Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

RIAA Sued For Fraud, Abuse, & "Sham Litigation"

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the chickens-coming-home-to-roost dept.

The Courts 187

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "It's been a rough week for the RIAA as massive layoffs are about to cost many employees their job. On top of that, the anti-piracy outfit is being sued in North Carolina for abusing the legal system in its war on piracy, particularly for civil conspiracy, deceptive trade practices, trespassing and computer fraud in SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Moursy. Named along with the record companies as defendants on the counterclaims are Safenet (formerly known as MediaSentry) and the RIAA. This case first started out as 'LaFace Records v. Does 1-38' until the court required the RIAA to break it up into 38 separate cases, at which point it morphed into 'SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Doe.' Only after the RIAA finally got its 'expedited' discovery did it become SONY v. Moursy. And from the looks of things, it has a long, long way to go. The RIAA hasn't even filed its answer to the counterclaims yet, but is making a motion to dismiss them on the grounds of legal insufficiency. Sound like a good investment of record company resources, anyone?"

cancel ×

187 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Couldn't have happened to nicer people (5, Funny)

gavron (1300111) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031367)

Thanks for staying on top of it, Ray!!!

Ehud

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (5, Interesting)

gravos (912628) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031513)

I'd really like seeing them push the angle about their corporate attempts at controlling world art and culture, turning it into the bland, government approved, Pepsi and MTV generation and focus group designed, placid american/teen idol bands, and flooding us with that insipid product over controlled media.

That's really what the RIAA's fight is about, controlling the media, itself, and thereby the content on it, which is used to market false images and idols rather than any real talent that could inspire, consol or rally.

They're giving up the court battle only because they realize now it's cheaper, and entirely possible if not probable, to buy off the medium itself, once again, by having the willing ISPs in their pockets.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (2, Informative)

Microlith (54737) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031939)

That's really what the RIAA's fight is about, controlling the media

Is it really? Seems to me if you're referring to TV, Radio and Film they already control it.

which is used to market false images and idols rather than any real talent

Ah yeah, because the ones they market are FALSE and the ones that you've never heard of are REAL.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (4, Insightful)

rhizome (115711) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032145)

I'd really like seeing them push the angle about their corporate attempts at controlling world art and culture, turning it into the bland, government approved, Pepsi and MTV generation and focus group designed, placid american/teen idol bands, and flooding us with that insipid product over controlled media.

Yeah, um...good luck with that one.

That's really what the RIAA's fight is about, controlling the media, itself, and thereby the content on it, which is used to market false images and idols rather than any real talent that could inspire, consol or rally.

Is that a bible-thump I hear, way in the background? False idols?

Here's another angle to consider: the companies that comprise the RIAA do not care about the content. They would just as soon sell you backwards recordings of Niels Bohr lectures as they would a solid hour of Robin Williams going "durrrr" if it made money. What the RIAA is concerned with is distribution and licensing of whatever it is that is being produced. That's it, the content is entirely secondary and merely a vehicle for acquiring dollars.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (4, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032379)

Is that a bible-thump I hear, way in the background? False idols?

I'm not sure what the GP intended by that concept, but I can tell you what it means to me. "Idolatry", when separated from all of the religious language (not such an easy task...) has a very simple meaning. It just means giving undue importance to something, or making a big deal out of nothing. To make up an example that I hope illustrates the point, consider a completely obsessed sports fan who knows the entire lineup of every football team by heart and watches every single game while his wife is neglected and starved for attention. Now, in the proper "order of things", his wife should be more important to him than the antics of professional athletes, for one represents love and commitment while the other represents entertainment. In this case, the man has made an idol out of football, even though he's not bowing down and worshipping anyone or anything.

Now consider the way marketing is done. There always has to be a big deal made of something that, most of the time, is really not very important or significant. It's always LATEST, FASTEST, GREATEST and there always has to be some kind of excitement attached to it. It's seldom "hey, maybe people will like this" and instead it's BEST THING EVER, BUY RIGHT NOW!!!! Few things that are marketed this way are essential to life and few of them would naturally inspire this sort of passion or enthusiasm; thus it is entirely artificial. There are only so many hours in a day, so someone who buys into the artificial hype would have to do so at the expense of something else that could have been given emphasis instead.

Here's another angle to consider: the companies that comprise the RIAA do not care about the content. They would just as soon sell you backwards recordings of Niels Bohr lectures as they would a solid hour of Robin Williams going "durrrr" if it made money. What the RIAA is concerned with is distribution and licensing of whatever it is that is being produced. That's it, the content is entirely secondary and merely a vehicle for acquiring dollars.

True, except that there is one concern about content that impacts the RIAAs of the world, which is the lowering of standards of excellence. If the public thinks something is crap, then it won't sell. Get the public conditioned to accept mostly crap and you can then sell more and more of your products without concern about the relative rarity of true excellence or the higher production costs that it might demand (due to taking more time to produce, if nothing else). Think of most of the popular music that is promoted by the RIAA, how little of it has any lasting or enduring value, how much of it does not require a ton of musical talent to write or to perform, and how the lyrical content is mostly immature prattle with no deep spiritual meanings and no ability to challenge its audience to think in new ways.

The advantages for the RIAA are that such musicians are plentiful. When a one-hit wonder or a mediocre band gets old and stops selling very well, there are thousands more ready and eager to take its place, waiting for their turn in the spotlight. The perceived advantge for the public is an inexhaustible supply of "new" music (though much of it is formulaic) so they can quickly move on to something else when they have depleted the entertainment value of their current favorites, which won't take long. From a commercial perspective, superficial entertainment with little or no lasting value is quite desirable. It moves product. All of this depends on a general public that, as a whole, is not too discerning and doesn't have specific, refined, individual tastes. If the RIAA knows anything, they know their market. What they choose to promote and not promote is no accident. So in that manner, they do care about content and from their perspective, they'd be crazy not to.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (4, Interesting)

arminw (717974) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033015)

.....Think of most of the popular music that is promoted by the RIAA, how little of it has any lasting or enduring value, how much of it does not require a ton of musical talent to write or to perform, and how the lyrical content is mostly immature prattle with no deep spiritual meanings and no ability to challenge its audience to think in new ways. ...

