Slashdot Mirror
IFPI Threatens UK Academic For Linking To Article
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Apparently the RIAA is getting sensitive about counterclaims. When a British blog author linked to a recent article about a defendant's counterclaims for extortion and conspiracy by the RIAA in a Florida case, UMG v. Del Cid, a record company executive who sits on the board of the RIAA's UK counterpart, the IFPI, threatened the author if he did not take his link down."
Their strategy is not to win those cases in front of court. They just want to scare you by suing innocent people. They want you to think "if that innocent guy got sued, maybe I am next". It's a bit like terrorism.
see here
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
.... and half seriously ...
...
IFPI, the more legal squeeze you put on the people with your ridiculous propaganda and bribed-for legislation, the more will slip through your loopholes
until the day when everyone realises that "intellectual property" thing is itself an excuse that allows you to profit where you should not.
protection rackets operated in the exact same way. heavy guy comes in and gives you notice that unless you payup he'll make you suffer. and don't go to the cops ( or in this case, fight back in court ) he'll make it worse for you and everyone else.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
When do the RICO investigations begin?
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
hubcaps are causing hate mail?
How does an article this incomprehensible make the front page?
Interestingly, Birch posted a comment in response to another person's question about creating backups: Andrew
Thank you for clarifying these are my personal views not those of the IFPI, RIAA, BPI or others.
In response to Mark I actually think there is nothing wrong with making a copy for your own use, in a sense side-loading to an iPod or similar is an extension of that use. Under current copyright legislation there is a need for customers to be allowed that facility but without it giving rise to them then making multiple copies for sale. The very specific instrument that allows the one and not the other is the difficulty in drafting any amendment.
Paul
Revolver Records So he supports fair-use and time-shifting, but not linking to sites on the web. Yay for stupid opinions!
the RIAA's UK counterpart, the IFPI
But isn't the IFPI the International Federation of Phonographic Industries?
I think the UK equivalent of the RIAA is the The MCPS-PRS Alliance?
actually threats like this are very effective because most managment get frightened by this kind of thing through a lack of understanding and are likely to just cut you loose rather then think it through.
But you can't just sack someone for expressing an opinion in Britain. But even in the US, a universtiy is certainly going to protect its employees right to freedom of expression.
1. Complain about a blog that makes you look bad and make it known to more readers than it would ever have had.
/.? I didn't.
/., probably on digg and probably on even more pages. Listed, and most likely soon copied and spread too. If anything, the takedown notice served as free publicity for the blogger, and even if he should take it down, that story will circulate for months to come.
2. ???
3. Profit.
Now, I don't really claim I understand every move of the mafiaa. More often than not, I do not. But I somehow don't get just how this is in any way beneficial for them. If anything, this information will get spread now. Did you know about that blog before it hit
Now it's on
It's just like every time. Trying to hush something up is the surefire way to spread it on the 'net. Because nothing is interesting before it's supposedly "forbidden" to know it. Because then, you have to learn it NOW before it vanishes.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
...and use emotionally charged words. "Piracy" does sound so much better than "copyright infringement" even though it has nothing to do with rape, pillage and plunder on the high seas; so why not call their tactics "terrorism"? All right, it would mean lowering ourselves to their level - but as long as they are allowed to do this with impunity, why shouldn't we?
-- Language is a virus from outer space.
Surely in terms of editorial integrity at least, it should be case that it would be wholly appropriate - if not actually desirable - to criticise a private company if you are being funded by the government?
Paul Birch of Revolver Records is probably not alone in seeing the government as being simply a tool of corporate influence. This just shows how bad things have got - that people like him now need to make no secret of the fact that they expect governments to work exclusively for commercial interests. I mean, we know that the military industrial complex is now one and the same as democratically elected government in the West, but to flaunt is like this is just staggering I think.
"And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
When will these organizations learn that by trying to suppress this stuff that they only generate more publicity for it?
Every time I think these dinosaurs have reached an unsurpassable level of outrageousness and chutzpah, they keep topping themselves. Do they not realize that every time they open their yaps, they lose more and more credibility and probably make downloaders and file sharers even more determined to persevere?
You know, you can argue about copyright law and the industry's legal tactics until you're blue in the face, but the fact is that the world has changed and these suits are going to have to eventually adapt or die. There's a whole generation of young people out there for whom file sharing, if it carries any "moral" weight at all, is looked upon as, at worst, a "sin" on a par with speeding or jaywalking. Rightly or wrongly, millions are growing up freely sharing their music as they see fit, and they scoff at being compared with hardened criminals for doing so. You're not getting this genie back in the bottle -- a "law" that is routinely and easily ignored by a significant proportion of the populace has no teeth.
"Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
I suspect the real question is why the bar itself hasn't taken action against these lawyers. Surely it seems that if the same lawyers are continuously bringing meritless lawsuits on behalf of the RIAA and dismissing them when it becomes clear the defendant won't settle and the plaintiff's case is sorely lacking evidence that their professional conduct is at least questionable and worthy of investigation. It's my understanding the courts generally don't like to have their time wasted with nonsense where the plaintiff is clearly lacking a credible case and it's in the bar's interest to reprimand the lawyers involved in perpetuating this behavior.