Slashdot Mirror


RIAA Announces New Campus Lawsuit Strategy

An anonymous reader writes "The RIAA is once again revising their lawsuit strategy, and will now be sending college students and others "pre-lawsuit letters." People will now be able to settle for a discount. How nice."

73 of 299 comments (clear)

  1. A Rose by Any Other Name... by Bonker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Demanding money with an accompanying threat is still EXTORTION, whether there's an actual lawsuit or not.

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    1. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Funny

      Where's the Mafia? I mean, do the RIAA have a list of college-kids-not-to-sue, cause I would have expected one of these executives to have gotten "wacked" by now for threatenin' a mob boss' kid.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      SPOILER: You watch too much TV

    3. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They are going this route because people are starting to get their legal fees paid when the RIAA loses.

      What better way to stop that from even happening by not taking them to court?

      Why are they targeting college students? Not because they are the biggest file sharers but because they have the least amount of money.

    4. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by planetwc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So to protect against a vampire, hire a vampire? Either way, your financial blood gets drained.

    5. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by Clock+Nova · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't forget that many college students also have parents who are putting them through college, and will be the ones to foot the bill for these "offenses." That fact could be playing a large part in this.

      --
      There they were, sitting in the van with all those dials, and the cat was dead. -V. Marchetti, CIA
    6. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by Goeland86 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except when they target students on financial aid, whose very education could be depending on the few thousands of dollars they're demanding!
      If anything, the RIAA is going to create a whole generation of people who could've afforded school, but thanks to those annoying bastards can't really finish their degree, are left with huge loans and don't have a degree allowing them to pay their debts. The RIAA is really pissing me off, they're not helping educate people, they're helping them drop out of school and get even further into debt!
      If the RIAA had any kind of patriotic interest whatsoever, they would stop suing students right NOW and instead try to have lotteries for scholarships for people who legally buy music. That'll get any students' attention, and they'll want to buy music in the process!

      --
      ---- I am certain of only one thing : I know nothing else.
    7. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by shark72 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Except when they target students on financial aid, whose very education could be depending on the few thousands of dollars they're demanding! If anything, the RIAA is going to create a whole generation of people who could've afforded school, but thanks to those annoying bastards can't really finish their degree, are left with huge loans and don't have a degree allowing them to pay their debts. The RIAA is really pissing me off, they're not helping educate people, they're helping them drop out of school and get even further into debt!"

      Personal responsibility and ownership of one's actions goes a long way here. Having that fast Internet connection sure makes it tempting to build your music library with P2P, but it's essential to understand the potential consequences and to also understand that you don't need to have that music -- and if you just can't do without music, there are plenty of free and legal sources. Trust me: I got through all seven years of college without once firing up a P2P app. Those kids could have, too.

      It's like anything else: if you participate in any illegal activity, there's a chance that you will get caught. I hope that most people understand this before they get to college. In this case, if your financial situation is such that paying a ~ $3.5K settlement would force you to drop out of school, then think very, very carefully before deciding to get heavy into P2P. We can't directly control the RIAA's actions, but we sure can control our own.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
    8. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by NtroP · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I can see this as being a big opportunity for Phishing.
      1. Set up a fake RIAA/MPAA settlement site
      2. Send fake threats
      3. ...
      4. Profit!
      --
      "terrorism" and "pedophilia" are the root passwords to the Constitution
    9. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by therobloe · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A friend of mine received a letter from the University, notifying him that the RIAA had his information and was accusing him of file-sharing. He was provided a number to contact them and settle out of court. This was three years ago, so it's not a new tactic. As to what happens when you do not respond? Apparently, nothing. He's not heard from them since. Rob

    10. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by Goeland86 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm talking about people like myself, who don't use P2P download, yet STILL get those freaking letters! It's like living next door to a drug dealer and the cops accuse you of dealing along with him! I have no issue with them trying to make downloaders pay, but people who DON'T download, and who don't have enough money to spend on that, that's extortion and it's illegal.

      --
      ---- I am certain of only one thing : I know nothing else.
    11. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by John_Sauter · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...I got through all seven years of college without once firing up a P2P app....

      I suspect quite a few Slashdot readers made it all the way through school without using a P2P application.

      John Sauter, class of 1967

    12. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by misterhypno · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A threat of litigation without litigation happening is not extortion. It is actually barratry. Barratry is also illegal.

      Look up the term. They are demanding money "or else we will sue," without bothering to even interview the person that they BELIEVE to be the culprit. That's barratry as I understand the term.

      In today's world of homes where several family members, dorm mates, roommates, cohabiting parters or whatever other domestic situation is present in a residence, happen to SHARE a computer, there is NO way for the RIAA to actually know for certain WHO is actually using a specific computer at any given moment, especially when people can have multiple user accounts under one master billing name.

      And while liability may be attempted to be tied to the master account holder's name, this could prove problematic if the master account holder is a deceased GI in Iraq whose twelve year-old kid is actually using his own user account, UNDER the master account, to do the downloads!

      What are they going to do? Dig up the dead GI?

      From what has gone on so far, this is not all that far-fetched a scenario...

    13. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by remmelt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Class justice. Text book example.

      Student: guilty until proven innocent (hardly has a way out except pay)
      **AA: legal until someone puts up enough cash for an investigation and is not shot down by "funded" politicians.

    14. Re:A Rose by Any Other Name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm sure you discreetly swapped punch cards in your day...

  2. Pre-letter responses. by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Funny
    > The RIAA is once again revising their lawsuit strategy, and will now be sending college students and others "pre-lawsuit letters." People will now be able to settle for a discount. How nice.

