Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Uses Local Cops In Oregon Raid
newtley writes "Fake cops employed by the RIAA started acting like real police officers quite a while ago — one of the earliest examples unfolded in Los Angeles in 2004. From a distance, the bust, 'looked like classic LAPD, DEA or FBI work, right down to the black "raid" vests the unit members wore,' said the LA Weekly. That their yellow stenciled lettering read 'RIAA' instead of something from an official law-enforcement agency, 'was lost on 55-year-old parking-lot attendant Ceasar Borrayo.' But it's also SOP for the RIAA to wield genuine officers paid for entirely from citizen taxes as copyright cops. Police were used in an RIAA-inspired raid at two flea markets in Beaverton, Oregon. 'Sgt. Paul Wandell, Beaverton police spokesman, said officers seized more than 50,000 items worth about $758,000,' says The Oregonian. But this is merely the tiny tip of an iceberg of absolutely staggering dimensions, an example of the extent coming in a GrayZone report slugged RIAA Anti-Piracy Seizure Information."
full article without the annoying request for info popup thing:
10 arrested in piracy raid at swap meets
CDs and DVDs - Police seize more than 50,000 items worth about $758,000
Sunday, June 10, 2007
HOLLY DANKS
The Oregonian
HILLSBORO -- Police closed down two popular swap meets Saturday and arrested 10 people on accusations of selling counterfeit CDs and DVDs in what one recording industry official called Oregon's biggest piracy raid.
Sgt. Paul Wandell, Beaverton police spokesman, said officers seized more than 50,000 items worth about $758,000. Most of the items were fake music CDs and movie DVDs, along with knockoff designer purses, sunglasses and clothing, and counterfeit brand-name toys, Wandell said.
Marcus Cohen, anti-piracy counsel for the Recording Industry Association of America, called the number of items seized at the M&M Swap Meet and Millennium Flea Market "overwhelming."
Besides being "the largest piracy raid in Oregon to date," Cohen said, Saturday's crackdown also was one of the largest operations in the country.
Wandell said Beaverton police got a tip about counterfeit items being sold at a Beaverton market in December, and the investigation led them to the Hillsboro flea markets.
Cohen was amazed by the quality of some of the bogus CDs and packaging, saying a good percentage of the Hillsboro discs were being counterfeited by a million-dollar replication machine like the music industry uses.
About 20 recording and movie industry investigators came from California to help police identify counterfeit items.
"We were surprised about the size and sophistication," Cohen said, standing in a steady drizzle Saturday afternoon at the chain-link fence that surrounds M&M. "It's something we are going to be paying very close attention to, finding who has a replication machine that shouldn't."
The names of those arrested and the charges were not immediately available. The owners of the swap meets were not arrested, but Lt. Michael Rouches, Hillsboro police spokesman, said he would ask city officials to look into revoking the owners' business license if they knew what was going on.
The flea markets are held every weekend.
Hayde Miranda, one of the M&M owners, said she didn't know any of the vendors were selling anything illegally. "It's unfortunate that some of our vendors, who are independent business owners, were selling things that were fake. We rent to them, but we have nothing to do with what they sell."
Miranda said M&M would be open today.
When dozens of police officers arrived about 12:30 p.m. Saturday to serve a search warrant at M&M, there were about 200 customers wandering booths that sell food, clothing, jewelry, trinkets, car parts, music and movies. While police blocked the entrance, a steady stream of drivers and pedestrians approached the gate at 346 S.W. Walnut St., hoping to get in and wondering what was happening.
"There were some vendors who ran and left their money behind, and some grabbed their money and booked," Wandell said. "But there were no problems, and it was very orderly."
Customers and vendors leaving throughout the afternoon as police packed up seized merchandise said they were not bothered by the raid. "The police were just doing their jobs," said a car parts vendor who didn't want to give his name. The vendors who were arrested "knew what they were doing was illegal," he said.
Wandell said customers who purchased counterfeit items would not be targeted because it would be hard to prove they knew the merchandise was fake. The CDs seized Saturday were selling for about $4.50 each and the DVDs for between $4 and $12, he said.
Fake CDs and DVDs usually have poorly printed labels, loose shrink-wrap or a different kind of covering, Wandell said. Some of the movies seized Saturday included "Shrek the Third" and "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End," which are still in theaters and haven't been released on DVD yet.
Cohen sai
~/.sig: No such file or directory
Send vigilantes to take care of the RIAA/MPAA organised crime racket on a case by case, come to your home basis.
Last I remember, impersonating law enforcement was illegal.
Is it too optimistic to hope they'll get busted for it someday?
Knowledge is power. Power corrupts. Study hard. Be evil.
Damn spics. Can't even trust them to keep their own name !
As a result, eight suspects were arrested and charged. Seized in total as a result of the enforcement actions were a total of 20,800 counterfeit CD-Rs, 71,428 counterfeit movie DVDs
The enforcement resulted in one arrest and the seizure of 13,000 counterfeit / pirated CD-Rs and 6,505 counterfeit movie DVDs. An additional search on 8th Avenue resulted in five additional arrests and the seizure of 33,600 counterfeit CD-Rs and 19,104 counterfeit movie DVDs.
Yup, it's still Fair Use. I mean everybody's been paid already right? Why should I have to spend more then I want to get something. I should only have to pay what I want to pay right? It doesn't matter how much they spent to make it right? Since they're an evil movie studio.
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
This is as it should be. Massive copyright violations like this are illegal, immoral, and unethical. Good job cops!
It's criminals like this who provide justifications for DRM and other annoyance. Everyone who objects to DRM and copy protection should be applauding the cops for investigating the swap meets, and the RIAA for merely informing the local police of the copyright violators, rather than engaging in their own strong-arm tactics.
That being said, it's a bit disconcerting to see them concerned with "who owns reproduction equipment like this". I really don't think that should be a concern of anyone... owning equipment shouldn't be a crime, even if it is professional-quality duplicators.
I mean, piracy is a crime isn't it? What's wrong with using real cops to bust people pirating stuff?
Unless people here actually condone piracy, which would be unthinkable for such a law and order crowd.
Why SHOULDN'T police officers be involved in a criminal copyright infringement raid? Selling bootleg CDs is WAY illegal.
I saw this on my local news the other night and they said that the quality of the DVDs and CDs were wometimes just burned CDs, and pressed ones from a professional level duplication system. This just proves how intelligent these crooks are, and I don't think it's much of a leap to assume that they also have the smarts to get around any DRM that can be dreamt up. Once again it is another case of "DRM just stops the paying customers, not the pirates." If they wanna get around it bad enough they will. And in the meantime, Joe User gets turned into a criminal because he has to break the encryption to put the DVD on his laptop for his convenience.
