×

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!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

252 comments

hmmmm (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090687)

Well well is this a frist prost?

Do the "takers" really count? (5, Funny)

Dancin_Santa (265275) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090696)

37 Ben Dovers
22 I.P. Freelys
20 Hugh Jasses

C'mon people, they are trying to run a business here, not deal with cranks.

Re:Do the "takers" really count? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090807)

Which idiot mod'ed parent as troll?

Re:Do the "takers" really count? (1)

Penguinshit (591885) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090997)


Hugh Jass

Wolverine is downloading MP3s??

wow man.. does Dr. Xavier know about this?

Nothing unexpected. (0, Redundant)

grolschie (610666) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090699)

As to be expected, why would anyone volunteer for this?

Re:Nothing unexpected. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090811)

You might want to volunteer if you're a proactive paranoid computer-illiterate parent with a son who you think can get into trouble because when he's in the basement the computer is playing music without cds.

Sacrificial lamb? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090889)

Does someone wanna settle on behalf of all "default_user@kazaalite.tk" users? And the variants?

my advice (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090700)

why dont you little geeks try being MEN for once, and go watch football (thats what *MEN* do on monday night) instead of sitting here wanking off about the "RIAA" (whatever that is), and this "linux" (whatever that is)... maybe someday you can even talk to a girl! GASP!

838! (2, Insightful)

cliffy2000 (185461) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090713)

And how many of them will be sued next year after lapsing back into their MP3 addictions? Hmmmm...

they must be kdding... (2, Interesting)

cRueLio (679516) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090714)

do they think that i'm gonna turn myself in and possible be closely watched etc. when I can just keep on sharing files with almost 0% chance of getting caught!?? heh! this is the funniest thing i've ever heard. i'm gonna take my chances and keep on sharing ... (using PeerGuardian - you can never be too careful) ...

This surprises me (4, Interesting)

scrote-ma-hote (547370) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090715)

I would have thought that it would have been more than this. There's a lot of P2P sharers out there, and surely some of them wouldn't understand the ramifications of what they were doing. Then they see this, think "that's good, I won't get into trouble now", and get a clean slate. 838 is ridiculously low.

Re:This surprises me (4, Interesting)

Davak (526912) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090787)

An older buddy of mine got scared, called, and said that he would stop sharing files. They told him to delete everything and that he would not be charged. End of story. They never took his name, number, sent him a get-out-of-free card, or anything.

So...

I'm assuming if they come after you. one can just erase everything and say, "I called and the guy said if I erase everything, you would forgive me."

Re:This surprises me (4, Insightful)

B.D.Mills (18626) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090799)

There's a sucker born every minute. Spammers make a "living" the same way. Spammers spam to millions, and make all their profit on the miniscule percentage that respond to the offer. The RIAA is doing much the same thing - making a dubious offer to the gullible - and it's not really surprising that the response rates are similar to the response rates for spam.

I would love to get hold of the list of people that have responded to the RIAA's offer. I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I want to sell cheap.

Not me (1)

Prof.Nimnul (583515) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090920)

I'm guessing that the vast majority of P2P users are in one of two camps. Either A) They're still not aware of what exactly is going on (it's not like this has really gotten a lot of play in the mainstream press), or B) They're part of the "It's not going to happen to me" crowd.

Most of the people I know still download music without a second thought, and still don't consider this to be the horrible sin that the RIAA is stating it to be.

A third possibility is that some people, like the 12-year old who was sued, is still under the impression that by paying a subscription to KaZaA, they're in the clear to download music availible on that service.

In any case, it's still too early to tell if this is going to work or not. The more lawsuits the RIAA presses, the more coverage they'll get, and as evidenced thus far, it'll only drive the wedge between and the public further.

Matt

Re:This surprises me (1)

El (94934) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090929)

The set of people who are cluefull enough to know the amnesty exists, and yet still clueless enough to beleive it will do them any good, is actually quite small. Plus, it costs time and money to have your confession notarized. I wonder if any of those 838 are faked confessions sent in with the name of RIAA officials...

On the other hand... (1)

Atario (673917) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090725)

...according to news reports [sfgate.com] , 52 out of 261 of the people sued have settled so far.

On the other other hand, this bit of news is brought to us by the RIAA themselves -- a continuation of their FUD PR stuntery.