    Slashdotters are once again revising their RIAA strategies, and will now be sending RIAA extortionists and barrators "pre-letter responses." Barrators and extortionists will now be encouraged to go fuck themselves sideways with a bowling pin. How goatse.

  3. Yay! by GFree · · Score: 5, Funny

    People will now be able to settle for a discount.
    Now that's what I call customer service!
    1. Re:Yay! by countSudoku() · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Mee Too! I've never downloaded any cool, free MP3s yet, but I'd like to. Can I settle in advance, then copy the living crap out of my soon to be new favorite P2P service? How much is that going to set me back to begin with? This may become a viable new distribution model!

      --
      This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
  4. College student feeling the wrath by kiyoshilionz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well I got hit by something similar. I downloaded a torrent of Green Street Hooligans, didn't even watch it. Recieved an email from the campus computer folk, told me that Universal informed them of my "copyright infringement", and if I delete the file immediately and tell them that I did so, nothing would happen, but if I did it again, I would lose my Internet connection.

    I don't remember if they said what would happen if I didn't delete the file (which I did, I'm not going to stick my neck out for the principle of it) but I'm sure it would have been ugly. I wouldn't be surprised if the RIAA is doing this too - intercepting communications out of your friendly campus and then telling the campus to enforce their restrictions. Way to scare your customers. How do they stay in business?

    Any other people get busted/almost-busted/pseudo-busted at their university?

    1. Re:College student feeling the wrath by twostar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Any kind of response probably wouldn't have come from the MPAA it probably would have just been at the university level. I use to work at a ResNet while I was at school. It was a state school and so we were protected by strict privacy laws. We received and processed hundreds of DMCA complaints each year but we never released a name or other identifying information. We even developed special procedures to ensure privacy and compliance with the DMCA.

      We would track down students after receiving a complaint letter and make sure the offending material was removed from the network. We would document this process and then a clean version was returned to the complainant. Typically we also showed them how to disable sharing on whatever they were running in order to reduce the likely hood of a repeat offence. The student would also have to have a meeting with a student coordinator for their building and usually ended up making some kind of awareness project.

      In the days of Napster, the university was threatened by the RIAA to release student information. Luckily (or not) we had just had an issue with an estranged parent getting information on a student and the lawyers had read up on their state privacy requirements. The university unilaterally said "No". Since the laws haven't changed, the students are still protected from lawsuits from the RIAA/MPAA/BSA using the DMCA to fish for info.

    2. Re:College student feeling the wrath by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Way to scare your customers.

      You're not a customer.

      How do they stay in business?

      By selling products created by artists who sign contracts with them, not giving shit away for free and having freeloaders defend it by scapegoating them as bad guys.
      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    3. Re:College student feeling the wrath by FranklinDelanoBluth · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're not out of the woods just yet, buster.

      What your campus IT dept. received was the same email/letter that any ISP receives about a DMCA infringement (do a WHOIS about any domain, and you'll find the listing for abuse, usually abuse@domain.tld, where such requests can be sent). The correspondence, from a watch dog group hired by the professional association (RIAA, MPAA, ESA, etc.), documents where and how they caught you pirating their copyrighted material (e.g. a log of you contributing to a torrent, or some files you were sharing on a DC++ server). It also serves as a cease and desist for the ISP. Your college/university may, as mine does, take it upon itself to enforce certain regulations for these offenses (e.g. my university will take disciplinary action on the second such infringement).

      However, the fact that the university (or even your ISP) has taken some sort of internal action does not mean that the issue has been resolved with the professional organization. This organization can, and increasingly more often does, still subpoena the ISP for the personal information of the owner of the infringing computer/account. While you will be informed quite shortly about the DMCA abuse letter (within days), the subpoena can come much later (on the order of months).

      Several years ago (about 3) I was caught for pirated material by the ESA. Luckily, they did nothing more than send the DMCA email. I've wisened up, and am much more careful about where/what I share. However, many other students have not. In the recent years over 100 students' identities have been subpoenaed, several months after receiving DMCA infringement notices about their individual abuses.

    4. Re:College student feeling the wrath by r_jensen11 · · Score: 2, Informative
      C:\? What's C:\? I think I remember something about A:\ and C:\, but that was back in 1993 and Windows 3.1... Fortunately, all my media is stored in /home/Media/, and if the right precautions are made, it can even look like there *is* no /home/Media/, only a /home/!

      I have a friend that got an email from our University saying that some movie industry threatened them because he downloaded Babel. He also said that it included instructions. He didn't tell me what these instructions were, but I seriously doubt that they could be followed by any OS other than Windows or OSX....

      Fortunately, however, I've discovered Jamendo, and now I'm listening to music that never gets on the radio, and all of the music on there is protected by Creative Commons. I much prefer their philosophy over the RIAA's and the MPAA's.

  5. Re:Pre-lawsuit letters are cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny


    Tag this article: thievingcunts

  6. Re:Piracy is hurting? by ZachPruckowski · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is this true? Does anyone have sales or statistics?

    Who cares if it's true? They say it is, and there's not exactly a pirate's lobby to refute them. Truth is completely and utterly irrelevant. It's not a question of what's right or wrong, it's a question of what you say and how loud you say it. And the media cartels own the conventional news sources.

  7. NEW George Foreman RIAA family lawsuits by linvir · · Score: 4, Funny

    Do YOU have illegally stolen music files on YOUR computer? It's more likely than you think! If you do, then our new discount lawsuits could be for you!

    Our patented lawsuit technology gives you a quick, easy settlement with no fuss. Order now and we'll even throw in this fantastic desk tidy. That's right: a discount lawsuit AND a desk tidy. All for the low one-time sum of 39.99

    Call now, and get your George Foreman RIAA family discount lawsuit settlement. We accept all major credit cards. Get your settlement now and pay nothing for six months. SIX MONTHS!

