Slashdot Mirror
RIAA To Stop Prosecuting Individual File Sharers
debatem1 writes "According to the Wall Street Journal, the RIAA has decided to abandon its current tactic of suing individuals for sharing copyrighted music. Ongoing lawsuits will be pursued to completion, but no new ones will be filed. The RIAA is going to try working with the ISPs to limit file-sharing services and cut off repeated users. This very surprising development apparently comes as a result of public distaste for the campaign." An RIAA spokesman is quoted as saying that the litigation campaign has been "successful in raising the public's awareness that file-sharing is illegal."
Dear Sir,
We are a group of UK film and TV producers, directors and writers. We are concerned that the successes of the creative industries in the UK are being undermined by the illegal online file-sharing of film and TV.
We are asking the Government to show its support by ensuring that internet service providers play their part in tackling this huge problem by giving us money. Lots of money. Just keep piling it in, we'll tell you when it's enough.
In 2007, up to (well, it could be) 25 per cent of all online TV piracy took place in the UK. Popular shows are downloaded illegally hundreds of thousands of times per episode, and some of them might even be ours rather than something American made with an actual budget.
It is true that in 2008, UK commercial TV broadcasters enjoyed the highest viewing figures in five years, that total TV viewing was up 10% year-on-year, and the valuable yet hard-to-reach 16 to 24-year-old demographic (the typical file-sharer) watched 4.9% more commercial TV and saw 12% more ads. But it's the principle of the thing: someone is getting money from something that touches something one of us once touched, therefore the money belongs to us. This is the style of corporate thinking that brought Britain its great economic gains from 1997 to 2007, after all.At a time when so many jobs are being lost in the wider economy, it is especially important that our gravy train be maintained.
Internet service providers have the ability to change the behaviour of those customers who illegally distribute content online. They have the power to make significant change and to prevent their infrastructure from being used on a wholesale scale for illegal activity. They have the power to stop people looking at the cover of Virgin Killer. They have a secret magic wand that will fix everything wrong with the media industry's income streams and they are refusing, with malice aforethought, to use it. If they are not prepared to give us all the free money we ask for and a bit more besides, they should be compelled to do so.
http://rocknerd.co.uk
I mean, their current methods have apparently atleast been in breach of investigative laws in several states and they may still end up in mess because of it, but ending the thing will atleast lessen the exposure..
Alternative explanation is that they have actually understood that extortion is bad.. nah.. not likely.
Just like the French. First you give us fried potatoes to clog our arteries, then you dump your "huddled masses" from your country to the U.S., and now you invent the 3-strike law to ban us from ISPs without due process of law (a jury trial).
>>>The RIAA is going to try to working with the ISPs to limit file-sharing services and cut off repeated users.
Thanks. ;-)
FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
There is absolutely nothing "illegal" about using bittorrent to download the latest linux distro or open office release.
But they want to tar every use with the same brush so they can stamp it out completely because it CAN be used in a naughty manner.
A bread knife CAN be used to kill someone but that's not what it was designed for.
Not only do I know that its illegal, I encourage it!
Thanks RIAA, for letting me know all about the super fun world of piracy.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
"Meanwhile, music sales continue to fall. In 2003, the industry sold 656 million albums. In 2007, the number fell to 500 million CDs and digital albums, plus 844 million paid individual song downloads -- hardly enough to make up the decline in album sales."
Wow, so now that people are given the option of buying only the track they like instead of the whole album... album sales are dropping. Imagine that! I guess blaming it on piracy is easier than making all 12 songs on an album worth buying.
Murphey's fighting Occam, and we're in the stands.
Working with the ISPs is an arms race at best. The ISPs block stuff, P2P devs come up with more and more devious ways to work around the blocks. Plus, in markets where competition is good, consumers will just vote with their feet.
Give it up, RIAA. Come up with better ways of making money. No one is willing to spend $20 to buy an album with 1 or 2 good songs on it. And few are willing to pay for what they will always be able to get for free.
My blog
For the individuals caught in them, the RIAA individual lawsuits really, really suck. Extortionate demands, no real ability to defend yourself(if your day in court costs you more than you can afford, it isn't your day in court), etc. On the other hand, though, the lawsuits as a tactic have been magnificently ineffective, and do very little to project RIAA power beyond those directly affected(and, indeed, the seem to project displeasure much further than they project obedience).
Focusing on the ISPs is potentially much more sinister. ISP user agreements, for anything other than expensive business accounts, typically have pretty broad service agreements, so they almost definitely won't even need to involve the courts to cut you off. If the RIAA and friends are successful, they could easily obtain de facto veto power over almost anybody's internet access, without any actually illegal conduct(unlike their present tactics). There is no reason to suspect that they would be any more discriminating or accurate in using such power than they currently are in filing lawsuits(probably less, in fact, since it will be cheaper than lawsuits), so the circle of the affected will be even wider. Not good.
1. announce an end to lawsuits
2. mediasentry keeps logging traffic
3. ???
4. file thousands of simultaneous lawsuits
5. bask in your crapulence
Because they were starting to lose.
They were starting to get in trouble with the courts, because they were filing lawsuits, and they in many cases had insufficient evidence to prove wrongdoing.
There were many cases where they were prosecuting innocent people, and this would ultimately be seen as harassment/abuse of the courts, resulting in sanctions for the RIAA.
The new approach will be more expedient, and less costly, since their victims don't get any due process rights.
They just send a letter to your ISP, and your ISP assumes you guilty.
You no longer have a chance to prove your innocence. If the RIAA doesn't like you and wants your connection turned off, they'll now have the means to make it happen, if your ISP joins their program.
