Since when are college students cartoon monsters? The RIAA is the cartoon monster you speak of, that people blame - the RIAA's response to the piracy situation is not the cause, it is the effect. The effect of what? Of piracy, of course. And the cause of piracy? Not quite so clear. I guess it's the fact that the internet is so new that it hasn't yet settled down to where regular right/wrong seem to apply (to most people). In time people may understand that piracy is wrong, just as they understand why other things are wrong - I would quote this great quote from "The Grapes of Wrath" if I remembered it.
The quote was about how, given time, people will collectively realize that certain rules must be followed, for the good of everyone (like rules about murder and adultery). Sooner or later, people will collectively understand the concept of Intellectual Property, and understand that it's not right to do certain things and that it is fine to do certain other things - not because the RIAA tells them, but because people have this sense for themselves. The RIAA isn't helping the cause, but the blame is not on them for the unpleasant situation as it is today.
RIAA strikes out at students
-
- KVRian
- 1256 posts since 22 Aug, 2003
-
- Banned
- 12367 posts since 30 Apr, 2002 from i might peeramid
as long as you can find the way to look down upon me huh..Cabinfever wrote:oh dear, another young foul-mouthed know-allxoxos wrote:see? now you know how work builds character, huh, fuckwad.
better mouth than mind and heart
you come and go, you come and go. amitabha neither a follower nor a leader be tagore "where roads are made i lose my way" where there is certainty, consideration is absent.
-
- Banned
- 12367 posts since 30 Apr, 2002 from i might peeramid
rellik you don't have a clue about wrongness.Rellik wrote: In time people may understand that piracy is wrong
do you have action figures of michael jackson or the beatles or something?
are they the official ones huh?
you come and go, you come and go. amitabha neither a follower nor a leader be tagore "where roads are made i lose my way" where there is certainty, consideration is absent.
-
TotcProductions TotcProductions https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=6202 - KVRAF
- 5157 posts since 5 Mar, 2003 from Franklin, NH
Hey! f**k you man! i'm frank!lunarhalo wrote:"Shit. let's drink to something else. Let's drink to fuckin'. Say here's to your f**k Frank."
-
- KVRAF
- 10597 posts since 13 Jun, 2004 from Alberto Balsam
-
- KVRist
- 231 posts since 31 Dec, 2004 from Network XXIII
Isn't that what public/college library's are for? Most are happy to purchase audio/video materials upon suggestion. This would not include the donations they receive from private collections. Besides, the internet is full of free and legal music for downloading, it may just not be some "corporate" popular artist. Support your music underground! (especially download KVR artists!)3*s wrote:Have you ever gotten a $5,000 speeding ticket?Cabinfever wrote:going on past judgments the result will be that petty criminals will have to pay for what they stole. oh dear, the poor little brat will have to pay ! what next ? they might have to get a job and work for what they want.3*s wrote:That's just great.
Ruin some 20 year old kid's life for trading a few songs.
More money in some rich douche's pocket.
f**k the RIAA.
The Recording industry is suing these people for thousands of dollars. These are mostly college students who have very little money because of tuition, limited job opportunities, work load, and housing. They want a little entertainment, so they download a few songs. Then the RIAA comes a long, takes away their tuition money, and where does this leave them? They might have to drop out of college and probably take some shit job for the next 5 years to get back on their feet. Does that sound like a fitting punishment to you? You don't loose a limb for stealing a loaf of bread in any civilized society. The icing on the cake is that the people pushing these lawsuits generally aren't the musicians, they're the execs. People with fancy titles who get paid ridiculous sums of money to basically say "yes, no, yes" and watch their stocks all day. The people who own the rights to the recordings and the majority of the cost of that $16 CD, generally shafting the people actually making the music.
The fact that someone in that situation could sue someone trying to get on their feet for grossly disproportionate amounts of money in a way that will basically ruin their life makes me sick.
an autumn leaf
on the open lotus ~
pond turns brighter ~
-
- KVRAF
- 5703 posts since 8 Dec, 2004 from The Twin Cities
OK, this is slightly tangential but I think its time to make some distinctions.
Every time I see people talking about file sharing there are these really extreme statements made that obscure the larger reality.
People make up their minds according to an ideology, which is then used as a bed of Procrustes to hack up reality. For instance,there seems to be this picture in some peoples heads of ALL p2p users as 'punks' who 'don't want to work' and who 'just want things without paying for them'.
Allow me to introduce you to A p2p user who doesn't fit this picture at all. He is a real guy, except for his name.
Hal is a Chef. Hal is a normal guy with a wife and a kid and a house in the suburbs. He spends almost all of his disposable income on music. He is a heavy metal fan, but his taste branches out a lot. He has an absurd amount of c.d.s and he shows no signs of stopping. But amidst all of his newly bought (he never buys used, its a fetish) c.d.s are a few that he got off of some p2p network or another, mostly rare bootlegs of some show at Slims or CBGBs or the like.
He also burns c.d.s for people. But not to steal, to proselytize. And here is what is missed that is so important: HE IS PROMOTING HIS FAVORITE MUSIC!!!!!
