Leaked RIAA Training Video

An anonymous reader writes "Gizmodo has a clip of that RIAA training video produced with the NDAA for US prosecutors that was leaked to torrent sites a few days ago. It argues they should pursue piracy cases because it leads to bigger and badder wares, like handguns, drugs, terrorist orgs, and hardcore repeat offender criminals. It's kind of sad how far they're stretching to bring law enforcement into the matter."

Comments

That solves everything!

[themushroom]

Because, you know, terrorists always watch pirated movies and download pop albums, and they're constantly Torrenting weapons of mass destruction (though it takes awhile with their throughput).

RIAA, Homeland Security... who knew they were one and the same?

Re:That solves everything!

[Jarik_Tentsu]

In future news...

George W. Bush: We have EVIDENCE that Sweden is hosting the servers of mass destruction owned by the notorious terrorist organisation, The Pirate Bay! Sweden is refusing to shutdown this evil group, so we must invade them to maintain peace in the world!

Random Person: But Mr. President...what does file-sharing have to do with terrorism?

George W. Bush: You must have missed that informative video presented by our friends, the RIAA linking file-sharing to terrorism. These 'torrents' can cause mass destruction and have already resulted in billions of dollars of damage to our economy and this is the beginning to them...torture, rape and murder is what is to come! We must liberate the internet from the tyranny and dictatorship of these file-sharers!

*Post-War with Sweden*

George W. Bush: I don't understand! We flattened every single server cluster in the country and Pirate Bay is up again...!

CIA: It seems they have multiple mirrors across the globe.

George W. Bush: They're all terrorist supporters! NUKE THEM ALL!

~Jarik

Re:That solves everything!

[cgenman]

It's true, isn't it? Your average terrorist is probably out there pirating software, cheating on their spouses, and experimenting with illegal narcotics.

Of course, terrorists also eat, go to the bathroom, and occasionally bathe too. That's because it's what people do. Correlation does not equal causality, unless you're very well paid to believe so.

Re:That solves everything!

[superash]

Pirate Bay's reply to George W. Bush - "Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"

Re:That solves everything!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well it's obvious you haven't got a fucking clue what you're talking about because the video is NOT talking about downloads, it's talking about ACTUAL piracy. That is, counterfeiting. Copying something and then selling it for a profit. And you know what? I'm dead set against that. I support the police and the MPAA/RIAA in their crusade to stamp out counterfeiting, because that really DOES harm the producer as well as the consumer. I only wish they'd spend half the effort stamping that out as they have trying to convince people that copying DVDs and CDs is wrong.

Re:That solves everything!

[KDR_11k]

I thought when you said actual piracy you meant boarding freighters, killing the crew and taking their valuables. I can see how that might lead to more violent crimes.

Re:That solves everything!

[Gandalf_Greyhame]

So Comcast aren't limiting their "unlimited" broadband service - they are fighting terrorism

Re:That solves everything!

[Fred_A]

I thought when you said actual piracy you meant boarding freighters, killing the crew and taking their valuables. I can see how that might lead to more violent crimes. I can't.

But then I can't really find a "more violent crime", especially since I know a number of people who have been captains or senior officers on large long haul freighters that have seen piracy up close. Even cruise ships and private small crafts such as sailboats aren't immune either in some areas.

Piracy can get very very nasty despite the romantic image it currently carries.

Re:That solves everything!

[EzInKy]

as a content creator, maybe you can explain to me why if a potential customer gets my software and pays someone else for a pirate copy, that's bad, and if they just pirate it without paying thats ok?


Because in the first case someone is making money off of you while in the second the second they are simply sharing information.


This idea that non commercial theft is ok is just a pathetic justification people use for their own greed.


Sharing information is not greed, it's quite the opposite as a matter of fact. It is a natural human trait that enables people to pass knowledge and culture from one generation to the next.

Re:That solves everything!

[Chrisq]

Look at Osama. It all started when he downloaded that bootleg copy of "love, love me do".

Re:That solves everything!

[Spacezilla]

Wow, that's actually pretty good, someone needs to mod that higher up. :)

Re:That solves everything!

[jrumney]

I once challenged the terrorism scare tactics used on the UK MPAA equivalent's unskippable advertising at the start of movies under false advertising regulations. It turns out that the claim is based on a single case in the 1980's where a known IRA member was arrested for selling bootleg cassette tapes at a boot sale in Belfast. Since there is a single case "proving" the link between piracy and terrorism, the ASA turned down the objections of myself and three others who complained about the ad at the same time, and the music and movie industry continue to spout the same bullshit.

Re:That solves everything!

[sm62704]

Because, you know, terrorists always watch pirated movies and download pop albums, and they're constantly Torrenting weapons of mass destruction

I think Microsoft would agree with that. So would the RIAA (well of course the MAFIAA would, that's what TFA is about).

Re:That solves everything!

[jsiples]

ahahahahaha....haha. Wow. Thats about all i have to say. This is probably the dumbest thing i have ever read. Maybe this is Bush's reasoning on going to Iraq for weapons of mass destruction, Saddam downloaded some porn off the pirate bay and since he's downloading movies, he's gotta have weapons of mass destruction.

Re:That solves everything!

[poetmatt]

Department of homeland security's response: "Unleash the ninjas!"

Re:That solves everything!

[kalirion]

Don't forget, terrorists also have training videos.

Re:That solves everything!

[Anonymous Coward]

http://gizmodo.com/358648/leaked-riaa-training-video-for-prosecuters-find-pirates--find-c

Re:That solves everything!

[KDR_11k]

Perhaps quantitatively more, not qualitatively?

Re:That solves everything!

[cinderblock]

Torrents are an excellent way to distribute WMDs.

The web tells them where all the pieces are. Fanning out, each terrorist has a specific piece to retrieve. Back at the base (that doesn't exist), they reassemble the pieces. Some are discarded because they don't quite fit so they need to go out and get better copies.

Every once in a while, the US pretends to be selling pieces only to turn around and tell them to stop building WMDs. They cut their internet connection temporarily until they call the security office and have their service reconnected.

After each WMD is assembled, they are watched and then stored until later when they want to watch that WMD again.

This entire time, they get credit with their group for making copies of all the pieces.

After a very long time, they are simply discarded.

Some WMDs never get completed, no one has the final piece that is needed to complete it, so they sit collecting dust until they are finally discarded.

Re:That solves everything!

[sammyF70]

Using the words "fucking clue" doesn't make your point more valid. Check at around the 16th minute of the video. They are talking about evil music downloaders and how they hope that other states, apart from California ("... ueber alles") will adopt stateside prosecution against illegal up- and downloaders.

Re:That solves everything!

[fbartho]

What romantic image? That kind of piracy has no romantic image, it's modern day boat bound assault and mugging with the added bonus that the criminals often have the greatest chance of getting away with it if they kill everyone (and less chance if they don't). The only romantic imagery associated with the word "piracy" is the comedic pirates of the Caribbean style piracy something purely in the entertainment realm. Which also is entirely different from the casual copy+share methodology if most college students on bittorrent, something that's entirely unromanticized, but it's something that a ridiculous portion of the college demographic participates in to some degree and views as normal while stressing and fearing the RIAA & co. Finally, it's something that is also entirely different from the sleazy pirating for sale which runs rampant in Asia, but that is really insidious when it happens locally.

Re:That solves everything!

[KDR_11k]

They could just share a plot summary. Sharing data verbatim that you could not reproduce manually is not a human trait.

Splitting a skull is just moving atoms. Moving atoms is a perfectly normal process so why should we object to smashing other people's heads?

Re:That solves everything!

[Leebert]

Pirate Bay's reply to George W. Bush - "Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr" Hmm... Given their history I'd more expect the reply to be: "Please go sodomize yourself with a retractable baton."

Re:That solves everything!

[rtb61]

Well come on be fair. Of course piracy leads to worse crimes, after all it facilitates the further spreading of anti-social content that the RIAA/MPAA etal support and protect. With lyrics and stories that low and behold promote crime, drug abuse violence and, that's right, the killing law enforcement officers. So who should law enforcement officers be pursuing, the pirates who are supposedly putting the publishers out of business or the publishers who a pushing violence, drug abuse and anti-social cop killing content upon the violent offenders of tommorow ;).

Muhahahahaha

[Ariastis]

A CD today, tomorrow the world! arrrrrrrrrrr....

Re:Muhahahahaha

[ArcherB]

A CD today, tomorrow the world! arrrrrrrrrrr.... Exactly! Who would have thought of downloading a Bangles tune as a gateway drug?

Re:Muhahahahaha

[Big Nothing]

Actually, they're dead on; I've been file sharing for a few years now and I am thinking of escalating to international terrorism and heroin distribution. It just feels like a natural next step.

Re:Muhahahahaha

[robot_love]

Exactly! Who would have thought of downloading a Bangles tune as a gateway drug?

I agree. Surely the desire to download a Bangles tune is indicative of a pre-existing drug problem.

Re:Muhahahahaha

[dwarfsoft]

I think what they mean is that by downloading the latest Britney Spears track, you are likely to require heavy drug use to forget everything you just heard.

How?

[TubeSteak]

How will they pursue piracy cases without a Navy?

Re:How?

[kaizokuace]

software pirates should just take to the high seas! As long as they keep running around unprotected waters they cant get sued! They will have to deal with firefights with real pirates and probably RIAA will send in black water or something. But it will be good times.

Re:How?

[blasterz]

Maybe Scientology can assign some of Sea Org to assist them

Re:How?

[bladesjester]

How will they pursue piracy cases without a Navy?

With law Ninjas

Re:How?

[calebt3]

Nations might not approve them piggybacking on the undersea fiber bandwidth.

Re:How?

[An ominous Cow art]

Of course all the RIAA'll be able to muster will be ass Clowns .

gateway crime misinformation

[Will the Chill]

This is just the same old "gateway crime" argument, which, if history is any example, will inevitably be scientifically proven false by statistical studies showing (perhaps a correlation, but) no causation.

All agressive prosecutors (persecutors?) will fall back on this precept when it starts to become clear the "crime" they're fighting against is victimless and thus shouldn't be considered a crime at all.

I find this is mostly caused by greed and ignorance on the part of the persecuting party and any agencies they employ in their unethical battle.

-WtC

*error 404: sig not found*

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[DracusMage]

'Cause you start out stealing songs and then you're robbing liquor stores
And sellin' crack and runnin' over school kids with your car

I never thought that a Weird Al song would actually be a part of the RIAA's groundwork for getting the government to do their bidding. But if the RIAA says that downloading songs is going to lead to running guns and drugs, then we should take this a step further.

In order to better "think of the children" we should immediately disband the RIAA and all of the record companies. I mean, if stealing songs leads to drugs being sold to children, or guns being fired at people, we should do the "right thing" and keep anyone from stealing music. Since they can't do this the way they are going at it, then obviously we should stop the music piracy by stopping the music.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[IdleTime]

USA should follow Norways example on how to deal with RIAA, MPAA and other such extortion outfits.
http://torrentfreak.com/norwegian-police-deal-massive-blow-to-mpaa-lawyer-080220/

"Like many lawyers in the anti-piracy arena, Tøndel tries to blur civil and criminal law to obtain leverage. The police are clear - their priority is investigating real crimes, such as murder and robbery and sadly for him, file-sharing does not fall into those categories. Tøndel must now make his claims against alleged pirates in a civil court.

Following this major setback, Tøndel wrote to the Department of Justice and demanded a meeting with them. Unfortunately for Tøndel, the response wasn't what he'd been hoping for -the Department of Justice completely refused him a meeting- leaving him to start suing IP addresses, which he's not allowed to do. Ouch."

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[emjay88]

Remind me again how pirating music (or anything for that matter) is a "victimless" crime?

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[webmaster404]

Remind me again how pirating music (or anything for that matter) is a "victimless" crime?

Because what the RIAA calls "pirating" is what most people did in the record days and tape days. I didn't see the recording industry suddenly get bankrupt. What about VCRs that recorded TV did that suddenly make TV stations go bankrupt? Or the TiVo how it skips ads, because I know that it made TV shows stop airing because people "pirated" them and skipped the commercials. The fact is, "pirating" is doing the same job today as radio did 10-20 years ago, promotes the artist. People won't buy something without hearing or seeing it for free, same reason a bookstore will let you read an entire book if you really want to without paying for it. In the end though, even though it hurts the *AA's cashflow for a bit, it will increase it in the long run by gaining new music fans.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[Scrameustache]

This is just the same old "gateway crime" argument, which, if history is any example, will inevitably be scientifically proven false by statistical studies showing (perhaps a correlation, but) no causation. Science which will be ignored by lawmakers and buried by the media.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[Samgilljoy]

This is just the same old "gateway crime" argument, which, if history is any example, will inevitably be scientifically proven false by statistical studies showing (perhaps a correlation, but) no causation.

And the old gateway crime argument is just a form of the ancient post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

People fill in the gaps in their information with ideology. Unfortunately, a great deal of law enforcement training perpetuates these ideas. Time and again, they'll tell you that people convicted of felony X first committed misdemeanor Y, but they fail to notice that they have no idea how many people actually commit misdemeanor Y without ever coming under the radar. Counterarguments which are under the radar, like the hordes of people who smoke pot but don't do crack, are filed away as potential crack smokers rather than demonstrations that smoking pot does not necessarily lead to smoking crack. They also ignore extensions of their own arguments, and not just the ad nauseam examples. For instance, one could just as easily say that drinking beer leads to smoking crack even in adults, but they won't. Why causal linkages between beer and pot and crack are so strong in kids, while the link between beer and anything "druggy" magically disappears during adulthood is beyond me, but then, I only had 9 years of full-time University education and 3 years of doctoral research, so I guess I ain't clever enough to suss out thar thinkun'

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[tubapro12]

Interesting idea, but the way I see it, if they're going to argue that piracy is a gateway crime, how can they not argue that music makes people violent? I have to offset this with the fact that they are the RIAA, nevertheless, combining these two opinions seems roughly logically consistent to me.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[OECD]

Tøndel must now make his claims against alleged pirates in a civil court.

Nooooo! The humanity!!! Think of the terrorists/children!

Barely off topic: How hard is it for a Yank to immigrate to Norway?

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

The fact is, "pirating" is doing the same job today as radio did 10-20 years ago, promotes the artist.

Radio stations (and the artists they play) are supported financially, usually advertising. The mere impression of an ad is worth a certain amount of money, and a portion of that money goes towards the artist (if they so desire it). Plus, unlike pirated media, radio can't easily form a library the same way CDs or downloads can, so the radio would encourage to a much greater degree the purchasing of media that could form a library. With radio, you're distributing an advertisement for the music. With piracy, you're distributing the product itself for free.