On the other other other hand, all this still makes the RIAA look bad.

Good night, and screw the RIAA.

Re:On the other hand... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090884)

Yeah, we only like the FUD when it involves anti-RIAA properganda.

Maybe one of the people they are suing parents that have a baby, and then we can have the best "RIAA is t3h eval!!" headline: "RIAA Sues Six Month Old Child!"

Good night, and screw Slashdot's hypocrisy.

Proclamation (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090726)

Know ye timothy, that we of slashdot
have deemed ye to be of the vilest sort
of editors, descended from the under-races
and fathered by lustful perverse acts. So
hereby do we recommend you for sexual revision
at the GNAA house for anal reeducation. Know
that all you understand currently about your
anus will be unmade in your psyche, and you
will find new and more wondrous uses for your
back-end. It is not a rear window, timothy
it is a door. Soon, immense phalluses of
significant natural pigmentation will burst
through that door, and your life will change
forever.

Misplaced use of the word "only" (0, Interesting)

Transient0 (175617) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090729)

I think that one in a thousand is actually a pretty high rate. Considering the rather dubious ground that the law-suits are actually resting on, and the fact that this dubious ground has been at least mentioned in a lot of media, I'm not at all surprised to hear that 99.9% of people are at least waiting long enough to talk to their lawyers before caving in.

All us "geeks" know better than to jump at the chance to prostrate ourselves before the RIAA, let's give the rest of the world a little credit for common sense too.

Re:Misplaced use of the word "only" (1)

Hitiek (150559) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090771)

Reread the article. 1/1000th of 1 percent. That is 1 in 100,000, not 1 in 1000.

Re:Misplaced use of the word "only" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090773)

1/1000 of 1% = 1/1000 of 0.01 = .00001 = 1/100000, so 1 in 100 000 (assuming someone at /. didn't get something mixed up (like I did $0.07 != .07 cents)

Re:Misplaced use of the word "only" (1)

cgranade (702534) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090774)

Er... that's one one-thousandth of a percent, or one millionth. RTFA.

Re:Misplaced use of the word "only" (1)

cgranade (702534) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090797)

Sorry. That should have been one 100,00th... I am tired, I guess. I even previewed...

Re:Misplaced use of the word "only" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090776)

Yeah, one in a thousand would be high. "less than 1/1000th of one percent" is rather lower.

Failed to notice the word "percent" (3, Funny)

MarkusQ (450076) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090780)


I think that one in a thousand is actually a pretty high rate.

Yes, but what they got was less than one percent of that.

In the metric system at least, 1% of "pretty high" is roughly equal to "quite low".

-- MarkusQ

Re:Misplaced use of the word "only" (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090781)

How did this fool get moded up to 2. Read more closely.

That's less than 1/1000th of one percent of the estimated number of P2P users worldwide."

Re:Misplaced use of the word "only" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090802)

Not one out of every one thousand, idiot -- 1/1000th of one percent. In other words, one out of every one million. Read the article, THEN post...

Re:Misplaced use of the word "only" (1)

halo1982 (679554) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090805)

No, its not 1 in 1000, its 1/1000th of a percent. 1*1000=1% *100%=100000 so i guess its 1 in 100000 And that would mean that there are around 84 million file sharers around. Does that figure seem a little low to anyone else?

No! No! No! (1)

khenson (706671) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090966)

Referencing A coupled cluster study of the 1 1A1g and 1 1B2u states of benzene and substituting reality for crap, inserting RIAA users and solving for responses we clearly see that the number of amnesty pleas was actually 1000 in every 10... Read the article Man!! and never match wits with a sicilian when death is on the line!!!

A good sign (4, Insightful)

7759-60784-1-E (706154) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090733)

People aren't falling for the RIAA's line of bullshit. It's somewhat reassuring to know that only 1/1000th of one percent of the p2p using public aren't stupid enough to completely open themselves up to litigation. I wonder what kind of legal steps the RIAA might take after this development, though (increasing, decreasing prosecutions), and what might happen to those unfortunate 800-odd folks who did fall for it.

Re:A good sign (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090918)

...p2p using public aren't stupid enough to completely open themselves up to litigation.

