalitarians throughout history.
5)
chown -R us
I heard about the DJ Drama incident on XM radio, and I couldn't believe that they had called it "racketeering" "profiteering" etc... RIAA and MPAA disgust me in ways words couldn't describe. Leave people alone, let the market determine what gets bought and what does not and stay out of everyones business. Mixtapes get sold in new york as much as crack... except one of those two items kills people. How bought the RIAA use their time to bust crack dealers instead? I'm sure your public image will go up quite a bit.
Relocating to San Francisco / Palo Alto... Hire me?
With a paintball gun you can put a camera up to 30 to 40' up out of action very quickly.
Other options include eggs (they set up particularly well in hot weather).
Be creative.
Need to remember to
a) Walk in.
b) Wear a hat and bulky clothing.
For lower-lying cameras you have more primitive options (St. Louis Slugger).
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Riaa is a bunch of lawyers on a financial rampage for profit. Lawyers are "sworn officers of the court", therefore lawyers are qutie matter of factly and without a doubt, agents of the state. Therefore, this is entrapment. When these DJs wouldn't normally make mix tapes of the requested artists, but then or asked or paid to do so (moneytary enticement), then it is entrapment.
As an aside, never hire any lawyer for your defence. As officers of their court, they are very much predisposed to make a good show trial, but let you down it. There are some lawyers who hate the system and fight it like a motherfo, and only do that swearing so they can get into action of defending regular people, but those are rare and few and far between. Most lawyers are just boobs and tools.
"Men in RIAA jackets helped cart away 'evidence'."
So since when do the RIAA have to legal power to seize "evidence"? Because if they don't SWAT can be charged with aiding in a felony (theft) and the RIAA people involved can be charged with theft
And even if they do have the power (which i seriously doubt) any lawyer could easyly get the DJ's off because if highly doubt the RIAA follow any standard procedures with "chain of evidence"
Remember folks, the RIAA should be referenced by its members for maximum negative publicity to these companies.
So instead of RIAA say "Push Records, Philips, Virgin Commercial Marketing and other members of the RIAA"
Here's a handy bookmarklett that will randomly choose 3 members of the RIAA each time you want to talk about it.
And here's an article explaining the reasoning.
The mix tape is better promotion than anything a record company has ever done. In some cases, the mix tape brought back artists that the record industry themselves ruined. It's pretty obvious that they are doing this because they don't want an artist to succeed with out there direct control. I imagine in the next few months after these rounds of lawsuits, we will see Industry mixtapes which will fail just like anything the industry does.
Odd. I don't consider it a troll so much as an instruction manual.
If only a few more britons think this way instead of bombs the camera thing will stop being an issue.
You only need to make it a gang ritual to disable one camera and you'd have no ground level cameras inside of a few years.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
1) Establish RIAA 2) Be a fucking assclown 3) ??? 4) Profit!!!
Perhaps, if your intellectual property's licensing scheme is having trouble attracting creators of intellectual property, your scheme might be flawed.
From the article:
The men have been friends since they met at college a decade ago, and they have an easy rhythm with one another, like teammates who play pickup basketball every week and can pass or negotiate a pick without making eye contact.
What kind of racist crap is that? Or, is the writer trying to show how she's "down with the brothers"?
**And since when does the RIAA get to act like feds and be part of a raid?** They've been doing it for years, unfortunately -- I came within minutes of an RIAA backed raid on a record show in Bell, CA, where they were going after bootleg albums; basically they came in with trucks, heavily armed cops, and guys in the RIAA jackets, and carted away merchandise by the ton -- no differentiation between the obvious boots and the apparently legitimate stuff; they were also taking dealers away in cuffs. That was a pretty typical situation, and they're likely still doing it -- it's just not particularly newsworthy. Ten or fifteen minutes earlier, and I'd have been caught in the raid as well, and had my whole day really trashed -- they kept everyone in the building until they were done, which took hours. The MPAA has also set up raids on science fiction and comics conventions in the past, although they've tended, from what I've heard, to be a more focused when it comes to the dealers they take down. The RIAA/MPAA crowd really need to focus on the area that hurts them most -- physical sales of pirated goods. They won't take on the pipeline that goes from physical plants in China to street vendors in NYC and elsewhere, though, because tackling *that* at the root is dangerous to them...maybe not as potentially bloody as going after the roots of the drug trade, but nasty enough...and they know they'll get less law enforcement backing than would be good for them. Going after grandmothers and children for P2P is much safer, as is making a big show of raiding record shows and DJ mix studios.