See the article:
Depending on the agreement, the ISP will either forward the note to customers, or alert customers that they appear to be uploading music illegally, and ask them to stop. If the customers continue the file-sharing, they will get one or two more emails, perhaps accompanied by slower service from the provider. Finally, the ISP may cut off their access altogether.
The RIAA said it has agreements in principle with some ISPs, but declined to say which ones. But ISPs, which are increasingly cutting content deals of their own with entertainment companies, may have more incentive to work with the music labels now than in previous years.
So, they're going to try running their extortions entirely outside the courts now? This'll be a good test of the ISPs.
...porcine aviatrixes...Hades Icecapades...etc etc..you get the idea.
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
An RIAA spokesman is quoted as saying that the litigation campaign has been "successful in raising the public's awareness that file-sharing is illegal."
The spokesman went on to say that the campaign will be stopped after it became apparent that "it was also successful in raising the public's awareness that the RIAA are douches."
An RIAA spokesman is quoted as saying that the litigation campaign has been "successful in raising the public's awareness that file-sharing is illegal."
If it's so illegal, then why did they sue for damages (that is, compensation) rather than prosecute file-sharers for a crime? You don't sue people because they robbed banks or stabbed someone, you sue because they owe you money for some reason.
So the real message they were sending to the public is, "File sharing takes money out of our pockets." Well, duh.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
An RIAA spokesman is quoted as saying that the litigation campaign has been "successful in raising the public's awareness that file-sharing is illegal."
That says it all really. They have managed a disinformation campaign to make people think that file sharing is illegal. No mention of the fact that it is perfectly legal if you have rights to the work, it is public domain, or you are using it under "fair use" terms, or a number of other more obscure legal circumstances.
Think of it this way, nobody bats an eyelid when you say "filesharing is illegal", but you would get some surprised looks if you said "video recording is illegal" or "photocopying is illegal" - they have managed to taint the technology with a possible illegal use.
It says "The RIAA is going to try to working with the ISPs to limit file-sharing services and cut off repeated users.". So they're not going to take you to court, they're just going to get your ISP to kick you off and with any luck blacklist you. ISPs are presumably so scared of the RIAA that they'll comply wherever possible.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
First the sad stuff
Good news:
How in the Sam-hell did y'all manage to scoop NewYorkCountryLawyer on this?!
Way to go. ;^)
--
Toro
An RIAA spokesman is quoted as saying that the litigation campaign has been "successful in raising the public's awareness that file-sharing is illegal."
It's also raised public awareness that the RIAA is the scum of the earth who will sue 12 year old girls for hundreds of thousands of dollars. I've personally never understood the concept that any kind of publicity that could make people spit on you when you walk on the street could possibly have any positive value down the line.
Hey, wait a minute! French fries allegedly come from Belgium. Both the French and the Belgians consider the term "French fries" to be grossly unfair: the Belgians feel they deserve the credit, and the French feel they don't deserve the blame.
Of course, there is the possibility that the first prototype fries were planted in Belgium by French agents provocateurs.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
The RIAA has taken to suing a lot of people who turned out to be innocent, on very flimsy evidence. If there is one thing that Americans generally dislike, it's programs, no matter how well-intentioned, that end up often getting the wrong people.
My 89-year old next door neighbor who is blind and deaf got a notice was next, so at least she's safe.
http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/11.1/iso/openSUSE-11.1-DVD-i586.iso.torrent
http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/11.1/iso/openSUSE-11.1-DVD-x86_64.iso.torrent
I am sharing these, now come and try to sue my ISP. He will be having a laugh. Try go after the originating provider and they will tear you a new one.
It is nice to see that what they wanted was to misinform people about their rights.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
It isn't like the rest of French cuisine is Richard-Simmons-Approved when eaten in the kind of quantities Americans typically eat things, so I don't see why they'd care about fries in particular.
I liked that period of time where we were supposed to call them "Freedom Fries". It made it easier to spot imbeciles.
"Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
A new can of worms is about to open. What will the burden of proof be for an ISP? It is very likely that it will be in their best interest to limit the amount of P2P filesharing whether it is legal or not. This seems like a win for the RIAA. What recourse will a cut off user have? If they signed a year contract with an ISP will they be required to pay a penalty because they were cut off? The judicial system is flawed, but what system will innocent people have if ISP's decide to cooperate whole-heartedly with the RIAA.
So the RIAA is offering to "work with ISPs." From the sound of it, what they want is for the ISPs to do a lot of work monitoring users, and take a serious public-relations risk for banning them. If I ran an ISP, I would not exactly be falling over myself to embrace those new headaches.
What's in it for the ISPs? If the RIAA is offering a carrot, then the size of the carrot is limited by the ever-diminishing money the RIAA has to offer. If they're trying to threaten with a stick, they're relying on either regulation, lobbying, or lawsuits -- in all three arenas, ISPs are more than a match for them in terms of money and influence.
The more I think about it, the more I realize this is just a face-saving tactic, and the "cooperative relationship" can't last because it's contrary to the ISPs best interests.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Hell, wherever they come from, they don't *need* to be forced in in double handfuls...
So the RIAA gives up on doing evil to pursue something more evil?
It's not worth it to go after individuals because of all the bad press, so instead attack the technology?
How about instead the RIAA just get over it? When the horse and buggy gave way to automobiles, buggy makers found another line of work. The recording industry should accept their fate, redefine themselves, and find a niche.
In short, it's over.
FAQs are evil.
Oh come on, someone mod the parent flaimbait AND irrelevant.. My own personal beliefs aside, how does this belong here?