And this is some obscure stuff: Mr. Bungle, The Melvins, Fantomas, Godflesh,....Where exactly is one likely to run into such artists except from a c.d. burned by a fan or an mp3 put up on a p2p network by a fan?
WHERE???
These artists are never played on the radio anywhere. Should they go away because they have fallen through the cracks of the faulty business models of a dying industry?
Every time I see people talking about file sharing there are these really extreme statements made that obscure the larger reality.
People make up their minds according to an ideology, which is then used as a bed of Procrustes to hack up reality. For instance,there seems to be this picture in some peoples heads of ALL p2p users as 'punks' who 'don't want to work' and who 'just want things without paying for them'.
Allow me to introduce you to A p2p user who doesn't fit this picture at all. He is a real guy, except for his name.
Hal is a Chef. Hal is a normal guy with a wife and a kid and a house in the suburbs. He spends almost all of his disposable income on music. He is a heavy metal fan, but his taste branches out a lot. He has an absurd amount of c.d.s and he shows no signs of stopping. But amidst all of his newly bought (he never buys used, its a fetish) c.d.s are a few that he got off of some p2p network or another, mostly rare bootlegs of some show at Slims or CBGBs or the like.
He also burns c.d.s for people. But not to steal, to proselytize. And here is what is missed that is so important: HE IS PROMOTING HIS FAVORITE MUSIC!!!!!
And this is some obscure stuff: Mr. Bungle, The Melvins, Fantomas, Godflesh,....Where exactly is one likely to run into such artists except from a c.d. burned by a fan or an mp3 put up on a p2p network by a fan?
WHERE???
These artists are never played on the radio anywhere. Should they go away because they have fallen through the cracks of the faulty business models of a dying industry?
-
- KVRist
- 231 posts since 31 Dec, 2004 from Network XXIII
"If you like Frank. Here's to your f**k. Cheers."TotcProductions wrote:Hey! f**k you man! i'm frank!lunarhalo wrote:"Shit. let's drink to something else. Let's drink to fuckin'. Say here's to your f**k Frank."
an autumn leaf
on the open lotus ~
pond turns brighter ~
-
- KVRian
- 1243 posts since 24 Oct, 2003 from Maine
I personally think the most reasonable solution is to make the maximum "damages" that file sharers are liable for equal to the sum of the download cost of the songs, ownership of any licenses would be deductible.
The laws that currently exist (in the US, not sure about the rest of the world) were created to deal with underground organizations that would mass market pirate VHS and cassette tapes in the 80's. The liability for 100 songs is something dr evil esque like 2 million dollars. Did the RIAA lose a couple million from some little girl sharing Brittany spears songs on kazaa? No. This forces a settlement. The RIAA can name their price. It's usually $2000-$5000 (do a google). "Fear will keep them in line" is not how a democracy should work.
I think a liability cap would be the most reasonable way to deal with this, as it makes the punishment fair, makes the law work for modern society, makes the RIAA's draconian tactics illegal, and the only people really receiving heavy damages are the ones downloading a lot of files without actually buying any music.
The laws that currently exist (in the US, not sure about the rest of the world) were created to deal with underground organizations that would mass market pirate VHS and cassette tapes in the 80's. The liability for 100 songs is something dr evil esque like 2 million dollars. Did the RIAA lose a couple million from some little girl sharing Brittany spears songs on kazaa? No. This forces a settlement. The RIAA can name their price. It's usually $2000-$5000 (do a google). "Fear will keep them in line" is not how a democracy should work.
I think a liability cap would be the most reasonable way to deal with this, as it makes the punishment fair, makes the law work for modern society, makes the RIAA's draconian tactics illegal, and the only people really receiving heavy damages are the ones downloading a lot of files without actually buying any music.
-
- KVRian
- 1081 posts since 21 Apr, 2004
Don't forget how corrupt American universities are when looking at this problem. Universities are probably at least as corrupt if not more so than the RIAA. Why in the hell are "institutions of higher learning" getting mixed up in this? - because they're getting money.
http://www.napster.com/napster_on_campus.html
Its not that universities join these Napster-like programs because they feel strongly about intellectual property law - its because they get some kind of incentive. Not too many American universities will take on some program unless it has some payoff. The payoff doesn't always have to be money - it can be a research project that brings more notoriety and press for the university - but there is always some kind of payoff. American universities have become corporations selling "education". I am good friends with a man who used to be a professor at a fairly large university but left because he couldn't stand the corruption and bureaucratic bullshit involved at the administrative (i.e money-handling) level.
Anyway, I'm sure there are just as many P2P dloaders per capita at "member" universities as non-members -
what better way to make something illegal even more attractive than to have an alternative "special" program "officially sanctioned" by the university.
Do people who come up with this shit forget what being young was like?