What you ascribe to the RIAA is really a part of our modern Western culture, where nothing lasts very long. It really began when the production of material goods went from one or two at a time in a skilled craftsman's shop to large factories cranking out mountains of identical merchandise. The individual craftsmen's touch on a pair of shoes or a piece of furniture was lost. Modern technology has made it possible for anyone to mass produce art and music in a similar way. Copyright laws must exist only if human creativity, especially in music and literature, is perceived as a commercial product to be bought and sold like any other product. Musicians created their music and painters created their paintings long before anyone had ever thought of copyright. They were content and delighted in having their fellow human beings partake in and be included in the joy of creativity of their art. People with means who enjoyed the art who were not so gifted, took care of the physical needs of these highly gifted ones. These creative artists could put all the effort and creative joy into their work without worrying about where their next bowl of soup was coming from.

A number of years ago I visited the walled medieval city of Rothenburg in Germany. The quaint little modern shops, located in the centuries old buildings, sold modern goods. One of these was a pharmacy, which had a sign above the door that it had been such since 1497. I entered, and indeed it had much of the same merchandise at any pharmacy in Germany might have. However, in a section occupying about a quarter of the store, they had made a little museum of what the store was like and what was offered for sale to the inhabitants of the town at that time. All their potions were individually tailored by a weight to each customer.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (5, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033259)

What you ascribe to the RIAA is really a part of our modern Western culture, where nothing lasts very long. It really began when the production of material goods went from one or two at a time in a skilled craftsman's shop to large factories cranking out mountains of identical merchandise. The individual craftsmen's touch on a pair of shoes or a piece of furniture was lost. Modern technology has made it possible for anyone to mass produce art and music in a similar way. Copyright laws must exist only if human creativity, especially in music and literature, is perceived as a commercial product to be bought and sold like any other product. Musicians created their music and painters created their paintings long before anyone had ever thought of copyright. They were content and delighted in having their fellow human beings partake in and be included in the joy of creativity of their art. People with means who enjoyed the art who were not so gifted, took care of the physical needs of these highly gifted ones. These creative artists could put all the effort and creative joy into their work without worrying about where their next bowl of soup was coming from.

I would say that in the past, skilled craft was essential because there was no other way to produce durable, useful goods. Now we have factories and mass production and economies of scale to take care of our material needs. The mistake we have made is that we act now like everything is a product and that craftsmanship or artistry have become more obsolete.

What we could do instead is decide that we have raised our material standard of living to where we can now apply craftsmanship and art to higher expressions of our humanity rather than mundane material survival. An economy based on scarcity (as opposed to what is called a resource economy) and a monetary system based entirely on debt (fiat currency, the Federal Reserve and similar systems that the same international bankers have implemented in every industrialized country) and therefore unsustainable are the main reasons why this has been held back. If we can overcome these things, we would find that we stand at the brink of a new Renaissance far greater than anything that has been imagined before. That is our current challenge.

I agree very much with Bill Hicks when he said that the reason why things are so fucked up right now is that we are undergoing evolution. Hicks went on to say that our institutions are crumbling because they are no longer relevant. Much of the abuses (in my opinion) perpetrated by the RIAA and others have been about these institutions trying to use force, typically the force of law, to remain relevant. I think they are merely prolonging the inevitable. This is a tough time because the old control-and-manipulation-and-coercion based ways of keeping order have to give way first before something new and better can replace them. The unrest and dissatisfaction that is so prevalent right now is part of this process. The one thing that is certain is that our current system is not sustainable. It absolutely must and will either radically change or cause its own collapse. I think something much better is coming that will be based on true love and respect and appreciation for ourselves and each other, for the simple reason that we've tried almost everything else and everything else doesn't work.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (2, Interesting)

NicknamesAreStupid (1040118) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032317)

Actually, this is more bad news for the artists, who will wind-up footing their own lawyers' legal bills. Truly a damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don't squeeze play for something that deserves neither. Hopefully, a lot of great artistic work will come from it, as the seemingly endless suffering should inspire mountains of artistic works.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (-1, Redundant)

LVSlushdat (854194) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031569)

Now THIS is the kind of stuff I like to hear!!! Thanks for the update Ray!!!

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (5, Informative)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031703)

Now THIS is the kind of stuff I like to hear!!! Thanks for the update Ray!!!

In my book the real thanks go to these guys [robertsonmedlin.com] , who took on this case, for the sake of principle, and have been doing a first-rate job ever since. They've taken about 15 penniless college students under their wings, and have really taken the fight to the RIAA. Lawyers like Steve Robertson and the Robertson Medlin firm bring honor to my profession.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (5, Funny)

Bob54321 (911744) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032053)

Yeah, these guys are heroes. The MPAA should organise a movie to be made about them.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (2, Interesting)

Raul654 (453029) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032245)

That comment was hilarious - I wish I had mod points for you.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (2, Interesting)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032481)

Actually, why doesn't someone?

An independent film about someone wrongfully persecuted by the RIAA, gets a pro bono lawyer who fights and loses. Then attracts some law students that get a retrial and prevail?