In some future date, Xray Von Erik will create http://www.perverted-jukebox.com/
"Sgt. Paul Wandell, Beaverton police spokesman, said officers seized more than 50,000 items worth about $758,000"
:)
In other words, $15 per item for knock off and counterfeit items, including CDs and DVDs with allegedly unauthorized copyrighted material... Bull. I say alleged because I'm guessing that there were plenty of hip hop mixtapes that are technically illegal but in reality supported by the marketing arms of various record companies, stuff that would never sell for more than a few bucks each. Or maybe illegally imported (but not illegal to own or sell in, say, China) DVDs... Let's face it, the movie studios have certainly perverted justice and the law in order to sell their stuff for $20 a disc in Wal-Mart, so I'm not crying a river for them. It's certainly not a price anyone would pay in a real free market.
Then there's purses, handbags, stereo equipment, all knock-offs... The assumption behind that $758,000 figure is that people would pay so many thousands of dollars for a Gucci bag, whatever that is, and selling a $20 knock off will hurt sales on behalf of Gucci.
Let's revise the statement above.... 50,000 items of merchandise at a value of, say $150,000 in market value might be more realistic. I can't see anyone sticking their neck out to sell that many items at a flea market for less than that.
Apparently the Music Studios are almost bankrupt. According to Marcus Cohen "We've gone into a survival mode."
You are so wrong, it's unbelievable. How does painfully wrong information get modded up like this?
I hope the RIAA realizes one day these are much better tactics than threatening people with lawsuits for thousands of dollars because they (maybe) uploaded some mp3s. It is so unbalanced. Somebody has thousands of cds they are selling on the street and all they do is take them but grandma has to deal with a lawsuit probably because some isp logged the wrong ip address.
I'm not sure on the law, but isn't selling above a certain amount criminal instead of a civil matter?
a Mac.
"We were surprised about the size and sophistication," Marcus Cohen (anti-piracy counsel for the Recording Industry Association of America) said, standing in a steady drizzle Saturday afternoon at the chain-link fence that surrounds M&M. "It's something we are going to be paying very close attention to, finding who has a replication machine that shouldn't."
Wait.... There are people how have replication machines that shouldn't? Is there a law against this? Only thy member of thouest recording industries shalt have duplicator machines?
Go jump in a lake, Mr. Cohen. Same goes to the rest of the RIAA.
This story is actually about them using REAL local cops (the kind who should be busting drug dealers and burglars) to do their dirty work, not rentacops.
I'm fairly sure that selling unauthorised copies of CDs/DVDs would cross the boundary into criminal.
Personally, selling is where I'd draw the line. Swapping, sharing, whatever, but profiting from pirating is a different kettle of fish. I would guess that the majority of file sharers would hold similar views, and whilst I'm sure that some will disagree and bring up some interesting/spurious analogies to counter that view, I will preempt by saying that not selling downloaded/ripped stuff is the difference between downloading and not stealing a car/handbag etc.
Between the falling angel and the rising ape
I'm pretty sure that copyright infringement to the tune of $700k is criminal in the US. I don't know where the boundary is, but after a certain dollar amount, it becomes a criminal matter.
You seem to be grossly misinformed. While copyright infringement done without the intent to make a profit is indeed a civil matter, copyright infringement for the purpose of making a profit is very much illegal.
Speaking as someone who thinks the DMCA is insane, despises the way the RIAA treats its artists and then calls itself the defender of musicians everywhere, thinks that copyright needs reasonable term limits, has the current AACS key in his MSN Messenger tag-line, and checks Beckerman's blog regularly in the hope of good news, I support this action.
You have tried to support your argument with faulty reasoning! Go directly to jail; do not pass Go, do not collect $200!
On the first hand we have people paid to basically impersonate police which most can agree is pretty bad, if not illegal (IMHO).
In the second case we have police raiding a flea market which was selling counterfeit goods, which I think most of you should realize is perfectly acceptable. If some jerk off is making money of copyright infringement, I hope they're taken to the ringer. At the -very- least their goods should be confiscated.
Bye!
American business interests are hurt by counterfeiting, and not just in music or movies. I was at the Pomona Fairplex a few years ago when San Bernardino county sheriffs came in and seized mislabeled Pentiums (they were 300s internally overclocked to 450 MHz -- yeah, this was a while ago :). Purveyors of fake Louis Vuitton handbags in the garment district get raided too: http://lapdblog.typepad.com/lapd_blog/2006/05/poli ce_seized_c.html (1) How likely is it, do you think, counterfeiters are paying collected sales / income taxes on their counterfeit product sales? (2) Even if they are, don't you think the sales/income taxes collected would be higher for legitimate goods? (3) RIAA member companies, and the artists that (however indirectly / low -- an argument for a different time) are paid through their efforts, are being deprived of their financial interest in the work they produced.
All of these are wrongs that "taxpayer funded" cops should be involved in policing.
geek. lawyer.
The threshold for federal prosecution for copyright infringement is $2500. It is well within anyone's rights to ask the police to close down a million-dollar market in counterfeit goods. USDOJ Computer Crime & Intellectual Property Section
I'll just keep saying it... Fuck the RIAA.
i periodically receive catalogs for high-quality recording and dj equipment (not musician's friend, another place that i can't recall right now), and from them, one can order a device to copy (and label) discs at rates of 15+/hr. these things only cost a couple hundred... so where does this character get a 7 digit figure?
This is exactly what they SHOULD be doing; getting the the people that rip off the Artist's FOR A PROFIT.
They should focus more on operations like this and less on filesharers.
actually, it can be criminal selling at an ammount of $0, in the US anyway.
it used to be that only pirating for profit (which i consider completely unethical, as opposed to doing giving it away for free, which i'm kinda on the fence about) was illegal, then the feds tried to prosecute some guy giving the stuff away (at work, and got slapped down by the counts, as it wasn't illegal if he wasn't selling it. congress then made the NET act to make that illegal.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
They confiscated 50,000 bootleg CDs which they valued at $15 each. Of course in reality, these items had a much lower value. It's like busting 1 pound of Mexican Dirt Weed and estimating it's value the same as BC Bud.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Regardless of your attitude towards people who download copies of music without the copyright holders permission, I don't know of too many people here who would argue that its OK to SELL copies of music without the copyright holders permission.
This is where the RIAA should be focusing their time.
Does this mean that they will go after real criminals now, who are and have been making millions for decades instead of spending thier time and money attacking young children?
That would be expecting way too much humanity from them.
Everybody knows 3 people with my name.
Selling pirated CDs and DVDs for personal profit is illegal and should be. I have no problem with the police assisting in taking out large distributors of this illegal media. The RIAA has no business pretending to be police. They are not civil servents and will not be acting in the best interest of the general public. At least the police are supposed to be working for the greater good.
Aside from the negative effects this could have on legal retailers, distributors, and artists, consumers could easily be fooled into thinking these items were legitimate copies. Some people do actually watch those extra features.
