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 Caught in Tough Legal Situation

samzenpus posted more than 7 years ago | from the catch-22 dept.

Music 267

JeffreysTube writes "The RIAA's legal fight against a divorced mother has run into trouble, with the judge now telling the RIAA that its only two options are to proceed with a jury trial against Patty Santangelo or dismiss the case with prejudice. If the latter happens, Santangelo officially "wins" and could collect attorneys' fees. The judge is less than pleased with the RIAA, which is now trying to drop the case without giving Santangelo a chance to be declared guilty. 'This case is two years old,' wrote Judge McMahon. 'There has been extensive fact discovery. After taking this discovery, either plaintiffs want to make their case that Mrs. Santangelo is guilty of contributory copyright infringement or they do not.'"

cancel ×

267 comments

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

Is that your final comment? (4, Interesting)

djupedal (584558) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440487)

JeffreysTube wrote" "The judge is less than pleased with the RIAA, which is now trying to drop the case without giving Santangelo a chance to be declared guilty."

Somehow, I don't think Mrs. Santangelo is in this to be declared guilty. But hey, I'm just a dazed onlooker - what would I know about the law.

Re:Is that your final comment? (1)

Fordiman (689627) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440615)

*waits for the 'haha' tag to get applied*

Yeah, definitely misworded. Still, these failed lawsuits are fun to watch. Like a flan collapsing in a cupboard.

Here's hoping the RIAA member companies wise up, stop the lawsuits, drop the DRM, and maybe get a good artist or two.

Stopping the lawsuits... (5, Interesting)

gavink42 (1000674) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440649)

Problem is that the RIAA doesn't have any incentive to stop the lawsuits, as long as they are able to intimidate the majority of their targets into settling. They just happened to pick a determined person (with resources) in this case.

Re:Stopping the lawsuits... (4, Insightful)

Fordiman (689627) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440665)

One (two actually; she's the second) that set a precedent that the RIAA should at least have some damned evidence before they get all sue-happy - otherwise, they're likely to be out more money than they could have sued the victim for.

Seriously, don't underestimate how risk-averse a large and established organization can be.

Re:Stopping the lawsuits... (4, Insightful)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440999)

It's not the majority that get cowed into settling. But it's a substantial minority. Something along the lines of 20%.

The RIAA makes money on the settlements, loses money on the default judgments, and loses a lot of money on any contested cases.

Re:Stopping the lawsuits... (1)

gavink42 (1000674) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441201)

Interesting percentage! Makes sense though... I'd be willing to bet that most of the ones that don't settle, don't have the money to settle, which could explain a high number of default judgments. If a person doesn't have the money to settle, they probably won't have the money to fight in court or make good on a judgment.

Re:Is that your final comment? (4, Insightful)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441063)

*waits for the 'haha' tag to get applied*

[+] mafiaa, haha (tagging beta)

You didn't have to wait long. Am I the only one who finds these damn tags redundant and asinine?

Let me be the one to start a beowulf cluster of them:

[+] haha, fud, defectivebydesign, mafiaaaa, microsoftsucks, itsatrap...

Hmmm, better stop there, otherwise that lameness filter might start earning its keep for once.

Re:Is that your final comment? (5, Informative)

tinkertim (918832) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440623)

Somehow, I don't think Mrs. Santangelo is in this to be declared guilty. But hey, I'm just a dazed onlooker - what would I know about the law.


Any sane person in a sane world probably thinks the same way, and of course the woman would not want to be found guilty. The RIAA sees that they are (probably) going to lose, and wants to try again from a different angle.

The key words are with or without prejudice. The RIAA right now is trying to have the case dismissed without prejudice, which basically is asking the judge to wipe out the last two years and allow them to start the process all over again.

If the case is dismissed with prejudice, it means the court will not entertain this and the woman can then (most likely) recoup her attorney's fees from the RIAA. Dismissed with prejudice is the next best thing to "Not Guilty".

This would set precedent that if the RIAA bullies you, and you win, you get to collect from them whatever costs you spent on your legal defense. The RIAA does not want this to happen.

So either they have to win the case on merit, or dismiss with prejudice. Its very (very) doubtful that they will win the case. If they lose (yep, you guessed it) the woman can sue to recoup legal expenses and will most likely win after long drawn out appeals and doors open to civil harassment suits.