I'd also like to say that's it's the RIAA's own damn business how they distribute their music. You can make all the recommendations you wish to them about what will help them get more money, but it's ultimately up to them as to what rights outside of fair use they wish to allow. If you don't like it, don't buy it, and don't pirate it. If it's commercially feasible, the free market should spit out a music label that allows more flexible licensing, one that recognises the potential of sharing, but until then, quit giving the government yet another reason to cave to the RIAA's demands.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[Sangui]

Because a lot of the people who pirate, wouldn't have bought the stuff in the first place. How many people would own photoshop if they couldn't just download it? That isn't Adobe's market. Back in the day people would just tape songs off the radio. What about the old two VCR trick? Rent a video from Blockbuster, use a blank tape and copy it while you watch it.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[pha7boy]

This is just the same old "gateway crime" argument, which, if history is any example, will inevitably be scientifically proven false by statistical studies showing (perhaps a correlation, but) no causation.

I would not be so quick to dismiss this. there is a little bit of difference between home brew piracy (what you are doing at home) and for profit piracy (what the guy supplying the Kenyan at the corner of 43rd and Broadway is doing). Generally speaking, suppliers of pirated movies/cds are part of criminal gangs. It might not lead to a suitcase bomb, but it might very well lead to drug smuggling and/or other crimes.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[hairyfeet]

The problem with that is this---THEY paid off OUR congress critters to change OUR laws!!! I should be able to download Elvis and Jimi and Janis now,they SHOULD be public domain.But thanks to the "bono rots in hell act" or whatever they called it copyright is what,a century and a half or something? The whole point of copyright was a fair trade,you get to make money for awhile,and then WE the public gets a greater public domain to choose from.THEY declared war by raping our public domain and until the law is changed it is an unjust law,and therefore it should be fought at every opportunity.I will not buy their *.AA garbage and if someone wants to steal their crap I say have at it.THEY started it,not us!

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[dbIII]

we should stop the music piracy by stopping the music

You can't stop the music. Nobody can stop the music. Take the cold from snow. Tell the trees, don't grow. Tell the wind, don't blow, 'cause it's easier.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[timmarhy]

"If it's commercially feasible, the free market should spit out a music label that allows more flexible licensing"

Oh please not this fucking argument again. IT'S NOT A FREE MARKET, RIAA are a cartel which buys off radio stations and setups up crappy tv shows.

your argument is fine if the consumer was actually given a real choice.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[robertjw]

That's a great point. I find it interesting how many video tape collections I've seen on garage sales in the last few years since DVDs became commonplace. People are trying to sell their pirated VHS tapes.

It's actually funny how much things change. I remember back in high school in the 80s when it was a big deal to get a bootlegged concert tape. You could get in SERIOUS trouble for bringing a tape recorder to a concert. These days many artists promote it and even have websites where fans can share their bootlegs.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[sconeu]

Cause you start out stealing songs and then you're robbing liquor stores
And sellin' crack and runnin' over school kids with your car

You forgot littering.... and creatin' a public nuisance.

Yeah, I know you were quoting Weird Al, but the Alice's Restaurant thing was too good to pass up.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[sconeu]

What about VCRs that recorded TV did that suddenly make TV stations go bankrupt?

They did! Jack Valenti told us they would, and Jack wouldn't lie, would he???

I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[Mr. Roadkill]

Yeah, I know you were quoting Weird Al, but the Alice's Restaurant thing was too good to pass up.

You can get any thing you want at Jon Lech Johansen's Restaurant (Excluding Jonny...)
.
.
"And creating a nuisance", and they all came back and sat next to me on the Group W bench, talking about father raping and selling crack and operating torrent trackers and all kinds of groovy stuff..."

Is that the smell of a brand new Slashdot Meme, perhaps? Or just of Arlo throwing up in disgust?

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

Oh please not this fucking argument again. IT'S NOT A FREE MARKET, RIAA are a cartel which buys off radio stations and setups up crappy tv shows.

Firstly, the RIAA has nothing to do with the TV shows which you unilaterally declare crappy.

Secondly, and more importantly, any antitrust issues can be dealt with separately without having to have copyright and copyright holders deal with the flak. If you have a problem with the way the RIAA conducts its business, rather than just targeting the organisation, target the behaviour instead, and make it commercially infeasible. No-one's going to listen to you when you just chant for the RIAA's head on a pike. You need to be constructive if you want any change, let alone a permanent one.

Thirdly, if the OP is right, indie music shouldn't really need the radio when they've got P2P sharing to perform the same function. If it is truly a better advertising/distribution scheme, then indie artists will have no trouble at all if they just relax their copyrights.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[Vskye]

Post is correct. I used to purchase tons of albums back in the day, and the first thing I did was copy it to either cassette or reel to reel tape. Played once, and that was it. I still find it hard to believe that doing the same thing now constitutes a crime. (burning to mp3, etc) I bought it, so kiss my ass. Otherwise I'll just stop purchasing music altogether and download it. And, the whole point of copying said album / cd is to preserve the original and create copies that might be destroyed,, so you can still have the original to fall back on and recreate new copies.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[siddesu]

so, what's wrong with prosecuting the guys for each crime they have committed using the correct approach?

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[Myrcutio]

There is one assumption thats being made here, that if we didn't pirate the music, we would go out and buy it. Fact of the matter is, alot of people who pirate music do it because they weren't willing to pay for ANY music in the first place. These "damages" (which only really hurt the record companies, the artists make trivial money on actual CD sales), are not actually damages at all. there was never money to be stolen, i as a college student have no money to speak of, and therefore can afford no CD's.

I can definately guarantee that when my favorite band comes to town, i won't be pirating the video of the concert, i'll fork up the cash and go see them. THAT's the only place left to make money off music, live performance.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[mikael_j]

I'd also like to say that's it's the RIAA's own damn business how they distribute their music. You can make all the recommendations you wish to them about what will help them get more money, but it's ultimately up to them as to what rights outside of fair use they wish to allow. If you don't like it, don't buy it, and don't pirate it. If it's commercially feasible, the free market should spit out a music label that allows more flexible licensing, one that recognises the potential of sharing, but until then, quit giving the government yet another reason to cave to the RIAA's demands.

How about we, the people, demand equal access to culture regardless of what some greedy suit-claden business major who is only able to appreciate something's value in dollars thinks about it? Of course, since most people are apathetic sheep when it comes to anything that isn't being spoonfed to them by The Almighty Television(tm) the problem with this is that it will most likely be impossible to change the laws in many countries, especially as various lobbyists are filling the politicians' pockets with money to keep them from doing "crazy" things like recognizing fair-use rights in the first place, saying no to DMCA-like laws and denying the lobbyists the ability to get ISPs to turn over the names of their customers without a court order...

I'm not even going to try to argue the practical points, I just wanted to point out that there is no God(tm)-given right profit, a lot of people (especially americans) seem to think so but opinions do not facts make.

/Mikael

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[BenoitRen]

a bookstore will let you read an entire book if you really want to without paying for it

Wait, what? Since when? No bookstore ever let me do that.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[cp.tar]

If you want to read a book for free - go to a library. Does reading the book for free promote the author? Maybe. But you also just took a royalty (that YOU owe them) out of their pocket.

I'm an adult now. I pay for things. I'm not defending the industry and their actions/tactics; I'm just saying the artists deserve to be paid. Too bad I can't collect two cents from you for my opinion, I think you owe it to me.

If artists enabled me to download their music from their site for twice the price they're earning per track now — which is, AFAIK, a few cents — I would gladly do it.
Since I cannot, and my loss would be disproportionately bigger than their gain, I say the hell with it.

MAFIAA's business model is outdated, no longer in step with available technology.
If it were about the artists, they would have adapted the business model to fit modern conditions. Instead, they are trying to adapt us to fit their existing business model.
Some artists have already offered their music on their websites. Many more will follow in their track. When that happens, I'll gladly buy music from them.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[JuzzFunky]

You can't stop the music, nobody can stop the music.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[Attila Dimedici]

I believe that such businesses are starting to develop. We forget that the RIAA business model didn't happen overnight. It took time after the development of recording media for businesses which took advantage of the new media to develop and to figure out how best to capitalize on the new market the technology of recording provided. Now, businesses will have to develop that take advantage of the distribution advantages that the internet provides. But that takes time.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

There is one assumption thats being made here, that if we didn't pirate the music, we would go out and buy it. Fact of the matter is, alot of people who pirate music do it because they weren't willing to pay for ANY music in the first place.

There's no such assumption being made here. The RIAA and copyright law can deal with you refusing to fork out the money for the music (although the RIAA would prefer if you did), but you actually don't get to keep the product that you decided not to pay for. The choice is simple: if it's overpriced, don't buy it, if it's worth it, then do, just like in any other instance of the free market.

I can definately guarantee that when my favorite band comes to town, i won't be pirating the video of the concert, i'll fork up the cash and go see them. THAT's the only place left to make money off music, live performance.

So, you're essentially letting die any music that can't be performed live? How do you think the fans of that music would feel? Copyright protects all works, biased only by popularity, i.e. the more people who derive enjoyment out of the artwork, the better it is protected. It's also optional too, so if your favourite bands don't mind its fans sharing their songs, and paying for the concerts, then they can. If they don't want that, that's their choice too. You have no more of a right to tell them how to do business than you have the right to shoplift a $30 CD and leave $5 because you think it's a "fair" price.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

No, I disagree. You act as if you're the underdog in these proceedings, but I can assure you that you are not. The RIAA has an ungodly amount of influence over the government, but you have even more. You have the power to, anonymously if you choose, take a copy of anything they offer. Everyone has. You are in the position to completely disregard the law much to their detriment and get away scot-free. They at least have to work and pay for every lawsuit, every lobbyist, every (mis)information campaign, and they need to compete against all this piracy-justification crap, but you just need the computer and internet access you had lying around and you can get around all that. You have an extraordinary power, and you are abusing it. If you want the laws to be changed (like shorter term limits), you need to work for it, like the RIAA is doing constantly just to keep the laws in tact. If you want to just get a free kick out of your ill-gotten gains, keep doing what you're doing. That is, until the government/RIAA decide that you've abused the privilege of anonymity and encryption enough, and make it illegal.

So, you can either buy into the excuse that the system is broken, that your vote and your voice mean nothing, and just sit on your butt downloading media, both recent and old, or you can actually get up and do something about it. Support the EFF if you want, or just tell the *.AA that you really can do without their garbage, and refuse to have anything to do with it.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[rmach]

I case anyone is not familiar with the song, here is a post to a version with animation at Youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0C93_0L2Z9c

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

How about we, the people, demand equal access to culture regardless of what some greedy suit-claden business major who is only able to appreciate something's value in dollars thinks about it?

We could, but thankfully economics and politics are driven by more than just a small group's short-sighted and unreasoned desires.

Of course, since most people are apathetic sheep when it comes to anything that isn't being spoonfed to them by The Almighty Television(tm)...

That's some given. I'd say it's more like a bunch of relatively wealthy people realising that petty political squabbles don't change the fact that they are content, and that democracy has succeeded for them.

...the problem with this is that it will most likely be impossible to change the laws in many countries, especially as various lobbyists are filling the politicians' pockets with money to keep them from doing "crazy" things like recognizing fair-use rights in the first place, saying no to DMCA-like laws and denying the lobbyists the ability to get ISPs to turn over the names of their customers without a court order...

A congressman who is unelectable in the public's eyes will still lose no matter how much money goes into the campaign fund. If you really want anything to change you need to convince the happy^H^H^H^H^H apathetic masses that copyright reform is, for some reason, jeopardising their very existence. Think that's impossible? You may just be in the wrong democracy then.

I'm not even going to try to argue the practical points, I just wanted to point out that there is no God(tm)-given right profit, a lot of people (especially americans) seem to think so but opinions do not facts make.

OK, so now we have a decent point that doesn't just rely on positioning the blame on everyone else except you. Copyright isn't about a God-given right to profit. It's about allowing culture-creation to become profitable, consistent with the rest of the free market. If you do anything else in the free market, and what you create is appropriately priced and useful or entertaining, then you will be able to profit from it, if you work for it. With art, without copyright, the demand is there, the money is there, the work is there, it just can't turn a profit when it's available for free elsewhere. That would be fine in the free market, if it weren't for the fact that the free version can't survive without the original version. The art business essentially cannibalises itself. That's what copyright is meant to correct. The right to profit is not God-given, it's man-given to encourage the further contribution to society. Y'know, everyone working to help each other out, the essence of society, you know what I mean?

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[Mathinker]

> The RIAA has an ungodly amount of influence over the government, but you have even more.

The One and Only disagrees with you. And I think most of us agree with him.

What do you think more easily sways a politician, a few (or even thousands of) voters (as long as they are a very small portion of the electorate), or one lobbyist with a lot of economic backing?

Think about it.

Frankly, my impression is that currently (it may change in the future), even if hairyfeet had the economic clout to try to spread his "stop raping the public domain" message to the entire US electorate, only a very few, relatively, would understand and/or care. Sad.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

Well, Mathinker, The One and Only is simplifying the math somewhat. You don't just get your vote, you get the vote of everyone you influence. Whenever you convince someone of your plight, that could be another vote to tip the scale. You don't have to do it one on one, you could advertise to the entire country via the web, and eventually, if you get some donations, via radio or TV. You could start a viral campaign, where you tell your friends to tell their friends to tell their friends... etc, to vote a certain way.

As for the lobbyist who has a lot of economic backing, your collective influence actually trumps any influence he has. He can only give the politician some extra advertisement money, but it's the public that must vote. You could put him out of a job if you wanted to, and he would no longer be of any interest to any lobbyists. They may be living the high life eating lunches, taking donations, but it's easy to fall and it's a long way down.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[xhrit]

>the RIAA has nothing to do with the TV shows which you unilaterally declare crappy.

ORLY? American Idol winners sign contracts to only record with companies owned by the show's producers and to allow related agencies to manage their careers. Former co-host Brian Dunkleman referred to the show as "owning" the winning contestants. Needless to say companies that are affiliated with the RIAA.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[petermgreen]

the problem with most electoral systems is you basically have to choose one or a very small number of issues that are important to you and then use those issues to choose between the small number of candidates who stand more than a snowballs chance in hell of winning.

so issues which aren't of paramount importance to a significant portion of the electorate get decided by the lobbyists who fund the politicians campaigns.

You also have the problem that most if not all sucessfull polititicans outright lie in thier manifestos.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[IdleTime]

All information needed can be found in English at http://udi.no/default.aspx?id=2112

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[enjahova]

Radio stations (and the artists they play) are supported financially, usually advertising.

That's right, it is a business model. It is a business that is almost completely consolidated and so dominated by advertising that it is essentially shitting on our public airwaves.

Plus, unlike pirated media, radio can't easily form a library the same way CDs or downloads can

Sounds like a Minus to me. Copyrights are supposed to promote the progress of science and the useful arts. Here you are arguing against efficient distribution.

I'd also like to say that's it's the RIAA's own damn business how they distribute their music.

Exactly, and if their business is failing why should we be making law after law to make sure they keep getting money? People like you have forgotten that it is in human nature to create. To create music, art, software, and all intellectual endeavors are what we do that makes us different from monkeys. You don't realize that we don't need a massive distribution industry anymore, we can share our creations directly with each other.