Thats why they are still illegally traiding music files on p2p! Its not like P2P users are stupid enough to open themselves to litigat..... Umm, wait a minute...

the poor blighted souls (3, Funny)

Alien54 (180860) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090734)

I am reminded of the far side cartoon: "bummer birthmark, man"

Did the RIAA at least send them a t-shirt with a nice target design on it? (your choice of in the back, or on the front)

[on the other hand, maybe the signees are lawyers setting up some sort of a legal honey pot.]

Re:the poor blighted souls (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090989)

Actually, you'd think they'd be handing out shorts; up the ass or your fucked:)

*ONLY* 838 takers?!?! (2, Insightful)

Spazholio (314843) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090736)

Holy hell, that's several times as many people that were sued! Why would so many people go for this, when there wasn't any legal action yet? And, if I remember correctly, those who were sued were offered this "deal". Why didn't these people just wait to see if they were going to get sued, and THEN take the deal?

Re:*ONLY* 838 takers?!?! (1)

ewithrow (409712) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090767)

The RIAA "amnesty" does not apply to people who have pending litigation against them. (this is the RIAA's terms, not anyone elses).

Re:*ONLY* 838 takers?!?! (1)

Alien54 (180860) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090785)

*ONLY* 838 takers

is in fact the true number of downloaders out there. The rest are spoof accounts. These 838 will of course go to jail due to the billions they have cost the record companies. and will be responsible for all damages.

This will go down as the world's biggest practical joke, faking out the RIAA.

Re:*ONLY* 838 takers?!?! (2, Informative)

babyrat (314371) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090995)

the RIAA specifically said this offer was not extended to anyone who had already been contacted, or presumably to anyone in the future once they were contacted by the RIAA lawyers.

That's why they didn't wait.

Worldwide? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090737)

But the offer only applied to Americans. What's the fraction of Americans that have taken the offer?

Let's stick to useful statistics here please...

RIAA's version of a Legitimate business (5, Insightful)

Erik_the_Awful (675368) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090741)

"It is refreshing to see that P2P United is acknowledging that their members should be more active in educating their users about the consequences of illegal file sharing that is rampant on their networks as well as the other risks these networks pose to personal privacy and security," Amy Weiss, senior vice president of communications for RIAA, said in a statement. "But, let's face it, they need to do a whole lot more before they can claim to be legitimate businesses."

So for the P2P United businesses to become quote legitimate businesses end quote, they should act like the RIAA and the RIAA's constituents.

1. Sue their own customers.

2. "Offer" their artists (perhaps the programmers in this case?) unconscionable contracts along the line of "You agree to assign the authorship rights of your work to us. You will bear the entire financial risk of the marketing and reproduction of your work. In most cases we will receive the vast majority of the benefits of your work."

3. "Cook" their books so that any profits generated by their artists/programmers appear in the vaguest possible terms, again avoiding any requirement to actually pay the artists/programmers.

4. Control their customer's access to new and old works. Make it difficult/impossible for their customers to legally obtain works that aren't on the "top 40."

5. Accuse anyone who complains (or offers an alternative) of profound moral sins such as stealing from the artists.

6. Spend profits purchasing lobbying power to protect the above system.

7. Attack any organization or entity that appears to offer alternatives to the customers or artists.

8. Require the artists under threat of financial ruin to use the above system.

Wow. That's a great way to run a business. I'm sure that the P2P networks would be loved by everyone if they adopted to above "business plans."

I've got a few other words for Amy Weiss, but they are not fit for printing.

Re:RIAA's version of a Legitimate business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090888)


Let me try. How about:

"Suck my balls, you monkey-humping cunt-whore!"

she may only understand techspeak though... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090957)

so... bash-2.05a$ echo "Suck my balls, you monkey-humping cunt-whore!"|rot13|mail -s cuntwhore amy@riaa.org

How Much for the List? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090744)

I bet I could interest them in 20% of some soon-to-be seized Nigerian oil money. Or maybe they'd just like to verify their Paypal or Citibank user name and password / PIN codes.