As for the RIAA, they are hopelessly out of touch if they think these periodic bursts of lawsuit happiness are going to have any real effect on the P2P community other than to push them to find better ways of concealing their activities. File-sharing already has its own mythology and legends - the RIAA is at least 10 years too late to try and stop it now.
http://www.napster.com/napster_on_campus.html
Its not that universities join these Napster-like programs because they feel strongly about intellectual property law - its because they get some kind of incentive. Not too many American universities will take on some program unless it has some payoff. The payoff doesn't always have to be money - it can be a research project that brings more notoriety and press for the university - but there is always some kind of payoff. American universities have become corporations selling "education". I am good friends with a man who used to be a professor at a fairly large university but left because he couldn't stand the corruption and bureaucratic bullshit involved at the administrative (i.e money-handling) level.
Anyway, I'm sure there are just as many P2P dloaders per capita at "member" universities as non-members -
what better way to make something illegal even more attractive than to have an alternative "special" program "officially sanctioned" by the university.
Do people who come up with this shit forget what being young was like?
As for the RIAA, they are hopelessly out of touch if they think these periodic bursts of lawsuit happiness are going to have any real effect on the P2P community other than to push them to find better ways of concealing their activities. File-sharing already has its own mythology and legends - the RIAA is at least 10 years too late to try and stop it now.
-
- KVRian
- 1081 posts since 21 Apr, 2004
"Heineken? f**k that shit. Pabst Blue Ribbon!"lunarhalo wrote:"If you like Frank. Here's to your f**k. Cheers."TotcProductions wrote:Hey! f**k you man! i'm frank!lunarhalo wrote:"Shit. let's drink to something else. Let's drink to fuckin'. Say here's to your f**k Frank."
-
- Banned
- 12367 posts since 30 Apr, 2002 from i might peeramid
ooh me! me!herodotus wrote:Should they go away because they have fallen through the cracks of the faulty business models of a dying industry?
you come and go, you come and go. amitabha neither a follower nor a leader be tagore "where roads are made i lose my way" where there is certainty, consideration is absent.
-
- KVRian
- 1243 posts since 24 Oct, 2003 from Maine
Online music in general, for me anyway, is about discovery. College librarys can be good for that, but I doubt one could ever parallel that of a file sharing network or a service like rhapsody.lunarhalo wrote: Isn't that what public/college library's are for? Most are happy to purchase audio/video materials upon suggestion. This would not include the donations they receive from private collections.
Yeah, I agree.lunarhalo wrote: Besides, the internet is full of free and legal music for downloading, it may just not be some "corporate" popular artist. Support your music underground! (especially download KVR artists!)
I was trying to say that the punishment doesn't fit the crime for the people who got sued though.
-
- KVRian
- 1243 posts since 24 Oct, 2003 from Maine
Here's my view on the good side of file sharing:
No one has the money to randomly buy CDs and hope they find something they like. That's where online music comes in. It's all about discovery. Check out countless artists, pick the ones you like. You get more exposure to music, artists get more exposure, great old music that would otherwise be lost forever is rediscovered buy a new generation.
One problem this causes the RIAA is if you can expose yourself to all the music you want, not just what's on the radio or mtv (in other words what they tell you), they lose one very very imporant thing: control of the consumer.
This is what it's all about folks. The RIAA knows they never really lost any money from file sharing. Profits went up in napster's prime. The important thing lost is the ability to tell people what to like.
"Yeah, I heard that song on mtv, but check out this guy from the 70's I just found on Kazaa. He rocks! And check out these local guys.."
This is bad for the recording industry. They're a company that makes money by controling what people hear. That's why they've been such assholes to independant and online radio as well as file sharers. They want to control everything; that means more money for them, at the cost of the people actually buying music.
No one has the money to randomly buy CDs and hope they find something they like. That's where online music comes in. It's all about discovery. Check out countless artists, pick the ones you like. You get more exposure to music, artists get more exposure, great old music that would otherwise be lost forever is rediscovered buy a new generation.
One problem this causes the RIAA is if you can expose yourself to all the music you want, not just what's on the radio or mtv (in other words what they tell you), they lose one very very imporant thing: control of the consumer.
This is what it's all about folks. The RIAA knows they never really lost any money from file sharing. Profits went up in napster's prime. The important thing lost is the ability to tell people what to like.
"Yeah, I heard that song on mtv, but check out this guy from the 70's I just found on Kazaa. He rocks! And check out these local guys.."
This is bad for the recording industry. They're a company that makes money by controling what people hear. That's why they've been such assholes to independant and online radio as well as file sharers. They want to control everything; that means more money for them, at the cost of the people actually buying music.
Last edited by 3*s on Wed Apr 13, 2005 4:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 1530 posts since 20 Feb, 2003
for all those people who want something for nothing and are sure how p2p is good for musicians, try this: set up your own music network with material from all those thousands of bands and artists which think that giving away product free is a good idea. that way its all legit and no one is ripped off.
yep, curse those greedy executives, just go straight to all the musos and ask them. wow, what an idea ! i can just see how popular it would be.
and if you really think the big record companies are so evil then don't listen to their products at all.
not listening is a protest; taking without paying is theft
yep, curse those greedy executives, just go straight to all the musos and ask them. wow, what an idea ! i can just see how popular it would be.
and if you really think the big record companies are so evil then don't listen to their products at all.
not listening is a protest; taking without paying is theft