If it's commercially feasible, the free market

It isn't a free market because people like you believed the sony bono crap. Copyrights are automatically granted now, they last for pretty much 2 lifetimes. They are monopolies on the distribution of products that are naturally distributable thanks to the internet.

I think the understanding you are missing is that it wasn't always like this. If you go back and look at world history (or the modern world in other countries) the sharing and collaboration of ideas was encouraged. It is only in the last century that things have gotten so perverted in our country. And it is only in the last decade that the internet has made it clear how far our laws have strayed from our nature. You will not hear my argument until you can accept that the current system is not the best possible system, that it is in fact a terrible system.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[sconeu]

Could it be that I've started a movement? :-)

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[gstoddart]

Because what the RIAA calls "pirating" is what most people did in the record days and tape days. I didn't see the recording industry suddenly get bankrupt. What about VCRs that recorded TV did that suddenly make TV stations go bankrupt?

That doesn't mean they weren't claiming it was going to ruin them at the time. They tried to get the VCR declared essentially illegal if I recall correctly. They wanted blank cassette tapes outlawed, and I seem to recall they had fits over reel-to-reel technology as well.

We're talking about industries who are very resistant to most new technologies which actually allow the consumer to do anything besides play what they've been told to buy.

All forms of electronic copying and playback have given these industries the willies for a long time. They're idiots, but they've been on the same message for decades. It's not like they're suddenly claiming the sky is falling, they've always been of that opinion. Just more so of late.

Cheers

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[hairyfeet]

Let us all not forget the revolving door between the congress and the high paying influence peddlers.So even if I did get my "Stop raping the Public Domain" or SRPD for short,and I did get enough out there to manage to get people to listen,by taking the money they are not only assured their silver coin now,but a high paying career afterwards.And as one of the posters below this points out,you have a limited number of choices to begin with.And for most elections for at least the last twenty years or so,it has been less "the lesser of two evils" and more "Coke VS Pepsi".Who cares if your choices are lobbyist loving sellout A or B?

But I do think this would make a great experiment for slashdot,just to see if such a change is possible.I think we can all agree that there are many intelligent, highly technical readers and posters here,and there are web hosts,graphic artists,networkers,teachers,students,the list goes on.And while there are many subjects on which we do not agree I think we can all agree that our Public Domain was a precious resource,a commons for us and our children to share,which is currently being strip mined by those who care for nobody but themselves.So here is my proposal-

I hereby give the slogan of "Stop Raping Our Public Domain" and the shortened "SRPD" under the public domain for slashdot and all the world to use.I propose that someone who has a decent webhosting service or a spare server with a good pipe set up a website for the purpose of spreading our message.Some of the graphics artists could come up with some cool logos or animations,musicians some nice music to download,some of the more elegant writers and teachers could write the prose stating our case in a way to appeal to the masses.We could even let the grammar Nazis spellcheck,lol! And all of it would be under the public domain and it would contain works and examples of the public domain,as well as showing how we are being robbed by the greedy.And then we the members of slashdot could spread news of it all over the web,to try and get a grassroots campaign started to restore our public domain into the beautiful commons it once was.

Would it work? Maybe,maybe not.But at least we would have tried to give something back,not only for ourselves and our own enrichment,but for those that will come after.For ultimately that was what our public domain was-an erichment to us all.Not only a free source of entertainment and knowledge,but a springboard,a place where an artist could find seeds with which grow new ideas.Which of course in turn would be fed back into the commons after the artists had a small time to feed himself and his family.Instead it has been turned into a wasteland by those that think copyright should last for eternity.Hell,maybe I'm just tilting at windmills,but I'm a sucker for a noble cause.SO I throw it out there to the slashdotters of the world.And just think--if it worked not only would you prove the old cynic in me wrong,but you'd help restore a fertile commons for all of us to share.A worthy goal,don't you think?

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[mugnyte]

you obviously didnt really trade much music "back in the day". we would go to school auditoriums and swap tapes, either copies, bootlegs or new. the system could involve meager amounts of money to offset perceived value, but the system thrived. it still does, if you know where to look.

  truth is, the public builds markets where the convenience and value of property is set by the participants. the music industry plays only into the first sale. with copying, the concept of "copyright" has disappeared for almost all information. if the medium originates digitally, sorry but you cannot use that channel in a locked pipe any more. i agree its an issue for many players, but the technology is out of the bag.

  the locks placed now on channels are the last vestiges of that system, but they are disappearing. you will see that the promise of continued content, of content in non-digital deliveries (live performance) become the major stream. there are models like this, in churches and public radio, where they simply ask for direct investment for future projects, not selling by-the-pound and locking the medium down. this is where newspapers, music and eventually videos are heading.

  a new, convenient device may prop up the notion that "we can secure the channel" now and again, but it doesn't last. everyone here knows this, and you even play by this model "i pay for things" voluntarily, not be force. you should simply pay to the artists you've enjoyed after you've sampled their goods. any good restaurant works under the same premise, and that usage has real duplication cost. Note even the software industry, where "registration" holds the real benefit in service, support and upgrades, and the package is usually completely unlocked.

  The sentiment here on /. is old and tiresome, but true: digital information is going to flow freely now that the Age Of Information has liberated its duplication and dispersion. steps to fight it are just waste and prolong the inevitable.

  Personally, i will acquire anything for free if the effort is low, and pay the commercial price if i feel i enjoy it. slashdot is part of this group. have you joined?

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

Yes, bringing more than a couple of issues to the table is quite difficult. On the other hand, maybe that's for the best, because society doesn't respond well to rapid change. It ends up being expensive and it gives people no time for acclimatisation.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

So how come it's possible to transfer copyright to a company (as some musicians effectively do), and where's the incentive in creating more works of art if you can live off of the royalties from one or two succesful albums or movies?

Most people can't afford to milk all the value out of their copyrights themselves, so they are able to sell it to a company. They won't get as much money as they would if they pursued it themselves, but they will get enough to encourage them to create again for a quick buck.

Why not cut back copyright to say, twenty years?

Well, apparently there are quite a few indie artists who actually do only see profit over a long period of time, and unlike the RIAA, they would be seriously hurt by shortening copyright terms. That said, I don't really buy it, and I certainly think that having the rest of our culture in public domain is more important.

That way if you record an album when you're twenty you'll still be in control of it and receive royalties until you're forty, seems like a pretty good deal considering most of us get paid only once for what we create...

Yeah, but it's not quite so fantastic when you consider that most of us get paid what our work is worth once off, whereas an artist relies on small-time payments from small-time customers (and not even all those customers decide to pay that money).

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[emjay88]

Because a lot of the people who pirate, wouldn't have bought the stuff in the first place. This is a flawed argument.
The crack addict who's scampering away with my TV is allowed to take it, that's not theft because he wouldn't have used his money to buy one in the first place.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

That's right, it is a business model. It is a business that is almost completely consolidated and so dominated by advertising that it is essentially shitting on our public airwaves.

That's irrelevant. The point was that P2P has a very different effect to radio.

Sounds like a Minus to me. Copyrights are supposed to promote the progress of science and the useful arts. Here you are arguing against efficient distribution.

That's only tangentially relevant. It's the same point: that P2P != radio. The argument that paying artists for their work encourages them to create more is a separate issue. But while we're on the issue, the act of creating a library doesn't itself "promote the progress of science and the useful arts", listening does. You can listen on the radio, support your own creativity, and support the artist financially without breaking the law. Or you could buy the music, or rent it out with a service like Napster. Illegal P2P is largely unnecessary for that purpose. If you want inspiration you may as well stick within the law. What the legal alternatives can't provide is a way for you to get your hands on as much art as possible without paying the artist for it.

Exactly, and if their business is failing why should we be making law after law to make sure they keep getting money?

It depends how it's failing. If it's failing from legitimate competition, i.e. someone has managed to produce a separate product that is of better value, and that person can sustain that business model as a replacement, then they have no right to protection from us. If it's failing due to people selfishly taking what they want, when they want, running them out of business, while contributing nothing back of their own, and producing no sustainable alternative, then we have a duty to protect them against such a hazardous aberration in modern economics. Currently, the latter is happening.

People like you have forgotten that it is in human nature to create. To create music, art, software, and all intellectual endeavors are what we do that makes us different from monkeys.

People like you forget that artists prefer to stay above the poverty line, so much so that most of them are prepared to give up being an artist for a little food money.

You don't realize that we don't need a massive distribution industry anymore, we can share our creations directly with each other.

That would appear to be true at first inspection, but not when you look at the market. If we didn't need a huge distribution system, then we wouldn't have a huge distribution system. We'd probably still have the RIAA (because they do more than just distribution), but they would distribute exclusively via the internet. It seems that broadband penetration and bandwidth allowances are just not there yet to compete with an uncompressed CD with cover art. We'll know when traditional distribution mechanisms become obsolete, because it'll be then that we won't be able to buy a physical CD any more.

It isn't a free market because people like you believed the sony bono crap.

Excuse me, but did you just tell me what I believed? I'll have you know that I'm a vocal supporter of shortening copyright terms.

I think the understanding you are missing is that it wasn't always like this. If you go back and look at world history (or the modern world in other countries) the sharing and collaboration of ideas was encouraged.

No, things indeed weren't always like this. Before broadband penetration levels reached such a soaring high, for example, there was much less need for strict copyright enforcement. Times have changed, for better or for worse, and pining for the good old days isn't going to help. It's best to rationalise the situation as it exists now, in its native context.

Also ideas are not copyrightable, unless you're referring

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[Mathinker]

> society doesn't respond well to rapid change

Yeah, maybe the Slashdot opinions you complain about all the time are a backlash from the rapid (on a historical scale) legislative changes in copyright law since 1972 --- none of which having been enacted in response to a wide public demand.

Which kind makes your "we the people will change copyright law" argument kind of strange. It seems clear that "the people" aren't going to do anything about it unless the content industry pushes society too far. How far that is, I have no idea. For me, it's already much too far, which means I am not your average person in this regard.

Re:gateway crime misinformation

[Myrcutio]

actually, there is an assumption being made, and that is that the price point of a CD is what i as a consumer am willing to spend. The ease of piracy these days means that the RIAA really can't deal with a consumer that doesn't want to pay, they just have to suck it up and try to prevent piracy (which we all know isn't going to happen)

As far as the concerts go, the point i'm trying to make is that artists don't HAVE to propogate their music through the RIAA, there are other sources of revenue besides CD's, concerts and t-shirts being prime examples. yes, downloading music illegally is a copyright violation, but like it or not this is the model of distribution that is being adopted by the mainstream. so if music doesn't want to die, the burden isn't on the audience to support an old model, it's on the artists (no matter what type of music they might make or whether they can perform it live) to sell their music in other forms besides a physical medium.

You have no more of a right to tell them how to do business they don't have to listen to the market do they? they can sit in their high rise corporate penthouses and rant at us filthy pirates. meanwhile, i suspect the artists will figure out there are better ways to earn a living with music, just look at orchestral performers and DJ's.

While it may be true

[joeflies]

that people involved in piracy of US copyright overseas may be involved in organized crime, it doesn't seem to match the profile of the people they are suing. If they want to fight organized crime, terrorists, etc, then shouldn't years of effort resulted in at least one lawsuit against a terrorist?

Re:While it may be true

[Anonymous Coward]

"If they [RIAA} want to fight organized crime,.."

Family doesn't fight family - capish?

Re:While it may be true

[kb0hae]

The RIAA and MPAA need to get their shit together.

1-When I rip songs from a legally purchased CD to OGG files on my computer, that is NOT piracy, anymore than making a compilation CD of my favorite songs from my collection of legally purchased CD is.

2- Recording from radio and TV stations that are broadcasting over the air has always been allowed...it is NOT piracy.

3-P2P downloads of music and movies have been shown to increase sales of music and movies...People don't like to buy something that they haven't heard/seen. Downloading copyrighted movies and music via P2P IS piracy, but it is not hurting the movie or music industry as much as they are hurting themselves by trying to hang on to their outdated business model, and treating their customers like they are ALL criminals.

4-This is the Big One...The RIAA, and MPAA need to go after the big pirates...you know...the ones who are making hundreds of thousands of illegal copies of copyrighted movies and music, and selling them all over the world.

Of course, I am not saying anything that the folks on /. don't know...

Re:While it may be true

[shark72]

"3-P2P downloads of music and movies have been shown to increase sales of music and movies...People don't like to buy something that they haven't heard/seen. Downloading copyrighted movies and music via P2P IS piracy, but it is not hurting the movie or music industry as much as they are hurting themselves by trying to hang on to their outdated business model, and treating their customers like they are ALL criminals."

If P2P increases sales, then the music industry's business model certainly isn't outdated -- it's only gotten stronger through the explosion of P2P! There appear to be two popular schools of thought: that P2P increases sales, and that the music industry's hemorrhaging of cash is due to anything but piracy. Then, there are folks who recognize that P2P has replaced sales for a good chunk of the consumer base, and that it's spelling doom for the "sell recorded music" business model. But these theories tend to run counter to each other.

The survey most commonly cited by Slashdotters is the one from last year which concluded that people who've used P2P services own more (legally acquired) music. But this is correlation, not causation -- people who use P2P are more likely to be music fans, and music fans are more likely to own music; people who are not music fans don't buy CDs, and don't pirate music, either. This makes perfect sense. But far too many people interpreted the study as inferring that piracy leads to sales -- a bit of "confirmation bias," as the statisticians like to say.

"This is the Big One...The RIAA, and MPAA need to go after the big pirates...you know...the ones who are making hundreds of thousands of illegal copies of copyrighted movies and music, and selling them all over the world."

The RIAA, MPAA, BSA, and law enforcement do chase counterfeiters with vigor. They've even gotten various government agencies behind them -- performing police raids at flea markets on the local level, and doing the state department level saber rattling with China regarding their tendency to look the other way when CD pressing plants churn out counterfeit media in volume.

While I agree with your sentiment, I think we're in the minority. When news of these actions occasionally makes it to Slashdot, the bulk of the sympathy is clearly with the counterfeiters. A common sentiment is that the counterfeiters are just trying to make a living, and that they're largely not interfering with legitimate sales, as somebody who buys that $3 screener copy likely wouldn't have bought the real thing.

Re:While it may be true

[poot_rootbeer]

Recording from radio and TV stations that are broadcasting over the air has always been allowed...

It's always been tolerated. "Allowed" is perhaps too strong a word, since there's nothing in copyright law that explicitly affirms one's "right" to create for personal use a permanent copy of a protected work that has been freely distributed.

The RIAA, and MPAA need to go after the big pirates...you know...the ones who are making hundreds of thousands of illegal copies of copyrighted movies and music, and selling them all over the world.

No doubt that large-scale commercial bootlegging is costing them more money than than when I rip a disc to my file server, but one of the primary arguments of the *AA's legal strategy (one which they have yet to provide sufficient proof of, at least to me) is that allowing a work to be freely copied via a P2P network IS large-scale bootlegging. It may only take one upload to permit 10,000 unlawful downloads to happen (again, the proof of this hasn't beens hown).