Honestly, everything is growing so increasingly weird now that pretty much every day I run across one or more items which simply shouldn't exist because they are written too far over the top to be real. And yet, there they are.
Neal Stephenson is obviously smarter than me. But I don't have to like it!
-FL
It /is/ a ritual. I've seen websites photographically recording the evidence of cameras being destroyed in Britain, with locations for anyone who wants to go out and join in the fun. I've seen videos of people getting up on step ladders, dousing things in petrol and setting fire to them, etc, etc (doesn't do much for the box but the hardened plastic they use up front rather than glass...)
SONY sues little old lady
Virgin Records send SWAT team against DJs etc.
You get the picture
Help fight continental drift.
a new word has emerged inside the dictionaries : mafiaa :
"RIAA Hires Artists, Then Sends In the SWAT team"
I guess its a lota gibberish as the New York Times has made the
contribution. Out of these troubles times (the era of the Lee Harvey
Oswalds), a new set of names, has emerged :
"Matthew Kilgo, an official with the Recording Industry Association
of America,"
So today one is warned to be very aware of names like : Kilgo, Kelso, Kilroy...
One wonders if the whole treat was written by New York Times snitches :
"In December, not long before the bust, I spent a week with DJ Drama
and the Aphilliates in Atlanta."
The scoop is at the bottom of the report : "Samantha M. Shapiro is a
contributing writer." You gotta be pretty dumbed down as a newspaper editor
to put snitches on your regular team.
Robert
In the dentists case, it looks like the county routinely uses SWAT teams for search warrants. In any case, the officer that shot Mr. Culosi was a 17 year veteran, so his carelessness should get him charged with negligent homicide rather than manslaughter.
That being said, I am insensed by this display. Imagine this same "intervention" on the part of the RIAA amid the burgeoning country music underground or the seedy pirates recreating overtures heard performed by the Cinicinati Philharmonic. A SWAT team? "Sometimes those black musicians have guns." I don't mean to sound naive about the content of the music or persona of the musicians being marketed in this niche, but I cannot help but rankle at the over-use of force in an urban black community. And at the expectation that because someone is in the hip-hop industry they would have "contraband in their studio."
Universalizable maxim du jour: Protect artists - Make a living with your art.
A LIVING, not a killing. If after reading this story anyone believes the RIAA is trying to protect the integrity of artists and not profits for distributors, I would be surprised. The telling datum is that the idea that mixers might generate profits in "legitimate" markets has not been lost on some decision makers. The idea that mixers are making "too much profit" is really what is at issue. I don't know how much is sufficient and how much is excessive, but it occurs to me in this article that the standard for both is different for urban black men than sub-urban white men.
"From the Net's heat, I wget thee... For hates sake, I spit my last ping at thee..."
Eye kneed eh Grammer chicken.
Lets just face it, if you are a artists sign contracts to be able to access markets. Radio stations are strong armed not to play independent content. If radio stations do treat with independents the RIAA monopoly withholds their content charges more for it, takes a long time working negotiating with for access to new hits, and prob dozens of other things i didn't think of. Artists sign with RIAA and their soul is owned. The RIAA can waste money for promotion of artists and then demand money for anything the artist tries to send independent of RIAA to compensate for money they invested in the artist. I leave it as and exercise to slashdot readers responding to me to look up and find some trivial examples of these monopolistic practices. Yours truly, Anonymous Coward.
No, because "sig" is a predicate nominative, not an object.
