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 To Sue Hundreds Of File Swappers

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the you-and-you-and-you-and-you dept.

The Courts 2047

Shackleford writes "The Washington Post has an article saying that the RIAA is preparing hundreds of lawsuits against Internet users who illegally trade copyrighted music files. The lawsuits will target people who share 'substantial' amounts of copyrighted music, but anyone who shares illegal files is at risk, RIAA President Cary Sherman said in a conference call today. The first round of lawsuits will be prepared during the next eight to 10 weeks. They will ask for injunctions and monetary damages against file swappers. It seems that after a federal judge ruled in April that file-sharing services have legal uses and thus should not be shut down, the RIAA has found that it must go after individual users rather than the services that they use." palmech13 points to a similar article on Yahoo News.

cancel ×

2047 comments

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

That is just stupid of them (2, Informative)

mpost4 (115369) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295637)

This would kill p2p networks; I say this because they are going after only the people that shares. But not after the people that download. Well if no one shares then there will be nothing to download.

I donâ(TM)t think that if one uses p2p networks correctly that there is a major problem. When I used napster I did download some music. After downloading some songs I would either delete them if I did not like them. Or I ended up going out and getting the CD because I like what they had to offer. Now that I do not have napster anymore, I have stopped buying CDs. RIAA you only hurt yourself by trying to kill P2P file sharing networks.

--- and for those of you who see this after the site gets /.ed here is the text to the article

The chief lobby group of the nation's major recording labels today said it is preparing hundreds of lawsuits against Internet users who illegally trade copyrighted music files.
The lawsuits will target people who share "substantial" amounts of copyrighted music, but anyone who shares illegal files is at risk, RIAA President Cary Sherman said in a conference call today. The first round of lawsuits will be prepared during the next eight to 10 weeks. They will ask for injunctions and monetary damages against file swappers, Sherman said.
"We have no hard and fast rules about how many files you have to be distributing" to be targeted in the RIAA sweep, he said. "Any individual computer user who continues to steal music will face the very real risk of having to face the music."
There are 57 million Americans who use file-sharing services today, according to Boston-based research firm the Yankee Group. Among the most popular are Kazaa, Morpheus and Grokster, which became prominent after the pioneering Napster service was shut down under a judicial order in 2001. Kazaa says that its file sharing software has been downloaded more than 200 million times.
The announcement is part of an attempt to rid the Internet of illegitimate versions of copyrighted works as it tries to find a way to encourage legitimate music download services. The RIAA has said that file-sharing services exist for few other reasons.
Record companies say file sharing is to blame for more than a billion dollars in lost CD sales, as well as millions in shrinking profits. The RIAA has focused most of its efforts on shutting down peer-to-peer (P2P) networks, but a federal judge in Los Angeles in April ruled that the sites have legal uses and should not be shut down. The recording industry instead is pursuing individual file traders.
The ruling came a day after another federal judge ruled that the RIAA could force Verizon Communications Inc., to hand over the names of four of its high-speed Internet service customers who were illegally trading large amounts of copyrighted music on the Kazaa network.
The Los Angeles decision helped pave the way for the RIAA's latest legal attack, said Sherman, who confirmed that the RIAA would use its subpoena power to obtain the names of file sharers from Internet providers.
File sharing "is not anonymous. You are engaging in an activity that's every bit as public as setting up a stall at a local flea market," he said.
Sherman said the RIAA is not targeting people who use P2P networks only for downloading, but he warned that the networks often contain technology that allows members to tap other users' hard drives to make copies of music files. That process can make a digital fence out of an unwitting network user, he said.
He pointed people to the Musicunited.org Web site, which contains instructions for uninstalling file-sharing programs and for disabling the functions that open users' music libraries to pirates.
Wayne Rosso, president of the West Indies-based Grokster file-trading service, said the RIAA's tactics are "nothing short of lunacy."
"I can't wait to see what happens when a congressman or senator's child is sued," he said. "They've taken leave of their senses. They lost their [Los Angeles] lawsuit against us and they're pissed about it, so their answer is to sue their customers.
"We know this piracy is wrong and can't go on, but for God's sake, they won't work with us under any circumstances," he added.

Re:That is just stupid of them (2, Insightful)

Gimpy00Wang (684540) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295659)

I think "getting rid of the people who share" is one of their primary goals since they don't like p2p's in any capacity. :) - G!mpy

Re:That is just stupid of them (0)

mpost4 (115369) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295672)

Read my second paragraph, I talk about how people can use P2P systems to explore new artists and they might go out and get the CDâ(TM)s from these people if they like them.