And here I thought...

[hedgemage]

That music downloads only led to communism.
http://www.modernhumorist.com/mh/0004/propaganda/mp3.cfm

Re:Lawyer are god

[themushroom]

Nah, they only look pasty like that. I can't speak on statistics of non-Caucasians securing student loans to law schools, though.

No no no. Stop. Right now. Fucking Stop.

[LordKaT]

NO. Fucking stop it.

STOP RIGHT THERE GOVERNMENT.

I am not going to let you use my tax money to start a "War on Piracy" - just like your dumbass "War on Drugs"

STOP. BAD DOG! NO BISCUIT FOR YOU!

Seriously, the only way you can teach these fucking politicians is by hitting them in the nose.

Re:No no no. Stop. Right now. Fucking Stop.

[Brieeyebarr]

Maybe this will cause even more people to see how flawed the logic that proponents of the "war on drugs" use.

It is the same basic idea, just even less true.

Re:No no no. Stop. Right now. Fucking Stop.

[QCompson]

Seriously, the only way you can teach these fucking politicians is by hitting them in the nose. So, to follow the war on drugs analogy, we should... keep voting for them?

Humorous

[eldavojohn]

This is the one with Tom Cruise, right?

I have not seen the video but I find it quite humorous when some organization's materials for training/brainwashing are leaked and it makes headlines. I.E. Scientology, RIAA, etc. What would even be funnier if the RIAA took the same position the Church of Scientology did and tried to repress this video.

Repression of information is the first sign of a flawed ideology. As we've seen in many court cases in which they've shut down systems, the RIAA is against any kind of information sharing via P2P software and therefore has a flawed ideology.

Gateway Drug?

[Freaky Spook]

Music piracy is the new gateway drug, I can't way to see the propaganda, sorry "educational" videos in the style of those movies such as Reefer Madness.

Innocent teenager downloads a couple of songs with some mates off the internet for a bit of a laugh.
Fast forward 6 months and he's wandering around the streets with a gun and portable hard drive leeching music off people at gunpoint.

OH GOD THE HUMANITY!!!!!!

Re:Gateway Drug?

[AoT]

Like this perhaps?

Re:Gateway Drug?

[Creepy Crawler]

A Gateway drug? But my PC is a Dell.

Re:Gateway Drug?

[BUL2294]

But a Dell is a gateway drug; using one will lead to a life of crappy jobs. Just look what happened to the Dell Dude...

It all started so innocently.

[palegray.net]

It was the heady days of the dot com era, and I was but a wee lad hacking away in my bedroom. One fateful day I stumbled upon a website called Napster, and soon began downloading hordes of ill-gotten music. Before long, my insatiable craving for tunes led me to buy more hard drives, then a RAID enclosure, then an enterprise-level SAN... I should have seen the warning signs.

I gradually withdrew from my friends and family, unable to control my urge for more tunes. I knew it was wrong, but it felt so... right. I began using other filesharing software, and soon experienced strange hallucinations involving limes and wires. I told a friend about it, and he gave me some pills to help me sleep better at night. The troubling dreams and hallucinations faded, but now I couldn't stop taking the pills. Chain smoking, heavy drinking, and chronic pacing soon developed. I was having trouble concentrating on anything other than file swapping, and began using crack cocaine to improve my focus. My teeth began to loosen in their sockets, and I was fired from work after failing a drug test.

Now I live on the streets, feeding my addiction through unsecured wireless hotspots that I access through a Pentium 90 connected to an exercise bike generator. My crack cocaine consumption has skyrocketed due to my need to constantly pedal the bike lest my rig lose power. Heed my warning: sharing and downloading music will ruin your life! Contact your local RIAA liason to seek treatment immediately. It's not too late... friends don't let friends use filesharing software.

Re:It all started so innocently.

[garett_spencley]

"Now I live on the streets, feeding my addiction through unsecured wireless hotspots that I access through a Pentium 90 connected to an exercise bike generator. My crack cocaine consumption has skyrocketed due to my need to constantly pedal the bike lest my rig lose power"

Well on the bright side, at least you're staying in shape ...

Re:It all started so innocently.

[Anonymous Coward]

through a Pentium 90 connected to an exercise bike generator. Well, at least you're carbon neutral.

Re:It all started so innocently.

[song-of-the-pogo]

Well on the bright side, at least you're staying in shape ...

and carbon neutral

Training?

[ezwip]

If you have not seen the video you can search for it on piratebay.org

Re:Training?

[palegray.net]

Unless of course you live in a country which is trying to block access to the Pirate Bay...

Re:Training?

[Architect_sasyr]

At which time please attempt to use some sort of magic software to get you around this restriction...

I dont understand...

[click2005]

Drug dealers dont make enough money forcing them to supplement their income by pirating CDs? Maybe they are winning the war on drugs. The cheaper prices must be a garage sale like Toshiba is doing with HDDVD.

Re:I dont understand...

[palegray.net]

The first hit (single) is always free...

omgz

[obnauticus]

Noobs, err RIAA sucks.

The Irony Is...

[fsckr]

That many of the 'artists' that the RIAA protects are hardcore repeat offender criminals that are pimping the handguns, drugs etc etc

Re:The Irony Is...

[Propaganda13]

I don't think many of the 'artists' are actually hardcore repeat offender criminals, that's just what their record label wants you to think. I do agree that it should be ok to pirate any records that promote illegal activity after all I'm on the grizzy, my nizzy.

ROFFLCOPTER

[Creepy Crawler]

The story forgot something...

The link of the TORRENT ...or search RIAA training video on piratebay

You know what?

[The Ultimate Fartkno]

I'm in the entertainment industry. I'm one of those corporate media whores who "hasn't come up with an original story in decades" and "keeps shoveling sellout pop shit down (your) throats" and "wouldn't know real talent if it walked up and kicked (me) in the balls." I'm part of the complex, epic machinery that creates the media that all of you "share" because it's all shit and worthless and you wouldn't bother downloading it if you weren't "sticking it to teh mang" and at the end of the day my rent and car payment and grocery store bills all depend on selling the stuff that you all pretend to loathe while you're copying it at terabytes per day.

And, sadly, all that being said I'd still rather have you guys steal all my work in "protest" than have the RIAA represent me and blame the Pirate Bay for 9/11, herpes, Ashlee Simpson's "career," and the fucking Kennedy assassination.

Seriously. I hate those assholes.

I still have rent to pay, though, so go buy a fucking CD you torrented or something, okay?

Re:You know what?

[mdenham]

Considering how I don't listen to any (well, hardly any - "Still Alive" is catchy) music newer than about 1987, how about you just burn me a "Best of Black Sabbath" album and I'll write you a check for $6.95?

Re:You know what?

[evanbd]

People on the internet are diverse. Those of us who complain about the RIAA and modern pop music aren't necessarily the same ones downloading their wares. It's no more reasonable to lump all internet users together than it is to lump all musicians or RIAA employees -- less so, in fact, seeing as it's a larger and more diverse group.

Oh, and I have bought CDs I torrented. In fact, I've got a couple sitting in an online shopping cart waiting for another addition or two. You may find it odd, but exposure to music results in purchases.

Re:You know what?

[The Ultimate Fartkno]

I'll do you one better. You go here...

http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3678098/Black_Sabbath-The_Best_Of_Black_Sabbath-2CD-(Remastered)-2007-EO ...and download it yourself. You burn it and send Sabbath a check, as I had nothing to do with it and have no claim to their cash. If the boys in the band like their arrangement with the label then they'll kick back some of the money. If not, then their beef is with the suits. Either way, I'm okay with it.

However, you should be warned that by downloading that torrent you're supporting communism, AIDS, baby rape, and late fees at video stores. I hope you're happy with yourself, you amoral hooligan.

Re:You know what?

[TheGratefulNet]

never mind all that.

just give us the damned URL or torrent and shuddup.

and don't call us, we'll call you.

Re:You know what?

[RealGrouchy]

Well, you want my two cents?

Because that's probably all you'll get out of it if I were to buy a CD, or a legal download, after the RIAA take their cut.

- RG>

Re:You know what?

[Dzimas]

Which Kennedy assassination would you like us to blame you for? ;) The global music industry is worth somewhere in the region of 30 billion dollars per year. That's a stunning amount of money for a discretionary product - after all, no one needs to purchase the latest hit songs. In the old days, one could make an argument that purchasing a $5.88 LP or cassette was "decent value." After all, there was no other way to obtain a high quality copy of a favorite song. In exchange for my money, I received physical media that I could resell, along with decent cover artwork and hopefully some interesting liner notes. These days, the major labels expect me to pay a buck for three minutes of highly compressed audio at a marginally acceptable bit rate. Your product sounds worse than it did fifteen years ago, and you've managed to get rid of artwork, liner notes and creative packaging.

The barriers to entry in your market have dropped through the floor - all that's needed is a killer "YouTube for music" app that lets independent artists reach an audience effectively and you're done for. Web-savvy artists love the idea of earning 50% or more for each track sold, rather than the meager royalties that large labels pay. They no longer need your exhorbitantly priced studio time (which you extracted from their royalties), expensive music videos (which you extracted from their royalties), or marketing effort(extracted from their royalties), nor are they comfortable with the idea of giving the lion's share of their earnings away. The days of the major labels are numbered. Now quit trying to blame us for your industry's ills and start working to come up with The Next Big Thing.

Re:You know what?

[the brown guy]

I still have rent to pay, though, so go buy a fucking CD you torrented or something, okay?
I am assuming that you are a media mogul, otherwise you probably won't see more than a few fractions of a cent from this hypothetical CD purchase.

Re:You know what?

[Anonymous Coward]

You are correct. People have a choice to consume the media that you produce. People using your media have the right to be paid for what it takes to produce it & to profit from it. For those who complain - the alternative is to create and share your own culture (YouTube, Jamendo etc) and make the broadcast media model irrelevant. This is far better than watching pirated Rambo XIX.

The RIAA behavior is a separate issue. The RIAA and the various DMCA clones should not be breaching personal privacy using dubious legal arguments. This vexatious litigant and should not be using processes and economic power to intimidate ordinary people - the impact on the individual is far greater on the individual than on the RIAA and it's backers.

The penalty for getting caught running a red light is tiny in comparison than the cost of a single copyright breach. The values that allow this is warped and way out of proportion.

Re:You know what?

[Spikeles]

so go buy a fucking CD you torrented or something, okay?

I did, it was a Sarah McLachlan song, after that i liked it so much i went and bought every album she made, then i bought the music video DVD and if she ever did a Live concert near my city I'd be the first to buy tickets. Not everyone is an amoral hooligan, some actually do care and want to support artists. Funnily enough she is part of the Canadian music creators coalition so she probably wouldn't mind so much that it was torrented in the first place.

Re:You know what?

[totally bogus dude]

I think you and the brown guy are confused about how people get paid. Most people in the "entertainment industry" get a salary or hourly wage for doing their job, just like your average IT worker gets paid a certain amount for performing their job function. The amount of sales of the product in a given month has no direct impact on their paycheck, and they aren't paid a proportion of sales.

However, if not enough people buy the product, the business starts laying off salaried staff to try to reduce their operating costs; or potentially shuts down altogether.

So these "2c are all you'll get" comments aren't clever or insightful or even funny, they just show your ignorance.

Whether or not we should care is another matter, of course.

Re:You know what?

[totally bogus dude]

Err, there was a similar response by a guy named "the brown guy".

Re:You know what?

[mdenham]

This is far better than watching pirated Rambo XIX. Whoa, Rambo XIX is out already? It's like I just saw it in theaters!

Re:You know what?

[pandrijeczko]

Firstly, being "in the entertainment industry" could mean anything from being a member of a band to standing behind a till in the local record store - and since you've obviously obfuscated what you actually do behind a generic description, the chances are that your job is probably more at the "boring end" of the industry rather than at the end likely to impress anyone on here. I just thought I'd make that small point first.

Secondly, sonny, I'm 46 years of age and I was more than likely buying music long before you were even a "twinkle in your dad's eye". If my wife is the first love of my life, then music is my second one - you'll therefore appreciate why I take considerable offence at your statements above.

The problem with most people who buy music these days is they are NOT music fans. Just like an antiques fan is someone who can really appreciate the craftsmanship that went into a piece of old furniture, a music fan is somebody who can just sit down and listen to a CD on a reasonable sounding (no, I didn't say expensive) piece of hifi whilst doing absolutely nothing else so that the music gets his/her full attention. Sure, like everyone else, I have music on in the background also when I'm doing other things but that isn't listening to music, it's just giving the mind a rhythm to focus on.

Consequently, those people who are not true music fans are more likely to be swayed by advertising & marketing to buy only the plasticised crap that's cheap for the record companies to churn out in high volume. And because the record companies treat that trash music as a high-profit low-cost commodity, they are the prime cause of why people pirate music - because ultimately, the majority of what they churn out is not worth the money being asked for it.

I, on the other hand, do not listen to that mainstream rubbish. Every CD I buy, I research before I buy it - yes, if there's a copy of it on BitTorrent or Usenet, I'll download it first because the chances are that it won't be played on any radio station. If it's good, I buy it because there's nothing like having a nice shiny disk and sleeve notes to read - if it's crap, there's no point even keeping the MP3s so they're deleted.

Additionally, I passionately search for the best prices for my CDs and, as a result, I can honestly say that for the pleasure I get out of each CD I buy, each one is worth far more than I paid for it - yes, I consider music to be very fairly priced.

So please do not tar us all with the same brush. No, I'm not some intellectual classical music type (I do like a little classical music but not much), I listen mainly to rock and blues music with a particular love of British psychedelia and rock during the late 60s and early 70s (which at the moment, is great music to be exploring because a lot of really obscure stuff from that time is being rereleased on CD currently). I care deeply about the music I listen to and I use BitTorrent and Usenet enough to make sure I'm not ripped off for any CD I'm likely to buy - that in turn means that every CD I do buy is good value for money and that therefore I'm pleased with what the record companies produce for me, albeit 90% of what they produce is crap.

Oh, and before you ask - I have 1200+ original CDs over 20 years of collecting them, 400 or so I originally owned on vinyl before CDs came out.

Re:You know what?

[mbius]

I'm in the entertainment industry. I'm one of those corporate media whores who "hasn't come up with an original story in decades" and "keeps shoveling sellout pop shit down (your) throats" and "wouldn't know real talent if it walked up and kicked (me) in the balls." I'm part of the complex, epic machinery that creates the media that all of you "share" because it's all shit and worthless and you wouldn't bother downloading it if you weren't "sticking it to teh mang"

In that case, can we have more Summer Glau in her underwear?

music pirate == terrorist

[arse maker]

These guys DO know how to market a product! Maybe they should instead focus their efforts on non Brittany Spears style artists?