I'm glad to hear that the record industry's gestapo organization (otherwise known as the RIAA) is going to stop going after the little people, but they have exchanged one morally impotent tactic for another; there going after net neutrality. These Nazi bastards are giving the music industry a bad name. I fear they won't stop until your paying them royalties not only for every song you own but also for every time you play it! I have no problem paying ONCE for the music that I own. I do have a problem when some money hungry politicion says I can't make backup copies of MY investment which I purchased legally and in good faith and then goes after filesharing in general. Suppose you were an artist and you wanted to share your creations with the world free of cost? Would you allow some A**hole in a suit dictate to you that the only way you could share your creations was by charging for them? I sure as hell wouldn't! O God please smite these f**king bastards!
Its just going to push every last communication on to SSL.
At the network level, it is almost impossible to determine the nature of the communication without inspecting the packets. They can't eliminate peer to peer packets because things like instant messaging, vonage, skype, ssh, etc. will fail as well and these are legitimate non-RIAA objectionable services. So, once ALL the p2p systems start using SSL, even the ISPs will be powerless to stop P2P without making their system largely unusable.
Besides, ISPs have more to gain by adding a "premium" service (at a price premium) that allows better P2P performance and user priority for gaming.
No if RIAA says your account is at fault and your ISP cuts you off can you appeal? What about lost productivity? I really do not want my ISP monitoring my connection. It is like asking the postal service to open all your mail that you send and receive. What about the getting the phone company to monitor all your phone calls. Well you are at it get monitor in your houses and cars so home builders and car manufactures can monitor you as well. Where does it stop. I really hope the ISP tell the RIAA to F off. When will some people with enough money band together to total fight the RIAA to the end.
My Sig indicates the end of the comment I posted.
...file-sharing isn't illegal.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to finish torrenting a Debian DVD.
The party has moved to Internet radio. Streamripper will record your MP3s at 128kbps and lay them nice and neat into their own directories for you while you work or sleep. The only problem you have is burning them off to DVDs when your HD gets full. And, of course, finding the time to listen to all of them. As Heinlein once said, "It's raining soup, get a bucket!"
Really? It's over? Really? This isn't just a ruse to lull people into a false sense of security? This isn't April 1st? Really? Wow...
Just remove the internet altogether. I mean 90% of the world traffic is spam, porn, viruses and illegal stuff. /sarcasm off
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
I don't think the ISPs will bite down on this. The ISP will obviously need to report the results to the RIAA, otherwise the RIAA will cry foul. Then, if the ISP misses an obvious "illegal activity" the ISP might be held liable by the RIAA for not protecting the RIAA's intellectual property.
"You failed to notify your customers that we knew they're stealing. So now, it's your fault."
I'm willing to bet more than a few ISPs will worry about this possible outcome.
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
How does this affect their campaign against colleges? i know there was an article in which RIAA wanted to extort money from colleges and agree not to sue them but what if colleges say no. is the ISP going to shut down internet access to the entire university if the RIAA asks for it?
Woohoo!
RIAA: "The courts are no longer putting up with our BS illegal extortion of our "customers." The risk has gotten far too high to continue our litigations against innocent people. It has come to the point where we are likely to be countersued by someone competant enough to level real damages against us and cut into our winnings...I mean profit...I mean proper and honest settlements against evil thieves. Time to move on somewhere we are less likely to lose by blackmailing ISPs into dropping users."
It's worse than that - they want you to think that all filesharing of music/video is illegal, which isn't true either. The trouble is, the music and video content that doesn't come from them and is perfectly legal to share is in fact produced by their competitors. So in stopping you sharing 'their' content, they also have an incentive to stop you sharing anybody else's content. Sharing of linux distros or software is really an irrelevance here, what they're really doing is trying to stop Joe Public's mindshare from drifting away from them and their offerings.
43 - For those who require slightly more than the answer to life, the universe and everything.
Thought that would work a bit better. Funny too, whenever I try to bring up the RIAA to some of my co-workers and non tech. savvy friends... they give me the "Who the hell is that" look. GJ RIAA, keep it up.
In other news, a pig has flown so fast that it traveled through time. And later in weather, it is snowing in Hell!
The game.
Citation needed please. Specifically I would be interested to know how many people the RIAA has sued, and of those people, how many have been found innocent in court. Anyone who has settled must be excluded from this count since their guilt or innocence has not been proven. Thanks.
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
Could it be that the RIAA realizes that these lawsuits might attract the attention of the new administration and decided that the political climate (recession, financial turmoil, new administration etc) does not support their efforts?
I think lawmakers are a lot less receptive to complaints from the RIAA when the economy is in the toilet and major US industries are in a death-spiral. I believe that the suspension of these lawsuits is only temporary.
-ted
In other news, mp3 download rate increases over 9000%.
ISP bandwidth use increases 870%
And hard drive sales are up, bolstering the economy....
Also 84.5% of all statistics are made up.
Go ahead and quote quote wikipedia, but I saw on the History Chanel last night (Modern Marvels, the fast food episode) that French fries were "discovered" and brought back to America by Jefferson after his post as ambassador to the French. So, even if they were invented in Belgium first, America made the french fry a staple food and Jefferson brought them to us from the French.
I'm using all of my mod points to mod ancient memes down. Please join me.
Oh, the joys of the Democracy...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
When you actually had to break the law in order to get the RIAA all up in your jock, non-law-breakers such as myself were left in relative peace.
Since they've now explicitly and announcedly decided to adopt a strategy of technology control measures, they just became a thorn in every geek's side.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
a trap. it is one.