Re:That is just stupid of them (3, Interesting)

chimpo13 (471212) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295676)

Have we ever slashdotted the Washington Post or Yahoo?

Help, we're not making money during this recession. We better start suing our customers. I can't wait for the recession to become a depression. Then maybe the RIAA can pay politicians to change the laws to put people into jail.

Re:That is just stupid of them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295686)

You are such an idiot.
Which site did you think was going to be slashdotted, the WASHINGTON POST??? YAHOO????
They prolly have more bandwidth than god.

Re:That is just stupid of them (1)

garcia (6573) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295696)

Uhh, isn't that the point? Kill the source of their files? Get rid of their major headache?

It's not going to kill P2P networks that are for ONLY trading allowed files, ie FurthurNET [furthurnet.com]

Re:That is just stupid of them (4, Insightful)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295711)

> This would kill p2p networks; I say this because they are going after only the people that shares. But not after the people that download. Well if no one shares then there will be nothing to download.

Uh, there would be nothing _ILLEGAL_ to download. There is plenty of material that would still be legal to transfer over P2P networks.

If you want to change the situation, you'll have to convince industry that it's in the wrong. Until then, it's still illegal. "Fair Use" hardly extends to letting hundreds of thousands (millions?) of people on the Internet that you don't know download copyrighted material from your machine.

Re:That is just stupid of them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295725)

They have to be able to find you before they can sue you. Good luck RIAA...

Re:That is just stupid of them (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295712)

Dear Karma Whore,

Thank you for doing us the "favor" of posting the text just in case the frickin' Washington Post gets Slashdotted. Thanks also for removing ALL formatting and making the blob of text difficult to read. We owe you one.

Thanks for thinking of us,
Slashdot

PS, please punch yourself in the balls

Re:That is just stupid of them (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295754)

PS, please punch yourself in the balls

done.

Re:That is just stupid of them (5, Insightful)

Surak (18578) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295776)

This would kill p2p networks; I say this because they are going after only the people that shares. But not after the people that download. Well if no one shares then there will be nothing to download.

Stupid of them? No, not stupid.

Duh! Think about it. Isn't that the point? To kill P2P networks? They're not looking for revenue from lawsuits, all they want is to stop the file sharing. Make it so no one shares, the problem is solved.

It isn't a revenue thing, and it never was. This is a power thing. Only the RIAA will determine what music gets to be popular and what does not. Not the listeners. HEIL, ROSEN! *salutes*

Re:That is just stupid of them (5, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295779)

This would kill p2p networks; I say this because they are going after only the people that shares. But not after the people that download. Well if no one shares then there will be nothing to download.
One thing to bear in mind is that most in the industry are fairly convinced that P2P filesharing is killing the industry. Rightly or wrongly, they believe that if someone has access to a free MP3 of a piece of music, they will not buy a CD containing the same bit of music, whereas they might had they not had access to a free version.

I recall the infamous Oxford Union debate which included Hillary Rosen who asked, obviously expecting a different answer, how many students had increased their CD spending after using P2P networks. She was, by all accounts, baffled (and probably thinking she was being lied to) when a majority of the students raised their hands.

On a basic moral issue, it really is up to the artists whether their works should be redistributed for free in an environment where that promise of control over their works has been made (and copyright laws constitute that promise.) Most record labels have the ability to provide free downloads themselves should they ever believe that such marketing would help sales. Many artists do provide free downloads of some, most, or all of their catalogs at their own websites.

I think the death of P2P sharing is not, even if its defenders are right about a supposedly positive effect it has on the medium, necessarily going to kill the labels or harm the artists. There are alternatives, but they put the question of what to distribute, how, why, and for how much, in the hands of the artists and publishers, not the "fans".

(Now watch me get modded down faster than it takes to download "Video killed the radio star" from Gnutella)

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295638)

fp

YOU FAIL IT! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295673)

YOU FAIL IT!

go shoot yourself in the head.

This just in... (5, Funny)

bytes256 (519140) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295641)

SCO sues the RIAA for stealing their business model

Woot! anotehr FP!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295642)