    Se habla español.

  8. A letter to the RIAA by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Informative

    Dear RIAA,

          I feel that I must point out that the quality of the music distributed by your members has sunk to such depths that if I have to listen to any more of it, I might just gnaw my own leg off in desperation. Of course such a situation would be grounds for an inmediate lawsuit by myself against your members for the sum of $3,000,000 US. I ask that you kindly desist from producing such self-mutilation inspiring music and, failing that, I am willing to settle for ten percent ($300,000 US) in advance in order not to pursue the lawsuit in the event of my loss of a leg. Thank you.

          Sincerely...

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  9. Re:Piracy is hurting? by hooded_fang · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Interesting. The Canadian music industry has actually benefitted from downloading. Even my cat knows that an MP3 is not the real thing and Im not planning on shelling out any money for a cd with 1 or 2 good songs. I end up test driving a lot of stuff before surprise, surprise I end up buying it. It just makes sense. This whole thing could have been done differently if the RIAA hadn't listened to the "wisdom" of people like Lars Ulrich. Sell Mp3s super cheap right off the start with a online purchase coupon that gives them a discount on buying the cd copy. Incentive marketing but the RIAA would rather be a fat old dinosaur. And we know what happened to the dinosaurs... Okay Im out of here before that Archangel Michael guy gets all preachy and self-righteous on me. I can already hear him saying "be a good boy and stand in line, individual thought is bad"

  10. Sneakernets: The Original P2P System by bluemonq · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It might not be nearly as convenient, but I've been hearing that in the dorms my fellow students are posting the names of songs that they would like to "buy". Some cheap 32-128MB memory tokens float around; discreet messages are sent telling them to keep an eye on "the SanDisk with a sticker on it" or the "green Dell one that has a crack in the casing".

  11. Re:Piracy is hurting? by SirTalon42 · · Score: 2, Informative

    A while back Slashdot posted some articles which confirmed that RIAA's profits were up, but their growth was slower than the rest of the economy so they use that to say their profits are 'down'. I think the last article I saw Slashdot post about it was several months ago.

  12. We Will Sue You by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 5, Funny

    Buddy you're a boy, make a big noise
    Playing music in school, gonna be a big man some day
    You got music on myspace
    You big disgrace
    Kickin your ipod all over the place

    We will, we will, sue you
    We will, we will, sue you

    Buddy you're a young man, pirate man
    Shoutin' in the school gonna take on the MAFIAA some day
    You got music on myspace
    You big disgrace
    Wavin' your napster all over the place

    We will, we will, sue you
    We will, we will, sue you

    Buddy you're an old man, poor man
    Pleadin' with our lawyers gonna make you pay today

    You lost your court case
    You big disgrace
    The MAFIAA kicked you off of myspace

    We will, we will, sue you
    We will, we will, sue you

    1. Re:We Will Sue You by jgoguen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's absolutely hilarious, and yet so disturbingly accurate. But what happened to the kids of the RIAA executive who got sued for piracy? A "stern talking to"? Well can't the colleges promise to give the students a stern talking too instead? Or does that only work when someone rich gets sued by accident?

  13. Are they still bothering to obtain evidence? by iamacat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They could just send a letter to every student and figure the ones with guilty consciousness are going to settle. With all the popups I am getting about winning various sweepstakes, it may even be legal.

  14. Leveraging the university? by venicebeach · · Score: 2, Interesting
    As others have asked, what exactly is new about this?

    From TFA, it seems to me that one of the new aspects of this strategy is:

    Basically, the letter is sent to the college or university, and is then forwarded to the student.
    So the student gets a letter delivered through the university. It's not clear if some kind of university action is implied or explicity stated in this letter, or if the universities have agreed to cooperate with the RIAA. Either way I bet getting the university to communicate with the student is a way of providing additional leverage. Perhaps now you are not only threatened with financial damage but with your educational status being revoked?
  15. Re:Wrong, clearly you don't know the law by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    None of this applies to RIAA's actions in this case. Threatening you with a civil suit for the commission of a tort is not a crime; it happens every day.

    Threatening you with a civil suit for the commission of a tort is not a crime when all you demand is a cease and desist. Demanding monetary compensation I would think would be a different matter. If not extortion, how about blackmail? "We know you've committed a crime. Pay us to keep quiet about it or we'll see to it that it goes on your criminal record, which you'll have to disclosed to any future employer preventing you from getting any well-paying job in the future."

    And such payment won't be legally binding, so they could still press charges, and your payment will be used as evidence of your guilt.

    IANAL.

    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  16. My laptop sometimes has problems starting up by gd23ka · · Score: 2, Funny

    I know what you're talking about, we did that a lot in the 90's and it was a lot more social
    meeting face to face with people. And you know you get to meet people and you help them out
    and then they help you out.. Like with my notebook lately, it has sometimes problems starting
    up with new tunes and a friend of mine will hook it up to his notebook with what I believe is a
    starter cable and jumpstart the music machine or the movie engine. Then sometimes its his
    laptop that has novelty stalls from time to time and then we hook them together again with the
    starter cable.

  17. When will we just say enough is enough? by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How long is it going to take before the public has had enough of this garbage and put a stop to it?

    it could be stopped tomrrow.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:When will we just say enough is enough? by westlake · · Score: 4, Insightful
      How long is it going to take before the public has had enough of this garbage and put a stop to it?

      as long as it takes the geek to admit that he isn't entitled to everything that isn't nailed down.

      the divide between town and gown is an old one, of course.

      off-campus, no one cries in their beer when a free-loading student with time on his hands, a pricey computer and unlimited bandwidth has to cough up some cash or forfeit some privileges.