2003 called. They want their idea back.
This requires that good people, and good lawyers, fight much *harder against these azzholes. Please remember that the French RIAA (forgot its acronym) recently sued motherfscking *sourceforge!
"Repeat users" of things like wget, aria2, and sourceforge need to beware.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
ACDC's new album sucks. Well, at least the song I heard is the same old boring Angus, with the same old boring bass line, and the same old boring drum beat.
In short, go buy the black album, you'll be happier.
Over here they're called "pommes frites", literally fried apples, but pommes de terre means potatoes, so it's short for fried potatoes, which is what it is.
that RIAA fare's quality has dropped far more than their sales have (with one or two exceptions, ...
I have to lol at:
such as Kid Rock and Buckcherry)
Out of ALL the RIAA offerings, these are the two paragons of quality? *chuckle*
You better watch out, there may be dogs about . .
An RIAA spokesman is quoted as saying that the litigation campaign has been "successful in raising the public's awareness that file-sharing is illegal."
Would a defendant be able to use that choice quote to show a judge that the lawsuit was merely a publicity stunt? If so, isn't that basically an invitation for the judge to smite the plaintiffs with a vengeance?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
The RIAA is not stupid.
I repeat: the RIAA is not stupid.
Their assault on technology is not the result of misguided or clueless decision makers.
Their assault on technology has gone beyond being attributed to ignorance. Too many people have explained (publically and, privately, to them) what's up.
This is malice. I believe malice is an acceptable response.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
I'm wondering how our friend NewYorkCountyLawyer feels, waking up to discover the legal war is over? Or is it? We're all suspicious of the RIAA but my mind harkens back to the pictures of the liberation of Paris in World War II. Wonder if NYCL feels that way? Sorry, NYCL .... don't hae any beautiful French women for you to kiss in celebration :)
Is that anything like An Hero?
Funny you should say Freedom Fries. I belive that Geno's steaks in South Philly still have it on their menu as such. If you like terrible service, greasy food and flagrant racism, this place is for you. For being a "Landmark" in Philadelphia, they are absolutely terrible. You can get better cheese steaks many other places (infact a small pizzaria right down 9th Street a bit called J&J's is AMAZING) in the area. Pat's steaks is not much better than Geno's, except they hate gays, rather than mexicans.
Complete ignorance. Yet people line up for blocks to get their steaks after the Eagles games let out. =/
Oh come on, someone mod the parent flaimbait AND irrelevant.. My own personal beliefs aside, how does this belong here?
Havn't you heard, 2008 is the year of the Linux desktop!
If I can not smoke in heaven, then I shall not go. -- Mark Twain
It's breaking a civil contract.
And, since RIAA haven't proven any damage nor, indeed, any activity they do not wish to see happen, it's not even that.
Or can I just *assume* that your dog shat in my yard and put a restraining order on your pooch?
There are a lot of modern inventions that originally came from Belgium. It is little known that Turkish Toilets were original Belgium Toilet, and were found in Belgium as early as 2000 BC. It is much much later that Turks improved the invention by adding the hole...
just asking
Did they make a statement that they will NOT sue individuals, or did they simply say they are thinking about it? I feel its the latter and that means absolutely nothing to a court of law, and they no that no-one thinks any bit pleasant toward them now.
ITS A TRAP. They sue the pants off everybody after the obtaining information under the guise that it was for purely 'informational' purposes.
I suppose now I can't send someone a document though email now, because that is file sharing and its apparently ilegal
Of course, there is the possibility that the first prototype fries were planted in Belgium by French agents provocateurs.
Do you really think that something as delicious as fries could be invented by the country that came up with the idea of escargots? French cuisine was only saved in the 19th century by the redeeming qualities of the éclair and its delicious creamy filling.
French fries are so named because they are french cut. Like french cut green beans. Nothing to do with their origin.
Now, how the french cut got it's name, I have no idea.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
This should be kept as public as possible, suing grannies, etc. is good for the world, if not the individuals.
Now it will all be insidious, underground, paying off lawmakers and ISPs. Things will be worse.
No sig today...
Download rythembox. It comes with magnatune and jamendo. Think Indy Itunes. All songs can be downloaded/streamed for free. It you like it, you can pay as little as $5/album with half going directly to artists.
http://projects.gnome.org/rhythmbox/
http://www.magnatune.com/
http://www.jamendo.com/en/albums
Fuckin A. "File-sharing" is not illegal. Copyrighted material sharing is, without the copyrighted folks granting permission. You would figure that they would want to ensure that "public awareness" would also include _clear_ statements to define their issue.