All that being said, I still think the RIAA is despicable and their attack on online media distribution is patently absurd and abusive. They need to work with the consumers instead of against them and realize that their model is outdated and irrelevant in the modern world.
Forecast for tomorrow: A few sprinklings of genius with a chance of DOOM!
That's fraud. And I support police actions against fraud. If the RIAA and MPAA would confine their attention to combating counterfeiting and other acts of fraud, they'd have a hell of a lot more public sympathy.
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
These busts are nothing compared to the container loads full of pirated CD's, DVD's, cosmetics, toys, bikes, medicine, clothing, batteries, cameras, and electronics coming in from China. The goods coming in from China look identical to the legitimate item, except that sometimes the batteries explode due to defects in cloning the original and the medicine, costmetics, and food sometimes kill and/or poison. If our government fails to contain China, the US will become to China what England was to the 13 Colonies. If the RIAA really wants to stop mass piracy and copyright violations, they should start with the container ships and the Walmart supply chains.
P.S. - Take my advice, don't feed the wheat-gluten from China to your pets.
The "not for profit" loophole was closed by the NET (No Electronic Theft) Act of 1997-1998.
Justice Department Announces Guilty Plea in Peer-to-Peer Piracy Crackdown This was the first criminal enforcement action against copyright infringement on a P2P network using BitTorrent technology. {September 2006]
"distribution operation"
"burner lab"
"pressed high quality product"
next, we'll be hearing bush declaring war on piracy.
...go and bust people that treated me badly?
I believe its called impersonation and its against the law.
So why are they not busted for it?
So they're allowed to enforce copyright law, but not immigration law?
Look, RIAA bashing is fun and all, but that article has some fairly significant bias to it.
What's the problem with the police being involved? Mass commercial copyright infringement? Yeah, that's a CRIME. Those FBI warnings at the front of the movie aren't just for show. And criminal law enforcement is the job of the police.
Would we prefer that the RIAA could arrest people? They might.
Could have been stolen CDs. Would be a much better explanation for the "high quality replication" than a million dollar CD press machine.
What you gonna do when they come for you?
Please forgive me.
"A tip-off on fake CDs is that they will have 20 to 24 tracks each, instead of 12 or 14," says Marcus Cohen anti-piracy counsel for the Recording Industry Association of America.
Yes, sir, and beware of one-pound cans of coffee that contain sixteen ounces instead of thirteen, sleazy operators that will sell you a four by four by eight foot "cord" of wood, and call the cops if your bag of a dozen bagels turns out to contain thirteen.
Short measure, your infallible sign of genuine U. S. music industry product.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Seems like this would be a better headline. Oh, but of course it would never make ./ unless the headline has RIAA in it, doing some imagined injustice. Don't get me wrong, I hate the *AA and everything they stand for, but come on, copyright infringement is illegal, and the police pursuing crime is hardly ./-worthy.
Here's the verbiage from the FBI copyright warning. Note that it mentions the following terms:
Unauthorized reproduction: Where the right to copy is not granted to you by the copyright holder or by fair use.
Illegal: Criminal law, not civil law applies.
Infringement without monetary gain: You don't have to sell it to be guilty.
blah, blah, blah.
"The unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this copyrighted work is illegal. Criminal copyright infringement, including infringement without monetary gain, is investigated by the FBI and is punishable by up to five years in federal prison and a fine of $250,000."
A One that isn't cold, is scarcely a One at all.
if they come knocking on my door they'd want to clearly identify themselfs as police officers or there will be nothing but hot lead greeting them.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
You could bust them if their vests said "POLICE" instead of "RIAA" -- as it is, I don't think a citizen's arrest is a crime, even if you're wearing a bunch of expensive body armor. Also, how are RIAA's goons regarded legally? Are they security personnel? What kind of legal latitude does that give them? Obviously, IANAL.
The RIAA wants to instill fear into the public. They do these small time things, like going after grandma with no Internet connection, so that the press picks up on it (and slashdot) and promotes their fear for them. Fear has worked for the Texas Mafia (Don, George W. Bush), so why not the RIAA.
Isn't all this copyright jazz only civil over in the US ? And is it really normal to be sued as the punishment for a crime ?
And what if ya don't give it to them they will sue your for... not giving the copyright material ?
Isn't collecting info about people like this only for the law enforcement ?
Isn't enforcing laws reserved for the police department ? I was sure.
The Internet tells me; Professional, Being paid to do an activity as the significant portion of one's income.
Yeah I'm sure they are being paid.
Lol
"finding who has a replication machine that shouldn't."
Who else finds the fact that having a 'repilcation machine' is a bit scary?????????
Wait, let me get this right. People are outraged that the RIAA used the local police department to seize unauthorized and unlicensed duplicates of their copyrighted works which were being sold for profit?
That's an actual felony in the United States, not the civil matter that small-scale P2P usage is.
Of course the police would be involved. I'm only surprised it was the local cops, not the U.S. Marshall's office or some similar Agency.
>Does this mean I can drees up like a cop
Maybe - you'd have to tell us what "drees" means, first, however.
I don't know where the boundary is, but after a certain dollar amount, it becomes a criminal matter.
If the copyrighted works have at least $1000 retail value, it is criminal infringement.
I live in Hillsboro, or as it is sometimes called "Hills-burrito" due to the large Hispanic/Latino/Chicano population here.
So considering the demographic of the M&M Swap Meet (NB: the Luchador graphic on the web page. Can't get enough Luchador madness.) (recognized by thew 2004 Hillsboro 2020 Vision Implementation Committee as "The Swap Meet is a good opportunity for Latino outreach."), how many of these people are illegal aliens?
If they are illegal, will they be deported?
Or is this just another show "catch-n-release" raid?
Now note, I am not against immigration. I actually think on the whole they are good immigrants and assimilating well in the typical 3 generation model, just as the Italian and Irish before them. I am however against the identity theft need to produce forged documents for them, and I am against the lack of enforcement of our immigration laws. Especially when we treat legal immigrants like shit.
BTW, you know how really hates illegal immigrants? Legal immigrants.
I was moving out of Phoenix and the mover complained about illegal immigrants (he was Hispanic). I made some typical PC comment about them, and got my head handed to me about how illegal immigrants give the Hispanic community a bad name, and how they have no regard for the law and how the legal Hispanic community has to put up with them because the US won't deport them.
Yeah, you know who hates illegal immigrants? Legal immigrants.
I also want to point out that the RIAA fells the need to pound on a bunch of people who barely speak English (their kids do, reference back to the 3 generation model of assimilation), who have no way to afford more than a public defender (which you don't get for civil suits, only criminal).
And as a aside, for a place referred to as "Hills-burrito" you'd think we'd have better Mexican food here.
Yes, they can dress up as cops and go out into public, but if they impersonate law enforcement officers, they can be arrested and punished just as much as a bootlegger. BOTH are FELONIES.