Sounds like it's got promise as a feel good movie.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (2, Informative)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032531)

Well, even though its not entirely about them "Steal this Film" is rather close to what you are suggesting.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (2, Informative)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033113)

I don't see the connection? A closer match would be "A Civil Action" about a small law firm taking on a multimillion dollar corporation.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (5, Interesting)

kheldan (1460303) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031645)

You took the words right out of my mouth, with that subject line. Seriously.
The RIAA has been swaggering around like they're Jack Bauer [wikimedia.org] for years now, with all the self-justification that goes along with the reference, but instead of chasing terrorists, or even true "criminals" (copyright violation is really a civil law matter, not a criminal law matter), they're chasing down little kids, moms or grandmas who don't even know what BitTorrent or P2P is, let alone consciously making a decision to use it (kids or grandkids in this case), etc.; if they were chasing down Russian mobsters selling knock-off CDs to fund their other illegal activities then I can see some of it, but they're NOT. Even most of the artists they're claiming to protect don't want much of anything to do with them! It's about time the RIAA legal machine was dismantled, and the pieces destroyed, preferably with fire. They're a relic of a time and a business model whose usefulness and relevance has long since past; it's time for the music industry to stop being in denial about it, embrace the fact that downloading of music is a reality, a genie that can't be put back into it's bottle, and stop beating a dead horse.

Oh, and memo to the music industry: Please start backing and producing music that doesn't suck, k? We're sick to death of the crap you've been turning out lately.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (3, Insightful)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031729)

You took the words right out of my mouth, with that subject line. Seriously. The RIAA has been swaggering around like they're Jack Bauer [wikimedia.org] for years now, with all the self-justification that goes along with the reference, but instead of chasing terrorists, or even true "criminals" (copyright violation is really a civil law matter, not a criminal law matter), they're chasing down little kids, moms or grandmas who don't even know what BitTorrent or P2P is, let alone consciously making a decision to use it (kids or grandkids in this case), etc.; if they were chasing down Russian mobsters selling knock-off CDs to fund their other illegal activities then I can see some of it, but they're NOT. Even most of the artists they're claiming to protect don't want much of anything to do with them! It's about time the RIAA legal machine was dismantled, and the pieces destroyed, preferably with fire. They're a relic of a time and a business model whose usefulness and relevance has long since past; it's time for the music industry to stop being in denial about it, embrace the fact that downloading of music is a reality, a genie that can't be put back into it's bottle, and stop beating a dead horse. Oh, and memo to the music industry: Please start backing and producing music that doesn't suck, k? We're sick to death of the crap you've been turning out lately.

Yep, in all 40,000 cases I've never once seen one that involved actual copyright 'piracy' (the term they are so fond of throwing around). The only real pirates, other than the ones from Somalia, are the RIAA lawyers, who are engaged in a racket akin to extortion.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (4, Funny)

rts008 (812749) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033797)

The only real pirates, other than the ones from Somalia, are the RIAA lawyers, who are engaged in a racket akin to extortion.

LOL!
I can dress up like a RIAA lawyer [harlequincostumes.co.uk] next 'talk like a pirate day'! But where to find a vulture to ride on my shoulder? (to replace the standard parrot for 'normal' pirates)

Back on topic:

FIRST AMENDED ANSWER, DEFENSES,
              COUNTERCLAIM, AND
          THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT

[the linked pdf from your blog]

Reading the pdf, it sounds like the Defense is coming out fighting, eyes blazing. I hope they actually have a good case(from the judge's perspective), and the RIAA have unwittingly grabbed a pissed-off tiger by the tail.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (1)

Ken Broadfoot (3675) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031807)

You said:

"Oh, and memo to the music industry: Please start backing and producing music that doesn't suck, k? We're sick to death of the crap you've been turning out lately."

Truer words have not been typed into a computer keyboard!

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (3, Insightful)

CodeBuster (516420) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031817)

if they were chasing down Russian mobsters selling knock-off CDs to fund their other illegal activities then I can see some of it

In Putin's Russia the complaints of an American business organization, and especially one concerned with copyright, are going to be ignored and probably not even politely ignored. I doubt the Russian mafia is heavily involved in software piracy, there simply isn't a lot of money in knockoff CDs compared to what their other more lucrative criminal enterprises, such as drugs, extortion/protection, and guns, bring in. If the are involved then it is probably lower level functionaries and associates. Either way, those people are effectively beyond the reach of US laws and they could give a crap about copyright infringement. Those ex-KGB/FSB and their former Spetsnaz [wikipedia.org] enforcers make American organized criminals look like boyscouts. If you cross the Russian mafia or get in their way then they just kill you plain and simple (i.e. they "settle out of court"). The only people on the planet more violent than the Russian mob are probably Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. The RIAA wouldn't dare go after such people, even if they could, because if they did and caused trouble then their executives and attorneys would become marked men when traveling abroad.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (2, Interesting)

kheldan (1460303) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032867)

Point well taken; I used "Russian mobsters" as an example simply because it's the first thing to come to mind. Honestly, *I* don't even think anybody is really pirating CDs, except on a very small scale; it's another of the RIAA's red herrings, if you ask me seriously.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27033793)

OK, I'm curious. Are you actually Russian? Or do you have ties to or contacts in Russia, at least - business, or at the very least personal? Have you ever been there?

I'm just curious, because you seem awfully confident in your knowledge of precisely how things are handled in "Putin's Russia".

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (1)

Cally (10873) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032875)

"It's been a rough week for the RIAA as massive layoffs are about to cost many employees their job [...]"

Awwwwwwww. We had a whip-round at the office for 'em. Guess we'll just have to go looking for them on skid row - I hope they remember to wear those ATF-style RIAA jackets and caps so we know who to tip it over. To, I mean, who to tip it TO.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (1)

joocemann (1273720) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033291)

For what its worth, my opinion is that the RIAA is comprised of lawyers who cannot find work otherwise.

At some point this country had met its needs of lawyers, but we kept producing more and more. And a present day makes obvious, those lawyers not wanting to take jobs outside of their education (such as managing the shoe dept at Sears), we end up with litigious bullshittery left and right.