*_T_U_B_G_I_R_L_*_T_U_B_G_I_R_L_*_T_U_B_G_I_R_L_*
T_____________________/***********\_____________T
U__________________/***(****)(**)**\____________U
B_______,-_~_-_(*(*)***/__\********|____________B
G_____/________(***(*(*)____\**)*(**|___________G
I___/__________(**)**)______(*)****/____________I
R_,___________|*()/___\______(***/_-----------__R
L.___________/***/_____\_,\``(*(*)________(____)L
*/___________/*/________\__|_/**/---___,_,_____|*
T________/__/*/__\______|__|_|*|____,/______\__|T
U_______/_((*))_###_\__0____(**)/--/_________\_/U
B\_/________-___\_##__/__-___/*(___|____________B
G_,________________-__)__\__(*)____\____________G
I.____________________\__/__()__\___\___________I
R/_____________________\___Cmdr_)\__)___________R
L_______________________\(_Taco)_/__(___________L
*________________________|\______|___/__________*
T_________________________|___-__|__/___________T
U\_________________________\---_-------_________U
B_\________________________/___|_______---------B
G__\______________________/____|______________(_G
I___\___________________/______|______----------I
R______\______________/______-_-------__________R
L___________----________________________________L
*_T_U_B_G_I_R_L_*_T_U_B_G_I_R_L_*_T_U_B_G_I_R_L_*
Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal.Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal.Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal.Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messry to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal.Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal.Important Stuff:

aw fsck (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295671)

oh well. at least I had an EP (early post)

Re:aw fsck (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295793)

christ that image is inconprehensible.
couldnt you at least link it, i like tub girl.
i wanna fuck her distended anus while she showers me with shit

Re:Woot! anotehr FAILURE!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295728)

tubgirl FAILS IT!

How I escape the RIAA (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295645)

I trade only in oggs. Right now, ogg is off the radar. I only get a few people who download from me, and I'm pretty sure they're not the RIAA.

Re:How I escape the RIAA (1)

alienhazard (660628) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295715)

is there any particualr place you get ogg music? i find it very difficult to find ogg music.

Re:How I escape the RIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295729)

Gnutella, usenet, kazaa (a little). Gnutella's gotten more ogg friendly recently with more clients handling ogg by default.

not this time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295648)

im not first

Good thing (5, Funny)

Waab (620192) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295649)

I only use file swapping services for new release movies, software and pr0n. I have nothing to fear from the RIAA.

Re:Good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295687)

Good thing I don't share music and just leech it.

Re:Good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295801)

Hear Hear!! I am 100% leech as well. Life is good!

Re:Good thing (0, Redundant)

Uart (29577) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295724)

You do have something to fear from the MPAA though. So do I.

Re:Good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295791)

Thank God my bittorrent of Matrix Reloaded will be finished today so I can stop attracting attention!

<knock knock knock>

Re:Good thing (1)

dpilot (134227) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295807)

I recently saw where someone is going after pr0n sites for patent violation. Apparently they have a patent on some sort of graphic distribution scheme. If you're going to go after someone, at least go after someone with money, end everyone knows that pr0n is one of the few web business turning a profit.

(specific reference forgotten)

in other news.... (5, Funny)

mrpuffypants (444598) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295652)

The announcement is part of an attempt to rid the Internet of illegitimate versions of copyrighted works as it tries to find a way to encourage legitimate music download services.

in other news every single mp3 dissapeared today from the internet. Hillary Rosen was heard to scream "Smells....like.....victory...."

Re:in other news.... (0, Troll)

XianDeath (543687) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295744)

If I still had my moderator points from yesterday, I'd have given you all of them just for the link in the sig... well referenced.

Re:in other news.... (1)

griffjon (14945) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295788)

...unfortunately for the RIAA, they were just all replaced by OGGs...

Can we sue... (1)

SegFaultCM (617569) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295655)

the RIAA for wasting our time with so many stories of their antics?

They really need to get a clue.

Now is the time. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295656)

cat /dev/urandom > Moby_Stars.mp3

Share as much random noise with copyrighted noise as you can. God, I would love to go to court for these guys and have them play my "music" for the jury.

Assholes.

Re:Now is the time. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295710)

cat /dev/urandom > Moby_Stars.mp3

Hmm, results in disk full, try :

dd if=/dev/urandom of=Moby_Stars.mp3 bs=1024 count=96

Re:Now is the time. (1)

xpulsar87x (305131) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295755)

Shouldn't you be careful going about such a practice? I had an idea of sharing popular named music (such as Metallica, etc) that all the content of the file would be would be "f the RIAA" repeated, but my senses got the better of me.

Who has the burden of proof in this example, is it the RIAA proving that the file contains what it is named, or is it you proving the file DOES NOT contain what it is named. I would assume the RIAA would simply attempt to burn you at the stake for even having a similarly named file, and that they would disregard the contents.

Re:Now is the time. (1)

castrox (630511) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295785)

Too bad you just implemented their own plan.

Cry me a river (1, Troll)

mao che minh (611166) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295658)

Simple answer: stop violating the rights of the RIAA and stealing and distributing their property, or face prosecution and legal fees.