There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
I'm sure this will be flamed, but I'm so very happy to see this happen. Suing their customers was one of the stupidest moves in the world. They alienated their customer base. They initially chose to fight the market instead of working with it and the long term consequences will probably be dire. When the market started to demand a digital format they should have immediately reacted (or perhaps should have seen the writing on the wall and been proactive) and begun selling online, as they do now. Consider this: College students, on the whole, have low disposable income. The "goal" of college is to increase your earnings potential and have more disposable income. If you sue a college student there is a good chance that you will force them to leave school for lack of time, energy and funds to finish college. The earnings potential of that college student lowers to near zero. Most people don't steal or commit crimes, even if they know they won't get caught, if they have a choice. Once these college students become professionals and increase their disposable income the time/cost of "stealing" music becomes not worth it and they'll start to pay for their music (assuming a good product, of course). Most industries work with law enforcement and law creation to mold the system into what they want. Although I agree that lobbying will make it harder to download in the long run, that's the point and that is their goal. They will try to take a mile and other groups will have to fight against them to limit how much they take. That is the system that we live in, and that is acceptable and accepted behavior from an industry. Music Piracy, in a way, is a new entrant into the Music industry's marketplace. A competitor as it were and should be treated as such. I'm glad to see that is finally happening. Now they have new challenges to face. Album sales, and total sales, are declining. If the average album has 11 songs and they sold 840 million singles, then they sold about 80 million albums worth of music, plus the 500 million albums, bringing them to 580, about a 12% drop from 650 million. They have a product set, they have a set of target markets, now it is time to go back to the drawing board and create a new strategic marketing plan. Product, Place, Price and Promotion. Cost vs Differentiation. Leadership vs Adequacy. Why are most songs the same price, or differ by only 10 cents? Wouldn't it make sense for the most popular songs to be the most expensive? Or as music gets older and less popular for the prices to adjust (like DVDs do?)? If you have a digital medium, why couldn't a vendor, like Amazon, be able to compile/sell an "album" with their greatest hits to date? There would be no need to wait for it to be printed. Compilation albums could be generated on the fly, quickly and cheaply, using something similar to the "Genius Playlist" in iTunes or using the same data that is used to determine "People who liked that, also like this." That's just a few ideas that come to mind immediately on ways that they might consider improving their marketing, more research is obviously needed.
If they've stopped suing, that only means now is the time to counter-sue them into oblivion. They can't get away with this kind of crap and then just decide they've had enough. They must be made an example of for all the other maliciously litigious organizations: Abuse the justice system, and you will be crushed utterly.
Make them wish they were SCO.
Good sig. Can you work in the "lose/loose" one too?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
What You Consider Is Irrelevant. Laws Still Apply. Resistance is Futile.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
You can kill someone with a rubber band and a paperclip. Will that do?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
It isn't like the rest of French cuisine is Richard-Simmons-Approved when eaten in the kind of quantities Americans typically eat things
Um, it isn't like any food is Richard-Simmons-Approved when eaten in the kind of quantities Americans typically eat things.
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
You're on to something. Despite popular complaining, it wasn't "one song worth listening to" ... because then we bought those singles that were already iTunes Priced even Back In The Day.
It was when an offering had about five good tunes out of 10 we just knuckled and bought the thing, and hoped they were all on the same side.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I don't believe any of that, but your post was a big red flag saying "look at me, I'm a jerk!"
And incidentally, Nicholas of Myra was in fact sainted--Saint Nicholas is the patron saint of children, sailors, and many others.
It's called knowledge. You should try it some time.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Actually some argue that they are called French fries due to the term Frenched. This is the most recent attribution that I had heard of. Yes they were apparently invented in Belgium but the reason they are called French Fries has to do with their being julienned rather than their nation of origin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Fries#Etymology
Am I the only one who read that as "RIAA to Stop Persecuting Individual File Sharers"?
There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary, and those who don't.
...and that enemy is small independent content creators who are gradually making RIAA artists irrelevant, but who rely on consumer-grade internet connections to get their product out. It's probably too much for ISPs to actually watch what their customers are pushing through their pipes, and an independent musician legally uploading files to a sharing site (or recording engineer/CD plant, etc.) looks an awful lot like an evildoer. Easier to just stop all of the traffic.
I'm positive they've had trouble getting someone to represent them now more and more evidence is available that they have been rigging the system. Lawyers are always up for money, but they're not stupid..
Insert
How does this seem to have a positive spin? Now the fates of individual users will be decided between corporations.
What's interesting is that a french fry and a pair of french cut panties are both "french cut" but look nothing alike.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
that is Racketeering Influenced Corrupt Organization, for those living outside the US. they act like gangsters, and are now, finally, being sued like gangsters.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
"The RIAA is going to try working with the ISPs to limit file-sharing services and cut off repeated users."
They're having too much trouble/expense with a legal system where, you know, defendants can defend themselves against weak or error-laden cases. The RIAA would much prefer a system arranged with ISPs that has NO trial at all. Just write it in as a term of service when customers sign the contract, and the moment you "break the rules" (even if breaking them includes downloading materials LEGALLY using p2p software), yoink goes your network connection. No inconvenient and expensive due process necessary. Suspicion will be adequate.
Mmm, hot grease-covered panties! Sounds delicious.
Well, being a jerk is a right of all humans. But, that does not apply here. swschrad is right.
Meanwhile, music sales continue to fall. In 2003, the industry sold 656 million albums. In 2007, the number fell to 500 million CDs and digital albums, plus 844 million paid individual song downloads -- hardly enough to make up the decline in album sales."
For this exercise, I'm going to use the information located here: http://futureofthemusicindustry.blogspot.com/2005/01/music-downloads-jupiter-research.html (which is also backed up on many other sites)
For an album costing $15.99:
* $0.17 = 1.06316% : Musiciansâ(TM) unions
* $0.80 = 5.00312% : Packaging/manufacturing
* $0.82 = 5.1282% : Publishing royalties
* $0.80 = 5.00312% : Retail profit
* $0.90 = 5.62851% : Distribution
* $1.60 = 10.00625% : Artistsâ(TM) royalties
* $1.70 = 10.63164% : Label profit
* $2.40 = 15.0038% : Marketing/promotion
* $2.91 = 18.19887% : Label overhead
* $3.89 = 24.3277% : Retail overhead
Using that, if we apply it to their 656 million albums sold in 2003, we get 1.70 x 656,000,000 = $1,115,200,000
But, just a note, that this number is likely smaller due to the constantly decreasing costs of CD production (The production costs and overhead were likely more in 2003 than what is outlined in this chart)
Also, if we apply that to the 500 million albums today, we get 1.70 x 500,000,000 = $850,000,000
Another note, that this number is likely higher due to some of those album sales being digital. I can't tell by how much due to lack of information (or at least what I'm willing to research)
While this is obviously a much smaller number, we have to take digital sales into account. Using the chart above, we can eliminate Retail Profit, Retail Overhead, Packaging and Distrubtion from the mix and replace it with a 35% itunes cut (lets just pretend itunes is the only reseller so I dont have to research the cuts from Microsoft and the like). Label overhead is also going to drop significantly, but by how much, I can't be sure.