I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
At last! A new business model! Appropriate used music equipment and profit from selling it, while driving indies out of business! Great! I see innovation! I see enthusiasm! I see progress! Go!
Your definition of entrapment is wrong. See here for a definition from a reputable source. On that page, you will find a number of things that contradict statements you made in the parent and other posts, including:
On the issue of entrapment the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped by government agents.
You claimed that the defendent must prove entrapment. The reputable source shows that the reverse is true.
- And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.
This refutes your point that "You must be "convinced" to do something that you normally would _never_ do. " -- using the definition to which I referred, it would be sufficient to prove that the defendent was not ready at that time to commit the offense.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
LOL, Wrong?
... [when] the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime."
That article confirms everything I said, EXCEPT that the Government must prove beyond doubt that entrapment was used. However, on that point (and others) there's no reason to believe that the actual wording of the law doesn't differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
Furthermore, let's look at what you wrote:
"it would be sufficient to prove that the defendent was not ready at that time to commit the offense."
Actually, you should sharpen those reading comprehension skills!
From your article:
"However, there is no entrapment
So while the specific word I used ("never") is not a word often found in legalese, the intent of my words, and the meaning they conveyed, was very clear, and exactly inline with the article you linked to.
So, in other words, thanks for backing me up with some links!
More Links!
a pment-Defense-5742.html
An excerpt you might enjoy from Lawyers.com:
"Discuss this defense with your attorney. It is not as simple as it seems. <b>You take on a burden of proof when you argue entrapment</b>. First, you have to admit you are guilty of the crime, which is why it is called an "affirmative defense". This can be dangerous. Second, <b>you have to prove you would not have committed the crime except for the external pressure to which you were subjected</b>. It cannot just be slight pressure or a mere request, as described in your inquiry. <b>There is a certain standard of proof you must satisfy, based on the law in your state</b>. Otherwise, you are basically admitting your guilt. You also have to show it is completely out of character for you to accept "what she does" you had to pay for, and/or to violate the law."
http://criminal-law.lawyers.com/ask-a-lawyer/Entr
so please, tell me more about how wrong I am.
I'm not sure of the source, but this is the first definition I found in a few mins of googling:
_ Construction_all.html
"An agent of the state is an individual or incorporated entity that, by
formal contractual arrangement with the state, exerts authority over
other individuals and/or incorporated entities, beyond the authorities
defined in contracts entered between the former and the latter, in
fulfillment of state responsibilities as enumerated in law."
http://www.mega.nu/webconst/chapter_Principles_of
... then you're looking in the wrong direction. RIAA will not provide you with culture, but with cheap crap. You need to turn to other forms of music entertainment, like online radio stations (http://di.fm does it for me) or independent groups that distribute their work mostly for free (trance[]control, for instance).
The RIAA instigates enough of these raids, the RIAA are going to kill someone. For copyright violation. It's just a matter of time.
;-\
True.
The real question is, who is going to do anything about it?
That's a long damned chain of lawyers...
SB
It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
Rather than reading Orwell, read Umberto Ecco's view on Fascism. He lived through Fascism in Italy. I do not think that the US is Fascist in the sense of Mussolini's Italy or Hitler's Germany, this would be a rather absurd comparison. But I do think that we are moving toward one key feature of Fascism, the synthesis of corporate and government power. We do have private armies, they are the 'security consultants' in Iraq. But you point is correct that there are no private armies operating within the US. I was careful to state that we are moving toward Fascism, not that we are Fascist. In the mid-Twentieth Century, a reasonable person could see the primary danger to the US as coming from the left, I don't feel that way today. Corporations are claiming the rights of humans, but they don't accept the same limits. A person convicted of a crime cannot own a television station within the US. However, GE has been convicted and they still are allowed to own television networks. This is literally a double standard, with the corporations being at an advantage over people.
Think global, act loco
... off the streets is good.
I don't know about entrapment, but if the mix was ordered by representatives of the copyright holders (the RIAA) was any copyright infringed? Doesn't this constitute explicit consent by the copyright holder?