So, by dressing up in raid uniforms, and behaving like police officers, they are impersonating law enforcement officers, which is unlawful, and in my words, just plain eerie.
What's next? RIAA Humvees or surplus troop carriers?
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
They sometimes use PCs connected to banks of DVD/CD writers.
While what they did was scarry, its pretty well justified. They were indeed selling counterfit CDs and DVDs for sale. NOT personal use.
The first problem with your justification is that you assume guilt. That's not hard to do when you presume all music and movies are owned by the MAFIAA, but this is not the case. When and if these people are convicted, we will know they violated copyright.
The second problem is that copyright is a civil matter. You don't need to drag the police into it any more than you need to drag them into a divorce. Evidence can be collected without police help and courts can slap a lien on the income of the guilty party. Oh, I know, there's now criminal copyright violation - but it's wrong and should be repealed.
A third problem, related to the first and second, is justifying the cost of copyright enforcement. Would society go to bat for anyone but the MAFIAA companies? If not, the public cost of this nation wide enforcement is strictly for the benefit of a very small number of private companies. It's hard to justify that kind of spending to protect a created right that few really enjoy. The point of copyright law is to grow the public domain and encourage publication, not to protect the profits of a few large monopoly providers.
The country should be covered in small shops publishing media that people want. There is talent and equipment everywhere and it's as big and diverse as the US itself. It is an abject failure of copyright laws to have not encouraged such a market but has instead favored the central production of uniform crap which is then sold in equally repugnant chain stores.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Not only that, but I wonder how legit the discs etc look. If they look enough like the real thing, people might just think they're getting a bargain. The means that they're getting screwed with an illegitimate item, and the creators/sellers of the original are also getting screwed (because the people in question would, at least, appear to be the type that prefers physical goods to downloads).
The amount of trouble that the RIAA is putting themselves through to deal with these flea-market lawbreakers is hilarious. Don't they know where their real enemies are? I must have uploaded the same amount of stuff over P2P just yesterday (perhaps I'm exaggerating, but you get the point). Of course, I encourage the RIAA and its lackeys to waste as much of their dwindling resources as possible... it will hasten their inevitable demise.
It's criminals like this who provide justifications for DRM and other annoyance.
No, the MAFIAA companies want digital restrictions to prevent competition. Digital restrictions won't do anything to prevent wholesale copy unless general purpose computing is outlawed.
There is also principled stand that can be made against copyright as it exists. Copyright is anything but perfect and it's not having it's intended effect. The rights to free speech and privacy you will have to give up to make digital restrictions work are far more valuable than those created by copyright.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Maybe because its a civil matter and not criminal?
ArchieBunker has said something I can agree with.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I'm just going to add to the chorus here:
Selling counterfeit goods in a mass market is a real felony violation called infringement for personal gain. It carried a jail sentence decades before the DMCA ruined copyright law. This is exactly the kind of crime that needs to be busted up by the cops, and I don't care that the RIAA was the one who tipped them off.
Way to go RIAA. Keep doing your job to protect your members' interests.
The rent-a-cop raids are atrocious, but they have nothing to do with a sensible raid seizing "50,000 items worth about $758,000." That kind of infringement is wrong. I hope the people who ran the market enjoy their cell.
--
Toro
The RIAA doesn't seem to feel their plate is already full. Now they're going after Hip-Hop mix tapes as well. I don't know what it's going to take to stop them, but I hope they hit it soon.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Yes, yes Bad Guys doing bad things are arrested, so what could be wrong with that?
The outrage could be inspired by a couple of reasons:
1. the privatization of law enforcement. There is an entire private structure dedicated to law enforcement in the U.S. (private prisons, arbitration, lawyers) This is a case where the line between private and public has blurred.
2. Outrageous excess. A couple of mega-corporations make enough money to hire their own law enforcement. I haven't even discussed their history of anti-trust, suspiciously monopolistic control of the distribution of entertainment, and a variety of other criminal acts already prosecuted.
3. Right of First Sale? Right of non-infringing use? These are very important legal concepts that the media conglomerates want to sweep away. They discourage these uses by prosecuting anyone from a Grandmother to some idiots selling counterfeits.
It's really very easy when you cast every issue in such black-and-white terms. You know exactly who the bad guy is. That must be comforting but it's misguided faith in an organization that history shows harm everyone.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
but you can't deny that the replication machine itself would be strong circumstantial evidence against the perpetrator, and would serve alongside other evidence if/when that person is brought to trial.
If a person has been caught violating copyright by selling large quantities of material, then the machine is evidence of how they did it but I don't see how that matters. I have stacks of CDs and a CD burner, but I've never violated copyright. You have to do better than proving someone has a press to prove they were counterfitting and society should never fault someone for publishing legitimate materials. The whole point of copyright law is to encourage people to publish, not to make them afraid of police raids.
There's a lot wrong with copyright
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Oh, LOLZORZ!! You called it MAFIAA! I get it, like RIAA -> MAFIAA!! Yes!! HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Boy, you see so many funny things here on Slashdot but damn, this one is epic. Epic I say! Exploitable!!!
Great scott, next thing we know you're gonna hit us with something completely unexpected like spelling Microsoft with a dollar sign!! HAHAHAHAHA!!! Please, stop it!!!1!! HAHAHAHAHAH!!! *holds sides* HAHAHAHAHA!!! OMFG, no moar plz!!! HAHAHAHAH!!!
The USA has legislated a new wonderful meaning for business law enforcement and criminal persecution ... where do we line up for the torture ... we must all be feeling a little passion for some S&M or at least a little bondage.
... they are such cock-sucking and cunt licking life-long clueless closet whores [AKA: cheap stupid unethical and unprofessional sex-workers (IOW: not Male/Female Career Prostitutes)]. Well, call me John or Jane when I am framed by business law.
DAMN, we will have to pay their fees (fines means two wrongs make a right or ends-means-justification)
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
It's entirely reasonable to presume that all music and movies that were being sold were copyrighted by *an entity other than the sellers* who had *not authorized that sale*, and the work was not in the public domain.
How do you know that it's not Creative Commons or public domain material? One of these cases was tipped off by an angry girlfriend.
So because you think something shouldn't be a criminal matter, it isn't
Democracies are supposed to work that way. Laws should follow morals rather than morals following law. People are put in jail when they outrage the public. I'll settle for repealing retroactive copyright extensions instead of retroactively jailing executives of the MAFIAA companies. Those caught bribing public officials don't get off so easy. Deal?
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
How many fulltime jobs can one man have?
Violent crimes are happening and increasing everyday... My taxes pay for these cops salaries. These cops should be at least fired and lost of pension. I would like them arrested (probably ain't gonna happen) for illegally use of public money. I could care less howm much money the RIAA is losing when citizens can't even freakin' take a simple walk outside. This is total BS. No joking around, these cops should be arrested.
