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 Admits SOPA Wouldn't Have Stopped Piracy

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the lost-cause dept.

Music 153

jfruh writes "One of the arguments against the now-dormant SOPA legislation was that, in addition to eroding Internet freedom, it would also be ineffective in stopping music piracy. Well, according to a leaked report, the RIAA agrees with the latter argument. The proposed laws would 'not likely to have been an effective tool for music,' according to the report. Another interesting revelation is that, despite the buzz and outrage over P2P sharing, most digital music piracy takes place via sneakernet, with music moving among young people on hard drives and ripped CDs."

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

RIAA... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819175)

Your punishment shall be more severe.

Hmmm (0)

eternaldoctorwho (2563923) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819177)

Hindsight rationalization, anyone?

Re:Hmmm (1)

NettiWelho (1147351) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819213)

More like sour grapes.

Re:Hmmm (1)

RandomFactor (22447) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819347)

Those grapes would have likely been yummy. SOPA...not so much.

Re:Hmmm (1)

NettiWelho (1147351) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819567)

[...] SOPA...not so much.

For you and me maybe, but for the fox(RIAA), it wouldve been delicious.

Um... (1)

BrownLeopard (876112) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819185)

...duh?

Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (4, Funny)

HornWumpus (783565) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819191)

I almost feel guilty every time I make a copy for someone. Almost.

Gotta upgrade to USB3. Copies take days.

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819223)

Tell me you have an Ampache server I can connect to.....

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819381)

Go away RIAA! You are not taking him down.

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819287)

Don't.

Make the labels feel guilty for making such a system possible by not upgrading their ways.

They are the ones who actually came out and straight-up said they don't give a damn about the digital age and won't support it, and will do anything in their power to destroy it.
Megaupload was the most successful thing they have ever had against such a digital service.
Of course, now the evidence is piling up that the entire case was illegal to begin with and not a single shred of evidence was in their favor in the slightest.

Just keep spreading around that the labels are corrupt, make as much noise as possible and let the artists themselves know about it.
They are the ones who need the most help.
They are the ones who are duped in to thinking the labels are even needed anymore. It was true over a decade ago, not so much now.
The labels job as-is is completely useless for any artist. You could take them out and artists, choreographers, singers, bands, CG modellers, stores, printing companies and so on could still find each other pretty damn easily.

Maybe one day we will have a world where creative content is free of these restrictions and it is loyalty that is rewarded.

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (5, Insightful)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819399)

The labels are not needed for the artists, but they are needed for the entertainers. Do you really think Justin Beiber would have gotten anywhere without a billion dollar marketing machine? With independent artists, music would be about the music and people would find the music they like. The marketed entertainment industry dwarfs the music industry, and that is what they are fighting for.

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (5, Insightful)

cfulton (543949) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819637)

Once again the "Free Market" prevails. We have Justin Beiber instead of good music. Thank God! Who would want a world in which talented creative people are well rewarded for their work and untalented teen age boys were simply teen age boys instead of semi-iconic sex idols for prepubescent girls. I for one happily bow to the marketing overlords.

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (2, Insightful)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821149)

And yet, if marketroids were geeks, they'd be hailed as successful culture hackers. But they're not part of Us, so they are reviled among Polite Company[tm]

Here's another thought: maybe some people out there are different from you, and prefer different forms of entertainment. Nah, crazy idea. We all love NPR, don't we? Every last one of us. I mean, if you don't love Peruvian hick music...I mean folk music...then you're hardly a person, eh?

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40821183)

Once again the "Free Market" prevails. We have Justin Beiber instead of good music.

This is like complaining about McDonald's not serving fine cuisine. When you go to sources which serve the lowest common denominator you're not going to get anything exciting (lest it upset someone)

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (5, Insightful)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820027)

Justin Beiber wouldn't be popular unless a lot of people actually liked his music, as hard as that is to believe. A result of marketing he may be, but they are marketing something people clearly want. The fundamental problem is most people have terrible taste in music. The labels are just pandering to that.

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (5, Insightful)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820129)

People do not want good music. People want to be popular. Entertainment marketing is about convincing people they will be popular if they like (and purchase) a particular kind of entertainment. The trick is producing entertainment watered down enough that you can get a large number of people to not hate it.