  18. Lawsuit Money by lymond01 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I wonder if students can get financial aid to help with this...

  19. Piracy for the Poor by Yfrwlf · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Please share with the poor who will never see this stuff any way. Copying isn't stealing, it's sharing ideas. Don't let these dying businesses try for force their old ways upon you. Make them get with the digital age and employ different business practices if they want to continue to have a business. Of course, even with sharing, as we all see, they will still continue to make millions of dollars from their crappy uncomfortable ad-ridden theaters. Don't let their greed fool you.

    --
    Promote true freedom - support standards and interoperability.
  20. Re:Operators are standing by! by Firehed · · Score: 2, Funny

    Tossing it a free knife set to an angry student who's about to meet with a RIAA lawyer might not be the best idea...

    --
    How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
  21. Re:Wrong, clearly you don't know the law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    No "crime" has been committed. The action is a tort. The violation of the Copyright statute for non-monetary gain is a civil matter, not a criminal matter.

    So the wronged party (RIAA in this case) is approaching the wrongdoer and saying "look, we can sue you for $X in damages, but we'd like to spare you and us the trouble of a court proceeding to collect said damages. Sign here, pay us $N in reduced damages to cover what we feel are reasonable damages in this instance, and in this contract you are signing you will see that we voluntarily give up the right to sue you for this particular infringement in the future."

    Just as if your kid broke one of my windows accidentally with an errant baseball. I could sue you, but I'd probably propose that we settle out of court for reasonable damages. Hardly a crime for me to propose that. And if you choose not to pay, I can of course take you to court.

    No "crime" is being swept under the rug. Just because you wish it was extortion or blackmail does not make it so. You ANAL and all of the moderators here clearly ANAL ;)

  22. Profit!! by teslar · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ok, I think I can guess the Powerpoint Slide that led to these letters:

    1. Get postal addresses of students accross the U.S. via their University
    2. Send them pre-lawsuit letters
    3. Wait for a fraction of the students to take up the discount offer
    4. PROFIT!!

    Note the absence of both an ??? and an "prove that the individual is infringing copyright" steps.

  23. Not Piracy, DRM hurting, Suing customers hurting. by openright · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Pirates" can not be blamed for the failure of media companies to adapt to and profit from the Internet.
    DRM was an attempt to put the Internet back in the bottle.

    People expect to be able to download stuff at a reasonable cost, (and some amount of information people expect for free).
    People expect to to their play and copy purchased media without barriers.
    College students will "copy tapes", as they have no spare book or beer money to spare. if you use legal threats or take money from them, this will not increase sales, or create new fans.

    The story has not changed since the days of Naptser and mp3.com. People would buy DRM-free media over the Internet for a reasonable cost.

    But if MAFIAA refuses to sell unencumbered media, it is hard to buy it.

    People do not want to go back to CD's and people do not want to go forward with DRM.

  24. I for one, by Original+Replica · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Welcome our independent artist labels, err, overlords. Maybe national CD sales aren't down, just "RIAA member" sales are down. I've purchased nothing mainstream for almost a year. I buy all of my CDs straight from the artists. Support your local talent. In New York City Subway, concerts come to you.

    --
    We are all just people.
  25. Re:Wrong, clearly you don't know the law by shark72 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Threatening you with a civil suit for the commission of a tort is not a crime when all you demand is a cease and desist. Demanding monetary compensation I would think would be a different matter. If not extortion, how about blackmail?"

    Listen to the AC; he's right on this one. Settling out of court happens all the time. Even "good" companies and people do it.

    The trouble with calling this "blackmail" or "extortion" is there may be a day down the road when you think you've been wronged, or you know you've wronged another person, and settling out of court is the quickest and cheapest way for you to get things right.

    ""We know you've committed a crime. Pay us to keep quiet about it or we'll see to it that it goes on your criminal record, which you'll have to disclosed to any future employer preventing you from getting any well-paying job in the future."

    Huh? I've read TFA; the RIAA isn't threatening (either explicitly or implicitly) to ask the feds to press federal charges in these campus cases. While the amounts of the purported infringement may technically fall into criminal infringement territory, the feds have better things to do; they tend to go after cases where the amount of infringment is in the high five figures and beyond. You know this; I know this; the RIAA knows this and the kids doing the file sharing probably know this.

    --
    Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
  26. Next Step by rlp · · Score: 2, Funny

    The RIAA's Department of Pre-Infringement sends you a letter warning that they know you were planning to infringe and demanding a settlement.

    (Oops, I just infringed on the work of Philip K. Dick).

    --
    [Insert pithy quote here]
  27. What is wrong with this? by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People will now be able to settle for a discount. How nice.


    Okay, maybe I'll get modded down for this (or get modded up for writing that old cliche), but what exactly is wrong with this? The RIAA is locating pirates via IP and, instead of suing them, offering them a quick and easy settlement.

    Back in 2000 during the Napster lawsuits, every Slashdotter including the editors said the RIAA should go after individual infringers rather than P2P networks. Well, now they're doing that, and you don't like that either. What's changed? Are you just opposed to the RIAA protecting its own intellectual property period?
    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
    1. Re:What is wrong with this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      it's already been shown that the *AA groups do not have a great track record of verifying copyright violations, they are bound to send these letters to at least a few people who have not violated a copyright.

      now that *is* extortion. if you get a letter from me saying give me money or I'll sue you for violating my copyright when you are certain that you have not? what would you do? could you prove in a court that you did not? it's a civil case, the level of proof is much more lax than in a criminal case. if i can convince a jury that it is more likely that you did than that you did not...then i win and the court orders you to pay me.

      of course give me some cash now and we don't have to go through that dance. lets just make life easier for the both of us and no one gets hurt. except you.