So some guys are running a legitimate business...selling Creative Commons licensed / GPLed coppies. Or they were selling legitimate commercial coppies but do not adhere to the RIAA / MPAA / BSA price fixing scheme. Then the STASI come to take them away for being politicall incorrect.
Thgere's one option: shoot back. It's too late to work within the system.
Andy Out!
The counterfeit $20 bill in your wallet is worthless - but try to pass it off at face value or sell the print run to an undercover cop at a discount and you will be doing hard time.
Cops, like judges and juries, do not "Think Geek."
> The goods coming in from China look identical to the legitimate item, except that sometimes the batteries explode due to defects in cloning
:-)
This is why you should only get cloned Sony batteries. Due to defects in cloning, they won't explode
People making recorded music or movies have no right to my cash. If I can download it, then I will for free with a hearty "Thanks" to the person that ripped it in the first place.
If someone can compete with the folks running off copies and sell them cheaper, then it will put the whole mess out of business even quicker. The advantage of this cannot be dismissed easily. Distribution for money achieves the same goal as downloading does, only it is far easier for those that do not have access to high speed Internet connections.
"A large percentage [of the vendors] are of a Hispanic nature," Langley said. "Today he's Jose Rodriguez, tomorrow he's Raul something or other, and tomorrow after that he's something else. These people change their identity all the time. A picture's worth a thousand words."
In the UK, impersonating a government official (which includes pretending to be one and looking very much like one) is a felony.
I wonder if the US has a similar law that might apply?
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
The $20 bill has a fixed value. Yesterday's top 40 hits have a value that is set by the market and could be zero.
It's rather assinine to attempt to conflate counterfeiting of ANY consumer product and money. There's a little bit more at stake when it comes to counterfeit money. This is why there has been federal enforcement against counterfieting money since there was a federal currency.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
how is this "news"?
They're using their grammar skills there.
When the supposed "rights" of corporations begin to exceed the rights of citizens, and police go to work for the highest bidder, we end up with the kind of facist oligarchy that has arisen in recent times in places like Argetina, or 90 years ago in the United States.
Wait till organizing unions is redefined as a subversive activity, the way it was when my Grandfather got his ribs broken by goons hired by the local mine when he tried to join the union. Wait until poverty is redefined as vagrancy and the homeless are rounded up and beaten or killed by police so that welfare taxes can be decreased.
Remember that the Thompson sub-machinegun was invented for the express purpose of being used against striking workers who picketed factories.
We MUST unite and speak out with one voice - the PROFITS of CORPORATIONS must NEVER be protected by oppressing the freedom of our citizens. Stand up NOW, or get used to living on your knees!
Okay, colour me confused; when did vigilantism become legal? Must've missed that memo.
""A large percentage [of the vendors] are of a Hispanic nature," Langley said. "Today he's Jose Rodriguez, tomorrow he's Raul something or other, and tomorrow after that he's something else. These people change their identity all the time."
So let me see if I understand this: a Hispanic nature implies one is shift or devious? Wow. You know, if a real police officer said something like this his or her career would be over.
Unbelievable.
A message from our sponsor
Nice trolling. I'll bite anyway.
First off, Nobody has a god-given right to profit. This is as valid for the RIAA and for artists, as it is for people selling "counterfeited" CDs. Copyright allows some people to profit from their creations, at the expense of having other people not being able to copy intellectual property freely. This is a law created by humans. It is not the end of the universe if copyright-law is changed or even abolished.
Proponents of copyright argue that giving a monetary incentive to artists is good, because we will have more talented artists that choose to spend their time creating intellectual property. While it's possible to argue about how large this effect is, it's very hard to deny it. So far so good. Detractors of copyright say that people should have the right to do whatever they want with information. Just because someone has taken the time to create it, doesn't mean they should be allowed to limit my freedom to use or copy it as I want. This is also very tough to argue against. It seems that the only way copyright makes sense, is to somehow find a balance between these issues. Artists should get some form of pay, people should have some form of freedom. There is very little black and white about the idea of copyright. While laws must necessarily be clear, the ideas behind it, are in effect quite grey.
Copyright is actually a very old idea. It existed as far back as in the Roman empire. Back in those days, it was mostly used in books. Just like today, books were written by authors. But unlike today, making a copy of a book, could involve one or more highly educated slaves, slaving for a year or more. Needless to say, books were quite expensive. In such a system, arguing that the author should receive a fair share whenever a new copy was produced, is not particulary hard.
Today (where I live), an album of music costs (in retail) about 2 average-salary work-hours. The cost (for a consumer) of making ONE exact replica of it, is less than a tenth of that. The cost of making mp3s out of it, would then be about 1-2 minutes. The cost of copying these mp3s to a buddy, would be about 1-2 seconds. Despite these almost shocking numbers (at least in a historical perspective), copyright legislation has recently become more in favour of copyright-holders. Essentially, the music industry, or more generally, the content industry, has partnered with the law-makers, to create a system that is completely unfair for the average consumer.
Actually, since today it is cheaper to produce a copy of some intellectual property, than it is to enjoy it (I can copy a CD much faster than I can listen to it), artificially restricting copying of content seems completely backwards. Why should the public accept such completely silly laws? Even if we can agree in principle, that it would be nice if artists got paid, that doesn't mean we must agree that copyright is the way to do it. Actually, it doesn't even mean that artists must get paid, it just means we would prefer a system that does so. But even so, a system that puts what looks like completely arbitrary restrictions on copying of content (that would otherwise be essentially free), is not something that can survive for long into the future. Copyright is dead!
I'm pretty anti-piracy and used to be involved in the movement in Thailand, but in truth, people are ripping off the RIAA's music and not the artists', since the copyright for the music is generally signed over to the agency. The artist is just "for hire." Reference. That doesn't make using the work without license any better: I was just clarifying the matter.
Put identity in the browser.
Isn't the kind of situation where the RIAA send their own militia to "assist" in raids like these a dangerous conflict of interest? If there are enough of these goose-stepping RIAA gestappo guards running around during the raid, misdirecting the actual law enforcement officers around them, what would prevent any additional RIAA guys from walking in during the chaos to plant evidence (like the duplication machine they mention), ensuring they can detain at least one person to make an example of before the public?
It's almost like giving the ok to a rape victim's family to participate in the bust of the suspect and trusting that none of them would throttle the guy before the police got to him.
8==8 Bones 8==8
So if you download Vista Ultimate edition and seed it until your ratio is 2 within a 180 day period, you lose your computer and other hardware "used in the manufacture of such infringing copies or phonorecords", in addition to getting up to a year of jail time and/or fines.
Nice.
...you never lose a child due to a speeding driver. But if you do, perhaps you'll realize that what you think their priorities should be may not be what they realize priorities should be. It's all good and well to say "yeah, I was speeding, but I wasn't hurting anyone!" - but that sort of logic just means that you feel a ticket is only valid if the person did hurt somebody; obviously, it's a little late for a ticket then.