Regardless, we're looking at AT LEAST a 5% increase in profit for the record labels. Apply that to the 844 million songs and we get $126,600,000 (At minimum) profit for downloaded songs (as opposed to the $84M using the old album profit breakdown)
This leaves us with: 126 600 000 (at minimum) + 850,000,000 (at minimum) = $976,600,000 (at minimum x 2)
So they're most definitely not losing the same amount of money as they are trying to claim. They are making more profits on a different business model. When you break it down you'll see that their profits have either barely been dented, or more likely have stayed the same or even increased.
And when you tack on the $400,000,000 estimated money coming from copyright settlements you'll see that the RIAA = Full of Shit (of all my shitty math in this post, this is about the only equation I can say with certainty is completely accurate).
What does that have to do with the RIAA?
... then ISPs can obviously stop botnet communications, email spam, Windows Messenger port connect attempts, and child porn distribution. What? They plead technical problems with doing any of those?
This ain't gonna happen.
Well, apparently, you only have to fool the majority of people for a little while.
"The RIAA is going to try working with the ISPs to limit file-sharing services and cut off repeated users"
I don't think that will work with THIS ISP http://www.superawesomebroadband.com/
Super Awesome Broadband
a great new ISP feature. "You can use any filesharing or P2P protocols you want, no packet shaping." Maybe they even impose sensible caps. Hell, I'd sign on.
I'm not buying it at all. I've been boycotting RIAA bands since Napster, and since they're promoting the hell out of it it would be the LAST album I would consider buying.
Free Martian Whores!
What's interesting is that a french fry and a pair of french cut panties are both "french cut" but look nothing alike.
On the other hand, if they made panties out of french fries, I bet a lot more geeks would learn what they look like.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Did the spokesman make this statement in front of a huge "Mission Accomplished" banner?
... and we're going to quit while we're ahread!", is what i see. The RIAA knew this tactic would fail, but in the end, they profited. How many millions of dollars have they stolen from innocent people?
In the end, rather than continue profiteering, they decided to quit BEFORE they get owned in court and loose everything...
Something else that made me lol in the article:
"Over the summer, New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo began brokering an agreement between the recording industry and the ISPs that would address both sides' piracy concerns. "We wanted to end the litigation," said Steven Cohen, Mr. Cuomo's chief of staff. "It's not helpful."
Yes, Mr. Cuomo, it's called:
1. Tax music downloads, punish legitimate users while not affecting piracy
2. See a substantial increase in music piracy in the state of NY.
3. ???
4. PROFIT!
ACDC's new album sucks. Well, at least the song I heard is the same old boring Angus, with the same old boring bass line, and the same old boring drum beat.
I like AC-DC about as much as the next Midwest-raised middle class kid. Having said that, when did any of their songs not sound identical?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Nobody's asking him to believe any of those things if he doesn't want to, and flaming people who do believe them for no good reason is a hallmark of a jerk.
You've got to be kidding.
"This very surprising development apparently comes as a result of public distaste for the campaign."
Wow what a shock people don't like to be sued... and its making us look bad.
Also, this: MEMO TO RIAA: You're NOT going to stop people from sharing music. You couldn't stop it when it was cassette tapes recorded off of vinyl, you couldn't stop it when it was cassette tapes copied off of CDs, you couldn't stop it when it was CDs ripped to CDRs, you couldn't stop it when it was CDs ripped to MP3s, and you haven't stopped it when it was MP3s and AACs shared directly over the public internet. What makes you think you can ever stop it? GIVE UP NOW!!!
They don't have to prove anything in court, just blackmail the ISP.
If they succeed, you can expect more wide ranging application of the same technique to restrict access to basic knowledge and reduction in freespeech ( and yes, i know technically you don't get free speech from your isp, but they DO operate with tax funded lines and are often monopolies so its sort of a gray area )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
And yet they still keep confusing the issue with lies to manipulate the public.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
"working with" ISPs
Suing ISPs.
Thank God I live in Australia, where my ISP is committed to protecting its users: http://iinet.net.au/press/releases/201108_iinet_to_defend_court_action.pdf. They even publish some articles via torrents: http://iinet.net.au/press/media-releases.html
To anyone else who lives here, I highly recommend iiNet - they have *very* large (but relatively cheap) caps and own most of the ADSL2+ infrastructure.
Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
bout time. tho i still hope the seeds they've already sown grow up and bit them int he ass. however it will be a big pain if the RIAA starts to help ISPs eliminate net neutrality.
I would like to see someone write a high profile worm that infects computers and then randomly downloads songs/videos via file sharing networks (ie torrents)
if the worm had the exposure some of these bot nets do then you could never tell who was downloading themselves or due to this virus. and without individual suits and forensic analysis of the users computer to determine the case you could never really prosecute anyone and the ISPs couldn't really do anything about it either.