Public education campaign

[Anonymous Coward]

While it is good to have employees believe in the company I do not think that is what this video is about. They want high profile crime with media coverage to be associated with piracy. This will cement the "evil" in the publics view of piracy. Even if it is incidental, having that association there will eventually cement the opinion.

Its not saying where you find piracy there will be terrorism. They are saying to law enforcement to use piracy as an excuse to bust otherwise known criminals. This will lead to the association of piracy with hardened criminal activity. Mentioned frequently enough in the news it becomes a very powerful public education tool.

--
Anonymous

Re:Public education campaign

[Chrondeath]

Do people associate tax evasion with mobsters because of Al Capone?

Re:WTF

[pembo13]

this even MS windows.... this is britney spears, and nsync, and prince. This on a level of sad that most can't even appreciate.

Makes sense

[TheOldSchooler]

That must be why the RIAA is sueing twelve year olds and grandmothers; to protect America!

In the nicest way possible...

[annex1]

I hope their families die in a motor vehicle collision, pinned under a truck of blank media.

Re:In the nicest way possible...

[rk]

While I hate the RIAA bastards, too, I really found this comment hideously offensive.

Do you have any idea how valuable a truck full of blank media is? What a shameless waste.

Re:In the nicest way possible...

[Killjoy_NL]

AOL cd's then? ;)

Don't Download This Song

[YutakaFrog]

The moment I read this I thought that they must have heard this song and said to themselves, "You know, this guy's got a great point here!" http://www.dontdownloadthissong.com/

Is this a hoax

[computerchimp]

Comon....this has got to be a hoax cc

Save the Next Britney

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone should make a video showing how money has ruined Britney Spear's life. If everyone had pirated her music and not gone to her concerts, she wouldn't have the problems she has today.

Do a public service, pirate music save the next Britney.

Re:More on the Lawyer war

[QCompson]

One more attack by the Lawyers on the rest of society. It's them against us and they write all the law and sit in judgment on those laws. The end result is less and less liberty and justice. If you even speak out against them you are branded a terrorist by their filthy guild. Filthy lawyers. Too bad there isn't a group of people, knowledgeable about law, who would defend you against these evil scum lawyers... you know, some sort of protectors who would present a defense against these bloodthirsty prosecuting attorneys and the corrupt legal system.

Re:WTF

[LaskoVortex]

The training video is to motivate law enforcement officers to imagine that people are out there downloading files while smoking crack, buying automatic rifles, and ordering their "gangstuh" enemies dead.

Here is the planned scenario: The video will first drive the cops into a rage, foaming at the mouth, ready to suspect anyone who uses a computer. The next step will be little bells and treats for the cops when they beat up someone using a computer or when they suspect of downloading files. The cops will need more backup and better cars. There will be a referendum, then a bond. It will become politically popular to be tough on downloaders. There will be worried moms and community meetings to discuss the problem of downloading. We will have now have a convenient scapegoat every time our children get in trouble or stop obeying us. The topic of downloading will be forbidden from the classroom except for the most Orwellian and shortest of all possible sentiments: "Just say No". We will Just Say No to downloading. Senators will pass legislation and presidents will run on the "crackdown" platform. We will call this phase the "crackdown" phase. Then we'll have a war: The War on Downloading. Our taxes will go up and we will borrow against the value of our currency fund the war. But we will be willing to pay with our freedoms and our future earnings because we will feel safer from the Threat of Downloading.

I say this with the utmost respect

[Smordnys s'regrepsA]

Most of us WANT you to lose your job. Nothing against you personally. A lot of us know how you feel, stuck in a dieing job with bosses who don't understand what is happening with/to the world.

I don't hate your musicians, I just hate the fact that some spoiled brat can make twice as much as me with half the effort and no college degree. I hate that those brats are being taken advantage of by overgrown bullies that make more money than I can, with low level degrees from classes whose main requirements to graduate are Show Up, and Bullshit Convincingly. I hate that there are sound technicians who took years out of their lives to learn how to use complex machines to make music sound better, when I can do the same damn thing with a $500 microphone, $1000 computer, and free/second-hand software that requires a week of spare time to master ($500 mic optional, I've heard some damn good professional-quality music come from a $25 mic).


Lucky for you for as bad as your industry's future looks, it will take quite a while to crash and burn. Enjoy it while it lasts.

Re:I say this with the utmost respect

[MadnessASAP]

I was pretty much with you right up until the end. Being a sound technician is a real art that requires alot of dedication and practice, I gurantee you that you will not be even close the their abilities regardless of whose using what equipment in a week or even 5 years. Not to mention that alot of artists and sound technicians aren't payed what they're worth but at least the independent artists are starting to gain alot more traction and it's now starting to be feasible to be your own label.

Re:I say this with the utmost respect

[DittoBox]

I don't hate your musicians, I just hate the fact that some spoiled brat can make twice as much as me with half the effort and no college degree. I hate that those brats are being taken advantage of by overgrown bullies that make more money than I can, with low level degrees from classes whose main requirements to graduate are Show Up, and Bullshit Convincingly. I hate that there are sound technicians who took years out of their lives to learn how to use complex machines to make music sound better, when I can do the same damn thing with a $500 microphone, $1000 computer, and free/second-hand software that requires a week of spare time to master ($500 mic optional, I've heard some damn good professional-quality music come from a $25 mic).

Yeah, right. Because I can get an off the shelf compiler like GCC and create an OS kernel or whatever after a week of playing around.

Whatever the hell you're smoking, I'd like some of that shit too.

Re:I say this with the utmost respect

[Smordnys s'regrepsA]

I saw it happen, is all I have to say. The gentleman in question messed around with music editing and creation software for about a year, but when he *ahem*borrowed*ahem* a professional program suite from a friend, he had used it to create 3 amazing, polished songs by the end of the week (well, used it and ~$3000 worth of random musical equipment). One song got minor radio play in some city near the Oregon/Washington border, so I know someone thought of it as professional.

He only sleeps 3 hours a day and was in between jobs, so I will grant that the amount of time he spent learning that week would be considered abnormal. Still, I would say he came very close to the abilities of a professional sound tech. That would be the entire point of creating better/stronger programs.

As for pay rates, I'm all for raising the salaries of anyone involved in the actual creation of music.

Re:I say this with the utmost respect

[robertjw]

The truth is somewhere in between. Being a sound tech, like being a musician, is about 80% talent and maybe 20% mastery of technical skills. This is why so many indie bands are huge, and sound so great, right now. The technology has allowed the artists to mix their own music. They know what they want it to sound like, and they can create that sound themselves. Many of the professional production techs seem to only know how to create music that the suits and the radio stations want to hear. This does not equal good music.

A great example is the formerly independent band Single File. They signed to a label and went into a studio with some hot shot producer. Their song Zombies Ate My Neighbors was a great song, good dynamics, an awesome bridge in the middle that really worked for the song. It could have used some polish, but the overall sound was great and got a lot of local air play. They re-recorded it, and the new version sounds contrived and lost much of it's original appeal. Nothing against the band, but I just don't think the addition of a professional sound technician added much to their music.

All this goes out the window when it comes to a live gig. You can't beat a professional tech when it comes to a live show, but the gp is right about studio work. If you have the ear for the music technology makes it easy to mix some great tunes.

Re:I say this with the utmost respect

[Peter Mork]

I concur. I used to run sound and lights (and security, go figure) for a nightclub. One criterion we used when hiring sound techs was a musical background. I figured we could teach musicians how to run the board much easier than we could teach a technician to be musical.

Re:I say this with the utmost respect

[poot_rootbeer]

I just hate the fact that some spoiled brat can make twice as much as me with half the effort and no college degree.

Are you at all heartened by the knowledge that for each "spoiled brat" who signs with a major label and makes twice as much as you, there are a hundred bands that signed, worked their asses off, and still ended up tens of thousands of dollars in debt because the label couldn't make stars out of them like the A&R lackey promised?

I hate that there are sound technicians who took years out of their lives to learn how to use complex machines to make music sound better, when I can do the same damn thing with a $500 microphone, $1000 computer, and free/second-hand software that requires a week of spare time to master

If it weren't for the life work of some of those technicians, you wouldn't HAVE the ability to make a decent-sounding recording on a $1500 budget. Technical innovation trickles down from the obscenely expensive professional studios to the obscenely cheap home recording rigs.

Re:I say this with the utmost respect

[Smordnys s'regrepsA]

Are you at all heartened by the knowledge that for each "spoiled brat" who signs with a major label and makes twice as much as you, there are a hundred bands that signed, worked their asses off, and still ended up tens of thousands of dollars in debt because the label couldn't make stars out of them like the A&R lackey promised?

I feel for them, but I also wish they had taken a statistics class and looked through the records (written not musical) of the other artists who signed. I feel the same thing for them as I do for a few of my family members who are positive that they'll get something back from the casino this week: Pity.

If it weren't for the life work of some of those technicians, you wouldn't HAVE the ability to make a decent-sounding recording on a $1500 budget. Technical innovation trickles down from the obscenely expensive professional studios to the obscenely cheap home recording rigs.
I'm glad it did... but if someone tried to convince me to used their building sized vacuum tube calculator, and pay for the electricity, and pay a usage fee, then pay some fees on top of that... I would just pull out my $9.95 scientific calculator that can do the same damn thing and say "Wow, maybe you should think about finding a new job."

Not to worry

[brilliant-mistake]

Federal prosecutors already know their jobs - that's how they got where they are, so I imagine they're a little skeptical about being "trained" by the RIAA. On the other hand, if the RIAA were to offer them some financial assistance...maybe we should start to worry.

More info from Gizmodo

[DigitAl56K]

Gizmodo wrote:

This is a leaked official RIAA training video produced with the National District Attorneys Association telling U.S. prosecutors why they should bust music pirates: Because it'll lead them to "everything from handguns to large quantities of cocaine [and] marijuana," not to mention terrorists and murderers! Like the author of TFA, I haven't seen the video (yet), but I'd hope conversations with members of the judicial system go something like this:

RIAA: "When we followed leads gathered in the process of prosecuting people for piracy we found other people we could prosecute for drug possession, terrorism, and murder!"

J: "Are you trying to say that the people you originally investigated were guilty of drug possession, terrorism, and murder, and that all people you intend to have prosecuted for piracy will also be guilty of drug possession, terrorism, and murder?"

RIAA: "Well, erm.. no..."

J: "So.. what are you saying?"

RIAA: "Well, piracy could benefit drug dealers, terrorists, and murderers, and so you should prosecute pirates with heavy penalties!"

J: "Have you filed charges against, say, The Pirate Bay, for sponsoring drug dealing, terrorism, and murder?"
RIAA: "Well... no..."

J: "Wouldn't you say that anybody providing a service to unknown clients, e.g. a website, may quite innocently service drug dealers, terrorists, and murderers in exactly the same way it would service law abiding citizens, making just as much differentiation between the two as your local laundromat?"

RIAA: "Ummm... we need a recess..."

If they show this to the DA does the Defense have.

[Joe The Dragon]

If they show this to the DA does the Defense have the right to view it or can the RIAA try to keep it from them.

Here We Go Again

[hyades1]

"Reefer Madness" for a new generation.

Re:Here We Go Again

[SoccerMomRobot]

I wonder how long it will be before samples from this video start appearing in songs.

Re:Here We Go Again

[dintech]

As soon as I get home... :)

Re:Here We Go Again

[NeuroManson]

Yeah, except now it's "Download faster! FASTER!"

if you're just a troll

[circletimessquare]

and you're misrepresenting yourself for fun, you rock dude

if you are actually who you say you are, you rock dude

Well, something to consider

[Sycraft-fu]

Is to look at going a more indipendant distribution route. Talk to someone like CD Baby and maybe start selling through them and on your website. If you want a way to sell your stuff that is outside of the RIAA controlled crap, well there you go.

Relax

[fahrbot-bot]

It argues they should pursue piracy cases because it leads to bigger and badder wares, like handguns, drugs, terrorist orgs, and hardcore repeat offender criminals.

Relax, the RIAA is just speaking from *personal* experience. Pursuing piracy cases has lead them to become hardcore repeat offender criminals. The video is a *warning* : if it can happen to them, it can happen to you - ooooooooo

Re:WTF

[hyades1]

"...just because they download software doesn't mean they are gonna do drugs and such."

Of course it does! I'm an extremely ethical person, and it's only when people hold me down and blow dope smoke in my face that I turn into a complete moral degenerate who simply cannot help but race to the nearest computer and begin compulsively downloading the latest drek from the Spice Girls or whatever.

Help me. Please.

The IT Crowd got it right.... (video)

[Picass0]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTbX1aMajow

Re:More on the Lawyer war

[QCompson]

The only difference between a defense attourney and a prosecuting attourney is which one fell asleep during the bar exam. If only that made a difference. Bar exams are pass/fail. Your joke fails.

WMD?

[Duncan Blackthorne]

Bittorrent == WMD (Weapon of Mass Downloading)?

Re:WTF

[tomhudson]

Are the RIAA going to be procuring crack for the cops to take while watching the videos - you know, like they do for their "clients"? And (bviously) themselves?

... because really, this sounds like someone's crack fantasy.

Broken Windows anybody?

[audi100quattro]

I knew a few broken windows could spiral into a bad neighborhood, I didn't know copyright infringement could do similar.

Re:Broken Windows anybody?

[BronsCon]

Look at the internet. What have all the broken Windows installs done to that neighborhood?

How many of those are downloaded? Of those which were not downloaded, how many are using patches which were downloaded?

Downloading really is bad when you bring Windows into the conversation.

Re:we are like SO legion

[Spy der Mann]

Can we now have a bunch of idiots upload time lapse videos of clouds with synthesized voice overlays declaring the end of the RIAA?
Please?
Can we?

They can even wear Guy Fawkes masks if they want!

I'm no moron, my mate, but I'll merrily meet your invitation. Let my moniker be my mask.

*clears throat*

"The anti-MAFIAA Manifesto" (v3.06)

Market Momentum. A marginal improvement in a massive move of milliards of monetary units. Mobs maintaining their millionaire manors with a martial ministry, marauding and muzzling the melomaniacs who made the mistake of mounting multi-user music-sharing programs onto their microprocessors, mostly for an ear-mashing, mundane and monotonous munch of music, with a miserable "remastered" dynamic range.

The Machiavellian Music Industry, the Movie Masterminds and their malevolent minions, muscled by the majority of the media, masquerade their managers as martyrs to maintain a megalithic marketing model, misleading the masses into malls like mules, macerating -no, milking- their income and molding them: With mesmerizing melodies, moronic mottos, mountains of merchandise and meticulously mannered nominations, those monsters mutilate the masses' minds, melding them into not more than mere mammals, with a microscopic mental magnitude, matching the mud and the moss.

Myth? Misstatement? Madness? MATERIALISM!

Meanwhile, in their magnificent mansions, the mink-mantled magnates morbidly mock the minorities' misfortune, while moistening their mouths in martinis under the moonlight, and masticating their meat and marshmallows like no tomorrow.