Put differently.. if speeders, drunk drivers, people running red lights, etc. etc. would just quit doing that, maybe cops wouldn't have to worry about them and put more manhours into those other cases.
The above not related to the MPAA/RIAA bit which this story is really about, so.. on-topic: good on them. It's a crime to sell counterfeit goods. Wake me when law goes into a direction where they can use a cop squad to bust somebody for downloading songs/movies only, and I'll actively oppose it. Those who want to make money off their downloads.. tough shitski if you get caught.
>The $20 bill has a fixed value.
Huh? Ever heard of inflation?
>It's rather assinine to attempt to conflate counterfeiting of ANY consumer product and money.
Why? Money isn't real either - you can't walk into a Federal Reserve Bank, for example, and redeem it... so, by definition it has no inherent value, only that which we ascribe to it.
>There's a little bit more at stake when it comes to counterfeit money. This is why there has been federal enforcement against counterfieting money since there was a federal currency.
Yeah, 'cause only the Federal Reserve Bank (which is not really Federal, a Reserve, nor a Bank in the generally accepted sense) is permitted to counterfeit money.
I can sympathize with the view that, say, Brokeback Pirates of the 300 Trojan Gladiators or the latest EminBrittneyBoys creation is not high art, and perhaps not worth $20 in some abstract aesthetic sense. But you know? Given the options of either parting with $20 or being the one kid at school who hasn't heard Oops I Dropped My Knickers Again, large numbers of people consistently choose "Pay $20, get junk". The capitalist in me says, yep, that does indeed demonstrate that for these people the valuation of junk is greater than or equal to $20.
Would folks pay less if there were a free market in music?
There *is* a free market in music -- there isn't a government body out there stopping you from making your own, you can buy it from anyone you like, there are hundreds of thousands of suppliers, and you can get terabytes of the stuff for nothing. Its that "free market in OTHER PEOPLE'S music" that doesn't exist. You, too, can use cheaply available microphones and recording software with low-cut outfits and nonexistent knickers to simulate a talentless hack, or you can buy from a local (or remote!) musician who already specializes in doing it (preferably with knickers). But, given the choice between popular hacks and unknown hacks, some folks like popular. That, by definition, establishes that popular music has value to them, despite any number of aesthetic arguments you might have against it.
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
A note to the mods: Troll != I disagree
>Huh? Ever heard of inflation?
But I think what the GP is refering to is that even with inflation, the $20 bill will ALWAYS purchase $20 's worth of goods. In the case of a CD containing music, when it is first released, and assuming it is someone currently popular, it may sell for £15+ (in the UK). Give it 6 months or more and you will likely find it selling for £10, and another six months and it might in the Woolworths bargain bin for £5 or less!
>>It's rather assinine to attempt to conflate counterfeiting of ANY consumer product and money.
>Why? Money isn't real either - you can't walk into a Federal Reserve Bank, for example, and redeem it... so, by definition it has no inherent value, only that which we ascribe to it.
It certainly used to be the case that bank notes would state "I promise to pay the bearer on demand ...", and this used to refer to gold (maybe that was just in the UK?).
The idea was that cash would only be printed to cover the value of the gold reserves. I believe this is no longer the case after a "run on Gold" starting in the '60s ... from the article ...
On August 15 (1971), with only $2.23 in gold available to redeem every $100 of U.S. paper promises, President Nixon declared international bankruptcy by closing the gold window. After that Sunday, as former Congressman Ron Paul and Lewis Lehrman have explained: "There were now absolutely no checks on the ability of the United States to inflate." And inflate the Fed has. By all measures, the money supply has increased by 400% since 1971.
Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
handmadehands.co.uk
Well, I'm glad to know we aren't suppose to have CD Duplication systems, anymore. Someone might want to pass the news on to, for example, Tiger Direct so they can stop selling them.
This sarcasm brought to you by the letter 'Doh!'
The real scary thing is that they don't believe a private citizen should be able to own a replication machine.
The private sector has no business enforcing laws. Arresting people is particularly risky. Of course I don't mind seeing people who so blatantly break the law (selling CDs? Only on /. could that be seen as "fair use") get busted. Get a real fucking job.
Of course I don't like the RIAA, but who do you expect to enforce the laws that are on the books?
Fascism is government run by, for, but not of corporations. Just as communism, its diametric opposite (but soulmates on the same axis), is corporations run by and for the government.
The concentration camps have been inevitable, but they're a product of fascism (and often of communism, though dispersal is more common). The rule by terror and pure propaganda is part of the package, because only that kind of coercion can motivate its people, without the consensus motivation from, say, democracy.
If an org like the RIAA makes a complaint like any other (group of) people, then a justice system decides on valid evidence to send police to make reasonable searches and seizures, followed by speedy trial with lawyers available to people informed of their rights facing proportionate penalties under presumption of innocence, that's not a police state. But when the private org directs the police or any other part of the process, that's fascism: government by corporation.
--
make install -not war
"t certainly used to be the case that bank notes would state "I promise to pay the bearer on demand ...", and this used to refer to gold (maybe that was just in the UK?). The idea was that cash would only be printed to cover the value of the gold reserves. I believe this is no longer the case after a "run on Gold" starting in the '60s ... from the article ..."
According to wikipedia, no nation uses the gold standard anymore: "The gold standard is no longer used in any nation, having been replaced completely by fiat currency. It still is in use by private institutions in the supply of digital gold currency, which uses accounted gold grams as money."
You are correct that the gold standard was removed by Nixon for the US, which was nearly 30 years after the UK left the gold standard, having gone to a flat currency after depleting its gold supply with World War II purchases of weapons.
So, yes a $20 note will always buy $20 worth of goods and/or services, the problem is that because of unchecked inflation since leaving the gold standard, the goods purchasable with that $20 will eventually be a pack of gum.
"Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
And it's a legitimate tool to an extent. If you notice most of the suspects are Hispanic, then you naturally target places where Hispanics sell. You're not going to get much return on your law enforcement dollars if the cops are casing a rich retirement community instead.
Are we not even allowed to mention race anymore?
"Excuse me miss, what race was the man who raped you."
"I won't tell, it's not politically correct."
"Well, it might help us catch him."
well, I'm not sure if it is a problem, but what did the RIAA need to do to get the cops involved?
DId the need to show some sort of evidence? did a judge need to ok it? Did they just call up and tell them to be at this address at a specific time without needing a judge or evidence of a crime?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
So, would the "fake cops" the RIAA employed be considered... RIAAt Police?
</badjoke>The police have all died of diarrhea.
in fluorescent ScotchGlo green. bust the coffeeshop if they mix your latte with skim instead of real milk. bust the parking valets if your car is scratched. bust TSA if they tell you to take your shoes off at the airport security line.
it's the new Superman PJs. everybody will want one.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Nobody has the god-given right to demand that an artist perform for free, either.