    2. Re:What is wrong with this? by troll+-1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Okay, maybe I'll get modded down for this (or get modded up for writing that old cliche), but what exactly is wrong with this?

      Well, I hope you don't get modded down because you express a popular view, though not necessarily one held by many slashdot readers.

      Perhaps many of us here are just plain irritated by stupidity, some of us are even inconvenienced by it.

      Let's be real, the Internet is the best content distribution system ever. The Internet is a giant file-sharing network by definition.

      For hundreds of years great works of art were produced with no copyright laws. We live is a very small part of history. Obviously artists need to get paid for what they do. But the costs of making quality recordings are greatly reduced compared to what they once were. Most bands I know today have their own web sites and distribute their music freely with the aim of making enough money to continue doing what they love by attracting enough people to see them perform live. For most artists today, the era of the highly paid entertainer is dead. It takes a new generation to realize this.

      The problem with the RIAA is that they're out of touch, out of time, and out of their heads. Deep down they must know they cannot possibly win in the end. But they're like the old horse and buggy manufactures who cannot bring themselves to face the reality of a new world.

      All the lawsuits and threats of lawsuits in the whole world will never stop people from sharing music. This is not an opinion or an emotional argument, it's a fact based on reality.

    3. Re:What is wrong with this? by queenb**ch · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The RIAA and protecting intellectual property are almost oxymoronic. If the money collected was going to the artists, no one would really have much to say. However, it does not. It goes to "feed the beast" that is the RIAA.

      Flip on your local radio station. Anything that gets played gets pre-approved by the RIAA. If you're an indie artist, you can kiss air time goodbye. You don't get any.

      Most people still get exposed to new music and artists on the radio. That means you get zero publicity for your work while the lastest Brittany Spears song will be played until you're ready to gouge out your own ear drums with a cocktail fork.

      Then, if by some miracle you do get signed, the record label-RIAA cartel fronts the money for the production of an album, foists off a producer on to the artist that will get the "right sound" based on what the record label executives think you & I like, and then bill the artists out the ass for "production costs" which have been know to include things like hookers for the label executives. Honestly, you'd be better off charging the production on your MasterCard since, with the fees and such the equivalent interest rate is about 41% APR, whereas your credit card has a maximum of 25% in most states. Keep in mind that it takes a minimum of 2 years to bring an album from concept to distribution. $100,000 at 41% = 141,000 (year1) 141,000 at 41% = 158,000 (year 2) 165,000 by year 3. That's just for a low budget CD. Now that money plus a bunch of fees comes out of anything that the artist might get.

      Recording contracts have this clause in them called recoupment. What that means is that the artist doesn't get a dime until the record company gets all and I do mean all of it's investment back. Record contracts are usually 20-40 pages of legalese describing what the artist owes the record company and how the proceeds from any sale of anything from T-shirts to CD's are to be distributed. Typically, artists get less than $1.00 of the $16.95 you pay for a full price CD. If you buy the CD from a discount store (read Wal-Mart) or a club (e.g. BMG Music Club), it may only be a few pennies per CD.

      Next, since you have an album you have to go on tour to promote it. Guess what, the label fronts the money again and takes it out of your hide later, along with interest. It works roughly the same way as your recording session. And yes, Virginia, recoupement comes into play again. If the tour doesn't make money, you don't get paid.

      Now add that to the fact that they routinely cheat the artists out of the comparative pittance that they're due. Then consider that this entire industry would be completely and utterly non-existent without the artists, do you really think that they deal fairly with anyone? Sympathy for the RIAA? Hah, more like sympathy for the devil.

      2 cents,

      QueenB.

      --
      HDGary secures my bank :/
    4. Re:What is wrong with this? by professionalfurryele · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Obviously artists need to get paid for what they do."

      One does not have a right to make a profit from what one does, even if it produces useful outcomes. If I go around mending everyone on my streets fences I am not entitled to compensation for doing so.

      If you cant think of a way to make a profit out of music, then live with the markets decision. Copyright is artists welfare, which we allow the recording industry to abuse.

  28. Missing the point about the MPAA by Simonetta · · Score: 2, Interesting

    All this discussion seems to miss the point about what happens if the MPAA actually is successful at stopping downloads of 'product'.
    Since all the downloading results from an inability to come to an agreement of what price people will pay to watch MPAA product, then if people can't watch MPAA product then they will watch something else.

        MPAA product is in its most basic form a sequence of video images edited together in standard film 'grammar' devised over the past 100 years that tells a standardized story (one of the 100 basic plot variations that literature and drama majors study). That's it. It's what all the fight is about.

        The greatest misconception of the MPAA is that they are the ONLY source of quality video entertainment available and that all people will naturally chose to 'steal' their product when given any opportunity and technical means to do so. This is actually true at the present time for most people but will, within a decade, not be true given the incredible advances in video games.

        Within a decade, games will cease to be only limited first-person shooters and cartoonish extensions of ZORK-style fantasy scenerios. They will take on the characteristics of MPAA product such as photo-realism, emphatic actors and characters, complex story and plot development, and scene editing that approaches standardized film grammar. Plus they will be fully interactive and allow multiple viewers/players to develop the plot line and dialog with each other. Basically 21st-century interactive synthetic cinema (it doesn't even have a real name yet, except for term 'video games') will be to the 20-century MPAA product what movies are to photographs. A completely different dimension and experience only historically and superficially related to the previous media.