RIAA's next move? (1)

TheWart (700842) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090745)

It will be very interesting to the next move made by the RIAA. Their whole 'shock and awe' campaign seems not to have rocked the boat much.
It has been said, but I will repeat it...when the 'average' person believes mp3 trading/sharing to be legal/moral/whatever, then the RIAA can threaten up the wazoo with minimal results.
At my school, a recent poll showed that well over the majority of students felt that mp3 sharing was 'ok to do' even though a much smaller percentage actually participated in the filesharing.
Seems to me, all the RIAA has done thus far is made itself look like the big, bad, wolf to the non-geek person.

In other news... (5, Insightful)

arctan1701 (635900) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090751)

In other news, 838 copyright infringement lawsuits were initiated by the major record companies. RIAA spokesman, "We're doing out part, we said that the RIAA would not sue Clean Slate suck... er... members. We have no control over what the record companies do."

Maybe the RIAA will realize people just dont care! (5, Insightful)

Mr. Ophidian Jones (653797) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090761)

It was pretty clear to everyone that the "Clean Slate" program offered nothing to individuals. If you know the RIAA is coming after people, what's the difference between admitting guilt and just stopping?

Instead, the RIAA is just building a list of "admitted offenders" to do God-knows-what with later.

One thing the RIAA and company seem to have a hard time understanding is that there will always be another way of sharing content. Peer-to-peer file sharing is just a method out of hundred other. To stop filesharing you have to stop ALL traffic on the net and screen every mail delivered in the world.

Since I can burn my files onto a CDR and swap it with a friend instead, stopping P2P sharing through the various online services is not going to accomplish anything. Maybe they will succeed in stopping a promising communications protocol from being able to mature and start being used in other ways like in a distributed OS or other ways not yet used.

The only way to stop filesharing is to gain the trust and liking of the buyers so that they pay out of free will. RIAA has taken the opposite route which already has proven itself futile. One can only watch sadly when they destroy great technology for no good.

Re:Maybe the RIAA will realize people just dont ca (1)

abertoll (460221) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090931)

Unfortunately steps have been taken and are being taken to make sure most people cannot burn music files to CDR...

And really this has been the point to begin with--they don't care if some "technically savvy" people are able to trade music, but because the common stupid user can trade any music they want, they have to try to stop it. Basically if you use Linux of course YOU can burn music files... but have you tried burning music files on Windows?

I did, and so far they have at least blocked me from burning mp3 files to CD format through Windows--even when I used non-MS software. Basically the operating system blocked it by checking to see if the file was licensed first. This was particularly frustrating seeing as how I have mp3 files which I recorded myself... do I need software to create my own licenses for myself now?

Basically if only Linux users could trade or burn music, no one would care.

and how many of these 838... (1)

tandr (108948) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090777)

... actually has a computer at home? ... and how many are older then 5?

sorry, couldn't resist :)

HIGH SPEED! (1)

SpiffyMarc (590301) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090962)

Well, I have 4 computers powering 8 CD-RWs... oh, wait, that's just one computer with a 32X burner... the RIAA has me all confused with their math [arstechnica.com] !

THAT MANY??? (1)

Theobon (691491) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090782)

Wow I didn't think there would be that many people that would actually fall for it. It is like going to a cop at a drug bust to ask if you can buy some of it.

replies? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090793)

the amnesty replies, half of which are probably fake.

Of worldwide P2P users? (3, Insightful)

inaeldi (623679) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090798)

Why the hell would anyone outside of the US even consider giving themselves in to the RIAA?

Anyone who did do that would be pretty stupid and should probably deserve to be charged.

I don't think numbers are what they're aiming for (2, Insightful)

metroid composite (710698) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090801)

"The music community's efforts have triggered a national conversation--especially between parents and kids--about what's legal and illegal when it comes to music on the Internet," said Cary Sherman, president of the RIAA, in a statement. "In the end it will be decided not in the courtrooms, but at kitchen tables across the country. We are heartened by the response we have seen so far."

This is precisely the point. I know a lot of people who are somewhat uneasy about file sharing. Giving it bad publicity was probably their goal from the outset. Not that they're going to stop hardcore swappers who know several sites other than Kazaa, have each other's emails, know how to proxy sites, et c. but plenty of casual users will think twice about getting into it.

Of the 838 how many were real? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090808)

I'm sure that more than a few of those have been the notorious file sharer, Ivan Preseley Freely (I. P. Freely). Or Amanda HugNKiss and her roomate Hugh Jass.