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (4, Interesting)

Genda (560240) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820311)

Its way more than that.... they will be popular, they will be young and beautiful forever, they will never die, have bad breath, fart, or be embarrassed. The machine whispers in your ear and tells you anything for the privilege of lightening your wallet, and locking down a few more neurons. Its ultimate goal is to rob the world of the capacity to form individual thoughts or make rational decisions. Is it not time to kill the machine.

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (4, Insightful)

equex (747231) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820165)

Justin Beiber is what people want, because it is marketed that way. People don't just have a terrible taste in music, they are also willing products of the marketing industry. (aka fashion)

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820201)

yeah... they "like his music"... I think the other post had it right, they like his cock. Little girls get horny too, don't believe everything they tell you...

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820241)

They are TELLING people what they want. The people are just too alarmingly retarded to tell the difference. Sad truth

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (2)

Genda (560240) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820285)

And Pavlov was able to get dogs to drool when they heard a bell... your point is?

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (5, Informative)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820433)

Not only that, but Justin Beiber (going from info on his movie) actually had to go around the standard labels and get popular by putting videos up on YouTube and touring around the US doing concerts at highschools and county fairs as well as doing radio appearances. This is because the labels didn't think music from a 16 year old boy would sell, especially from a person that was previously unknown for anything. By the time he had an album released, he already had quite a following. There's a million examples of artists that are the result of the music industry marketing machine. Justin Beiber is probably one of the worst examples you could pick.

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (1, Insightful)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820859)

Justin Beiber wouldn't be popular unless a lot of people actually liked his music, as hard as that is to believe. A result of marketing he may be, but they are marketing something people clearly want. The fundamental problem is most people have terrible taste in music. The labels are just pandering to that.

Exactly right. If you went to some English-speaking desert island where they've never heard of Justin Beiber and you played a teenage girl his music, and some 'indie' artist's music and you asked her which she liked better, she'd pick Justin. His music is popular because his demographic likes it. Look at Rebecca Black. Her terrible song rocketed in popularity with no marketing behind it. Why? Because her demographic liked it.

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (4, Insightful)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821245)

Justin Beiber wouldn't be popular unless a lot of people actually liked his music, as hard as that is to believe.

No, I think most people dislike Justin Bieber. It just happens that the very specific demographic that likes his music is also a demographic that has nothing but disposable income, oodles of time to waste listening to bad music, immature musical tastes, and a greater need to follow the crowd than any other age group. Their customers are fools with nothing they're saving their money for. That makes it the most profitable sector of the music industry, and that's why they're the most influential.

It has nothing to do with popularity among most people.

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (1)

jxander (2605655) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821045)

I fail to see the downside.

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (1)

SuperTechnoNerd (964528) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821683)

Yes but the Beiber's of the world are grown by the record labels, for the record labels, instead of a garage band that moves up through the scene because they are good. So no, Beiber and the likes need the labels because no talent needs a lot of help and pimping to be be successful.

Re:Portable HD with 25K+ CDs worth of music. (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821671)

Exactly. It's better to feel guilty when you actually pay for stuff. That gives the MAFIAA money.

Logic (2)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819203)

Next up: Legislation requiring all hard drives, thumb drives and other storage devices to be registered with the government. You will need to transfer ownership of all devices and must submit monthly logs of any device your storage medium has been connected to regardless of whether or not it was accessed or even powered on.

Additional fees may apply for concealed carry SD cards.

Re:Logic (2)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819211)

Next stop: Wetware and stacking your brain.

Re:Logic (1)

cheesybagel (670288) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820003)

Nah we should cut off everybody's tongue as a preemptive measure in case they decide to sing a song they do not have a license for.

Re:Logic (1)

Genda (560240) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820357)

No, the parent has it right, they want to stack you brain. Any time you have a thought, think of a song, remember a movie, or a passage from a book, a small bit of money is deducted from your account. Since you account will be completely empty within about 4 minutes of your receiving a pay check, and since you'll still be having thoughts, the powers that be will inform you that you are now a ward of the state (a wholly owned subsidiary of the folks who stacked your brain.) You will do as you are told, or they will activate their right to carve out any memories they deem as their IP. Welcome to heaven as envisioned by he XX-IAA.

Re:Logic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819269)

That's okay, SD cards are getting small. And the number of places you can conceal them is therefore increasing.