Those mischievous moguls magnify their monumental monopolies by multiplying their machinery: Digital Rights Management, DMCA, "Trusted" Computing (Mr. Stallman was not mistaken). Maltreating musicians, misusing copyright to the max, mirroring the Matrix by mining the government to monitor communications, marching like the militia to school meetings in the mornings with menacing memos, mirthfully mismatching mortified mothers for maleficent mobsters, mandating most into misspending more and more (or be imprisoned). Their main motivation is no mystery: Money.

Money! A metastatic misery, a muddling myopia, a momentary make-believe, a magnetizing mirage! A manipulating mephisto, which metamorphoses the meek into mercenaries and murderers, making them moan like Midas in a maniacal manner: "mine, mine, mine!!" Is modesty no more?

MONEY! MAY OUR MAKER MALEDICT THEE!

(Meditate my musing for a moment)

This melee, to maximize their market share. Most of mankind's malignancy is merged into a man-made monster of mastodonic measures. A mammoth called MAFIAA. Months pass, and the multitudes mourn the ever-minimizing mobility of their mediocre minds, amidst marred music, meaningless media transmissions, and miniaturizing freedom. This multinational massacre must be terminated, but most men make meager or no moves, at most mimetizing their communications with muTorrent, masked by the mist of encryption. Is this illegal? Maybe. Morally wrong? Maybe, maybe not (memorize this term: Civil Disobedience).

IT IS MANDATORY THAT WE DO MUCH MORE, OR THIS MACABRE MELTDOWN WILL MOVE ON!!

Militate and manifest yourselves in the metropolis! This is a major command! Miraculous modifications start as a minimal idea in a man or a woman's mind. Maintain your might! Manly move forward, and donate money to your magnanimous comrades, the EFF and FSF, for their mission is not minor! But if you malinger...

Memorize my message, merciless mice! You might enjoy your freedoms for a minuscule moment - you shall miss them in melancholy for millennia, after they mutate into a marooned, mummified memory in a mausoleum named morgue. Misunderstand me not: this moderate memento, merriment to many, may be a premonitory ultimatum.

A MAYDAY!

Merry to meet you, I'm merely a man behind a mask with a mystifying moniker. I am M.

Recommended

Hard Cheese, My Friend

[Phoenix666]

Economic shifts and dislocations happen to all of us. Why should you be immune?

I started out in hedge funds. Then Long Term Capital Management flamed out and took most of that industry with it.

I taught myself to program and got into I.T. That was a great ride, but then the dot-bomb happened and took most of that industry in New York with it. The demand for I.T. recovered, but the clients and companies decided to outsource most of it to India instead of hiring back trained natives.

Advertising, however, continued, so I switched to project management for interactive. I had to learn, shudder, to deal with people. But I sucked it up and did it because it was necessary.

In short, re-tooling and acquiring new skills has to be part of your stock in trade in this Brave New World, compadre. Being "creative" does not bestow some magical immunity from that necessity, I'm afraid.

But look on the bright side, being "creative" should give you a leg up in figuring out what to do next. And figure it out you should, because entertainment as we know it is about to fall off a cliff.

Re:Hard Cheese, My Friend

[Xuranova]

LTCM put hedge funds on the map, they didn't destroy it.

legal?

[poetmatt]

Is a video about how to falsify being an expert witness considered even legal? Or does it open a new can of worms on that front.

I LEARNED FROM THE RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

I was one of the first pirates that got caught under the .NET act. i am an avid slashdot reader and love
the articles and this one certainly caught my eye.

I was involved with piracy for one simple reason: education.

to pirate a software was to learn how to use it. Then, build a career on the knowledge
you learned. since knowledge is priceless (until the vapid idea of intellectual property was
invented to draw boundaries in our imaginations) I was not considering piracy a crime, since it was a COPY that I had no funds to pay for.

a Copy of MS Office was 499$. I thought it was worth 499. I just couldn't afford it being a latch key kid with a limited income.

I pirated my whole computer career. Getting my first copy of Windows NT enabled me to have cutting edge technology. Linux would have been free, but I was interested in making a career and took the VOLE path.

Anyway, it fascinates me that even after I was prosecuted by the FBI for conspiracy to commit copyright infringement and spent 3 years probation and .5 years in jail (a real federal prision, mind you) that I still work for a company, that still pirates, and it's so rampant now with volume licensing I still have learned that the lesson is: I AM A TERRORIST.

I will always be a terrorist.
I make bombs in my basement.
(I'm being fascecous however you spell it).
I am causing poverty in foreign countries.

bullshit.

the question will always remain: did I ever deprive someone of the money (hence STEALING) or did I never give them the possibility to MAKE the money (hence, piracy).

It was already decided in the courts (in 1984) and the politicians love to hear MPAA and RIAA sing praises that they are LOSING money.

They LOST the opportunity for the MAINTAIN THE VALUE of the COPY of the PROPERTY BY REQUIRING a LICENSE of something that you cannot CONTROL (a copy, either heard through OSMOSIS or from free marketing from your friend whom just got this really cool CD) or was it because The idea of *ECONOMY* HAS CHANGED.

Now go make some laws that surround the new ECONOMY where the works are judged VALUED by their CONTENT and you have "RIAA and MPAA making pieces of SHIT and demanding payment for it".

Still the same argument. SOMEONE needs money for their hard work.

Why can't we all just do what we ENJOY to do. Do you really need BLING on that finger to make your image? Do you need that money to afford that cocaine and 40's you drink and the mercedes you drive? Do you REALLY need my 15$ to put you at the top of your game?

Cause all I need was a copy of that CD to tell me IT WAS A PIECE OF SHIT.

Re:I LEARNED FROM THE RIAA

[pandrijeczko]

Hey, Big Scary Pirate Man!

I hate to say this but I'm not aware that it actually ever took many skills to pirate Windows NT or MS Office in the first place. Certainly just a case of copying the CDs if I remember right - only recently has Microsoft made it more difficult by introducing registration keys. But around the time of Windows NT, there was no such thing, even on MS Office.

As for the rest of your monologue, how about just being a nice, sensible consumer and just DON'T BUY SHIT IF IT AIN'T WORTH THE MONEY! That way, the RIAA doesn't get the justification DORKS like you give it to treat me, an HONEST user, like a pirate...

Like Global Warming

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

Yep. The real problem with copyright infringement is that it doesn't sound harmful, and even when its effects are explained in a clear manner, the long term nature of the problem and the economics base of the argument belie its urgency. It's a similar problem with global warming. There's serious danger that there will be some very negative effects to us, but the whole theory is just dry science and the scope is very long term. The only way it has made it into the public mind-space is through the sometimes outrageous speculation over what will happen to the societies of the world. It's the same tricks are being played here, just with the RIAA less hesitant than the scientific community to really stretch the truth for a good crisis.

It almost makes you proud

[Smordnys s'regrepsA]

...to read an anti-racism AC post. Until you realize (s)he didn't read two comments down within the same thread for the obvious answer.

Smart, Private, Good-natured: You only get to pick two!

The National District Attorneys Association...

[blitzkrieg3]

...are the guys that produced this video. TFA is got the wrong ETLA, because it isn't the RIAA.

This has a number of interesting consequences, not the least of which is that the RIAA probably doesn't have copyright of the video, and the NDAA might not issue a takedown notice to say... YouTube. Also, this indicates that at the NDAA had some interest in what the RIAA has to say, though I'd be surprised if it wasn't the RIAA that made the first phone call.

It actually does solve a lot...

[Serengeti]

Hate to ruin the fun here... seriously I love all of you... but no where in the video were they suggesting that piracy and terrorism, murder or drugs are related.

All that was suggested was that if officers wanted into a suspects home, but did not have enough evidence to issue a warrant on the suspected charges alone, they could use piracy as a means to get that warrant. The intent, which should be obvious by now, is to get into the house so that evidence of terrorism, drug trafficking or violent intent involving firearms might then be 'coincidentally' discovered.

And hey... sounds like it's a great strategy. How many people do you know that haven't pirated anything at all? The police just found themselves a skeleton key.

Re:It actually does solve a lot...

[imemyself]

Interesting, and IANAL, but it seems like that wouldn't necessarily work real well. If mean, if you get a warrant for someone "pirating" music, the only things that they can really look at/take would be the computers, maybe some CD's, etc, right? I was under the impression, that (as some example I read put it), the police could not get a warrant to search a home for a stolen piano, and then arrest the owner because they found drugs in a cabinet, because they could not have reasonably expected to find the piano in the cabinet. Does anyone know more about this sort of thing?

Re:It actually does solve a lot...

[Cassius Corodes]

In theory they can't, but in practice they could easily come up with an excuse, and after they found something its too late.

Re:It actually does solve a lot...

[iminplaya]

The police just found themselves a skeleton key.

"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is
the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough
criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that
it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, Ch. III, "White Blackmail"

Re:It actually does solve a lot...

[Anonymous Coward]

... but doesn't a warrant limit the scope for investigation?

That is, if the warrant is about piracy, evidence for piracy is all you get out of a search, at least formally?

But, assuming you are right, it must be a good sign that investigations of suspicion of terrorism can't just barge in anyhow, and that they need something more solid, like suspicion of piracy to get in ... But somehow I think it really is the other way around ...

Re:It actually does solve a lot...

[ultranova]

"It's so convenient to have a system where everyone is a criminal" - Adolf Hitler.

And I'm pretty sure most other succesful dictators have had similar notions. Don't attribute to Rand what she clearly didn't invent; whether this should be considered to be to her credit or discredit is another matter.

Re:It actually does solve a lot...

[mitchellfx]

Here's a quote from the video. According to a prosecutor from the RIAA:

"I think number one it has to be stressed that this crime, this type of crime effects quality of life in the DA's, uh, jurisdiction in the cities in which they work and live, but the other thing is that it's a link to a lot of other crimes. And I tell the prosecutors and I tell the police officers that I work with all the time use this type of a crime as a tool this might lead you to a drug investigation...It also has links to terrorism organizations for you federal prosecutors out there..."

You can find this about 2 minutes into the video.

Re:It actually does solve a lot...

[petermgreen]

the police could not get a warrant to search a home for a stolen piano, and then arrest the owner because they found drugs in a cabinet, because they could not have reasonably expected to find the piano in the cabinet
no put pirate software/music/movies can be stored on things like USB sticks which are pretty small so they could reasonablly expect to find them almost anywhere.

Afaict the trick for the cops when doing a fishing expedition is to get a warrant to look for something small and easilly hidden (papers is a classic), that way they can "reasonablly" expect that it might be hidden almost anywhere.

Re:It actually does solve a lot...

[gstoddart]

All that was suggested was that if officers wanted into a suspects home, but did not have enough evidence to issue a warrant on the suspected charges alone, they could use piracy as a means to get that warrant. The intent, which should be obvious by now, is to get into the house so that evidence of terrorism, drug trafficking or violent intent involving firearms might then be 'coincidentally' discovered.

That is a very terrifying concept. Will the RIAA fake some evidence to suggest that someone at that address has been sharing files? Or are the RIAA pushing to have law enforcement have a blank cheque to enter homes on the suspicion that someone might have been pirating music? In which case, the RIAA is trying to get the police to have greater powers to investigate copyright infringement than actual crimes which they are supposed to be investigating?

I fail to see how the police could get a probable cause warrant for piracy without any supporting evidence. Or, are the RIAA trying to claim that everyone is so likely to be pirating that they should be able to enter any dwelling on the presumption that piracy has likely happened, and we don't need any stronger evidence than that?

Currently, the police aren't the ones who are supposed to be investigating copyright issues unless it's on a commercial scale. The sheer idea of making up a bullshit premise to enter a property, and thereby granting legitimacy to having the police as an enforcement arm of the RIAA, is a scary thought indeed.

I seriously hope someone gives these guys the smackdown they deserve over this. This undermines most of the checks and balances in the legal system in sort of a scary way.

How many people do you know that haven't pirated anything at all?

Quite a few, actually -- and without any evidence to suggest that someone did, using the presumption that they likely did is a complete end run around evidentiary responsibility. I think we should be sending police into the homes of the RIAA randomly on the assumption that record execs have a house full of hookers and blow at any given time. See how they like it.

Cheers

Re:It actually does solve a lot...

[slimjim8094]

That's not how warrants work. At least, I'm moving to Canada if that's how they currently work, because they sure as hell didn't work that way before.

If the police suspected you of, say, building explosives (large shipments of fertilizer, etc) - they'd get a warrant for searching for explosives. Now, they come in and look in your closet and find 40 kilos of marijuana. They can't do anything - that's not why they got the warrant. But you can sure bet that they'll be looking for a warrant to search your house for drugs or drug traces. So they come back the next day, and all traces are gone (unlikely by the way).... they're sunk. They can't act on evidence (and can't collect evidence, like take your pot) that they get without the proper warrant. Now, the prosecutor will probably try, but a good DA will have a real big problem with that. The purpose of this is to prevent the cops from getting an easier-to-obtain warrant with easier-to-obtain probable cause, and looking around for what they can find to pin on you...

If that's not how it works anymore, I'm leaving. Of course, IANAL - but this was explained to me by one.

Re:It actually does solve a lot...

[johneee]

As far as I know (from watching Law and Order) if they happen to see something illegal while they're going after the piano, then it's all good. For example: If the piano was stacked high with bricks of cocaine, they wouldn't have to just move the bricks to the side while they took the piano, they could arrest the person for the coke. The question in court is whether it's reasonable to assume that they found the coke while executing the warrant. Your example is probably unreasonable, and wouldn't be allowed, but mine is and probably would be.

Again, this is just from watching TV, so it may be an invention of hollywood.

Oh, and as an aside, the other thing is that in Canada, we don't really hold to the same standards. If throwing out improperly gained evidence would lead to a perversion of justice (ie, the person would go free on the drugs if the evidence was disallowed) then the courts might allow it to be introduced in the case anyway. There would also probably be sanctions or criminal charges against the officers involved, but the first case would be allowed to go forward.

Re:It actually does solve a lot...

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't attribute to Rand what she clearly didn't invent; whether this should be considered to be to her credit or discredit is another matter.

Unless you want to scrub every quote less than 2000 years old, shut the fuck up. The quote is attributed to Rand because she fucking wrote it. An NO POINT EVER is quoting somebody indicative, suggestive, or even remotely asserting that the quoted person is the originator of the idea expressed, only the manner in which it is stated. Further, Rand wrote Atlas Shrugged in a period of over a decade (40s, 50s) so you might want to consider overlap (30s, 40s). Lastly and by your moronic logic, you just attributed the insight to Hitler you fucking fascist pig.

Re:It actually does solve a lot...

[iminplaya]

Well, no matter who said it first, it goes to show that the message is what counts. I simply picked the one that came to my mind at the moment. It doesn't matter that she didn't invent it, she did say it. That's good enough for me. I would tend to believe that it might not have even been recorded when it was "invented". A demonstration of the thought is being displayed before our very eyes, as I'm sure it has been for many centuries. My point is that we shouldn't support the authorities that put it into practice. I really don't give a damn who said it first. People just need to be aware of what is happening. And it's much worse coming from a country that spends all its time preaching to the world about "freedom and democracy". It tends to reduce their credibility when when they have a legitimate complaint. Not that I should expect your average WalMart shopper to care. They're happy to be able to frost their cake with a paper knife.