        When this begins to happen then the MPAA comporations will really be up shit creek. Because they will have alienated all their potential customers and supporters back when their could-have-been customers were young as a result of their clumsy and repulsive gangster tactics that used on college students back at the beginning of the 21st century. By the time that interactive synthestic cinema begins to really take off, the MPAA will have created such a wall of hatred and repulsion between themselves and their former customer base that they will not be able to make any connection between the corporations that they represent and their former audience. They will be as obsolete as 'white-only' drinking fountains, with the same general public repulsion.

        This general extortion campaign directed against college students will eventually backfire in a big way when the MPAA comes to realize that they can't get anyone (except media history majors) to download their precious product. By then it will too late for them.

    1. Re:Missing the point about the MPAA by sweatyboatman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When this begins to happen then the MPAA comporations will really be up shit creek


      Copyright holder organizations have shown a consistent behavior in the face of technological change: seek special protection through lawsuits and legislation. They will do the same with the scenario you envision. When hardware & software improve to allow tools to play and produce real-time film-quality images, they will also allow the tools needed to identify and report "infringing" material in real-time. (Just as they are doing now with MP3s and Flash video)


      Dated: Oct 12, 2020

      Dear MPAA Customer,

      Our software (part of Windows Awesome! Control) has indicated that you have played/created a Video Game or Reenactment which contains scenes similar to works copyrighted by one or more of our members. This action is in violation of the Think Of the Children! Copyright Extension Act of 2017. This letter is to inform you, as per section 16C of the TCCEA, we have been authorized to remove $300,000 from your checking/saving/federal loan package. Please note, this action does not prevent the MPAA or any of its members from taking further legal action against you for this or any other offense.

      Have a nice day,

      The MPAA


      You can be assured that when people start making movies on their own computers, the MPAA will start suing people who use themes, characters, dialog, music, lighting, etc... similar to those used in the studios' films. Then as now, they will go after the people least able to challenge them and most likely to settle. And then as now they will do a full-media blitz to convince people that they're doing all this in defense of the poor, oppressed artist.

      It's possible that at some point in the future, the people the MPAA goes to for their custom-made legislation will be the same people the RIAA/MPAA are now suing and maybe then their well of new legislation will finally run dry. And maybe, just maybe, some courageous legislators will actually fix the copyright law to favor musicians and their fans over media conglomerates.

      I wouldn't hold my breath.
      --
      It breaks my pluginses, my precious!
  29. Reverse Tactics by codepunk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ok turn on your mp3 recorder right now and record a copy of your voice.

    Start out with this content is copyrighted by "Your Name"

    Then you can just spend some time saying la, la, la, la, la, la, la or whatever
    trips your trigger. Now put it on a p2p network share folder changing the name to metallica.mp3 or whatever trips your goat. Place a sniffer on the connection, when the goons grab your file
    trying to figure out if you are hosting copyrighted tunes you slap them with a big ole fat lawsuit
    for copyright infringement.

    --


    Got Code?
    1. Re:Reverse Tactics by fishbowl · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The point of your post is well taken but I see it from a different direction.

      The problem with the media industry's heavy handed approach to copyright, puts
      a damping effect on anyone who actually wants his copyrighted work to be freely
      distributed. Part of the reason for this is that the idea has been firmly ingrained
      in the minds of millions that "copyright" means "illegal to copy or distribute", which
      is not always the case. Copyright and controls on distribution are related but not the same.
      Also, people tend to assume that "copyrighted material" refers only to those items represented
      by large corporate entities, and that individual works (insofar as people realize these even exist),
      do not carry the same protections. Finally, the actions of the media industry puts a cloud of doubt
      on the distribution channels themselves. The very protocols become synonymous with "stealing". This
      definitely creates a chilling effect for anyone who would like to take advantage of those distribution
      channels for purposes that are 100% legal.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  30. felony charge - for a screener posted to the web by westlake · · Score: 4, Informative
    The violation of the Copyright statute for non-monetary gain is a civil matter, not a criminal matter.

    LOS ANGELES Feb 22, 2007 (AP)-- A man who allegedly uploaded a copy of the film "Flushed Away" onto the Internet after getting a copy from an Oscar voter faces a felony charge.

    Salvador Nunez Jr., 27, was charged with copyright infringement and faces up to three years in prison if convicted. He was scheduled to appear in court March 1.

    Prosecutors said he obtained a copy of the movie after it was sent in advance to his sister, an Oscar voter and member of The International Animated Film Society.

    The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences received a tip in early January that someone put "Flushed Away" on the Internet, and a digital watermark identified it as an Academy screener film.

    When interviewed by FBI agents, Nunez acknowledged he uploaded "Flushed Away" and the Oscar-nominated film "Happy Feet" onto the Internet, court documents said. However, investigators only found a copy of "Flushed Away" in his computer hard drive.

    It wasn't immediately known whether Nunez has retained an attorney.

    Man Charged With Uploading Movie to Web

    There are many points of interest here, but most significantly the feds decision to prosecute the uploader on the felony charge. That would be a first and a major change in policy.

  31. ReRetaliation under the wire. by Technician · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Personal responsibility and ownership of one's actions goes a long way here. Having that fast Internet connection sure makes it tempting to build your music library with P2P, but it's essential to understand the potential consequences and to also understand that you don't need to have that music -- and if you just can't do without music, there are plenty of free and legal sources. Trust me: I got through all seven years of college without once firing up a P2P app. Those kids could have, too.

    I can certianly see a few pissed kids wanting to share the damage back to the RIAA. Somehow I see entire external hard drives loaded with MP3s being passed down the dorm hall for everyone to take a copy and add to the library just to spite the RIAA. The sneaker net will be back in full force. I remember those days with 12 inch LP's and cases of blank cassette tapes.