What's really happened is a happy confluence of internal corporate reality, legal reverses, new political calculations, technological innovation, and irreversible shifts in consumer behavior.
The internal corporate reality is that the old, hard-liner Baby Boomers have seen the writing on the wall and taken early retirement to spend more time with their families and write their memoirs, or they have been sacked for year after year of plummeting revenues. They have been replaced with Gen X or near-Gen X people and younger who are not deaf to the scorn of their peers nor to the trends in technology and music consumption.
The legal reverses include losing individual cases and having entire methodologies banned by the courts, but what's perhaps worse is that defeating the RIAA has become a teaching exercise for entire law schools. When future generations of lawyers are being trained to fight evil with your organization as the EVIL, you know this particular strategy is in trouble.
The new political calculations are what others have mentioned and discussed here, that they're now pinning their hopes on winning the debate over net neutrality. But they don't have a good shot at that because too many other players' interests, players who are much bigger and richer than the RIAA, are aligned against them. Never mind the consumers, since they never count for the people like those in the RIAA who like to play like they're Masters of the Universe.
Technological innovation continues, well, at least in the forms in which people use it to access music. iTunes is the model now for how people get new music. CDs? Please. Downloads in all their forms are the way anyone under 35 now gets their music. Artists may be in the music business, but the RIAA is in the CD business. The RIAA would have as much luck trying to force everyone to go back to 8-track as trying to force them to go back to CDs.
Consumer behavior has irreversibly shifted against the RIAA. As others have pointed out, the cartel made sense when it was hard to produce professional sounding music and difficult to distribute it. Both those barriers have been almost totally eliminated. Musicians can do it all themselves now, and fans can find them through so many channels like Facebook, etc. that are outside the control of the cartel. But it's not just the How and Where that have escaped the cartel's control, it's also the What. The average band and average fan have a wealth of indy music to sample and find influences in that is beyond the wildest dreams of those brought up under the tyranny of the old cartel system. And they have found the quality of the stuff out there to be much higher than the synth-pop that cartel-produced music ultimately devolved into.
So the RIAA is the walking dead. The record stores like Tower Records have already gone. The parlor game now is to guess how much longer the RIAA needs to bleed before they implode entirely. Their abandonment of the legal strategy is a strong indication that we don't have much longer to wait. If this recession/depression lasts longer than 6 months, the RIAA will not survive the year.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
Yea before we could all burn CDs or email 10,000 digital copies of music/movies/data/whatever we all appreciated how you people made the copies for us and organized them in the store. However you are now superfluous so, buh-bye-now. Its time for the NEW SHIT. PS we still guna get you back for the law suits
This has less to do with the RIAA deciding to switch tactics in enforcing copyrights and it has more to do with the RIAA not wanting a legal precedent set about file sharing.
The way around this is to cut out the ISPs. Just don't go through ISPs. For years and years long before the web the Internet (and DARPA NET) ran on communication links that went up and down. When All that travels over the web is emails and news and files then yu don't need a 24x7 link. The data sat in queues and moved when the link was up and waited when there was no connectivity. All the software to make this work is still on our computers are could be.
So what we do is go back to asking other people to connect with you. WIFI (with a good antenna) can connect with some on 10 miles away and connect a a small local group. Tossing a 100BaseT wire over the fence gets you to the guy next door and phone modem get you any place. There are more kinds of links and I could imagine some geeks might actually enjoy setting this up.
What you call this is a peer to peer physical network. It's the way the Internet used to work 30 or 25 years ago.
That was my first reaction too.
The new policy is still bullying, just bullying ISPs to cut-off P2P users rather than bullying users directly. If the ISPs play ball -- and they have less motivation to fight than the targetted users (indeed, since the users mainly targetted are likely a very small proportion of the user base that is using a high proportion of the oversold bandwidth that the ISP has available, it may see the RIAA as giving it an excuse for something it would like to do anyway) -- then the user has none of the options to defend themselves that they would have if the RIAA went after them with direct litigation.
Both the French and the Belgians consider the term "French fries" to be grossly unfair: the Belgians feel they deserve the credit, and the French feel they don't deserve the blame.
Fine. We'll have Belgian Fries and French Waffles. Is that better?
While they haven't filed any new lawsuits, they are still sending out "settlement" letters. All this means is that they have figured out that using lawsuits to pressure people in their extortion scheme costs money and eats into their profits. So now they will get your ISP to apply the pressure while the RIAA just collects the cash.
IOW, instead of sending Vito & Guido around with baseball bats, they've placed Guido on the Chamber of Commerce and installed Vito as the mayor, and now collect their protection money as a commerce tax.
Speaking as a P2P developer, this again raises the question of why the DMCA safeharbour provisions have never been applied by various defenses. (NYCL!) This change in behavior amounts to overly broad DMCA takedown notices, which conspicuously weren't part of RIAA scare tactics before.
For serious listening I play vinyl LPs. They just sound better, more like music. But my mobile phone has a hard time playing LPs, and the stylus keeps getting stuck in my ear when I answer a call.
I understand your concern. But the interesting thing about the industry is that it fails utterly to understand all things digital. Completely. It's unreal that they have not a single person who can explain these matters to them.
Sure, they want the ISPs to do their jobs for them. "Stop those pirates! They're on your nets, so you stop 'em!" What they fail to understand is that it is impossible.
I invite the whole of Slashdot to think of a way to absolutely block piracy that will work short of yanking your cable out of the wall. I propose that it cannot be done.
So let them chase after this mythical solution. It'll keep them busy. With any luck it will take them ten or so years to discover this and by then they'll hopefully be bankrupt.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
I'm sorry...I got a little confused as to who you were responding to. I will watch where I put things more closely.