"Give me convenience, or give me death"

Sweden's neutral!

[volpe]

I can see Bush figuring that attacking Sweden would be a piece of cake, seeing as how they're a neutral country with no army.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Foobar of Borg]

I can see Bush figuring that attacking Sweden would be a piece of cake, seeing as how they're a neutral country with no army.

Well, like most other countries, if anyone tries to actually invade Sweden, they would be met with a lot of resistance. You don't need a standing army to get people mobilized in a hurry. Sweden was able to stay out of the first world war and keep an "armed neutrality" during the second world war. There is a short but descriptive video of Sweden during the second world war here. Only the title is in Swedish. The audio is English.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Cassius Corodes]

While that might be true, it takes a while to build up an army, with a professional and experienced core to serve as the officers. You can expand an army to be 10 times the size fairly quickly but you need some core to start from and that can take up a generation to succeed. You need to train the pilots, design and acquire hardware all of which takes time in modern warfare.

As an aside, Sweden stayed out of the first and second war by NOT being important either strategically or resource-wise, rather than some kind of political strategy (they pissed off Hitler plenty but there was really no need to do anything about it). Belgium (in both world wars) and Netherlands + Denmark + Luxembourg + Norway (in second world war) were officially neutral yet got wiped because of strategic and resource reasons.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[naer_dinsul]

Where do I go to get my 34 seconds back?

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[me at werk]

I can see Bush figuring that attacking Sweden would be a piece of cake, seeing as how they're a neutral country with no army. Tell my wife I said... Hello.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[arivanov]

No army?

Bwahahaha... They do not just have their own army, they are also one of the biggest manufacturers of weapons in the world. Ever heard of Bofors? Swedes make their own small arms, artillery, tanks, even fighter aircraft.

All of that considerably cheaper than USA or UK and a lot of that much better quality than the USA or UK. They buy some avionics from BAE, but otherwise their weapons industry is mostly native. In fact, IIRC, USA is importing some small arms from Sweden for their special forces. So does UK.

While the Viggens and Griphens do not look so fancy they can actually stand their own against most NATO or Russian aircraft. Same for other Swedish kit.

This is one "neutral" country I will definitely not f*** with. It is neutrality armed to the teeth.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Paolone]

Sweden stayed out of the first and second war by NOT being important either strategically or resource-wise Except for the enormous amount of iron ore mined out shipped out to Germany and Britain, of course: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_iron_ore_during_World_War_II

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[f1r3f0g]

So who makes those knives then?

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Anzya]

Actually, Swedens official strategy for an invasion is to only hold out long enough to allow all our milita to run into the woods and get armed. After that: guerilla/terrorist warfare for all :)

A tactic I belive USA in Iraq called unfair ;)

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Laughing Pigeon]

While the Viggens and Griphens do not look so fancy

Contrary to their vixens though...

This is one "neutral" country I will definitely not f*** with

Your obviously not familiar with those yet!

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[stupidflanders]

The Viet Cong held off pretty darn well without the tools of "modern warfare" in 'Nam. Guerilla warfare is amazingly effective in some situations. Even George Washington used it in the American Revolutionary War:

...he came to understand that what we now know as guerrilla warfare was the only way to fight in the American wild, and he mastered it

I can see it now: Sweede/geeks hiding behind server clusters, plotting raids on Rockstar caches, wearing down the morale of the enemy by constantly playing Hamster Dance.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Ozeroc]

"So who makes those knives then?"

    If you're talking about Swiss Army Knives then I guess it would have to be the Swiss, who live in Switzerland, which is a good drive from Sweden.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[somersault]

I'd forgotten about that hamster dance. It's a good tune. You want to be playing the 'crazy frog' remix of that F1 driving "if you laugh at this, it proves you're insane" thing.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Woy]

Maybe the USA can repeat Russia's performance in scandinavia. Make sure you enter through Finland, and bring a lot of tanks.

I mean, repeating the Afghanistan war was not enough right?

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Jarik_Tentsu]

I can see Bush figuring that attacking Sweden would be a piece of cake, seeing as how they're a neutral country with no army. I read that article - your post was *gold*! I think your post deserves a +5 Funny more than mines does. For people who can't be bothered reading the massive article, volpe is referring to:

Sweden has a well-trained force of about 25,000. The president looked at him appraisingly, several people in the room recall.

''I don't know why you're talking about Sweden,'' Bush said. ''They're the neutral one. They don't have an army.''

Lantos paused, a little shocked, and offered a gentlemanly reply: ''Mr. President, you may have thought that I said Switzerland. They're the ones that are historically neutral, without an army.'' Then Lantos mentioned, in a gracious aside, that the Swiss do have a tough national guard to protect the country in the event of invasion.

Bush held to his view. ''No, no, it's Sweden that has no army.''

The room went silent, until someone changed the subject.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Kattspya]

By the end of the vietnam war the Vietcong were all but dead (literally). I can't remember if the casualty rates were 80 or 90% though. At the end of the war almost all of the figthing was done by the NVA.

Vietnam is a good example of political warfare but to call it a guerilla victory is wrong imo (unless you consider them one and the same).

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Mateo_LeFou]

I assumed he was talking about the great Wusthof Crustbuster, which has an umlaut over the "u" and is therefore probably Swedish.

Alas, it turns out to be the Germans, who live in Germany, which is also a good drive from Sweden.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[sskinnider]

I was lucky enough in 1991 to be in Stockholm while Sweden's non existent army were doing exercises in downtime Stockholm complete with tanks, armored personnel carriers, heavy weapons and the like. They may not have a conventional army, but they by no means lack the capability to defend themselves.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[s2jcpete]

The Swedish fielded two volunteer SS battalions during WW2: 5th SS-Panzer Division "Wiking" and 11th SS-Freiwilligen Panzergrenadier Division "Nordland"

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[mgblst]

Ha ha ha. Sweden managed to stay out of World War 2, by working with the Germans, continuily supplying and buying from them, for the entire war. This is not something to be bragged about. They were quite happy to ignore the problems with the Nazi regime, and even allowed German troops to move through Sweden.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[DataBroker]

Sweden was able to stay out of the first world war and keep an "armed neutrality" during the second world war.

I went to Denmark, and was told all about Sweden's "armed neutrality". I was told that the only reason that Sweden was allowed to remain neutral was because it succumbed to Germany's will. It essentially agreed to work full-time supplying war materials (iron ore) if Germany agreed not to destroy it. For more, check out this link.

Minor disclaimer: I'm relaying info a Dane gave me on the Swedes. Don't kill the messenger. Personally, I love all things Swedish and offer the traditional salute; bork-bork-bork!!

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[microbox]

While that might be true, it takes a while to build up an army, with a professional and experienced core to serve as the officers. You can expand an army to be 10 times the size fairly quickly but you need some core to start from and that can take up a generation to succeed. You need to train the pilots, design and acquire hardware all of which takes time in modern warfare

IAAACG (I am an arm chair general), but, AFAIK, Sweden has a very large and well trained reserve comprising of pretty much every able-bodied man in the country. They also have very good defences and professional know-how. The USSR would certainly have defeated them, esp. in a protracted war, but it would have been tough going. They probably would have used paratroopers to capture the main airport in Stockholm, and used significant naval capability.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[mortenalver]

They don't use "u" with umlaut in Sweden, anyway.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Anonymous Coward]

See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Armed_Forces

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[ronocdh]

There is a short but descriptive video of Sweden during the second world war here.

Thank you so much for presenting that video with a straight face. Your delivery just made my day.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Ox0065]

so...

compulsory military service (or alternatively community service) exists in Sweden. (^-^) Didn't you know?

...also, as I understood it, Sweden & Finland were instrumental in disabling Germany's hard water (read nuclear bomb) plant for long enough for the USA to steal all the technology / scientists they needed to whip up a couple first. 12 Scandinavian commandos bombed a factory guarded by 500 SS soldiers in the middle of German occupied Norway TWICE with no casualties. They went to ground in the countryside after the first attack. There had been an earlier British attempt of which there were no survivors.

http://www.espionageinfo.com/Gu-In/Heavy-Water-Technology.html

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Opportunist]

Sweden doesn't need a lot of military hardware. What it needs is hand rifles and lots of them (and it DOES have those. Hope I'm not spilling a military secret here).

Take a look at the country. What do you see? Right. Mountains and wood, wood and mountains. Yeah, you can easily take Stockholm, but after that it's about as bad as it gets, terrain wise. Tanks? Forget them. Planes? Ask a 'nam pilot what he bombed, he could bomb the same there. Lots of wood and little to see.

The best ally of Sweden is its countryside.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[jamstar7]

Oh, Sweden has an army alright, they just don't spend the fraction of their GNP on it that the US does.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[CrystalFalcon]

As a non-commissioned officer (2nd Lt) in this non-existent army, I can attest to that. We may look lost in international politics, but we manufacture some of the best weapons available (and some which are not available), and the one thing you wouldn't want is a pissed-off Swedish population taking to arms. Where our politicians fail, the men and women of the country stand extremely proud and do not bend over.

Should a country invade, an aggressive superpower in particular, you'd have every man, woman, and child capable of carrying a gun as rebellion - and Swedes are the organized, cold and rational kind with a chilly, calculating stare. Iraq would look like Kansas in comparison.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[dloseke]

While Sweden may not have a strong army, they do have one. My counterpart sitting across my office from me served during his 6 month conscript.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[mpe]

While that might be true, it takes a while to build up an army, with a professional and experienced core to serve as the officers. You can expand an army to be 10 times the size fairly quickly but you need some core to start from and that can take up a generation to succeed. You need to train the pilots, design and acquire hardware all of which takes time in modern warfare.

Except that this dosn't appear to apply in the situation of a guerilla militia trying to get rid of a foreign army.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Mateo_LeFou]

what about that "O" with a line through it?

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[R2.0]

"All of that considerably cheaper than USA or UK and a lot of that much better quality than the USA or UK. They buy some avionics from BAE, but otherwise their weapons industry is mostly native. In fact, IIRC, USA is importing some small arms from Sweden for their special forces. So does UK."

While I admire the Swede's determination to keep a homegrown arms industry, lets not get too carried away. The US buys weapons from EVERYWHERE - FN of Belgium has been selling a lot to the Army, the M1 Abrams tank barrels come from Germany. Britain is the same. I wouldn't go crowing about the superiority of Swedish weapons because they've sold a few on the international market.

As for the Gripen, it's development was bit checkered. Sweden sunk a lot of money into the development of a fighter they could call their own, only to wind up with the functional equivalent of an F-16 - IIRC it was a minor scandal at the time, because they could have bought a fleet top grade F16's for less than the development costs of 1 Gripen.

There are plenty of reasons to keep a native arms industry - economy and quality aren't necessarily 2 of them.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[greyhueofdoubt]

Sweden does have a military- current strength is 65,500 members. We (U.S.) even have an exchange program with them for training.
They have an army, a navy, an air force, and a home guard (like national guard).

-b

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[HumanPenguin]

Sweden also had geographical advantages. Getting ground troops into Sweden even now would be a hard battle. But with the ability to drop tanks from aircraft it would be possible. During WW2 getting ground troops over the mountains surrounding Sweden was a much harder battle. So the front gate was the only real option. Then air support was only effective to support ground troops. Now there is more options to target precisely with air attacks but still ground support is needed to win any real war short of wiping the nation out altogether.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[popmaker]

No, they don't. They have an o with dots above it instead. The Danish have the o with the line through it.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[carps]

"Sweden does have a military- current strength is 65,500 members." I understand they would like to expand, but ever since their forces began computerized recordkeeping they inexplicably can't get over this 65,500 level.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Foobar of Borg]

Sweden does have a military

Oh, I know. I just wanted a blank-faced way to make an absurd joke using that video. Actually, you can find (serious this time) overviews of some aspects of the Swedish military on Google video. For instance, there is one on littoral warfare involving the Swedish navy and how they deal with congested coastlines.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[C0rinthian]

12 Scandinavian commandos bombed a factory guarded by 500 SS soldiers in the middle of German occupied Norway TWICE with no casualties. They went to ground in the countryside after the first attack. There had been an earlier British attempt of which there were no survivors.
You know, I have this wierd mental image of German SS officers hearing the sound of a thousand voices chanting "Spam Spam Spam Spam..." before being slaughtered by Vikings.

Lovely Spam! Wonderful Spam!

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[nurb432]

Remember too that this country started without a standing army.. So i agree its easier said then done.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[jedidiah]

No. It's just flat as a pancake and just as empty.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[Jardine]

also, as I understood it, Sweden & Finland were instrumental in disabling Germany's hard water (read nuclear bomb) plant

Hard water must mean something different in Germany. Unless nuclear bombs require water that is difficult to get soap to lather.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[mjwx]

Hard water must mean something different in Germany

Hard water in Swedish and Nordic dialects (and others if I have forgotten them) can mean Heavy water in English. Heavy water contains a higher than normal ratio of Deuterium isotopes (D2O or 2H2O) which is used in the construction of Nuclear and Hydrogen warheads.

Given the context the OP is probably a European and its just a translation error between Hard Water (mineral content) and Heavy Water (Deuterium content). It's a common mistake for Nordic and Germanic translations.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[arivanov]

Actually if we compare how much was spent on the development of the F16 and the Gripen, the Gripen is fantastic achievement. The swedes have beaten BAE and USA in terms of productivity in R&D by such a large margin that it is not even funny.

In addition to that the running costs of the Gripen are only a small fraction of the costs of the F16 and it has a much better MTBF. That is why it was chosen by at least two Nato countries for recent purchases. It is better value for the money

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[mjwx]

Western Europe has been making better quality small arms (than the US) for some time, Fabrique Nationale(FN) in Belgium (P90 Personal Defence Weapon), Heclker and Glock in Germany (G36 and a variety of pistols), Beretta in Italy just to name a few. Most of Hollywoods most famous arms like the Beretta and Desert Eagle(Israeli) were designed outside the US. I've also said for a long time that the US army should give up on the M16 Rifle (no full Auto, too long/unwieldy, designed to fight the Soviets in Europe not jungle or desert warfare) and phase them out for a European rifle (probably best if made under license in the states) at least until better modern weapons (OICW?) be developed (IMO, M16's are better then AK's but I have never fired an AK).

As for Tanks, the US Abram's incorporates the best parts of the German Leopard 2 and the British Challenger 2 but are still evenly matched, in a direct fire fight the winner would be the best tank crew. All three are superior to almost all Soviet tank designs.