Re:Logic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819439)

The real trojan for access to your pc is the mp3 you, or even other people, pirate.
In Italy we already pay the local performing right organization for every hd we purchase to cover the costs of piracy. Would that mean we can put a lil pirate stuff there? nope.

Re:Logic (1)

daem0n1x (748565) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819471)

And you are not allowed to memorise any song or film. Your memory must be erased after exposure, or else you might commit piracy by singing the song or telling the plot to someone.

Re:Logic (1)

jd2112 (1535857) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819973)

And you are not allowed to memorise any song or film. Your memory must be erased after exposure, or else you might commit piracy by singing the song or telling the plot to someone.

Didn't they try that with 'Men In Black'? They even had the tagline 'See it again for the fist time". It worked better for "Men In Black II". The movie simply wasn't as memorable.

Re:Logic (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819539)

I just can't wait for the legislation sponsered by the RIAA that simply allows the labels to send armed gaurds to anyone's home and hold them up for wallet cash and loose change at any time.

Re:Logic (5, Funny)

davester666 (731373) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819617)

The title of the bill will feature both "child pornography" and "terrorist".

Re:Logic (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819655)

You just made me shit.

Re:Logic (2)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820047)

I just can't wait for the legislation sponsered by the RIAA that simply allows the labels to send armed gaurds to anyone's home and hold them up for wallet cash and loose change at any time.

Won't happen, the government doesn't like anyone infringing on their monopoly.

Re:Logic (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820371)

~chuckle~ Good Point!

Re:Logic (1)

Shagg (99693) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821201)

Why not, the BSA already does it.

Re:Logic (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819615)

Nah, no need for any of that. Just bully manufacturers into building a backdoor into their products, include something in the EULA that states that the big 5 media companies can access your device at any time for any reason. No need to spend all that money on lobbyists or deal with that pesky publicity.

Lousy logic, as an old person, I can do better (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820205)

Outlaw young people, round them all up and put them in work camps. That will teach them and get them of my lawn too!

On a more serious note, Brein (dutch RIAA) knows its block on the piratebay is meaningless. It is just the first small baby step to get politicians to swallow the poisoned pill. They know what they want to achieve in the end, a completely locked down society where every bit of content is payed for repeatedly and all creation belongs to the 1% no matter who created it or when it was created or how free that person made it.

But you can't ask for total control at once because most politicians are not completely amoral yet. But every small step, readies the ground for the next step.

Re:Lousy logic, as an old person, I can do better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820329)

But you can't ask for total control at once because most politicians are not completely unafraid of crowds bearing torches and pitchforks yet.

TFTFY.

Yes I must agree (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819259)

Piracy only happens because hardware permits it...

    We must out law sneakers.

Re:Yes I must agree (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819917)

Or at least, have a fee on all sneakers going to the four-letter associations to compensate all the sneakernet piracy.

The real sneakernet (2)

CheesyMoo (655560) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819277)

The real 'sneakernet' is flash drives embedded in tennis shoes

Re:The real sneakernet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819487)

The real 'sneakernet' is flash drives embedded in tennis shoes

Thank you for confirming your age to Slashdot. We didn't even need to set up a trap to get this information out of you, further fueling our disdain for and cynicism towards the general state of cleverness and ingenuity of kids these days. We will be certain to hide all the alcohol and cigarettes from your view and dispatch a squadron of old-timers to dutifully inform you about how life was back in the day and then instruct you as to the most appropriate location for you to stand in relation to their lawns.

Re:The real sneakernet (1)

OhSoLaMeow (2536022) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820247)

Wow! The Usenet Oracle has joined /. !!!

Re:The real sneakernet (3, Funny)

Genda (560240) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821061)

I believe you need the following display to assist with proper sneaker net age determination...

AGE .................... MEDIA

Babylon 1 Star ............. Clay Tablet
Beyond Farting ............ Papyrus
Farts Dust .................. Parchment .... (What's a sneaker?)
Forbidden Planer star . Printed paper
Star Trek star ............ Reel Tape
Old Fart ................... Paper punch card deck
Star Wars star ........ 8" 180 KB Floppy
Middle Aged .......... 360 KB Floppy
STNG Star ........... 1.44 MB Floppy
Babalon 5 star ..... Tape Cassette
Young Man .......... CD
Youngun ............. DVD
Todler ............... Flashcard
Infant ............... Flashdrive

Re:The real sneakernet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40821723)

Ah, but it's the "embedded in tennis shoes" part that's important, I feel. That is, the point where it's no longer data transfer so much as a company manufacturing a trendy shoe with flash media installed in it. Do we have an "Embryo" category yet?