No, they're actually called "Freedom Fries".
If there is one thing that Americans generally dislike, it's programs, no matter how well-intentioned, that end up often getting the wrong people.
IOW, The USA Parrot Act is doomed?
Wake me when the gavel drops on that vote.
He may be an AC, but he's spot-on.
Remember this? That's in our future if the RIAA has its way.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
The EU Trade Commission will have to form a sub-committee to discuss it. They'll get back to you, eventually. ;-)
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
You say,
I say, "Just look for the Chinese restaurants." No, really, I'm being serious -- I've done some globetrotting, and everywhere I've gone, I've found Chinese restaurants. It's kinda funny, really, when even on remote tiny non-touristy islands in the Spanish-speaking part of the Caribbean, or on the tiny islands of the Pacific Northwest, you can find at least one Chinese restaurant somewhere.
This reminds me of a true story of a friend of mine. He's an interesting bloke -- his dad sounds like the punchline to a weird joke, as an Iraqi Jew living in Singapore and running a Cajun pork BBQ restaurant...
But anyway, let's call my friend Andy. He grew up partly in China, and speaks fluent Chinese and English. He was in Mexico City visiting some friends, and was walking across part of town to visit some other friends for a party. Only he'd gotten lost, and didn't speak a lick of Spanish. So what does he do? He finds the local Chinese restaurant. He walked up to the counter and asked, in flawless Chinese, how to get to XYZ address.
The Chinese proprietor and cash register girl just stood their with their mouths wide open for a moment, before finally getting out, "Why are you speaking Chinese to us?" To which Andy replied, "Because I don't speak Spanish." "Oh. Well, you take a right here and a left there..."
So seriously, knowing Chinese could also be extremely useful for international travelers. If you ever get lost, just find the local Chinese restaurant.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
IANAL, but if filesharing really were illegal, would not the police and the FBI be going after the lawbreakers?
It isn't like the rest of French cuisine is Richard-Simmons-Approved when eaten in the kind of quantities Americans typically eat things, so I don't see why they'd care about fries in particular.
I liked that period of time where we were supposed to call them "Freedom Fries". It made it easier to spot imbeciles.
You're having trouble spotting imbeciles?
It's actually from 'frenched fries', where 'frenched' refers to the style of cut.
If someone is cut off in this manner, can they not sue the RIAA for malicious harassment?
I know the ISP agreements prevent breach of contract with ISP's, but the RIAA inciting this kind of customer abuse and denying them their rights in the process should produce a justified case.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
"The RIAA said it has agreements in principle with some ISPs, but declined to say which ones."
Because the ISP's know damn well what will happen when people find out who they are.
Someone needs to dig this up fast and post it far and wide.
When these ISP's are raped by class action lawsuits and face customers bailing in droves, you will see a different tune.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
More ways than one.
Aren't we usually Freer with help towards each other?
I also have to think that rather than deal with a truckload of hassle the ISPs *without bandwidth problems* will brush them off.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
is for a number of consumers who get cut off from the net as a result of RIAA's actions to file a class action suit for tortuous interference. I can't wait.
Not all conservatives are stupid,
but it is true that most stupid people are conservative.
- Hume
"Your arrogance disgusts me"
We don't care.
You do realize that if they were called Belgian Fries, the name would quickly be shortened to "Belch Fries." Naturally they would be even more popular among children than they already are, exacerbating the obesity problem.
It would not only be grossly unfair, but just plain gross.
oh my god. yes. this is what i've been looking for. arrrrr!
that they stopped filing lawsuits "months ago" and haven't filed their mass lawsuits since early Fall, and that the last suit they filed was in August....I did a little investigating and found out that they've been filing tons of lawsuits right through last week.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Like the title says, RIAA does nothing out of love. They are stopping this unjust persecution of the weak simply because they will no longer have immunity from the law after 20 Jan 09!
From:
"No ISP Filtering Under New RIAA Copyright Strategy"
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/12/no-isp-filterin.html
"New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo facilitated the deal between the RIAA and the ISPs."
He also was behind the shutdown of Usenet access by the ISPs.
What's next? Internet filtering by the ISPs at Cuomo's prodding? Locking out users who use proxies?
Why isn't anybody calling this Cuomo guy out?
And if you think it can't happen, just look what happened to ISP's NNTP offerings.
All gone. Under the guise of "fighting child porn"
I patented screwing your mom. But it got revoked for "prior art."
Where is the proof of damage? Who is the victim? What guilt has the mind of the sued party possess? None. Those lawsuits are 100% illegitimate attacks on people's right to freedom. There is no victim. There is no crime. It's just bytes[]
when did any of their songs not sound identical
Bon Scott had more range than Brian Johnson, IMHO, allowing more diversity.
There is a difference between the 'sound' of AC/DC, and all their songs sounding alike.
. ..
Wow, like, you'all just plumb outa yer gourds or what? I think the gentleman might have been referring to the impossibility of the RIAA suspending its litigious activities and comparing that to two other questionable seasonal beliefs.
Or perhaps I'm wrong and he is a jerk.
Then again, I guess he could have used His Noodlyness or the Tooth Fairy (all praise to his/her name) but of course that a) wouldn't have been seasonally topical and b) still would have cheesed-off some nut case who really really thinks those two IMAGINARY beings are real.
If you choose to believe in Santa Claus as a REAL person, be my guest (or the guest of the state) but the TRUTH is that there is no such person flying around the sky and delivering presents down chimneys. Same goes for the other one.
GROW UP.