Either way, precedent is about to be set that will help people fight off RIAA bullies, which of course they don't want to happen.

They need to stop harassing people who can't hope to match their legal resources. This woman basically just kicked them in the nuts, hard. Good for her. Just like a good old fashioned kick in the nuts, you don't feel the 'real' pain immediately, for the benefit of those without nuts or experience in having them kicked.

Re:Is that your final comment? (4, Funny)

rucs_hack (784150) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440647)

This woman basically just kicked them in the nuts, hard. Good for her. Just like a good old fashioned kick in the nuts, you don't feel the 'real' pain immediately, for the benefit of those without nuts or experience in having them kicked

Little too much detail on your final point there bud

Re:Is that your final comment? (5, Funny)

jkrise (535370) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440663)

This woman basically just kicked them in the nuts, hard. Good for her. Just like a good old fashioned kick in the nuts, you don't feel the 'real' pain immediately, for the benefit of those without nuts or experience in having them kicked.

Give us a youtube link, and we'll decide. Or is that covered by an RIAA copyright as well?

No Win, No Knee (4, Funny)

AGMW (594303) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440905)

Man, wouldn't that be a hell of a settlement! The RIAA Lawyers, directors, etc have to stand, legs akimbo, whilst the lady walks up the line kicking them each in the tabs! Any flinching means the exec has to move to the end of the line for a second kick!

If only all cases could be settled this way!

Look for the new adverts ... "No win, no knee"!

LOVE IT!

Re:Is that your final comment? (5, Funny)

FSWKU (551325) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441275)

Give us a youtube link, and we'll decide. Or is that covered by an RIAA copyright as well?

That would come under the MPAA's jurisdiction. For it to come under the RIAA, both entities would have to complete their merger and transformation into the Music And Film Industry Association of America (MAFIAA).

I know you hate the RIAA (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18440497)

But they help us too. For instance, I own a record store, and my business faces ruin. CD sales have dropped through the floor. People aren't buying half as many CDs as they did just a year ago. Revenue is down and costs are up. My store has survived for years, but I now face the prospect of bankruptcy. Every day I ask myself why this is happening.

I bought the store about 12 years ago. It was one of those boutique record stores that sell obscure, independent releases that no-one listens to, not even the people that buy them. I decided that to grow the business I'd need to aim for a different demographic, the family market. My store specialised in family music - stuff that the whole family could listen to. I don't sell sick stuff like Marilyn Manson or cop-killer rap, and I'm proud to have one of the most extensive Christian rock sections that I know of.

The business strategy worked. People flocked to my store, knowing that they (and their children) could safely purchase records without profanity or violent lyrics. Over the years I expanded the business and took on more clean-cut and friendly employees. It took hard work and long hours but I had achieved my dream - owning a profitable business that I had built with my own hands, from the ground up. But now, this dream is turning into a nightmare.

Every day, fewer and fewer customers enter my store to buy fewer and fewer CDs. Why is no one buying CDs? Are people not interested in music? Do people prefer to watch TV, see films, read books? I don't know. But there is one, inescapable truth - Internet piracy is mostly to blame. The statistics speak for themselves - one in three discs world wide is a pirate. On The Internet, you can find and download hundreds of dollars worth of music in just minutes. It has the potential to destroy the music industry, from artists, to record companies to stores like my own. Before you point to the supposed "economic downturn", I'll note that the book store just across from my store is doing great business. Unlike CDs, it's harder to copy books over The Internet.

A week ago, an unpleasant experience with pirates gave me an idea. In my store, I overheard a teenage patron talking to his friend.

"Dude, I'm going to put this CD on the Internet right away."

"Yeah, dude, that's really lete [sic], you'll get lots of respect."

I was fuming. So they were out to destroy the record industry from right under my nose? Fat chance. When they came to the counter to make their purchase, I grabbed the little shit by his shirt. "So...you're going to copy this to your friends over The Internet, punk?" I asked him in my best Clint Eastwood/Dirty Harry voice.

"Uh y-yeh." He mumbled, shocked.