It is illegal to obtain copyrighted material from sources that are not authorized to distribute it - especially knowingly, but knowledge of the illegal act is not neccassary. The buck stops there. Whether or not increased music "sharing" benefits the music industry, or if a lack of good music is to blame for falling profits, or the economy is the cause, etc, is completely irrelevant. Stop stealing.

Re:Cry me a river (5, Insightful)

theLOUDroom (556455) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295727)

It is illegal to obtain copyrighted material from sources that are not authorized to distribute it - especially knowingly, but knowledge of the illegal act is not neccassary. The buck stops there. Whether or not increased music "sharing" benefits the music industry, or if a lack of good music is to blame for falling profits, or the economy is the cause, etc, is completely irrelevant. Stop stealing.

Price fixing is also illegal.

So are cartels.

Welcome to the real world where people break the law, and only the poor or unlucky deal with the consequences.

Re:Cry me a river (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295743)

As if that somehow makes stealing copyrighted music OK? Stop redirecting the argument.

Re:Cry me a river (1)

LordKaT (619540) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295736)

Modded down Troll?

Alright, maybe he is trolling, but I think this deserves a little focus. The RIAA is treating this like business; however, the people who trade files do not look on it as a business, but as a hobby. It's a serious conflict of interest.

Honestly, I think the RIAA is going about this all wrong, and as soon as the lawsuits start, there is going to be a rather large backlash. What else could they do? Well, for one thing, not be so damn afraid of technology.

--LordKaT

Re:Cry me a river (0, Troll)

cfscript (654864) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295739)

why was this post modded troll you socialist fucktwats?

Re:Cry me a river (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295759)

Stealing? You seem to be using a word that describes a certain action, and applying it to a completely different action. Learn to express yourself. If one copies a "copyrighted" string of data, one is not stealing, although one might be guilty of one or more intellectual property "crimes".

Hmmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295767)

I own a cable modem and router, will the RIAA come after me because my roommate downloads bootleg songs without my knowledge? If they can't sue the ISPs then how can they sue people who may share their bandwidth through a cable/DSL router?

Also, Kazza has 240,000,000 downloads. The odds of the RIAA getting you have got to be fairly slim. Sounds like they're going after the guys with 300GB hard drives and T3s.

Re:Cry me a river - you got it! (2, Interesting)

MerryGoByeBye (447358) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295774)

Why?

Why should I not "steal" music which I've already bought, but was delivered in a shit format? Why should I not "steal" music which is not available any longer? Why should I feel bad about taking a miniscule portion of some conglomerate's profits which for years has been selling me inferior music (thanks to ridiculous contractual obligations) on inferior media (originally, to save money; now to fuck me in the ass) for huge profits which go straight into the backpockets of knobs like Jack Valenti and almost none of which end up in the artists' hands?

Please, please please, tell me why I should stop "stealing" again. Please.

What comes around goes around! Cry me a river, indeed.

Re:Cry me a river (1)

DASHSL0T (634167) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295786)

Stop stealing.

Nobody is stealing. They are infringing on someone's copyright. Big difference.

Oh no! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295660)

Oh no! They set us up the bomb!!!

hong kong (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295662)

i bet theyll make a lot of money because niggers cant afford computars and white people haved money

please dont mod me down this is a serious inquiery

Re:hong kong (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295733)

what does race have to do with filesharing?

Huh??? (5, Funny)

TopShelf (92521) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295669)

"The Washington Post has an article saying that it is preparing hundreds of lawsuits against Internet users who illegally trade copyrighted music files."

So the Washington Post is suing music file traders??? Since when did they join the RIAA?

Re:Huh??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295748)

Don't you know? All media organizations eventually become part of either the RIAA or the MPAA.

Especially a corporate-owned newspaper, which is basically a form of entertainment anyway.

We keep losing customers! (5, Funny)

MerryGoByeBye (447358) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295670)

I don't understand! We sue the fuckers, and they still won't buy our products!

-- Jack Valenti

Is this it? (2, Interesting)

gricholson75 (563000) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295675)

I've heard talk that once the RIAA starts suing the general public, that's when there will be a huge public complaint against them. So, what do my fellow Slashdotter's think, will this be another nail in the coffin of the music industry as we know it. Or will they succeed in scaring(sp?) people out of trading files?

seems legitimate to me (4, Insightful)

73939133 (676561) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295677)

These companies do have copyrights on the songs in question and their copyrights are being violated. Going after the people who violate their copyrights seems legitimate to me. This is the way things should work.

What I have always objected to with the RIAA actions is that they have been trying to restrict what I can do even though I'm not trading in copyrighted content. It is the chilling effect on legitimate uses that have made past legal actions and laws like the DMCA so harmful.