    Portable hard drives are like cassette tapes on steroids. I have a 400 gig one. Too bad I'm no longer in a dorm.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
    1. Re:ReRetaliation under the wire. by Gerzel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's why Microsoft is going to enforce an environment where all music and possible "Premium Content" has to be vetted by someone who has legitimately bought governance like the music industry. If you can't afford to buy the government then you should pay like the good little serf you are.

  32. hah... by luzerlinux · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'd like to see them actually squeeze any money from my broke college ass, it'd be like magic.

  33. Re:Where is the story here? by StikyPad · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's USENET unfortunate USENET that USENET there's USENET no USENET decentralized USENET content USENET distribution USENET system USENET with USENET practically USENET anonymous USENET access.

  34. Re:Pre-lawsuit letters are cool by Sj0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I look at it this way:

    1. College students as a whole can barely afford books, rent, or food, let alone music.
    2. College graduates can afford lots, including lots of music CDs.
    3. as a consequence of 1. and 2. it can be said that college students are a tiny market which will become the largest market for premium content, due to their massive disposable income.
    4. It seems that because of 3. it is unwise to piss off said demographic.
    5. I'm a professional, but I haven't bought a CD (or pirated music -- they don't even deserve mind-share!) in 7 years, because behaviour like this seems unethical to me, and pisses me off.
    6. ???
    7. Profit!

    --
    It's been a long time.
  35. 100% lying by insomniac8400 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Purdue had around 40 notices from the RIAA when they were paying for the stupid Rukus music site for all freshman to have access. When they dropped the service because it was dumb(and I think it didn't even work on ipods), the next year they get over 1,000 notices? It shows the RIAA is just trying to extort colleges into signing what are probably expensive contracts with crappy and useless download services.

  36. Re:We're all "customers" by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Admit it--you just want to pirate music without any consequences.

    Who the hell wouldn't want that? I would like very much to have a complete copy of the sum of human knowledge -- every book, every song, every film, every picture -- at my disposal. And I think that most people would probably like the same. Even if we only used a small fraction of it, it would be a great thing to have. And to get it for free (or nearly so) would be even better, since it's the cost of the thing that is generally the big obstacle to having it.

    Are you saying that you don't want a copy of everything there is, for free?

    Remember: copyright is like a necessary evil; it does a bad thing (temporarily and partially restricting the free flow of knowledge and culture) for a good reason (to encourage the creation of more knowledge and culture which can be partially shared immediately, and fully shared after a while). If implemented properly, the good outweighs the bad. But copyright is never a tolerable or desirable thing for its own sake, and it is always wrong to support copyright in cases where it would not produce more good results than bad results.

    Piracy is basically a good thing (it is the free flow of knowledge and culture) but which can have bad, or more accurately, self-defeating, results (in that it reduces the encouraging effect of copyright). Still, if the good of piracy happened to outweigh the bad -- i.e. if the good of freely flowing information was better than the reduction of encouragement to create -- then piracy would be preferable to copyright.

    We don't have to have absolute copyright or absolute piracy. We can vary them. We could arbitrarily say that copyright applied on weekdays, and not on weekends, if we wanted to. If this produced a better outcome than seven days a week of either copyright or piracy, then it would be what we should do (barring something better yet).

    So maybe it would be a good idea to allow ordinary individuals, acting non-commercially, to pirate music without consequences, accepting that there would be a bad effect in that less music might get made, and accepting that there might be a good effect in that people would be more free vis-a-vis music, while we still kept copyright for commercial purposes as well as for corporate entities.

    Don't dismiss the idea out of hand, and even if you ultimately don't think that it would produce a better outcome than the current system, if you think that there could possibly be any improvement to the current system -- particularly one that people could live with and which they'd be inclined to do anyway, even if there weren't a law about it -- then surely it would be worthwhile to consider it.

    To quote George Carlin's description of the current generation: "Gimme that, it's mine! Gimme that, it's mine!"

    Meh. I agree, that people are greedy. People who listen to music are greedy, and want free music. People who make music are greedy, and want to be paid for their music. Neither side is good or bad. Copyright, as a utilitarian system, handles this adeptly. The genius of copyright is that you can appeal to the long-term greed of music listeners by getting them to suffer some short-term deprivations, and you can use those deprivations to appeal to the short-term greed of the music creators, who suffer long-term deprivations. Everyone ends up a winner, so long as you do it right. But for decades now, we haven't done it right, and it's getting worse. The reason that piracy wasn't such a big thing in the past is not because people acted differently. People have always acted the same. It's because more things were legal, so the same sort of conduct in the past was unremarkable, while now it is notable. Conduct hasn't changed, but the laws around it have, and not for the better.

    --
    -- 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.
  37. Oh for the love of... by Chas · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Will someone just bitchslap these shitfaced cockmasters with RICO already!