Re:The real sneakernet (1)

Genda (560240) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821759)

I believe that would be the "Zygote" rating.

No? No! (2, Funny)

Sasayaki (1096761) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819299)

Of course not. The point was NOT to endlessly funnel more money towards the RIAA, the MPAA and their respective legal teams, but to take the modest and humble earnings from lawsuits and return all of it to the artistssshhhahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaa.

Man I crack myself up sometimes.

No category for free legal downloads? (5, Interesting)

diversiform (1085477) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819315)

I get most of my music via free, legal downloads from artists and labels that offer them for promotional reasons. But I don't see this on the chart at all. Am I unusual, or was this deliberately left out of the RIAA's calculations?

Re:No category for free legal downloads? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819437)

Free legal downloads are as big a threat to their business model as piracy, so they just lumped them together.

Re:No category for free legal downloads? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819457)

That's how I find new stuff, free promotional downloads (samplers on Amazon, creative commons DLs on artists' sites). Then I try to buy direct from the bands I like at performances (cash for CD, direct) if they perform nearby. If not, I'll purchase through CDBaby, Amazon, etc. Hoping to see more Humble Music Bundles [slashdot.org] , too!

Yeah, it still left too much internet Freedom (2)

Andrio (2580551) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819363)

"SOPA wouldn't have stopped piracy... It wasn't powerful enough! We'd need legislature that takes away even more internet freedom! The new bill we're going to be lobbying for will allow us to stop piracy once and for all. In addition, it'll stimulate the economy, create new jobs, and combat terrorism."

Re:Yeah, it still left too much internet Freedom (1)

jd2112 (1535857) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820001)

"SOPA wouldn't have stopped piracy... It wasn't powerful enough! We'd need legislature that takes away even more internet freedom! The new bill we're going to be lobbying for will allow us to stop piracy once and for all. In addition, it'll stimulate the economy, create new jobs, and combat terrorism."

Outlaw this pesky internet thingy. And all forms of writable media including paper.

Re:Yeah, it still left too much internet Freedom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820057)

Stimulate pedophiles, create terrorists, and fight jobs?

SOPA (2)

Dmritard96 (1268918) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819365)

RIAA dropped the SOPA?

Momentarily Dormant (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819455)

FTFY

Re:SOPA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820105)

RIAA dropped the SOPA?

Yet the artists are the ones getting screwed. Ironic, isn't it?

Re:SOPA (1)

Genda (560240) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821109)

DON'T PICK IT UP!!!!!!! Aaaaaahhhhh, poor bastard!

Damn you (1)

thomas8166 (1244688) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819393)

Either they had really short hindsight, or they knew all along. Either way, these guys are asses.

What assholes! (1, Insightful)

Xtense (1075847) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819397)

So we knew RIAA were assholes, but up until now i always thought they were just deluded idiots who bought research that supported their imagination. After seeing the percentage slide from that ITWorld article, I'm still brimming with viking rage.

Assholes, every one of them - they just lost my one last excuse to at least feel a tinge of sympathy for them. Sympathy for their illness, mind, but sympathy nonetheless.

foresight (1)

DynamoJoe (879038) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819447)

That just means they'll try harder next time.

MPAA backed SOPA (2)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819459)

From what I've heard, it was the MPAA that really pushed SOPA. The RIAA didn't think it would help them much, but, of course, weren't going to say no if given SOPA-powers. (Yes, I notice that looks like "super-powers." Does this make the MPAA a "SOPA-villain?")

Don't think for a second that the RIAA has gone all cuddly and pro-sharing, however. With SOPA defeated, the RIAA is making themselves busy pushing laws that they think would benefit them at the expense of customers.

Don't know if you can still do this... (1)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819593)

But in 2004-2005, a friend of mine and I discovered that you could mount the iPod Classic as a hard drive and bring the files over from Terminal.app or a Linux equivalent despite Apple's attempts to make it hard to access. Since the files all had ID3 tags, their attempts to obfuscate the file names were pointless if we wanted to share our collections.

Re:Don't know if you can still do this... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819733)

Just plug your iPod into a computer... you can drag and drop apple's files and if needed, convert them to an mp3.