Today (where I live), an album of music costs (in retail) about 2 average-salary work-hours. The cost (for a consumer) of making ONE exact replica of it, is less than a tenth of that
Distribution is not production.
No deposit, no return. You cannot copy what does not exist.
Ratatouille takes four to five years from concept to release. It employs 400 people and has a budget of $100 million dollars.
Pixar continues the Disney tradition of the intense study of the living animal in character animation:
"[Bird] brought a tank of rats for the animators to study for more than a year, in order to analyze the animals' movement of their noses, ears, paws and their tails as they ran." Ratatouille
It is this level of artistry and commitment you are paying for, not the pressing into plastic, when you buy the Blu-Ray disk at Walmart.
A classic Slashdot tactic is to accuse someone you disagree with of "trolling." I am not trolling. I'm just stating the truth about piracy, which has been spun over the years into some goofy moral crusade against copyright instead of being describe as what it actually is--selfish people scrambling to get stuff for free before they get caught. It's an entitlement culture.
What on Earth does this have to do with the argument? Obviously if an album isn't good, it won't sell. I'm not even sure what you think you're responding to with this statement because it has nothing to do with piracy. What someone does have a right to is compensation for their work, so if you take their work, you have to pay them for it. Otherwise, it's slavery.
In other words, you don't have a god-given right to their music.
If your ideas of freedom to use or copy it extend to distributing it over P2P networks, then you are infringing on their freedoms and rights.
Ah, and here we go. I knew somebody would use this classic tactic--change the debate from the morality of making sure an artist doesn't get paid to a history lesson on copyright and how it's "antiquated" or "obsolete" or "dead." Which, of course, isn't true since the GPL relies on copyright. It also has nothing to do with the topic of the discussion--the immorality of making sure an artist doesn't get paid when you take their work.
What does the time it takes to listen to something have to do with anything?! Does that mean fine wine should be worth 25 cents because I can drink it really fast? Products are priced based on the value assigned to them by market demand, not by their production costs or consumption duration. You're just using more distraction tactics to make sure people aren't discussing the artists. We've gone from scapegoating the RIAA to scapegoating copyright. You pirates are deathly afraid of discussing the human beings you're ripping off because it paints your movement in a bad light--a light you've worked very hard to avoid by blaming the RIAA as much as you possibly could.
Wow. Just wow. "It would be nice if artists got paid." At least you admit that you're okay having artistic slaves putting out work with no compensation so that you selfish pirates can enjoy it for free, as if you have some right to it.
"Sufferin' succotash."
In a lot of states, someone unlawfully entering your home can be shot on sight. I know if I saw some goon wearing a RIAA raid jacket in my house, the 12 gauge would be barking in response.
That said, I have no problem with REAL cops busting morons SELLING pirated cd's.
Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
If the RIAA goons and their rent-a-cops decide to enter my home (assume no state law enforcement is present). Do I have the right to shoot them?
As far as I know, I am defending my wife, child, and property from an unknown threat. What is to stop a gang of street thugs from wearing "RIAA" windbreakers and robbing my house?
What if I don't even know what "RIAA" means? Am I supposed to be familiar with every trade organization when defending my home?
-ted
Cops collected counterfeit materials from a flee market? What the hell is wrong with that?
If I'm reading the article correctly, the raid was based on tips that the Beaverton Police acted upon. While the RIAA came in to verify that certain items were counterfeit, they were NOT directly in control of the raid in this instance.
The issue gets confused by the links to raids where the RIAA actually seemed to be directing the raid while using rent-a-cops. That isn't the instance in this case.
Now I wouldn't be surprized if the RIAA were responsible for the tips. Of course, there is always the chance that a disgruntled customer turned them in, especially if the product they received was substandard.
In the Beaverton case, the police were doing the right thing, shutting down people that were profiting from other people's work.
Ya know it really pisses me off when I hear how the "artists" need to get paid for their work so we need to stop pirating their CD's. This has very little to do with the artists and a lot to do with greedy corporations that are desperately trying to hang on to a defunct business model. It's been proven time and time again by people in the industry (to include artists) that the recording industry screws over their artist's big time. Most of the profits go to the recording company and NOT the artists. I didn't stop buying CD's because I could download them; I stopped buying CD's along time ago when I noticed how much the recording industry was screwing ME over by price gouging me into oblivion. I got sick and tired of being charged outrageous prices for something that cost them pennies to make and the easier and cheaper it got to make the more they charged. Now you've got selling downloadable music online, how much cheaper can you get?? Yet it cost even MORE to buy it!!
Here's a way to sell music that would seriously work. If you charged a monthly fee of say $10 or $15 to have access to any music you wanted as much as you wanted how many people do you think would do it? Most probably. I know everybody is thinking OMG no way! You'd go out of business! No you wouldn't. Think about it, how many people actually buy music right now? How many people would subscribe to this service... every month. So you have Joe average that buy's maybe a CD every few months, if that. Or... $15 EVERY month like clockwork. The customer gets what he wants, music. The recording industry gets steady monthly income guaranteed. A lot more people would go for this than currently buys CD's. Sounds like more monthly income to me.
Or how about this, how much music would YOU buy if it cost 5 cents a song to download? The cost would be so negligible that people would buy songs on a whim, constantly. Instead of buying 10 songs a month at $1 a song they might buy 100 songs a month. Sure that's only $5 vs $10, but how many MORE people would be doing it? Probably 10 times as many. Now you have just increased profits 5 fold while making your customers very happy.
What the market will bear is complete bullshit. I am sick of hearing that mantra to justify screwing people out of their hard earned money. "It's just good business". Bullshit. It's fucking people over. All of this boils down to maximizing profit which means selling the biggest piece of crap you can while not completely pissing off your customer. When did this become GOOD business? Can any of you deny that this is EXCTLY what the recording industry does? How often do we see CD's come out that have MAYBE one or two good songs and the rest is crap? That's pretty must SOP if you ask me. Look, I have absolutely not problem paying a fair and reasonable price for something. If the recording industry would wake up and accept that the people have caught on to their tactics and aren't going to take it anymore Things would get much better. As long as they continue to do this and there are easier ways to get the music people are going to do it. And there is absolutely NOTHING the RIAA can do about. They may think they can but they are fooling themselves. All they are doing is pissing people off.
I believe its called impersonation and its against the law.
But they aren't impersonating the police. They aren't impersonating ANYONE. Their jackets say "RIAA." Just because you are conditioned to be fearful of people who wear official-looking clothing doesn't make it THEIR problem. I agree that they are a bunch of swine. I AGREE. But if you give in to the demands of some random person wearing a flack jacket without proof that they have official power, YOU are the idiot.1. The math adds up quite nicely if you assume that the retail value is used, rather than what the people were actually charging. That would represent the money that the retailers are losing because of the counterfeit operation.