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  38. What the RIAA really is doing.. by SohCahToa · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As much as i hate the RIAA, as i am sure everyone else does....they are using a major loophole with these letters. I'll explain why. First off, if this WAS illegal...the RIAA wouldnt have publicly annouced it...they would have just done it and saw how much money they could make before someone blew the whistle on them. second, the definition of Extortion (accounding to britannica) is as such: Unlawful exaction of money or property through intimidation or undue exercise of authority. It may include threats of physical harm, criminal prosecution, or public exposure. Some forms of threat, especially those made in writing, are occasionally singled out for separate statutory treatment as blackmail. now, the loophole lies in the wording that the RIAA chooses to use. By calling the money they want from the person in question a DISCOUNT makes this not extortion sadly. By saying its a discount, they are saying that the person in question has a choice to pay this fee or not; and if not then they will sue. By definition, extortion is FORCING someone to pay money and/or property...so by calling it a discount gives the user the right to ignore it and take it to court or chose to pay it. In no way is this forcing the Receiver to pay, its giving him a choice to. Thats why these shanangians are legal, as of now. Using a loophole like that is terrible IMO. the fact that the RIAA is targeting specificly college students with this new strategy is extremely shrewed as well. They are targeting college students...not because of the access to broadwith or because The RIAA wants to ruin thier lives...its because they are the most likely to pay this insane fee. Thats right, they are picking on kids that are typically ages 18-23 because they are easy to scare into pay by sending them a possible law suit. On a general role, the average college student music downloader knows nothing about the RIAA and its scare tactics. So imagine you are kid, newly on your own in college...and one day after downloading the entire internet music database...you get a letter of impending legal action from the RIAA. In a huff, you carefully read over the letter hoping that it is a joke. But it isnt...but as luck would have it...the RIAA is offering that you pay a fraction of what they would estimate you'd pay...a god send for the average college student. And college students would pay the few hundread dollars so that they arent sucked into paying awhole lot more. The RIAA pretends to bring down the hammer on the average college students, and uses the fact that most students are either on ficantial aid or their parents money as a legal way to extort them. The RIAA offers a choice, and uses the recievers self-dought to excerise legal extortion. I hope this is stopped, this flagerent disregaurd for fair law must be stopped. But as i see how these letters are worded, and though it seems to be absolutely illegal, i'll bet all my illegally downlaoded music that its 100% legal as of now. I wonder if they would actually persue the people who dont pay if there is enough people that do actually pay up.

  39. Soft Target by ZoOnI · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Students who don't have the money or time to fight the mafia are a easy target.

    --
    "Never say Never."
  40. Yeah... by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I wonder if you could fire back a pre-lawsuit threat to countersue them for legal fees and offer to let them settle for a discount...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  41. 1PAA by Lehk228 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Are you 1337?
    Are you a PIRATE?
    Are you a 1337 PIRATE?

    If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then 1PAA (1337 PIRATE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
    Join 1PAA (1337 PIRATE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time 1PAA member.
    1PAA (1337 PIRATE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing 1337 PIRATE community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World! You, too, can be a part of 1PAA if you join today!

    Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

    * First, you have to obtain a copy of 1337PIRATES FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it. You can download the movie (~130mb) using BitTorrent.
    * Second, you need to succeed in posting a 1PAA First Post on slashdot.org, a popular "news for trolls" website.
    * Third, you need to join the official 1PAA irc channel #1PAA on irc.1paa.us, and apply for membership.

    Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today! Upon submitting your application, you will be required to submit links to your successful First Post, and you will be tested on your knowledge of 1337PIRATES FROM OUTER SPACE.

    If you are having trouble locating #1PAA, the official 1337 PIRATE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is pirateNET, and you can connect to irc.1paa.us as our official server. Follow this link if you are using an irc client such as mIRC.

    If you have mod points and would like to support 1PAA, please moderate this post up.

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  42. Cynical by remmelt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Apart from the answers listed above, I would like to point out that the current legal atmosphere is in favour of the guy with the deep pockets.

    If you get sued by the RIAA and you go to court, there is a chance that you'll win. This will cost you a lot (a LOT) of money and time, sometimes even years of your life. Sometimes you'll get cost awarded to you as in a recent case, but the RIAA will appeal, taking more time and more money. If you win without being awarded legal costs, you will most likely have spent more money than the RIAA was going to settle for.
    Then there's the chance that you'll lose, and you'll have to pay everything the RIAA asked for, plus your legal cost and if you're very unlucky theirs as well (I think, IANAL).

    So, basically, going to court will cost you, even if you win.

    The RIAA knows this. That's why it's a little cynical that they're offering a "discount" now, don't you think?

  43. Spyware? by mgiuca · · Score: 2, Informative
    OK have I missed something - cause one thing nobody has commented on is this para from TFA:

    One of the agents of the RIAA, such as Media Sentry, downloads a file from an unsuspecting file-sharer. A screenshot is made of the individual's shared directory, or several files are downloaded to ensure a viable case. The individual's IP address is then obtained. The RIAA then subpoenas the file-sharer's ISP requesting the personal information associated with that IP address when the alleged upload occurred.
    OK so, basically the RIAA sets up a file for you to download just so they can catch you (Entrapment), which then installs itself on your computer against your wishes or knowledge (distribution of Spyware), takes screenshots of your computer and sends them to RIAA (clear invasion of privacy).

    And this is to enforce the law? Aren't there laws against doing such things?

    Furthermore, what shitty evidence is an IP address. IP addresses do not equal individuals, for several reasons.
  44. Boycott RIAA by Intron · · Score: 2, Informative

    Gizmodo is calling for a one-month boycott of the RIAA sponsoring music labels: Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal, and Sony BMG. Don't buy anything during March 2007 to let them know what you think of these tactics.

    --
    Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
  45. You answered your own question by theelectron · · Score: 2, Informative

    If college students as a whole can barely afford books, rent, food, etc, then how come so many of them have fancy cars and computer systems?
    I think you answered your own question:

    The student can make out even better if mommy and daddy give him/her a car and pay all tuition/room board plus give some extra.
    I'd also argue that a vast majority of students do not have said niceties. I am currently a college student as a very large public university (#2 on the RIAA college pirating list) and I can verify that a very large majority of undergraduate students (the ones who live in the dorms using the campus network and getting the piracy letters) are lucky if they have a car, and very lucky if they have a car newer than 5 years old. Undergraduate students do NOT have much disposable income. The grad students may have a tough schedule, but at least they get paid for it. They (and the professors) are the ones who drive the nice cars around here. I don't know where you went to college or how recently, but what you are saying is simply not true at any of the state colleges in this state (I visit many of them around here to visit old friends) and I would imagine it would not be much different at most public schools.