Re:Don't know if you can still do this... (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819779)

that's how they learnt their lesson with iphone/touch ipods.
no standard moving of data around or 3rd parties uploading music without itunes.

seriously, itunes sucked soooo much for setting up 160gb classics..

Re:Don't know if you can still do this... (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819937)

I imagine Apple deliberatly made the iPod a write-only device in order to maintain a better relationship with the labels.

So 1990s ... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40819597)

The RIAA wants us to repurchase our media collection every few years to change formats so they can include DRM. It was bad enough that my 500+ cassette tape collection needed to be repurchased as CD audio. I was pissed, but the difference in audio quality really did matter to me for most of them. OTOH, my Judas Priest tapes weren't repurchased.

Around 1996, I converted my thousands of music CDs bought during the years of BMC Music club membership into MP3 files. It took me over a year doing about 5 CDs every day to finish. Usually 2 before work and 1-3 in the evenings. Computers were much slower back then, so doing a rip/lame was about 45 minutes per CD. It was like eating an elephant one bite at a time.

Every few years, I need to move those files to new storage media. Of course, they are backed up too - there's no chance that I'll be redoing all that time and effort again. When I need to move the data, I don't use a sneaker net. I have a real network, thank you.

I was unhappy with some of the prices of those CDs, but at least I "own" it. Clearly I was confused. I'm unhappy with current pricing for electronic music and don't believe I "own" anything afterwards. It isn't exactly "property". It feels imaginary. At least the question whether a music file will play on my systems today or in 50 yrs from now has finally been answered - no DRM.

SONY's attempt with a rootkit convinced me to never put a music CD into a mainstream OS again AND it proved to me never to trust big content companies AND never to buy software or hardware that is required to support their business failing DRM models.

I've tried a few different DRM-encumbered music files over the years through free samples.
The "Plays-for-Sure" stuff never played.
The Apple stuff never played.
Those failures convinced me to never buy music electronicly.

RIAA - "You've Got Another Thing Comin'"
I'm not "breaking the law" here.

1996? Really? (2)

silverspell (1556765) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819955)

Around 1996, I converted my thousands of music CDs bought during the years of BMC Music club membership into MP3 files. It took me over a year doing about 5 CDs every day to finish. Usually 2 before work and 1-3 in the evenings. Computers were much slower back then, so doing a rip/lame was about 45 minutes per CD. It was like eating an elephant one bite at a time.

Every few years, I need to move those files to new storage media. Of course, they are backed up too - there's no chance that I'll be redoing all that time and effort again.

1996? Either you're off by a few years, or you were a very early adopter...and at an average of 50MB per CD, you would've needed at least 100GB for "thousands" of CDs (i.e. 2000 CDs minimum). Hard drives that large weren't commonly available for another five years.

Plus I'd imagine those encodings sound dramatically worse than what you could get five years later at the same bitrate. Moreover, 128k was the custom at the time (onion on belt, etc.), and the old 128k files I have from the late '90s sound truly horrible today. All the high frequency transients turn into jangling keyrings.

So, uh...are you sure that Clinton was in office when you started this project?

Re:1996? Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820111)

Yeah, and 45 minutes per CD sounds awfully fast. I think it took about that long per track in 1996-1997 and there weren't many easy tools to do the job (I was an early adopter and I splurged on a massive 8GB hard drive somewhere in early 1998).

Re:1996? Really? (1)

cheesybagel (670288) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820161)

Uh I think I was using MP2 in 1996. I remember playing MP3 files in a Pentium (i586) computer so it should have certainly been possible to play the files in 1996. I do not remember which was my first MP3 encoder but I remember it was not LAME.

Re:1996? Really? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820797)

You may be correct. Perhaps it was 1998?

I know that I started ripping around 1996 ... I was at a specific job that year and other guy showed me how. I may not have ripped everything in a systematic way for a few more years.

Initially, my MP3 player was a audio/data CDROM device from iRiver, so every 5-10 ripped CDs were burned to a data CDROM. As HDDs sizes increased, I made more and more of the audio files "live" on the network. BTW, I still use those same CDROMs in my 2001 vehicle to listen for hours at a time.