Of course, the RIAA might actually want to keep the numbers down so they can argue more stringent methods are needed to curb filesharing.

I want to.. (0, Redundant)

bmantz65 (642864) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090809)

personally meet the people who DID agree to settle. Then I promptly smack them in the back of their head and wonder why.

Re:I want to.. (2, Funny)

wonkamaster (599507) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090998)

Then I promptly smack them in the back of their head and wonder why.
You'll wonder why you smacked them?

May have to stop search for intelligent life jokes (2, Interesting)

Crashmarik (635988) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090813)

The other question is are these 838 people the ones that actually buy the things spammers sell ?

Seriously I am surprised anyone actually took this. Even if you were worried, and believed that the amnesty was worth something you could have checked for your name in the subpoena databases and if it wasnt there just stopped. Why expose yourself needlessly.

Re:May have to stop search for intelligent life jo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090972)

Or maybe they unlike most of slashdot are smart enough to realize that what they are doing is wrong (and I doubt that), illegal, and want to avoid the large fines that they could be charged with.

1/1000th of 1% of p2p users? (2, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090814)

That is going under the assumption that ALL P2P useage is audio piracy... and that isnt true.

Thanks for spreading false information.

Yeah, most of it is for PORN (N/T) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090874)

mmmmh, porn...

The real question is... (0, Redundant)

MarkusQ (450076) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090820)


the RIAA has only had 838 takers for their file swapping amnesty offer

I'd like to see the break down by name though. For instance, it would be interesting to see what percentage of them were named "D. McBride", "G. W. Bush", "B. Gates", "A. Coward", etc.

-- MarkusQ

Unfounded pessimism (5, Funny)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090826)

That's less than 1/1000th of one percent of the estimated number of P2P users worldwide."

I think that this statement comes from the "glass is 99,999/100,000 empty" viewpoint. I'm more of an optimist, and I prefer to look at it as 1e-5 full.

Re:Unfounded pessimism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090953)

wish i had mod points to mod this up

tsarkon reports FUCK RIAA fuck you (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090827)

Dear CEO of RIAA, and all employees of RIAA, all supporters of RIAA and all stake and shareholders of FUCKING RIAA;

You malodorous little pustuled cunts, why don't you all shove Sonicare toothbrushes up your asses, only with krazy glue instead of toothpaste, and then let those tiny scrubbing brushes do their job?

Is the ONLY time you fucking pukes appear is to bash 12 year old girls coLLege funds? Or just piss on anyone meek anytime ? RIAA - you are a but a small worm, a lowlife, with no creativity, no originality and very little intelligence. YOU MUST FUCKING DIE

Obvious to everyone but RIAA (1)

nsda's_deviant (602648) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090834)

Isn't it completelly obvious to (practiclly) everyone that the extended olive branch was just a publicity gimmick? I say practiclly only because RIAA ends up shooting themselves in the foot again with more negative publicity. How many more times can one firm screw up before the snowball becomes an avalanche? Boycott RIAA [boycott-riaa.com] is gonna go mainstream within months.

The real news in all this should be that things are going to get a lot worse before it gets better for RIAA.
RIAA Sues wrong person [slashdot.org]
P2P Music Sharing Remains Popular Despite RIAA [slashdot.org]
RIAA Sued For Amnesty Offer [slashdot.org]

Must be a lie (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090835)

I refuse to believe there are only 838 stupid people on the internet.

Re:Must be a lie (5, Funny)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090938)

It's just that all the other ones were too stupid to know what "amnesty" meant.

-- Dr. Eldarion --

I guess the public is more savvy... (2, Interesting)

vonsneerderhooten (254776) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090837)

I guess the public-at-large is more savvy than we give them credit for. People saw the loophole in this "amnesty" offer glaring them in the face, and decided it wasn't a good idea. FYI, the loophole was(is?) that signing up only guarantees you won't be prosecuted by the RIAA; you're wide open to anyone else. And no one has enough faith in the RIAA to think that they would actually do something to protect you.

my $.02


-D

Re:I guess the public is more savvy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090860)

I guess the public-at-large is more savvy than we give them credit for.

I disagree, if anything the public got confused while trying to fill out the forms and/or filled them out incorrectly.