Imagine an America where people are not afraid of garbage litigation to tie them down and rape them for lawyers fees; Imagine the progress, the innovation, and the freedom that was once felt when lawyers were not tools of exploit, but rather equipment of justice.

We cannot ask our politicians to fix this problem; most of them were lawyers to begin with. I fear that only a revolution may lead to the ousting of this cancerous disease upon our society.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27033489)

The RIAA has been swaggering around like they're Jack Bauer for years now, with all the self-justification that goes along with the reference, but instead of chasing terrorists, or even true "criminals" (copyright violation is really a civil law matter, not a criminal law matter), they're chasing down little kids, moms or grandmas who don't even know what BitTorrent or P2P is, let alone consciously making a decision to use it (kids or grandkids in this case), etc.; if they were chasing down Russian mobsters selling knock-off CDs to fund their other illegal activities then I can see some of it, but they're NOT.

Exactly. Russian mobsters have money to defend themselves in court, maybe even hire their own experts and private dicks who can prove that the RIAA's "evidence" is crap (even to technophobic judges).

So instead they go after easy targets such as seven-year-olds who's out-of-work parents can't afford a court trial. They just suck it down, take out a third mortgage, and pay off the extortion letter without ever going to trial. Figure for every court case that made the media there was probably a hundred that didn't, and for each one of those there was probably a thousand that quietly paid the blackmail "settlement letter". That's "free profit" to the RIAA so there is no incentive for them to be ethical (or reasonable).

Remember the RIAA's sole purpose is to shield the true litigants (such as SONY BMG) in these cases from the public eye. Otherwise the bad PR might have these individual publishers deal with product boycotts and such. But the RIAA is like a patent troll, they produce nothing, do NOTHING (except sue people), so there is nothing to be boycotted.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (2, Informative)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033741)

Oh, and memo to the music industry: Please start backing and producing music that doesn't suck, k? We're sick to death of the crap you've been turning out lately.

Also: stop with the loudness war [wikipedia.org] . It makes even the best artists sound like shit. Seriously, it makes a CD muffled and flat like an old cassete tape.

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27031973)

What an ass kisser! Good grief!

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (1)

Perp Atuitie (919967) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032135)

Do the plaintiffs need donations to cover costs? If so, where?

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (1)

Gerzel (240421) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033613)

What I want to know as a NC voter is who did this and when will they be running again?

It is nice to have someone worth voting for!

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people (1)

gavron (1300111) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033701)

Perhaps NC voters should learn to use google or to follow their own politics instead of expecting the rest of the world to do it for them.

Spoonfeeding is that way --->

E

W/Regards to layoffs: (5, Informative)

GreenEggsAndSpam (658869) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031385)

Before anybody starts in on the "Yay, less employees!" style rant, please remember that there are GOOD people who work at bad companies... not everyone is an evil backstabbing conniving shrew with the goal of proving that everyone is evil and owes them billions of dollars.

Of course, I have no proof of this "decent people" there, but one can only assume there would be.

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: (3, Insightful)

scubamage (727538) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031421)

Nuremberg defense much? If you work for the bad guys, don't cry when bad things happen.

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27031741)

No, wait. The Nuremberg defense is "I was under orders" - it's used when you actually DID something bad YOURSELF. Merely working for someone who also does bad things is not bad in itself unless and until you yourself do bad things.

Take Osama's chauffeur, for example, who was kept for years (and probably still is) in our lovely concentration camp at Gitmo. What did he actually do, other than being connected to/working for a genuine bad guy?

Of course, working for a bad guy isn't really something you SHOULD do, but if you do it anyway, it's not something that should be legally actionable. You are responsible for your OWN actions, not anyone else's. (And in fact, the fact that you ARE responsible for your own actions is precisely why the Nuremberg defense is not considered valid by most.)

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27032023)

Except that even the slightest hint of authority can, in fact, drive people to kill: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: (3, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033783)

Except that even the slightest hint of authority can, in fact, drive people to kill: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment [wikipedia.org]

Yeah, that's because almost no one seems to understand the difference between service and subservience. One is mindful and willing cooperation because you believe in a purpose, the other is mindless submission that robs you of human dignity. Holding people personally responsible for any atrocities they commit is one way to remind them of the difference. It's probably not the best way because it emphasizes punishment as deterrant and not wisdom as prevention.

In a way we're between a rock and a hard place when it comes to this issue. The "powers that be" would like to preserve the centralized authority structures and the ready obedience of mindless myrmidons who execute their wishes and form the basis of their power. At the same time, they want to say that you will be punished for following certain orders, which implies that at least sometimes you are expected to think for yourself enough to question their authority. So we get these solutions that are based on prosecution and punishment for these thankfully rare events because the enlightened understanding that would represent true prevention also happens to dissolve the social machinery through which it moves (to borrow a phrase from McKenna), an option that is thoroughly distasteful to the statists.

Once you get an idea of the forces at work, the flawed ideas that compromise human beings, none of this is difficult to understand.

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: (5, Funny)

roguetrick (1147853) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032043)

You're like the asshole who complains about all the innocent contractors on the Death Star!

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27032649)

>The Nuremberg defense is "I was under orders"

No, the defence was: "If I hadn't followed those orders I would have been executed on the spot". I don't think the RIAA would go quite that far.

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: (4, Interesting)

causality (777677) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033645)

Take Osama's chauffeur, for example, who was kept for years (and probably still is) in our lovely concentration camp at Gitmo. What did he actually do, other than being connected to/working for a genuine bad guy?

Which is pretty funny considering that Osama bin Laden's brother, Sheikh Tarek bin Laden, and his construction company have very close ties to the Bush family, including of course former Presidents George Herbert Walker Bush and George W. Bush. In fact the more research you do, the more both the "good guys" and the villians seem to all be one big happy family. They are all connected to each other and either know each other or know each other's immediate families. Anyone else think it's just a little, I dunno, odd, that the media hasn't made this common knowledge? I mean, you'd think that'd be newsworthy considering the utter trivia that's tirelessly discussed about other celebrities and public figures.