Sorry if it was implied that all those files were always on a harddrive. I don't think that happened until around 2001. I've looked up my HDD purchases ... that was an interesting exercise. In 2001, I bought 4x80G drives to add to the multitude of 1.6G, 3.2G, 13G, and 20G drives already here from 1996 on. Fortunately, I'd retired the 2[45]0MB disks years earlier.

Oh and "thousands" in my marketing class taught me that is 1001 or more. ;) Anything over 1000.00000 is "thousands."

never to buy software or hardware that is required (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820135)

Exactly.

I haven't paid for a commercial OS license in years, use Linux instead.
I haven't bought a Bluray player, Roku, a 3D HDTV or netflix device. My thoughts are that until these work without DRM on my systems, it would be bad to give them any more money. Alone, my sacrifice doesn't do anything, but together with all /. readers, we really could send a message. What message? "Support Linux or early tech adopters won't support you."

I do take advantage of Amazon Free MP3 albums when they are available, but I'll never pay any money for audio files. I'm older now and current music isn't very important to me. With all those CDs ripped 15 yrs ago, I can go for months without hearing the same song twice.

If I were going to buy music, it would only be directly from the artist after a local show.

A big metal-band got me pissed about record companies. I was a big fan, but since they filed that lawsuit, I haven't bought ANYTHING with {that crap name} on it since. Again, I doubt my little boycot matters to the band.

I'm a man of principles on this stuff. Don't worry, I don't have any principles on many (most?) other things ... I did some work for SONY in Japan in the late 1990s, as an example.

Oh, and I don't have a bookface account either, so watch out! ;)

Re:So 1990s ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820243)

You could also just hold "shift" whenever you insert a CD into a Windows PC. That prevents autorun.

I believe you can tweak the registry to turn autorun off by default, too.

Re:So 1990s ... (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821167)

It's much easier to rip now with modern amenities like batch rippers (dbpoweramp), online tag databases and USB where you easily support 6-10 drives per box.

It may even be worth it if you are fussy enough to want essentially error free rips.

Re:So 1990s ... (1)

laffer1 (701823) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821427)

I had a pentium 100 in 1996 and it took me much longer than 45 minutes to encode a CD's worth of music. First I had to dump it to WAV files which back then dumped at near regular playback speed. Then i setup a batch script to run the command line client to convert the wav to an mp3. Due to limited disk space, I couldn't queue up too many at a time. My PC only had an 850MB HDD and it was only 5400RPM. That was before I had winamp too.. playing back an MP3 used like 25% of my CPU in stereo. For disk reasons, I only kept tracks that I really liked, not whole CDs. I'd burn them to a CD using a friend's burner starting around 97. It was pretty awesome.

As for buying music electronically, check out Amazon. They give you MP3's. No DRM. Apple has some of their audio in DRM free format, but it costs extra. Plus amazon hosts the files for you in thier cloud player for free so you can play them from any browser in additional to having the files locally. Things have changed.

Agree with you on buying electronic music (1)

bbbaldie (935205) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821445)

I would never, ever, ever pay a buck for a downloaded song. I used to say that once the RIAA backed companies that would sell the songs at Russian rates, i.e. 10-20 cents per song, that I would support them.

That was a couple of years ago. Now, i hate these greedy bastards so much that i would pay more for music just to bypass them.

Fortunately, as long as i can access mp3million.com, it's a non-issue.

well of course it wont. (1)

nimbius (983462) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819727)

as we all know by now SOPA wasnt the legislation we needed. it would never pass because under analysis by our patrio-tastic legislators it didnt work, so therefore we at the RIAA havent failed in our mission. We've merely come to appreciate the system of checks and balances that our freely elected government sees fit to impose to ensure whats just, right, and proper is applied to society.

this upcoming legislation however is correct and will prevent download piracy, a form of terrorism used by iranian homicide bombers, from taking place by using digital locks and content protection to preserve freedom. please disregard its passage.

Re:well of course it wont. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820215)

Needed? Not even traded freedom for safety, traded it for private companies profits. And now results that is not even that. So you just gave up your freedom for nothing, and not yours only, because it is being pushed anyway to other countries.

Welcome to slavery Y2K edition.

Maybe not the point (5, Interesting)

nine-times (778537) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819759)

Call me paranoid, but sometimes I think that some of the anti-piracy proposals are not about stopping piracy. SOPA, for example, could have made it impossible for a site like YouTube to exist, which in turn would make it difficult to share user-generated content. Because it made it dangerous to host user content and content from independent sources, it would risk forcing sites to only allow content being distributed from major corporate sources who could be verified to own the content.