"That's it. What's your name? You're blacklisted. Now take yourself and your little bitch friend out of my store - and don't come back." I barked. Cravenly, they complied and scampered off.

So that's my idea - a national blacklist of pirates. If somebody cannot obey the basic rules of society, then they should be excluded from society. If pirates want to steal from the music industry, then the music industry should exclude them. It's that simple. One strike, and you're out - no reputable record store will allow you to buy another CD. If the pirates can't buy the CDS to begin with, then they won't be able to copy them over The Internet, will they? It's no different to doctors blacklisting drug dealers from buying prescription medicine.

I have just written a letter to the RIAA outlining my proposal. Suing pirates one by one isn't going far enough. Not to mention pirates use the fact that they're being sued to unfairly portray themselves as victims. A national register of pirates would make the problem far easier to deal with. People would be encouraged to give the names of suspected pirates to a hotline, similar to TIPS. Once we know the size of the problem, the police and other law enforcement agencies will be forced to take piracy seriously. They have fought the War on Drugs with skill, so why not the War on Piracy?

This evening, my daughters asked me. "Why do the other kids laugh at us?"

I wanted to tell them the truth - it's because they wear old clothes and have cheap haircuts. I can't afford anything better for them right now.

"It's because they are idiots, kids", I told them. "Don't listen to them."

When the kids went to bed, my wife asked me, "Will we be able to keep the house, David?"

I just shook my head, and tried to hold back the tears. "I don't know, Jenny. I don't know."

When my girls ask me questions like that, I feel like my heart is being wrenched out of my chest. But knowing that I'm doing the best I can to save my family and my business is some consolation.

Some people are offended by my blacklist system. I may have made my store less popular for pirates and sympathisers, but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make to save my industry from destruction. I am inspired by artists such as Metallica that have taken a stand against the powerful pirate lobby. When everyone believes 2 + 2 = 5, to simply state the truth, that 2 + 2 = 4, is a courageous act.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (5, Funny)

Wavicle (181176) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440543)

People flocked to my store, knowing that they (and their children) could safely purchase records without profanity or violent lyrics
...I grabbed the little shit by his shirt...
...take yourself and your little bitch friend out of my store...

Wow. Now I see why the CDs don't contain profanity or violent lyrics. There's plenty right there in the store.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (5, Informative)

phantomflanflinger (832614) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440553)

I can't believe someone posted this AGAIN. http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/10/2/103735/275 [kuro5hin.org] If more MAFIAA cases made it to court, there'd be more justice. Judges and juries are better than lawyers. I mean morally better, which isn't saying much I know.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18441221)

The defendant also has lawyers.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441313)

Yup, seen it here a few times. Why think when you can cut & paste, huh?

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18440567)

Personally I could care less if you got pirates black listed but don't expect your sales to start jumping through the roof. Most people I know buy far fewer CDs then they did before because most of them buy online and many of us are sick to death of hearing the mainstream stuff via radio saturation. I know of some who have admitted to owning several pirate CDs but like me they only got a copy to see if they liked it. Like me they try to purchase the music if they can but often we can't, why? Because the stuff we are downloading isn't mainstream and sold in the CD shops plus when it might be 11:30pm when I am browsing, why wait until tomorrow if I can buy right now online and have it ready to go on my MP3 player for the trip into work? That and there are artificial restrictions on many online stores preventing us from buying music, especially foreign music.

My daughter downloaded some Ethiopian and Russian music and loved it, can we buy it? Not legally. I personally do not buy CDs at all anymore, I buy MP3s from indie bands, preferably directly because I want my money to go to the artist, not some middleman.

Steven.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18440613)

I was fuming. So they were out to destroy the record industry from right under my nose? Fat chance. When they came to the counter to make their purchase, I grabbed the little shit by his shirt. "So...you're going to copy this to your friends over The Internet, punk?" I asked him in my best Clint Eastwood/Dirty Harry voice.

"Uh y-yeh." He mumbled, shocked.

"That's it. What's your name? You're blacklisted. Now take yourself and your little bitch friend out of my store - and don't come back." I barked. Cravenly, they complied and scampered off.