By the same standard that was good enough to indefinitely detain somebody without charging them with any crime, a certain former President should be at Gitmo, too. That's if we're going to invest so heavily in guilt by association. Intentional or otherwise, we Americans certainly haven't lost our sense of irony.

Godwin's law... (1)

ethicalBob (1023525) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032509)

Wow... Godwin's law rears it's ugly head REALLY early in this thread.. Nice one.

Re:Godwin's law... (1)

gavron (1300111) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033745)

Godwin's law didn't rear it's[sic] ugly head.
You did.

Ehud

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: - Godwin's Law (4, Insightful)

db32 (862117) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031529)

There were a lot of good people that were Nazi soldiers too. That doesn't make it any less of a good thing that their team lost and they lost their jobs.

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: - Godwin's Law (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27032521)

I just can't believe how few posts it took to hit Godwin's law.

People that work for bad evil ARE EVIL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27031543)

if i worked for Hitlers office good chance i am to be held accountable, YEA maybe not as bad but if you work for a company that is known to be bad evil or whatever you made the choice to work for them , SO to the guy whining about good people at the RIAA if there were then how do they sleep how do they smile and say have a nice day , how do they live with themselves.
THING is they DON'T
THEY ARE EVIL JUST AS THE BELL EMPLOYEE THAT WORKS FOR THEM IS EVIL.
If you want change then you go to the people also that work there and say " i hate you , you work for an evil company"
if everyone did that 100% change will happen as these people will stress out and or leave if they are decent, then what we have left is the truly evil greedy people and i say we put em all in an arean and press the red button

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: (5, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031879)

Before anybody starts in on the "Yay, less employees!" style rant, please remember that there are GOOD people who work at bad companies... not everyone is an evil backstabbing conniving shrew with the goal of proving that everyone is evil and owes them billions of dollars.

Of course, I have no proof of this "decent people" there, but one can only assume there would be.

This is why many religions have an idea called "right livelihood". The Buddhists are very good at using sensible terms with simple descriptions and so I borrow their term here, but it's a recurring theme appearing in many belief systems. It goes by different names but the concept is that part of having integrity involves earning your living in an honest way that causes as little harm as possible, whether that harm is intentional on your part or incidental.

I know I could not in good conscience work for the RIAA. I could not see the harm and the human suffering and persecution that they perpetrate and join up with them without having a lot of inner conflict. Most of that conflict wouldn't even be a conscious thing. It would manifest in terms of a general dissatisfaction, of the vacuous sort that "you need more stuff, latest fastest greatest" rampant consumerism is designed to fill. It would be the opposite of being strong and needing very little and having a joyous satisfaction with life that comes from trying as much as possible to live in harmony with other beings. It would cost me my principles and therefore my well-being, not in a catastrophic sense but in a subtle corrupting double-minded sense. When I say double-minded, I mean that sensation that one part of you is for something while another part of you is against that something. It's become common, but that is not at all normal and is properly regarded as a disease (or "dis-ease") state.

I'm not advocating a religion or a religious belief. I'm saying that sometimes concepts become incorporated into these beliefs for what you might call practical reasons. It's unfortunate that religion has become such a divisive tool for control but I think that for most of them, this was later added onto the original beliefs and observations to make them into "systems". Most of them started out as sincere efforts to experience true health and joy on the physical, mental, and spiritual levels. You can see that if you can perform the not-so-easy task of unravelling and getting past the practitioners who know little about their own beliefs, the needlessly complex religious language, and the institutionalization and systematization of what are supposed to be personal beliefs. For most religions, I think the early founders would be quite horrified to see what their ideas have become, not unlike how the Founding Fathers would feel about the monstrosity that our federal government has become. In both cases, that does not mean that the original ideas were unsound, it means that the ideas become monsters when they turn into systems and demand that people conform to and become subservient to those systems. This process is in direct opposition to the idea that a belief is a tool or a helper that is there to give you ideas to consider, test, and accept or reject as part of your own personal quest to decide for yourself what you believe. The idea of "right livelihood" is one that I was thankfully able to test by observing other people instead of having to make my own mistakes and I have found it to be a sound idea.

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: (5, Insightful)

Tassach (137772) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032141)

There are no good people working at bad companies. They chose to work there. Even the "it was the only job I could get" defense is complete bullshit. You ALWAYS have a choice, even if you don't like the alternatives you have to chose from.

After I got laid off the last time, I got a VERY lucrative offer from an extremely scummy company that did data mining and direct marketing. After a long discussion with my wife, I turned it down, even though there was a very real chance that doing so would have meant losing my house. Fortunately something else came along, but it was scary there for a while.

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27033847)

How could you lose a friggin' HOUSE. Oh. That sucks, man.

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: (1)

nametaken (610866) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032519)

Bullshit. I hope they all default on their mortgages.

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032979)

If you are supporting evil, you are evil. You might think you are good, but you are lying to yourself; you might say you are good, but you are lying to others. Hence the whole saying about how hard it is for a rich man to get into Heaven - I think you have to acknowledge the validity of the idea regardless of whether you appreciate the religious window-dressing (I don't, but it doesn't stop me from quoting either. Or at least referring to.) If you own shares in genocide, you're a murderer. It's okay to say you're trying to do good, but there's no position in which you can defend working for certain industries, let alone corporations.

Re:W/Regards to layoffs: (2, Insightful)

Lalo Martins (2050) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033729)

First: what everybody else is saying re "just say no".

Second: if there are good people working there, then good for them, the layoff is an opportunity and incentive for each and every one of them to go find a morally acceptable job which won't ruin their health with buried guilt.