Re:seems legitimate to me (2, Insightful)

Chmarr (18662) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295806)

I agree... I'd much rather the people ACTUALLY doing something illegal be punished, rather than me just for using technology (file swapping, CDRs, DeCSS, etc) that the pirates just happening to be using.

Uh Oh... (1)

nycsubway (79012) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295678)

What is considered 'Substantial'... I can't say that I've downloaded any music myself, however I do have a friend, with say, a lot downloaded MP3s... I'm just wondering how this 'friend' would be effected by this?

Re:Uh Oh... (1)

Old Uncle Bill (574524) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295768)

My question is, how the hell do they prove you are sharing 1000 MP3s? Do they download every single one, or just 3 and assume the rest are legit?

Not surprised (1)

BigDork1001 (683341) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295679)

I doubt that anyone here is surprised by this. The RIAA didn't have any luck going after the p2p networks so now they're gonna go after users who don't have the money to afford legal support needed to take them on.

Hopefully this will backfire and blow up in their face. One more nail in their coffin.

This May Be A Good Thing (tm) (3, Interesting)

evronm (530821) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295682)

If they go after enough people, those people will probably organize and be able to put together a decent defense, unlike the lone college students they've been harrassing to date.

At the very least, if this happens, the RIAA could be stuck with a significant legal bill...

Let's sue... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295685)

all those GPL violators and make them pay and intimidate them, because THAT kind of stealing is immoral.

The kind of stealing slashbots like is ok though.

Why the negative slant? (5, Insightful)

ProtonMotiveForce (267027) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295692)

What's wrong with this, supposedly, why does the article make it sound like "Oh no, more evil antics from the RIAA"!

They are doing the _right_ thing. Go after people breaking the law, not the entire service.

Newsbreak! You don't have the right to download free music!

Dumb, dumb, dumb (2, Insightful)

dragoncortez (603226) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295693)

This is ridiculous. If the RIAA wasn't so concerned plummeting sales (hello, it's the economy stupid!) they'd realize that letting things run their course would be far wiser. With Kazaa threatening to go legal, and Apple's iTunes doing so well, it's only a matter of time before users get tired of hunting down songs hidden among garbage tracks on the free p2p networks.
I mean, just the other day, I was trying to download a couple songs from the new Third Eye Blind album because I'd left the CD that I'd already purchased at home, but I downloaded 20 rotten tracks for every one that I was looking for.

Re:Dumb, dumb, dumb (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295781)

Third Eye Blind? Do yourself a favor and download some real music next time.

Time wasters (1)

Thumb-One (653376) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295695)

Seriously, some legal-eagle has to figure out a strategy that will tie up the RIAA's legal team's CPU cycles. The RIAA assumes these individual's resources are limited, so they will fold. Someone needs to disabuse the RIAA of the notion that they are immune to similar tactics.

no problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295702)

if you see me on the news for holding the RIAA hostage, don't be surprised

bust a cap, son

The way it should be (3, Insightful)

aridhol (112307) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295704)

I have no sympathy for those who are sued (assuming reasonable penalties). They break the law, they get caught, they get punished. I don't see anything wrong with that.

Why is this "stuff that matters"?

And this suprises us how? (2, Funny)

moc.tfosorcimgllib (602636) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295705)

We knew this was the strategy they have been building towards. Much like Dumbledore we must learn to keep our allies at a distance, lest they become a snake and bite us with their poison music files.

What we must do to survive is to make sure the battle we fight is in front of the ministry of magic so that everyone will see what evils the RIAA has in store for everyone, and to also show the world he-who-must-not-be-named is back.

So gather arms, and start working in secret ways to continue learning new and unique file-trading secrets. We might have to flood the p2p networks with 1kb text files renamed to popular mp3 music files. Something that wouldn't take any time to download or discredit as an mp3, but enough to fool the evil Death Eaters into thinking these files were in fact, the real mp3 files they wanted.

So Fight brave young Potter, fight to live another day!

Can you say boycott? (4, Interesting)

mindlessrabble (210490) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295707)

If we all boycott RIAA members products (yes downloads too), we can hurt them.

There is room for a meeting of the minds. RIAA members basically charge $15.00 for something that costs them $.25 ($.01 for the plastic and $.24 to the artist). No industry that has to mark up raw materials 60 times to cover marketing and distribution can expect to survive.

At the very least a boycott of just a couple of months would defund the RIAA.