You self-absorbed motherfucking piece of shit, I hope the kid and his witness friend have their parents sue your goddamned business into the ground for battery. You talk about your shit Christian music and bullshit family values, then commit felony battery on a minor because you object to someone's exercise of free speech. Kiss my asshole, you self-righteous hypocrite.

They have fought the War on Drugs with skill,....

Holy fucking shit, I thought you might be serious up to this point, but you obviously think the war on drugs has been a success. It follows that you think the war in Iraq is a moment of blazing glory in the history of the US. What a load of horseshit.

Now take yourself and your little bitch friend ....

You do keep your fire insurance current, right? Talk to my daughter that way and you'll wish you'd gone into the dental prosthetic business.

I just shook my head, and tried to hold back the tears. "I don't know, Jenny. I don't know."

You made your bed; now you and the slut Jenny can goddamned well lie in it, you fucking vigilante bastard.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (5, Insightful)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440617)

So that's my idea - a national blacklist of pirates. If somebody cannot obey the basic rules of society, then they should be excluded from society. If pirates want to steal from the music industry, then the music industry should exclude them. It's that simple. One strike, and you're out - no reputable record store will allow you to buy another CD. If the pirates can't buy the CDS to begin with, then they won't be able to copy them over The Internet, will they? It's no different to doctors blacklisting drug dealers from buying prescription medicine.

I understand your grief, but "it's that simple" is a dead give away that your solution is kinda too easy to work.

And if you read what you wrote couple of times, you may realize the irony of the situation. You refused to sell a CD to a buying customer. Sure, he was going to put the CD on the Internet, and that sucks. But he was there to buy that CD.

In the end, before your intervention you had 1 CD sold, after your intervention you had 0 CD sold. Where do you believe this "punk" will get this album from now? Either another store, or the Internet. You lose, either way.

It takes *one* to copy his CD to the Internet for the entire world to have. You have to simply accept that blacklisting people that talk about copying CD-s *in the store* is a wildly inaccurate way to blacklist all pirates.

Even if you "decide to play safe" and blacklist every single person in US (assuming you're in US), someone will buy this CD in another country and upload it, and adapt your business to this, and you'll be out of customers since you blacklisted them all. It's a lose-lose situation.

Violence against the customers just causes lost customers and bad word spreading about your shop. You can be sure this guy told all his friends about this event, and they told their friends. You'll likely not see then buying from you any more.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (2, Informative)

ampathee (682788) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440833)

FYI: YHBT [google.com] . HTH. HAND :)

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (2, Funny)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440917)

FYI: YHBT. HTH. HAND :)

BBQ?

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1, Funny)

ampathee (682788) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440955)

FYI: YHBT. HTH. HAND :)

BBQ?

BYO.

--- the lameness filter is deadly accurate --

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441051)

Love the sig, but now I have to clean up the coffee.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (3, Interesting)

mrshowtime (562809) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441069)

How about the fact that the President of Clear Channel radio said yesterday that pretty much the music (radio) industry is on it's way out? How about the fact that the "Hip Hop" rap era is finally over with? How about that 90% of the music released commercially today is CRAP? Really, in ten years are there still going to be cd's sold in shops? Will optical storage in 10 years look as funny as reel to reel? The music industry is scared because their reign of terror is finally over. The movie industry won't be affected as much, even though digital distribution of films is going to finally release that stranglehold that the studios currently have. The movie studios will survive because of their ability to make the big budget films nobody else can. Also 3-D movies will become more of the norm. CD's came out in 1981, 1981!! CD's came out a year before MS. PAC-MAN. The music studios are long overdue for a technology shift.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

Fordiman (689627) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440625)

Hehe. Thank you, that's the funniest thing I've read in a while.

Create an unenforcable, uncreatable blacklist of pirates. Dude, you should be on letterman.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (2, Interesting)

Dr Dodgy (1063100) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440659)

So... Your clients are going to hear you've been assaulting customers?

Nice one. Way to fuck your own "self made from the ground up business" right up in the ass!

So what if people are putting the crap you sell on the net, all you heard is hearsay in the store. If I was one of those kids, I'd be dragging you through both the papers and the courts, then see how you like the plummet into bankrupcy rather than just a gentle slide.