FUCK ARTISTS (-1, Flamebait)

bonch (38532) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031391)

FUCK artists, and FUCK their rights! I join my fellow Slashdotters in cheering yet another anti-RIAA, pro-piracy article on Slashdot.

The RIAA is the bad guy, not me! Slashdot posts stories that tell me so, making me feel better about all the piracy I take part in. Artists are my slaves, and they shouldn't be given anything for their work. Somebody else will pay them, through concert tickets or t-shirts or something--I don't know, I don't really think about it.

It's not my fault I pirate--the RIAA is evil! Can't you tell from Slashdot's totally objective coverage? They use an "obsolete business" model and ignore the "free advertising" that piracy provides. The RIAA keeps artists in draconian contracts full of pure evil and signed in the blood of newborn babies--artists didn't willingly sign their contracts. I'm helping the artists, you see! I'm striking back at the RIAA and making sure they don't make any money. I just don't think about how the artist doesn't make any money either. I'm not a thief, I swear!

So, I join my fellow Slashdotters in saying FUCK artists, and FUCK their rights!

Do you kiss your mother with that mouth? (3, Interesting)

gavron (1300111) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031423)

Slashdot isn't for or against piracy, it's an online forum. People who read the forum have a variety of diverse opinions.

So far the only one saying "F... the artists and F... their rights is you."

That's one too many.

E
P.S. F... the RIAA.

Re:FUCK ARTISTS (2, Interesting)

jerep (794296) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031435)

It's not the artists' fault if the RIAA wants to keep most of the profits for themselves, you don't see artists suing people for downloading their songs (unless they're called Metallica and are little money bitches), most of the time the artist is just glad people are enjoying their work.

IT isnt art (1)

CHRONOSS2008 (1226498) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031611)

1st of if it was art they would have long ago got in bed with the technology and been making ..albeit less money but the goodwill and such it would have been far different.

As the lawsuit launched a while ago suggests and yea its been a few days and reported elsewhere , that these people don't make the product they market it , and do that poorly and keep massive BUSINESS profits for themselves.

If artists as you call them are part of it then they are doing it for money , which is not what art is or should be about , there fore the premise is that this is a product like a hammer and when you apply the business practices of such
you arrive where the lawsuit is going. This is why the riaa can't reply to this right away cause the mountain a lawyers is effectively saying YEA they are right. what do you want us to say.

if its not about money then donate the upcoming Conan movie as a good will gesture world wide with no DRM, as a message it is about art , heck do another batman and donate ALL the cash to charities.

YA right ain'
t gonna happen with that evil greedy lot and yes that includes the actors and musicians whose only goal is to make money not give you somehting, no artist would ever sue on account of his or her own art,

art is meant to be shared and enjoyed, not
litigated and controlled.

Re:FUCK ARTISTS (-1, Flamebait)

PiSkyHi (1049584) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031443)

I'm an artist, you can FUCK me !

Re:FUCK ARTISTS (5, Insightful)

scubamage (727538) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031457)

I live with artists, and I will gladly pay for worthwhile music. That means the guys I see in bars. That means the guys I see at concerts. You think we treat artists like slaves? You realize that to this day not a single filesharing case settlement has actually been shared with a SINGLE recording artist? The artists are slaves, but not to us. Fuck the RIAA.

Re:FUCK ARTISTS (1)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033359)

That mostly has to do with their every single victory having later been overturned in appeals so far. However, I think that they would rather cut off their own legs than turn over a single penny to one of the artists they supposedly represent.

Wizard of Oz (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27031471)

"If I only had a brain..."

Re:FUCK ARTISTS (1, Funny)

SpockLogic (1256972) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031497)

Piracy is nothing more than selfish leeches grabbing people's work for free and justifying it by blaming others.

Ah, time to fire up my Bit-Torrent client and then have a stroll through USENET. Thank you for the reminder.

Re:FUCK ARTISTS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27032275)

"FUCK any "artists" who sign up with the RIAA, and any trash who does so... FUCK their rights!"

^^^ There... fixed that for you. You're welcome.

To quote NOFX... (4, Insightful)

scubamage (727538) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031401)

The dinosaurs will slowly die

And I do believe no one will cry

I'm just fucking glad I'm gonna be

There to watch the fall

Prehistoric music industry

Three feet in la brea tar

Extinction never felt so good

Re:To quote NOFX... (1)

jerep (794296) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031463)

Amen.

The music industry is NOT music, it's money. Music itself will always live on.

Re:To quote NOFX... (5, Insightful)

Cousin Scuzzy (754180) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031953)

Absolutely. How are large record companies even useful nowadays? It used to be that it was expensive to record and reproduce music, and distribution involved getting physical product out on shelves. Since shelves = floor space = rent, stores had to move as much product as possible, so there was value in having the music they were selling promoted by big companies with a lot of advertising money and a stranglehold on commercial radio.

The landscape has changed dramatically over the last decade. Recording is so cheap that it can be done reasonably well with equipment costing a few thousand dollars or less. That means it's pretty much accessible to everyone. For $10/month you can sign up with a digital music distributor who will put your mp3s on Amazon.com, itunes, etc. Set up a myspace page for your band or register a domain and get an inexpensive web host and you've got a web presence. It's up to you to get your music heard and purchased, but when you do you'll get most or all of the proceeds.

Seriously, what has the music industry given us lately except bland, pretty pop stars with little musical talent?

Re:To quote NOFX... (5, Funny)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032679)

How are large record companies even useful nowadays?

Well they provide quite a bit of employment to some otherwise unemployable lawyers. Doesn't that count for something.

Not all artists record in Internet-popular genres (2, Insightful)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033473)

Seriously, what has the music industry given us lately except bland, pretty pop stars with little musical talent?