B: When it comes to lost sales, any counterfeit is 'worth' the retail value as far as the retailers and others are concerned.
Sometimes the difference between profiling and the facts are in the reader's mind.
The person making the comment (Langley) may be telling the truth and nothing but the truth, because people DO change their names if they break the law. I've read some 'wanted' posters that have several aliases on them. It is a smart way to avoid getting caught. And it is not limited to any one ethnic group.
The person making the comment may also be completely correct in observing that a large percentage of the vendors are Hispanic, at least in the case they are talking about. If the market is in an area with a lot of Hispanics, then it would be demographically expected for a lot of the vendors to be Hispanic.
It gets kind of tricky when you are reporting facts AND dealing with ethnic-social groups. The quote about the percentage of vendors being Hispanic can easily be considered profiling as it stands. But if the quote were attached to an article about how people could get away with repeated offenses, especially if the offenders are predominantly Hispanic, then it is less profiling and more factual.
Note that the same 'profiling' versus 'fact' problem can be applied to any ethnic-social group.
Note that some people also copy CDs and such for their friends. They aren't charging for them, but it does disobey the spirit and letter of the law.
Now if friendship had a monetary value, the RIAA and others might have a solid case against them.
Something should be done about this.
I know whenever someone breaks into my home or assaults myself or my family, I call the A-team.
You guys need to stop flipping out over stupid no-duhh shit.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Instead of calling it piracy, call it counterfeiting. They are making copies that are not the real thing, even if the results are exactly like the originals.
As far as I know, counterfeiting is still illegal.
Knockoff sneakers, as long as they don't claim to be the originals, are fine. Counterfeit sneakers, those claiming to be the original brand, can open the original manufacturers up to lawsuits if somebody get injured wearing them and the injury can be traced to inferior materials or construction. That is one reason for going after counterfeiters.
Then you have the reputation side of things. Even if a counterfeit product doesn't result in a lawsuit, it can generate headlines, which can darken the reputation of a business. I sometimes wonder how many product recalls are due to problems with original products and how many are caused by counterfeits.
The comment can also be translated to mean that citizens who own replication machines and use them for illegal purposes, i.e. counterfeiting, are people that should not be owning them. It does not explicitly say that private citizens should not own replication machines.
Selling counterfeit clothes? Good. The only difference from non-brand clothes is way too often just the logo, and the demand for a thing with a logo is in this case driven merely by advertising. Such ad-generated feeling of a "need" is not genuine, and can therefore itself be considered counterfeit. Answering such counterfeit demand with a counterfeit supply is therefore perfectly ethical.
I don't think a citizen's arrest is a crime, even if you're wearing a bunch of expensive body armor. Not so: it's illegal in New York for a civilian to wear a bullet-proof vest.
are paid security forces considered civvies?
I am fascinated that after the property is confiscated by the police, RIAA/MPAA investigators report to the station to sign complaints and assume custody of the evidence. I thought the evidence had to be secured by the police until the criminal phase was completed. You know, Evidence?
What gets me the most about this is the RIAA coming in and using law enforcement for their own ends. In a way, they have a monopoly on their market. This market consists of protecting artists and other people connected to creating media that others may enjoy. I personally think partly because of their monopoly and power, they have overstepped their bounds. There is no one to stop them like there is with other businesses. Let's say Artist X made a disc or book or whatever and there is another similar one from Artist Y. Neither is better or worse but the consumer chooses Y over X more often than not. Artist X uses the RIAA to protect their investment, while Artist Y uses another agency. The RIAA has been well known to use excessive ways to protect their customers, while the other agency has decided to use more gentle or agreeable methods. In seeing the two methods, consumers of Artist X and Artist Y can now make a different decision on where they buy because of this new information. This is how much of consumerism works in the USA. There are checks and balances in subtle forms such as this. Competition always makes people change- or they lose business and money. Now, something as big as the RIAA can't survive without money and there's someone around paying them to do what they do. I don't know what the little person can do about this other than use the media to try and force others to make similar agencies (and use them). I think keeping people from making knock-offs that look like the real thing and selling them as the real thing should be stopped. There are so many gray areas in piracy but there are also black and white. The black need to be stopped, the white need to be protected and the gray should be kept at a casual pace. With a balance like this, people can get what they want and those making efforts to create things legally also get their monetary appreciation.
PS Fuck that, by the way ... in my opinion, bullet proof vests ought to be protected in the same way that the right to bear arms is protected by the second amendment.
Allowing the people to "bear arms" but not the modern armor that defends against arms is exploiting the letter of the law to defeat it's spirit.
It's despicable.
I have to check, but I have heard that in NY, if you don't have a permit to carry a weapon, it is illegal to wear a bullet proof vest. The intention is to deter criminals. Armed security guards would presumably have carry permits and could wear them. So the term "civilian" was inaccurate, but not by much, at least in the metropolitan area (I'm not referring to the south), as it is relatively unusual for civilians to have carry permits (they are supposed to be difficult to obtain).
The business about the second amendment is another topic altogether. The United States is a more dangerous place than other countries on account of its more permissive attitude towards guns--an attitude which tends toward a self-righteous sense of God-given, constitutional entitlement. That's a sociological fact.
The United States is a more dangerous place than other countries on account of its more permissive attitude towards guns--an attitude which tends toward a self-righteous sense of God-given, constitutional entitlement. That's a sociological fact.
I would rather run the still-unlikely chance of personal harm, than sacrifice the people's ability to defend themselves from organized aggression.
The people may occasionally prey upon each other with weapons, but that's the price we pay for the ability to defend ourselves by possessing them. I worry more about a society that has an unarmed civilian populace and is policed by an armed and combat-trained "warrior class" -- it creates two different "groups" of people, and it's a sociological fact that people are less empathetic towards those they perceive as being in a different group.
It would be difficult for the government to start arresting citizens with squads of secret police (China?) if it was a social norm for everyone over 21 to have a handgun in a shoulder or hip holster.
If you want to keep the citizens from possessing weapons, you must keep the entire society from possessing weapons, or you run the risk of exposing the unarmed and "naive" population to exploitation by the dehumanized soldiers and riot police.
I understand that total disarmament isn't a realistic solution in the here-and-now; I like the idea of having a "citizen's military" in which high school graduates undergo a mandatory one or two-year training program, and are then sent home "on reserve," with their service weapons, required to report for PT maybe once a month. Of course the military does need full-time soldiers; a minimum of these, just those required to operate defensive military bases and maintain war equipment, could be recruited from amongst those who excel during their mandatory service period.
This, I feel, keeps the power from becoming consolidated in the government, and ensures that the "warrior class" is just the society at large -- imagine the inner conflict a soldier would feel if he were ordered by his superiors to shoot protestors who were also fellow soldiers!