Aircraft is really where the US wins hands down, but this comes at the astronomical cost of the Aircraft, this makes sense for the US (which could afford it) and my own nation Australia (which has a large land mass but can only support a small Air Force) but not for small nations with large populations and small borders which can support larger air forces of cheaper aircraft. F22's, F35's and F18's (I'm yet to see a real competitor to the A10) and B52's are all far superior to their Allied (Eurofighter, SAAB Gripen(Griffin), Raffale) and Enemy (Mig 29, Sukhoi 33/35, J10, Bear bomber) counterparts.

The US is still the only power who operates Fleet carriers, but IMO the carrier is going the way of the battleship (Navies are highly conservative and will only change doctrine when it is absolutely required, this is true of all navies WWI battleships still sported masts). In 20 years VTOL aircraft like the F35(B and D models IIRC) and Harriers will be carried by smaller and faster Assault carriers as even the US will no longer see any sense in paying for expensive Fleet carriers. I also believe that Submarine carriers (Japanese developed one during WWII) may make a resurgence when a large flight deck is no longer needed.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[volpe]

So who makes those knives then? Look everybody! Dubya reads Slashdot!

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[volpe]

Has *anybody* who read my GP post looked at the article and seen the part where Dubya insisted that Sweden was neutral even after someone corrected him and told him it was Switzerland?

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[volpe]

Thanks. I'm glad *somebody* bothered to read it!

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[cuantar]

The Swedes didn't care about what Germany was doing in Norway; they just wanted to bomb Norway. You know, an old Viking sibling rivalry thing.

Re:Sweden's neutral!

[cuantar]

They hired 36 new recruits once, but the moment that last guy graduated from boot camp, the records keeper suffered a stroke.

K, how about medication

[Serengeti]

Ease up a bit. I'm starting to think I'm crazy, as no one else seems to have grasped that they aren't saying that Terrorists, Murderers and Drug Dealers are all also pirates...

What they're saying is that law enforcement can use piracy to access suspected terrorists, murderers and drug dealers property by means of warrants that they wouldn't otherwise be able to obtain.

They're suggesting that Bob, a drug dealer, by chance also pirates Britney Spears MP3's. So the cops use that as reason for a warrant. While searching Bobs apartment for Britney Spears related material, they also //just happen to stumble on// Bobs coke stash. They don't care about the piracy angle so much as the fact that it can be used as a tool for other means.

Re:K, how about medication

[Beyond_GoodandEvil]

So you're recommending the cops seek a warrant in bad faith, to catch "real" criminals. Have you also thought about attaching magnets to the corpses of the founding fathers to generate electricity?

Re:K, how about medication

[BloodAngel_Au]

Even I've seen enough Law & Order to know this won't work more times than it will, and I'm Australian.

But then again, if you say terrorist nowdays then most of the rules go out the window.

Typo in article description

[RogueSeven]

It argues they should pursue piracy cases because it leads to bigger and badder wares ...

I think you mean that piracy leads to "bigger and badder warez"!

You misunderstand

[einhverfr]

Going after piracy cases leads to terrorist organizations-- you know, organizations which terrorize people.

What they mean is that going after piracy helps bolster one of these organizations, known as the RIAA.....

Question.

[Talinom]

Is the RIAA going to sue people for pirating their anti-piracy video?

I can see it now...

[Landshark17]

*two brothers, Billy and Timmy come home, Billy is listening to his iPod*

Mom: Billy, did you legally obtain all the music on that iPod?
Billy: Yes, mom.
Mom: Mrs. Johnson told me her son lent you a CD... you know that's piracy!
Billy: But, mom!
Mom: No "buts"! You're grounded and no internet for you until we're sure the RIAA isn't tapping our computer!
Billy: But Timmy stabbed a kid at school today!
Timmy: The voices tell me to hurt people.
Mom: Did he violate international copyright law?
Billy: There were cops and an ambulence and everything!
Mom: You didn't answer my question.
Billy: No. He didn't.
Mom: That's right. Now you go to your room. Timmy, would you like some ice cream?
Timmy: I want to burn things.

Please please please...

[Landshark17]

Can I get it with Mike Nelson rifftrax?

Gun runner

[wiredlogic]

What do you mean? Don't most music pirates aspire to be international gun runners?

Re:Gun runner

[ThirdPrize]

Maybe not but I believe the IRA and similar organisations did resort to bootlegging CDs and DVDs in an effort to make money. If you are an illegal organisation you usually have to resort to illegal means to make money.

Re:Gun runner

[mink]

Why don't they just open a Starbucks or something.

The Big Question

[georgiawebguy]

The big question of the day: Was the video DRM?

Re:we are like SO legion

[OverflowingBitBucket]

Marvelous!

If there was ever a post that justified a "(Score: 6 Legendary)", this is it.

Re:we are like SO legion

[Quantam]

"Merry to meet you, I'm merely a man behind a mask with a mystifying moniker. I am M."

I don't suppose that's a Death Note reference?

Oh, and one more thing...

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

People won't buy something without hearing or seeing it for free, same reason a bookstore will let you read an entire book if you really want to without paying for it.

Music stores will let you do the same thing. In both cases, you don't get to keep the work.

Re:Oh, and one more thing...

[mbius]

Define "keep." With the vast majority of enertainment, I get all the value I'm going to in the first pass. Handy, since the oxymoron of "licensed property" has evolved to mean I don't get to keep stuff I do buy.

Re:You're right. It's not.

[Quantam]

I haven't. I don't watch movies that much, and download them even less (I think I've downloaded one movie to date, and it wasn't through P2P; and for that matter, I never did watch that). But there are an L, M, and N in Death Note. All three of theme are particularly cryptic, and enjoy mind games. In one particular scene that came to mind, N wore a mask when meeting with the main character.

Re:we are like SO legion

[Killjoy_NL]

Nope, V for Vengeance (good movie)

P.S. Deathnote is FANTASTIC! :D

Good music needs creativity and an artist ...

[freaker_TuC]

... not a spoiled brat.

I'm a musician part-time myself, invested in my computerless studio with many reasons (mainly because a computer cannot give me the freedom I got) and have been working for over 15 years long in the music industry. I've started with 12" records and am now trying to get something back from my investment by producing and live events.

I had to work and fight hard to get this maintained, to keep my collection fresh, since music is NOT one of the cheapest products around. The filtering process by itself to only keep the best of the best and ignoring the rest is even a job by itself since there is a lot of crap out there for the same/a higher price against the better creations. I've never had anyone paying for my equipment or records; it's all coming from my own sweat.. no spoiling and most of these complex machinery exists with a good reason.

Next to that I am having my college degree which I am not even practicing. So, I wonder, what's your point of hostility?
It doesn't mean because people like to save their creativity to CD we are all sleeping with the RIAA...
I know I'm not talking about everyone, since I got only my own experiences to talk about; although; I'd suggest you to do the same.

I don't even have to reply with the "majority form" for that. Since "us" is so broad defined it has no leg to stand on.
The RIAA may be dying, music will live on; it's a form of communication, it would be the same to say English is dying. No way!
Music is an art; just like there will be painters and writers there will be musicians ready for the cause of delicate artistism.

(ps: I wouldn't give a shit less if the commercial top-50 music would die off,
since this is an artificial created beast from the recording industry without real grounds for art, only financial gain, which makes us with artistic intend look bad!)

Re:Good music needs creativity and an artist ...

[Smordnys s'regrepsA]

(ps: I wouldn't give a shit less if the commercial top-50 music would die off, since this is an artificial created beast from the recording industry without real grounds for art, only financial gain, which makes us with artistic intend look bad!)
Hit the nail on the head, my friend. I was attempting to say that very thing, only I just spewed a little too much venom. You are what I want to see, more independent producers creating as a work of passion. If you and your musicians are in my area and have local concerts, chances are I am buying your music.

Re:we are like SO legion

[dysfunct]

What an alliteration. If I was wearing a hat, it would be off to you!

Alice's Restaurant?

[aproposofwhat]

Now I do feel old.

Damn.

Have seen that video before...

[Doctor O]

...and I'm not falling for this 2girls1cup shit *again*.

Phone them

[Myrkridian42]

The scanned letter that comes with the video has this at the end:

For requests/additional information on the DVD or it's content, please contact the following respective RIAA representive:

Northeast Region
John Curry
212-533-5869

Central Region
Deborah Robinson
610-521-8566

Western Region
Marcus Cohen
714-236-0830

Southern Region
Matthew Kilgo
678-402-2000

Has anyone else thought about calling these numbers? Maybe give them a review of the video, debate copyright policy and enforcement, call them greedy assholes, etc?

I Think the problem is...

[pev]

...that there are known links between piracy and organised crime and dare I say it, probably even the T-word. BUT it's a tale of two storeys. There're the people that do piracy for money involving duplication, forgery and sale that cost the recordig industry serious $$$ as they target people who would be paying for genuine media. These are the guys that make money and do bad things. The problem of course is that the RIAA et al seem happier to publicly go after the people that copy friends music at home. You know, the ones that generally didn't have any money to give the RIAA in the first place and aren't copying for profit, so no real monetary losses have even occured anyway.

All the over-excited comments here about people thinking the RIAA are calling them terrorists for copying CD's is jumping to conclusions and ignoring the above. Having said that the RIAA seem happy to let legal officials make the same mistake without clarification, and they are generally a complete bunch of c***s.

I love music and I love musicians. I think the only people that benefit from record sales should be the people that make the music and are involved in being creative. Bollocks to the execs and shareholders that took a beautiful business and turned it into a soul-less industry. Wouldn't it be nice if we could just go back to small record labels with no shareholder interest...

Re:I Think the problem is...

[Dunbal]

"I Think the problem is that there are known links between piracy and organised crime and dare I say it, probably even the T-word."

      Put the crack pipe away. WTF?

Re:I Think the problem is...

[pev]

Put the crack pipe away. WTF?

Well reasoned response, you should be proud of yourself.

So tell me. When people set up CD duplication plants that produce 50,000 well produced, colour printed hard-to-spot counterfeits CD's that look just like the real thing, who do you think is able to bankroll setting up such an endeavour, arrange distribution and keep it running? Certainly not you or I and not what you'd think of as a dis-organised criminal. Or can you provide a better explanation that doesn't involve mentioning crack or swearing?

~Pev

Re:I Think the problem is...

[Dunbal]

When people set up CD duplication plants that produce 50,000 well produced, colour printed hard-to-spot counterfeits CD's that look just like the real thing

      No one does THAT anymore either. Originals = $20... your "reproduction" = $5. My copy via bit-torrent: free (the cost is my bandwidth and patience). Wake up, no one "buys" pirate copies anymore. You're 10 years behind.

Re:I Think the problem is...

[pev]

Wow, another well thought out response.

The original article and RIAA video was mostly about counterfeit media (did you even bother to read TFA or watch the video?). My response was also clearly about counterfeiting media. Why on earth are you harping on about bit-torrent? As for your comment about no-one buying counterfeit stuff any more... Well, for most of this planet (yes, there is a world outside of the United States - get yourself a passport and come visit us) counterfeiting is going just as nicely as it was 10 years ago. Go and hang out in markets in Turkey, Japan, Moscow or pretty much any city and you'll find plenty of stuff to choose from, or even ebay for that matter.

If you want to make sweeping generalisations, feel free, but be sure to back them up with references if you're trying to make a point instead of trolling.

Re:we are like SO legion

[yakumo.unr]

V for Vendetta, very good movie, even better original graphic novel.

Re:You're right. It's not.

[Spy der Mann]

Here's a reminder.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW6HbZXI9Y0

Music Industry Training Video

[flyneye]

How about a training video for prosecuters showing them that investigating the crimes and questionable practices of the RIAA like stealing songrights from artists,enticing underage children into contracts and wasting the judiciaries time could lead to cocaine busts , pedophile rings, prostitution,political corruption and other organized crime rings?
                Truth,folks,we just don't need the music industry for anything anymore.They're an outdated entity who's only purpose was ever as a middleman with their hand out.
We now have a level playing ground for musicians to do their own business with a much more sensible business model. Sell performance not copies.Even other methods were outlined in a recent slashdot story on Kevin Kelly and his view http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/kelly08/kelly08_index.html which makes complete crystal clarified sense.
Consider this the thrashing death throes of an obsolete industry who doesn't have the sense to quit trying to breath with the laundry bag over its head.

Re:Lawyer are god

[sm62704]

Nah, they only look pasty like that.

Yeah, like we nerds have room to talk.

RIAA and homeland security are the same

[seeker_1us]

Before Gonzalez erhhhmmm "retired" he tried to introduce a "copyright reform" bill. In it was a specific clause that required DHS to work RIAA.

There's no way to reason with the RIAA

[microbox]

I have to offset this with the fact that they are the RIAA, nevertheless, combining these two opinions seems roughly logically consistent to me.

It seems that we have an infinite capability for deluding ourselves, usually as part of some egocentric strategy. Reason is useless when the opposition does not see the need for evidence.

After having a long discussion with a neocon, who believes that Iraq is responsible for the US's actions (blaming ones actions on another is kinda psychopathic), and from reading the dialogs of creation "scientists", it has become remarkably apparent that logical reasoning is an endless web of self-deception when it is not combined with evidence.

It is only recently that the union of evidence and reason was discovered by the Ionian greeks. Their ideas were squashed by Pythagoras, Plato and co., probably because evidence was scant for an unfair social heirachy with them at the top.

"Thinkers" have expelled a lot of hot air, to reason why they should have what they have, and take what they take. The sophistry of the RIAA is just one voice in a long history of "reason".

It's a sad fact of life, that ignorance has a dangerously profound power when combined with greed. So powerful is this ignorance, that we'll accept the products of science, yet reject the methodology.

Oh man you Americans...

[slashdotinmyface]

Haha you Americans are so fucked (up) :-D

Re:lol

[justinlee37]

I think it can at least lead to the first one on your list.

I reserve the right to be wrong

[m2bord]

But I can't help but think that if the RIAA and MPAA and similar agencies quit pushing such draconian measures, quit hogging access to the music/movies/media we love, and lowered prices to reasonable levels with an appropriate portion being given to artists and writers would lead to more purchases.

Giving users what they want would help also. Quit promoting American Karaoke..err Idol type stuff and go back to discovering talent all over the country regardless of what they look like

That's the problem with current music offerings...Aretha Franklin, Mick Jagger, probably Elvis too, wouldn't make it on the radio today.

The entertainment industry is suffering because they are just not the only game in the house anymore. Video games, the Internet, and let's not forget the high cost of fuel and just living is causing people to stop buying luxury items. Music and movies are luxury items.

I'm not sure which is actually scarier...

[iceT]

So, which is actually scarier:

1) The fact that the RIAA is trying to sell the concept that piracy leads other crimes

or

2) That law enforcement might actually believe them!?!?!

Badder wares?

[nurb432]

Like handguns? Give me a break, in this country ( except for states that refuse to honor the constitution ) handguns are legal.

Actually, its rather offensive.

PiraBoogle

[roryunderwood1]

How about a torrent search engine ... using Google's own custom search engine - see PiraBoogle.com - naughty Pirate Bay / naughty Google?