P2P users are not necessarily pirates (3, Insightful)

L-Train8 (70991) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090855)

That's less than 1/1000th of one percent of the estimated number of P2P users worldwide.

The slashdot story perpetuates the same fallacy that the RIAA is constantly trying to promote, namely, that P2P == piracy. Not all of the P2P users worldwide need to be granted amnesty, because many have not done anything illegal. True, that 836 number is a tiny fraction of the number of pirates the RIAA estimates, but their numbers are skewed to help their cause. Still, ther are probably more than 836 people violating copyrights via P2P networks.

Re:P2P users are not necessarily pirates (1)

Nogami_Saeko (466595) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090912)

A good point...

I still find it odd how the RIAA and MPAA folks persist on calling it "stealing".

People are not "stealing" anything, they're "infringing a copyright".

N.

Re:P2P users are not necessarily pirates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090977)

Still, ther are probably more than 836 people violating copyrights via P2P networks.


Biggest. Understatement. Ever.

Perhaps the spam companies need to learn from this (1)

DWormed (711488) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090870)

Perhaps it's time the spam companies learned from the RIAA's bullying tactics. Copyright the "@" symbol (hey, despair Trademarked the :-( [despair.com] ). Offer an amnesty program, where all you have to do is "opt-in" to be safe from their frivolous suits.

They would, of course, promise not to sell your email addresses, just share it with their "partners". Of course, the partners pay for the privelege of being one.

More statistics... (2, Funny)

jemenake (595948) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090890)

...and further investigation reveals that, of those signing up for amnesty, 94% of those individuals were unpopular high-schoolers who seem to have also recently:
  • Subscribed to a whole bunch of lame magazines, asking to be billed later,
  • Requested enlistment information from all four branches of the armed service, and
  • Signed up for diaper delivery service.


Seriously... why doesn't the RIAA just make the amnesty form into a business-reply card and put them in all the kids magazines?

No Surprise... (1)

MoeMoe (659154) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090893)

That's less than 1/1000th of one percent of the estimated number of P2P users worldwide.

And yet, I'm sure they will somehow end up being taken for the same amount that the RIAA would sue all P2P users for combined, since they freely admit to illegal actions... Last I checked, an agreement made outside of legal context (ex: side betting, friendly wager, etc.) cannot be bound by the laws of the United States government.

It should be noted... (1, Redundant)

bobdotorg (598873) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090904)

It should be noted that of the 838, an astounding 773 had the name Hugh Jass, Phil McCrackin, Mike Hunt, Ben Dover, or Hugh Janus.

838 beers on the wall.. (1)

Genjurosan (601032) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090915)

So I was going to go look for the number of employes the RIAA had, as I was betting on the fact that they probaly only have 838.

The interesting thing was, www.riaa.org is not coming up.

Thinking that this was just my internet connection, I travled to www.webperf.org for a 3rd party breakdown and I received a 130 second response time..

Damn, what a shame. *grin*

"Clean Slate" - hmm, I've heard that before... (3, Funny)

$beirdo (318326) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090926)

Does the name of this program remind anyone else of a line from the original Matrix?

Agent Smith: "We're willing to wipe the slate clean, give you a fresh start and all that we're asking in return is your cooperation in bringing a known terrorist to justice." ...to which the obvious answer is...

Neo: "Yeah. Wow, that sound like a really good deal. But I think I got a better one. How about I give you the finger... and you give me my FSCKING MP3s back?"

more from Wired (3, Informative)

segment (695309) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090935)

P2P group seeks peace but talks tough
Declan McCullagh, Staff Writer, CNET News.com

Published: September 29, 2003

A newly launched peer-to-peer trade association has offered to sit down and negotiate with music industry lawyers, while it simultaneously denounced its adversaries as obsolete and "tyrannosaurical."

P2P United, a group of six peer-to-peer businesses, held a coming-out event Monday in Washington, D.C. The lobbying effort is designed to demonstrate to the U.S. Congress that peer-to-peer companies are legitimate enterprises that will abide by the law. The group is touting a code of conduct that promises to warn users of their software that copyright infringement is wrong, but does not offer to police the vast sprawl of peer-to-peer networks for illegal activities.