I imagine that some genres are far more popular among people without high-speed Internet access than among people with it, such as vocal jazz or country music. For artists who record in such genres, the record industry gives them distribution and promotion.

RIAA guilty of promoting copyright infringment? (4, Interesting)

tinkerghost (944862) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031485)

  • Music isn't sold it's licensed
  • minors cannot enter into a licensing agreement
  • replaying of digital music - downloads or CD - require copying of data to a buffer
  • Using a legitimate copy of digital media is a violation of copyright if there is a lack of a valid license.

All music sold to and played by minors results in technical copyright violations. Since the RIAA heavily promotes music sales to minors, they are guilty of inducing copyright infringement.

This could be fun.

"Music isn't sold it's licensed" (1)

Kickasso (210195) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031559)

Wrong. Next!

Re:"Music isn't sold it's licensed" (2, Funny)

Kickasso (210195) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031591)

crap, looks like a troll has got me. mod me down to pblivion.

Re:"Music isn't sold it's licensed" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27031747)

Oh if we modded down every post that fell for a troll, half of slashdot would be -40 degrees.

Re:"Music isn't sold it's licensed" (1)

mabhatter654 (561290) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031821)

no, that's exactly the reasoning for EULAs on shiny video game disks when they are met to "play" just like CDs. In fact Sony tried adding an auto load on their CDs so you would have to accept a "license" to play a PC on a computer so they could add their rootkit software.

Big expensive Executives and Lawyers have the same attitude about CDs and copyright.. not just slashodot trolls.

Re:"PC on a computer" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27031961)

I want to play a PC on a computer! Where can I get one?

Re:RIAA guilty of promoting copyright infringment? (4, Insightful)

seeker_1us (1203072) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031643)

  • Music isn't sold it's licensed

No that is not correct. You buy a CD like you buy a book. You only need a "license" if the copyright holder has to give you a limited subset of his or her limited monopoly on copying/distribution. You buy the CD, you do not need any of the copying/distribution rights that are reserved to the copyright holder.

I don't know where this idea that music is "licensed" comes from. Sometimes I think the RIAA is spreading this to make us believe we don't really own the CD's we bought.

Re:RIAA guilty of promoting copyright infringment? (1)

mabhatter654 (561290) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031839)

Sony tried just that with their autorun exe... so they could say you "accepted" the malware on your computer.

Re:RIAA guilty of promoting copyright infringment? (2, Interesting)

westlake (615356) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032057)

You buy a CD like you buy a book. You only need a "license" if the copyright holder has to give you a limited subset of his or her limited monopoly on copying/distribution.

When you a buy a copyrighted book, you do not buy the rights to copy and redistribute the book. You do not buy the right to produce or perform derivative works. I see no difference here.

Re:RIAA guilty of promoting copyright infringment? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27032203)

Close down all libraries. Close the movie rental stores.

Re:RIAA guilty of promoting copyright infringment? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27032549)

Damn you people can be stupid. Which part of "copy and distribute" mapped to "rent" in your tiny mind?

Re:RIAA guilty of promoting copyright infringment? (3, Informative)

tinkerghost (944862) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033685)

No that is not correct. You buy a CD like you buy a book. You only need a "license" if the copyright holder has to give you a limited subset of his or her limited monopoly on copying/distribution. You buy the CD, you do not need any of the copying/distribution rights that are reserved to the copyright holder.

The whole point is that the RIAA is arguing that music is only "sold" when it's convenient for them to deal with it in those terms. Otherwise it's licensed. I am looking at 15 of 20 random CD's having the notice that 'unauthorized lending' is prohibited.

Copying to buffers for use as intended was supposed to be covered under law. According to Blizzard V Michael Donnelly it actually requires a valid license. That's software, but as we are fond of pointing out here, data is data. If copying software to ram is a copyright violation without a valid license, then copying music to the ram buffers in an MP3 player without a valid license is also a violation.

The original statement is sort of a unintended consequence train with all of the push to increase copyright strength.

If North Carolina proves their case (1)

HaKKa (1273700) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031507)

If North Carolina proves their case then I think that any and all decisions won in favor of the RIAA should all be overturned.

Re:If North Carolina proves their case (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27032771)

If the sun rises tomorrow I think you should give me a million dollars...

Re:If North Carolina proves their case (1)

Puffy Director Pants (1242492) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033447)

It's not North Carolina filing this, but somebody in North Carolina.

Big difference.

Gee... (1)

Puffy Director Pants (1242492) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031515)

Maybe somebody ought to look at those filings for the laws being cited if he wants names.

'Kay, i get this, but why not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27031711)

When the admitted to having a DoSing sidekick?
Or when they purposefully hacked into a private tracker* to upload copyrighted files to see if anyone would download them.
Then used said DoSing sidekick to attack them when they plugged the hole?

*used for someones own files they released for free.

Or did they get in trouble for this already... must have missed it if they did, and i don't miss stuff that often.

NewYorkCountryLawyer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27031779)

I usually have little love for lawyers but damn, I like this guy!

Thanks for all the fish, Sir!

Do they have a lawyer fund.. (1)

drunkennewfiemidget (712572) | more than 5 years ago | (#27031805)

I can donate to to help them cover the costs of stomping on those maggots?

I'm willing to shell out a few CDs' worth of cash.

Re:Do they have a lawyer fund.. (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032277)

Same here.

I couldn't find a link or any information to go about it in the article; Do you know any details about how we can show support?

Re:Do they have a lawyer fund.. (4, Informative)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032639)

I couldn't find a link or any information to go about it in the article; Do you know any details about how we can show support?

Sure, send these guys [robertsonmedlin.com] a check with instructions to apply it to Ms. Moursy's case!

Re:Do they have a lawyer fund.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27032865)

I couldn't find a link or any information to go about it in the article; Do you know any details about how we can show support?

Sure, send these guys [robertsonmedlin.com] a check with instructions to apply it to Ms. Moursy's case!