It's not certain, but it could have been viewed as pushing us back towards broadcast networks where ISPs and large media companies act as gatekeepers on what information and entertainment you have access to.

Re:Maybe not the point (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#40819959)

As an internet giant, youtube would be safe. It's smaller sites that would be shut down. If SOPA had been around back when youtube was a new startup, it'd have been crushed then. One big effect of SOPA would be to make it easy for larger companies to shut down smaller competitors, ensuring that control of the internet remained in the hands of a select wealthy few.

Re:Maybe not the point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820013)

How is that paranoid? I thought they did not make it a huge secret that this is one of the goals. This was the great thing about the old system where you had to get a record pressed which could only be done by the labels. If YouTube uploads could only be done by the labels they could "guarantee" the quality for a "modest" fee. Its just like pressing records minus the costs of duplication (for the labels!). The artists would get shafted just as much

Re:Maybe not the point (2)

digitalaudiorock (1130835) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820065)

It's clear that these groups just don't like the nature of the open internet at all, and they won't be happy until it's reduced to the likes of pay TV, where we're all just spectators.

Re:Maybe not the point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820251)

I always found it interesting that they only shut down mp3.com after they started selling artist's music direct to the consumer. A lot of artists used their platform. After mp3.com was shut down with a bombardment of lawsuits no one else tried the model again.

Re:Maybe not the point (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820301)

Call me paranoid, but sometimes I think that some of the anti-piracy proposals are not about stopping piracy.

Paranoid? You're delusional if you think some of the anti-piracy proposals ARE about stopping piracy. The media industry associations want to have full control over production, distribution, and promotion of the content in their industry so the barrier to entry is too high for any competition to enter. They want everyone consuming their content on approved devices from verified sources so everyone gets used to being a passive consumer who happily pays and pays without thinking of whether they're getting any value for their money. Never mind what you used to be able to get for free or whether buying the physical media was cheaper than a here-today-gone-tomorrow digital download (and don't even mention buying used content, that goes against their business model!). Piracy barely even factors into the discussion.

Re:Maybe not the point (1)

jxander (2605655) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821153)

Even more alarming, SOPA would have made it impossible for a site like Wikipedia to exist, and I've got a term paper due in a month. How would I write it without Wikipedia?? I'm pretty sure over 75% of all college students would crash and burn the instant Wikipedia went away.

Re:Maybe not the point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40821299)

It's all about criminalising a civil offence. This way the recording industry doesn't have to shoulder the cost of prosecution as it's now transferred to the state. The state get the benefit of ambiguous language to spy on people and silence vocal opponents.

what would stop Hollywood Accounting? (1)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820245)

It is a much much bigger problem as artists / musicians don't get paid and US Taxpayers are being cheated.

Too late for that... (1)

rkhalloran (136467) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821393)

Check out Steve Albini's often-quoted piece on recording contracts and tell me otherwise...
At this point albums are promotional materials for concert tours, where most bands make their money.
At least until Ticketmaster and Live Nation get bought up, at which point musicians may as well go back to flipping burgers....

Sneakernet piracy? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40820315)

Is it really piracy if you copy music from friends? Isn't copying between friends and family members completely legal in most jurisdictions?

Re:Sneakernet piracy? (1)

JimProuty (1298167) | more than 2 years ago | (#40821143)

please tell me you are not serious.

Re:Sneakernet piracy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40821515)

At least I am (not the same AC as above). In Belgium it is mostly legal to make copies and do downloads if this happens in the family or with close friends. As far as I understood id, a tax on every writable medium pays the copyright holders.
  See e.g. http://www.fwdmagazine.be/fwd/135823/is-illegaal-downloaden-stiekem-toch-legaal-/ (In Dutch) . Or google for yourself.

Who's the real pirate here (1)

fluffythedestroyer (2586259) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820393)

I wonder if when the RIAA or any other organisation that goes against the people and they win millions or some cash..do they really give it back to the artist like it's logically suppose too or they keep it ?

Yeah... right. (4, Insightful)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | more than 2 years ago | (#40820415)

And if SOPA had passed, we'd be hearing from the MAFIAA all about how it was a decisive, history-making victory for artists.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?