Just a random question (5, Interesting)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295708)

Can all of us file a lawsuit claming that the RIAA continues to overcharge for the sale of CD's even after courts found them guilty, rapes its musicians of duly earned money, and for blatent infringement on our rights as a consumer pertaining to free personal use of music purchased? You know only cause its like calling the kettle black to say they are so high and mighty and we are all evil law breakers

It's time for a militia (5, Funny)

rice_web (604109) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295713)

I was holding back, but it's time to start a militia and hit 'em where it hurts: the stomach, elbow, etc.

I can assemble a force of 1,000 drunk North Dakotans with hunting rifles in about a week!

Potential to end Reign of Terror (4, Interesting)

DarkBlackFox (643814) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295714)

This could potentially be a good thing:

Out of the hundreds of users targeted by these lawsuits, all it would take is one to stand his/her ground and fight. Once one rises to the challenge, a following will form. Once the following is formed, more and more attention will be levied on the case. The more attention the case recieves, the more people will become aware of the monopolistic and grossly unconstitutional actions of the RIAA. Once more people become aware, Congress will have to start paying attention to the people again.

Keep in mind, up to this point all the people (or students) the RIAA has sued have settled. What would happen if at least one stands up and goes to court?

The constitutionality of the DMCA and associated laws would undoubtedly be the first things reviewed, and again, given enough attention, could be soundly defeated.

Heres to crossing my fingers.

zigging when they should zag (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295717)

Well, these clowns have been fighting the wrong battles here for ages. This one is no surprise.

The strength of P2P has nothing to do with the small % of users who share huge amounts of material. It's the combination of thousands of individuals each sharing a small amount of material. Seeing tactics like this is even counterproductive because it sends the message that sharing a few files is okay; the real crime is sharing lots of files.

Even with its size, the RIAA isn't big enough to sue the litte guys who are the engine of P2P. This human-redundancy is why P2P is around to stay.

Whew! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295718)

I'm glad that I only share porn.

This 'ownership of ideas' is an important issue (3, Insightful)

Raindance (680694) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295719)

How people understand cultural and legal issues is often in terms of analogies; the RIAA is trying to create and focus attention on the analogy between copying music and theft; copy music and youâ(TM)re a common thief.

What are some better analogies? Music as basic human right when available, music as buckets full of water from a communal village stream?

How weâ(TM)ll think of the ownership of ideas is being determined right now. Iâ(TM)d say weâ(TM)ve an obligation not only to ourselves but also to others in our culture and future generations to think critically about what weâ(TM)re making music, the access to music, and the ownership of music, analogous to.

Isn't the problem the other way? (4, Interesting)

Nephilium (684559) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295720)

I thought it wasn't the sharing that was illegal, but the downloading of material you don't have rights to. This looks like it's just going to fall under safe harbor...

Nephilium

FUD (5, Interesting)

onyxruby (118189) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295722)

This is FUD pure and simple. They simply don't have the resources in lawyers and the like to take this to a widespread level. A tactic used by civil rights workers back in the 60's was to have so many people present, and so many people arrested that they overwhelmed the system, forcing the let-go of the rest. If enough people get involved in enough jurisdictions, than at least one of them will get an intelligent judge. With that intelligent judge a precedent about fair use with regards to music can be set, letting the rest go.


Enough cases and favorable precedent will be set somewhere. Some of these precedents will make their way up to district courts, and could eventually make their way all the way to the Supreme Court, a risk the **AA's just can't take. We've seen this before from the **AA's where they were afraid of a precedent going against them and dropped the case. They know about this, and don't dare make this as widespread as many people seem to believe they would.

One thing leads to another... (1)

theoddball (665938) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295723)

Well, now I'll have to start making bootlegs of the music I download and selling 'em...otherwise I'll never be able to cover my legal bills.

OK with me... but they need to be careful. (5, Insightful)

sdo1 (213835) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295730)

Isn't this pretty much what everyone wants? If someone stabs someone else to death with a knife, you don't go after the knife maker (P2P software) you go after the murderer (copyright violator).

(it's just an analogy, so save your breath... I'm not at all suggesting that copyright violators are equated with murderers and you know it)

My big concern is that I want to make sure the RIAA/MPAA/etc. are VERY careful about who the sue. They need to make VERY SURE that those they are suing are actually making the copyrighted works available for download or or downloading them. No blanket lawsuits that snag people who haven't done anything wrong (we all know the Professor with the with mp3 of his speach or the kid with the Harry Potter book report). And they also need to be very careful about snagging people who are sharing songs that the bands don't mind being shared. There are many bands out there that don't care at all if their live performances are shared amongst fans.

But I really have no problem with people being sued for sharing commercialy available copyrighted works. That's the law, it's how it should be, and it means that there's NO NEED for new laws to cover this.

-S

Jail (1)

skinnedmink (637713) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295734)

I might as well start walking to jail now.