In a completely hetero, utterly non-sexual and non-romantic kind of way, I LOVE YOU!

Re:Do they have a lawyer fund.. (1)

ChoGGi (522069) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033227)

seems as good as anyplace to post this
awhile ago somebody mentioned how your website looked and i believe you said suggestions are welcome or something along those lines so
http://userstyles.org/styles/15517 [userstyles.org]

Charges (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27031899)

What, that's it for the charges? I mean come on, I can come up with at least three more without breaking a sweat. I like the sound of "civil conspiracy" though. If only "being soulless life-destroying monsters" was a legitimate charge.

crap.... (3, Funny)

kribby (964773) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032039)

who here knows how to play the world's smallest violin?

News for Nerds (2, Insightful)

westlake (615356) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032261)

It's been a rough week for the RIAA as massive layoffs are about to cost many employees their job.

It has been tough week all around.

You could preface every Slashdot story with this line and only the cast of characters would change: Novell lays off openSUSE Linux developers [betanews.com]

you5 fail it (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27032339)

*BSD is dead. Are you GAY log on Then the prima donnas to than its Windows keed to be Kreskin minutes Now while are about 7000/5 NIGGER ASSOCIATION things in The deal with you survey which have left in philosophies must I'm sick of it. effort to address BSD addicts, flame munches the most theorists - support GNAA, In addition, teeth into when If you answered many of us are lesson and according tothis this exploitation, BitTorrent) Second, [tux.org]? Are you fly...don't fear members all over show that FreeBSD are there? Let's Fanatic known can connect to keep, and I won't Share. *BSD is whole has lost

This just in! (1)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032447)

Ham Sandwich Sued For Not Being Anything Like A Set Of Golf Clubs!

Got a lawyer? You can file suit. I don't quite get why people got so mightly pleased when they hear that someone of whom they don't approve now gets to spend a bunch of money to deal with the fact they just got sued. Because your neighbor could sue you for the fact that your hubcaps are too shiny, and the reflections aren't being properly stopped by their tinfoil hat. And you'd still have to hire a lawyer.

Re:This just in! (1)

V!NCENT (1105021) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032855)

I don't quite get why people got so mightly pleased when they hear that someone of whom they don't approve now gets to spend a bunch of money to deal with the fact they just got sued.

When humands feel that they are threatenend, they try to identify that threat. They like it when something is being done about that threat.

Basic human instinct.

Re:This just in! (4, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032971)

I don't quite get why people got so mightly pleased when they hear that someone of whom they don't approve now gets to spend a bunch of money to deal with the fact they just got sued.

Because if this lawsuit is successful, it could help to end a long series of persecution and, in my personal opinion, abuse of the legal system (IANAL). This is a good thing. There are solid principles involved here that have nothing to do with personal feelings of "approval".

It's simple. There are times when wrong things go on. There are times when the legal system has a good chance of correcting those wrong things. This is one of those times.

Because your neighbor could sue you for the fact that your hubcaps are too shiny, and the reflections aren't being properly stopped by their tinfoil hat. And you'd still have to hire a lawyer.

If that bore any resemblance to "ending persecution and abuse" then I would see your point. It doesn't, so I don't. Frivolous lawsuits do happen. All frivolous lawsuits are lawsuits; this does not mean that all lawsuits are frivolous. I mean no offense, but please tell me that I have misunderstood what you were getting at, that you in fact are not advocating a position with such a glaring and easily addressed flaw. It's quite easy and tempting to feel "jaded" about our legal system and this will cloud your reasoning if you allow it, but it doesn't have to be that way.

Please... (1)

Anachragnome (1008495) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032495)

...Let me be the first to say, "Its about fucking time".

As uttered by one John Wilkes Booth... (1)

TwoScoopsOfPig (900069) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032913)

... sic semper tyrannus!

RIAA Abuse of Tax Payer Money (2, Insightful)

olddotter (638430) | more than 5 years ago | (#27032955)

While I would love to see this be the beginning of the end to the abuse of tax payer money for the services of the RIAA, I expect they will be around for a while.

I really do think the thousands of lawsuits they have brought are an unfair burden to the governments that support the courts these suits clog up. We have more important things to do with money in times like these. The RIAA needs to get with the program and give the people what they want, in the format they want it in. If they don't then ultimately they will be pushed aside no matter how ugly or bloody (hopefully figuratively) the battle becomes.

Dues (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27033139)

The RIAA, which had stood for maybe a thousand years, didn't know we were coming that day. If they had, they would have run. NYCL was the eye of our rage. And through him, our captain Ahab, we would set things right again.

there's so many people to thank, first they'rs... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27033313)

There's soo many things I can say right now.. And like them or not I don't think their methods were totally ligit.. But I think the saying goes what comes around goes around? this is for suing the small guys for their life savings over a few songs.. Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch

No layoffs for lawyers (3, Insightful)

WidgetGuy (1233314) | more than 5 years ago | (#27033679)

In my junior year at college, I took an elective course in FORTRAN programming. The bug bit hard. I changed my major from pre-law to electrical engineering. I, then, went on to graduate studies and a 25+ year career in commercial software development (mostly in Silicon Valley). The money was great and I never "worked" a day in my life.

Until, that is, I turned 50.

All of a sudden, I couldn't buy a job. Worse, I had to endure being interviewed by 20-something project leads who thought hexadecimal was "some sort of weird religion" (hey, maybe they were right at that). Adding insult to injury, I later heard in one case that they decided not to offer me the position because they didn't think I was "technical enough."

But, with douche bag outfits like the RIAA, SCO and Microsoft around, it looks like the lawyers are (as usual) going to do just fine. No layoffs in that "profession" (except maybe for a lowly paralegal here and there).

Does anybody else here now wish they'd become a lawyer? Naw!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>