The members of P2P United that showed up at the event at the National Press Club included LimeWire, Blubster, Grokster and Streamcast Networks, which distributes Morpheus. (The other two participants are BearShare and eDonkey 2000.) Noticeably absent from P2P United is Sharman Networks, distributor of Kazaa.

"P2P United is here and intends to remain here as a presence in Washington to demonstrate not just with our words but with our actions that this is not a fly-by-night business," Adam Eisgrau, a veteran lobbyist who represents P2P United, said at the event.

However, other members of the lobbying effort at the event denounced the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)--which is targeting individuals in its legal efforts to stifle file swapping--in language rarely heard in policy circles.

"What the hell are these guys doing? Who do they think they are? For God's sake!" Wayne Rosso, president of Grokster, said. "This is absolutely reprehensible. I don't care what anyone says, but suing a 12-year-old girl is child abuse."

Eisgrau said the colorful language shouldn't hurt the peer-to-peer group's planned efforts to reach a deal with the RIAA. "If they're afraid of a few adjectives, even our willingness to talk with them won't save them," Eisgrau said.

"It is refreshing to see that P2P United is acknowledging that their members should be more active in educating their users about the consequences of illegal file sharing that is rampant on their networks, as well as the other risks these networks pose to personal privacy and security," the RIAA said in a statement. "But, let's face it, they need to do a whole lot more before they can claim to be legitimate businesses."

P2P United wouldn't give details on what kind of deal it would seek with the RIAA and other copyright holders except to say that it was looking for some sort of compulsory license or indirect payment system. One idea that's been floated is for Congress to levy a tax on high-speed Internet connections, with the proceeds split between the RIAA and peer-to-peer companies.

"It has been reacted to as if it were radioactive," Eisgrau said, talking about the suggestion of compulsory licenses. "That has to change. It is a legitimate set of strategies present in copyright law in many forms. It is a general subject that belongs on the table."

Eisgrau, who once worked for the American Library Association, said the idea was to impose "small levies which are spread widely and pretty invisibly" and noted that a previous copyright compromise in Congress resulted in a few cents "being attached to the cost of a blank tape."

NYTimes [nytimes.com] subscription bs required

All lies! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090952)

The confessed filesharers are nowhere near an impending campaign of surveillance and harassment! Many hundreds of thousands of repentant P2P users are dashing themselves on our walls as they try to sign up for amnesty! They welcome our benevolent reign over all intellectual property!

Death to all intellectual property! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090985)

Yeah, I love getting stuff for free! Why the hell should I pay for movies, music, software, games, books, etc? Those are out dated business models, thus I should be able to have what ever I want for free!

Maybe they should go on tours to make lots of money, although like most people who mention how they support the artist by not buying their albums, I for one would never pay to see them.

Interesting question (4, Insightful)

El (94934) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090960)

How many of the file swappers are actually under the age of 18, and thus not legally capable of executing a signed confession? What would a Notary Public have done if that 12 year old girl came in to get her confession notarized? "Can I see a driver's license please? Two forms of picture ID?"

Spite and Plenty-O-Files (2, Insightful)

felonious (636719) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090971)

Yes this is just the latest in a long line of self-serving propaganda. Stories of this ilk have only one intention and it's completely self-serving.

Scare the consumer into staying with an old business model. Only misinformed and gutless fall for this misguided and weak attempt and converting the masses.

What we as consumers are best exemplifying is civil disobedience on a virtual, grass roots level. Copyright infringement isn't stealing so it's hardly disobedience but it's an easy way to articulate the thought.

I have been downloading this and that since it was mostly ftps through napster and the like and from my experience the files available are just as plentiful than before. The RIAA propoganda is just that...pure bullshit meant to scare little kids and grandparents. I've yet to see the RIAA go after someone with the funds and knowledge to fight them. They're going after the easy marks and I'm not surprised.

Whne it's said and done it'll just be little kids and grandparents who buy the shitty music we are exposed to on a weekly basis.

Anyone who buys music is polishing the brass on the Titanic. It's going down and I'm loving every minute of it:D

Try ignoring the RIAA (2, Interesting)

saskboy (600063) | more than 10 years ago | (#7090978)

And try supporting the alternatives:


[magnatune.com]
http://magnatune.com/

IN SOVIET RUSSIA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7090991)

...RIAA SWAPS YOU!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...