RIAA - Lawsuits for fun and profit (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295735)

This proves the RIAA is masterminded by the $cientoloi$t$.

LOOK AT MY .SIG (2, Informative)

Lonath (249354) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295737)

I called this *MONTHS* ago. I suggest that if this pisses you off, do a few things.

  1. Stop stealing stuff.
  2. Never give money to the copyright industry again.
  3. Vote for people who don't support this kind of extortion.


Check out this post! [slashdot.org]

The more of us share.. (1)

andr0meda (167375) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295741)

.. the harder it will be to nail down a single individual.

And maybe the generous people of the kazaa crowd can set up a small fund for anybody who get's sued after all? If the p2p networks also distribute the costs of the risks involved with a large userbase, then no-one should feel anything heavy at all.

Now here's a business model that work..

Lots of angry parents in 3...2...1... (4, Insightful)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295749)

Presumably, internet accounts are maintained in the name(s) of the adults in the house. Thus, irregardless of who is swapping songs over the broadband connect, there will be lots of unsuspecting Moms & Dads getting hit with these lawsuits out of nowhere.

Are we about to see the first "reverse class-action" lawsuit, where all the *defendants* band together to protect themselves against 1 plaintant? I call dibs on the patent :)

We're never happy (4, Insightful)

weave (48069) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295750)

Let's see, in the beginning, our collective position was that it's not the fault of ISPs and programs that their users use them in illegal ways and targetting the ISPs and software vendors was not right. Common carrier arguments and all.

So now RIAA are targeting people who are sharing the stuff out, now we're all going to say how evil that is too.

Isn't it great to be fickle! :)

But seriously, what happens if a user doesn't know their stuff is being shared? What if the next windows worm searches out for someone's legal mp3 collection and then connects to a p2p network and shares it out, all unknown to the user? A stretch? Hardly, certainly possible.

Didn't someone just get a case thrown out for having child porn on their computer because they maintained that their computer was hacked and the stuff planted there?

I assume RIAA is doing this in civil courts and hence won't need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, but I am still curious how they intend to make a case that each user actually knew they were sharing files.

(I also assume they don't expect anyone to fight it and to just roll over and settle...)

Still, if this kills illegal trading, I think it's a good thing. Call me old fashioned, but I still believe people should pay for this stuff and if it's a load of rubbish -- which most of it is -- don't buy it. At least then maybe they will stop blaming the net for declining sales and maybe, just maybe, produce some better and more diverse talent at a fair price. But I am still concerned about innocents being caught in the collateral damage and hence don't trust RIAA to execute this fairly.

The RIAA can go to hell (1)

deman1985 (684265) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295751)

I still fail to see how the RIAA or even the courts can assign some arbitrary value to "monetary damages" caused by people sharing files. How do they know the people downloading the file will ever even listen to it, much less that they would have bought it?

The very thought of them going after individual file sharing users sickens me. The RIAA needs to be more innovative and find ways to make being legal seem more "appealing" rather than just trying to scare the little people and take their money.

This is no surprise . . . (1)

werdna (39029) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295756)

. . . nor is it necessarily a bad thing.

So long as RIAA is able to argue to the Congress (who, whether you buy it or not is quite convinced, as are the courts, that unauthorized file sharing with third parties is properly actionable under the copyright Act) that individual actions are impractical and useless, they will be able to agitate for more laws like the DMCA.

Copyright infringement is actionable, and if some particular conduct that involves file sharing is copyright infringement, then it is actionable. But as we all know, the technology admits a kazillion possibilities for non-actionable and socially useful results. It is the latter that I am concerned about protecting.

I *DO NOT WANT* to have RIAA argue that we should circumscribe and turn back fair use and the first sale doctrine. I *DO NOT WANT* to have RIAA argue for more, non-balanced non-IP rights such as the anticircumvention rights under DMCA.

So, if they have to sue a few hundred people who ARE infringing, so be it. This is as it should be. If RIAA can't stand the PR or sell the public on the idea that this is the right thing to do, that's their problem. If promiscuous file-sharers are using modern technology to obtain massive libraries of music that they didn't pay for, that, too, is their problem.

Me, I want fair use, the ability to conveniently have access to the media I purchased or licensed and the ability to share information in the modern age. And if the RIAA and promiscuous sharers don't like it, they can both go to hell.

What about.... (1)

Hinokagutsuchi (591570) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295757)

What about people like me that have several thousand mp3s, all of which are from CDs I own? Having a nice, big list of mp3s is easier than changing cds every five minutes.

Prove It. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295760)

I would guess they would have to download each and every song and verify it was infringing, otherwise their claims of copywrite violations are just that "claims"

Why are the RIAA/MPAA only ones complaining (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295762)

about file swapping. I would have to say that a large percentage of files swapped are of Pornography. However, I have yet to hear one complaint from the companies who produce these movies. It would seem that they would have the most to lose, since people would probably not buy the original product after downloading. Most people probably see this as a good alternative to buying these materials as it is more anonymous than going to the store, or even ordering over credit card, and having it deliver in "discrete" packaging. I wonder if sales of pornography have been hurt by P2P

Peer-to-peer suing (2, Funny)

pmz (462998) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295764)

Why doesn't the RIAA distribute MP3s that sing "You are so sued! (Copyright 2003 RIAA)" when played? This would save them a lot of paperwork.

Reverse Psychology? (2, Interesting)

qorkfiend (550713) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295769)

"I can't wait to see what happens when a congressman or senator's child is sued," he said. "They've taken leave of their senses. They lost their [Los Angeles] lawsuit against us and they're pissed about it, so their answer is to sue their customers. ..." - Wayne Rosso

*sarcasm* This is a sure way to get consumers back on the RIAA's good side. Once they sue a few of us, we'll all stop, and we'll buy lots of CDs from the people who sued us.*end sarcasm*

No really. I cannot think of a single idea that could possibly drive a bigger wedge between the RIAA and its consumers.

Um... (2, Insightful)

Gaijinator (218180) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295770)

Why are they starting with the lawsuits while most college kids are on summer break, and therefore not P2P-ing on the college networks? That's where most of the filesharing occurs...

This is good (4, Insightful)

Night Goat (18437) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295771)

I for one have no problem with this, other than my wanting to side with the little guy and not "The Man." It's illegal, as far as I know, to distribute content that you don't have the right to distribute. Better the RIAA go after actual lawbreakers than they go after services which are used for legitimate purposes as well.

Oh, and for those of you who got freaked out after reading that the RIAA's cracking down, there's always EMusic [emusic.com] and the Apple Store. I did notice that it is frequently cheaper to just buy the CD at Cheap CDs.com [cheap-cds.com] than it is to pay $9.99 for the AAC-encoded album. Check there first! Just a public service announcement so you don't get screwed like I did. :)

Interesting notes from IP seminar (3, Informative)

notcreative (623238) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295773)

At the Oregon State Bar CLE Seminar on Intellectual Property, they mentioned a provision of the DMCA that states, as I understand it, that someone can only be sued under the statute if their financial gain from the activity can be shown to be over 1000$ during a period of 180 days. This would imply that people who swap a couple of songs a week would be safe from prosecution. In fact, 1000/180 = 5.55$ a day, which would be five songs (and an NSYNC song) at the Apple rates of 1 song = 1 dollar.

Another interesting fact was that there is a three year statute of limitations for infringement for civil suites, so all those college collections of music you made should be free and clear.

IANAL, but I'd like to be one day, mostly so I don't wind up in jail. Again.

GSM Sucks ASS! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295777)

Okay I just returned by AT&T GSM cellphone.

Its sad that I began to wish for a 56K modem setup while I was using the device.

If you want slow then go with GSM. If you want high speed then wifi is the only thing you can use in the US right now. Maybe 3G/4G will fix this. But since it is taking forever for GSM to spread to the entire US i doubt any other options will come out within the next 10 years.

How BitTorrent will save us all (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6295782)

"No, your honor, I didn't actually share the copyrighted material in question. I shared a stream of 1's and 0's which they then compiled into the copyrighted material on their PC. My 1's and 0's in no way violated anyone's copyright, as without the others, it's nothing but garbage data."

It is their right, but... (5, Insightful)

TurboDog99 (442475) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295783)

As I've said before, I think the best solution for the RIAA will be to clean up their image and get people on their side. If people saw artists and their organization as people who need to make a living instead of money hungry whores, they may get a bit more sympathy from the market. These lawsuits are probably costing them more than they are making from them, and the bad PR is just driving their customers away instead of bringing them back. I think what the lawsuits will instead cause is that the next big P2P network will be encrypted and anonymous like Freenet is striving for.

Good thing I don't live in the US (4, Funny)

danny256 (560954) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295792)

I think I'll share a few more albums to help out the poor Americans, I don't think the RIAA is going to launch any international lawsuits.

Illegal files? (2, Interesting)

BorgCopyeditor (590345) | more than 11 years ago | (#6295795)

The thing that bugs me is the term "illegal files". There are no illegal files, even if there are (currently) illegal uses of those files. The benefit of p2p as I see it is that I can download songs from a CD that I own if I happen not to want to spend the hour it takes to rip them myself.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>