The only thing more fun than vigilante justice, is watching the person who led the posse be hanged in the town square.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (-1, Flamebait)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440673)

I dont think Christians can really Rock.

Thats like saying Catholics have good sex.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (3, Interesting)

zakezuke (229119) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440793)

I dont think Christians can really Rock.

Thats like saying Catholics have good sex.


Well, Madonna [wikipedia.org] was raised Catholic, and baptised her children in a catholic church. I don't know if she's been offical excommunicated from the church like Sinéad O'Connor, but if she has not she's likely still a Catholic. I can't say for a fact that she has good sex, but she does have alot of it and has published a couple of books on the subject of her sex life. I am not a fan of Madonna... and in fact use her as an example of how unhealthy attitudes imposed by the Cathlic church really are. It would seem that people, men and women alike, who were raised full blown Catholics from my observation tend to end up either prudish or hyper-sexual. While I would have serious reservations having a serious relationship with someone raised Catholic, I can say I have had great sex with Catholics.

But Catholic School Girls... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18440883)

I mean, we've ALL heard stories, haven't we.

A lot of sexual tension when finally released!

Woo hooo!

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

Dragonslicer (991472) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441283)

Last I heard, she's "following" Kabbalah. And no, that doesn't make her Jewish, so don't take it out on us. I've had a rabbi that described Kabbalah as a whole lot of really strange stuff that even she could barely make sense of.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (3, Insightful)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441387)

a whole lot of really strange stuff that even she could barely make sense of
Sounds like all religions to me.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (3, Funny)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441351)

I can say I have had great sex with Catholics.
Are you sure you're supposed to be here? It's bad enough a slashdotter claiming to know a woman but actually, you know, touching their toilet parts? Wow!

Schoolgirls! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18440837)

Wait, this is Slashdot, how did you forget about the catholic schoolgirls? I thought they were like the #1 geek fantasy.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

EveLibertine (847955) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441057)

Depends on your taste really. If metal is your thing, check out Tourniquet [wikipedia.org] .

I'm an atheist, and don't really listen to that much metal, but these guys did some pretty cool stuff in their day. I haven't listened to any of their newer stuff, so I can't really say anything about that.

I'm also sure there's a pretty good pun about stoning in there somewhere, but word fail me.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440681)

Wow! Your record store's been dying for the past 4 years!

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18440687)

Don't mod this guy down! It's just what he wants. If I had an account, and any kind of cred (karma points, social pull), I would make sure this post got (5, Funny) next to it. It's obviously a joke!
Witness:
"They have fought the War on Drugs with skill, so why not the War on Piracy?"
"I just shook my head, and tried to hold back the tears. 'I don't know, Jenny. I don't know.'"
And just take the time to read the final paragraph, for cryin' out loud! I've seen some pretty terrible attempts at sarcasm online (digg), but to see a truly clever showing get misconstrued is simply tragic.

another AC says (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18440935)

I concur!

Outmoded business model (3, Insightful)

symes (835608) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440803)

Sorry to say this, but your business model is now outmoded. This is why you are not selling CDs any more. In the same way that horse and cart sellers are few and far between, and email has come to dominate written communications no one is as interested in buying physical copies of their music. You need to diversify and evolve your business, not assault spotty teenagers.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

AxminsterLeuven (963108) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440851)

Deja vu. Anyone?

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18440855)

Well, sounds like you're a pillock then! Assaulting underage customers? and you wonder why your store is losing money? The real reason isn't piracy it's more likely to be bad management! Oh and for information, I buy the occasional Cd, but most stuff I buy online legally. However, I don't buy as much as I used to because most of the new stuff is complete CRAP! Maybe if the record companies actually produced good quality music instead of the massed produced twaddle they do at the moment, they'd sell more! poor poor millionaires cant afford their next humvie!

Cut and paste post alert (4, Informative)

init100 (915886) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440865)

Alert: The parent is a cut and paste post. This usually indicates a troll.

Other instances of this post are here [slashdot.org] and here [slashdot.org] .

Christian selection.. (1)

andr0meda (167375) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440871)

.., the image just needs a little red and black and some old celtic symbols to complete.

I think your record store, as hard as it may sound, is simply OBSOLETE. The people that flock to your store to buy christian family music are most certainly NOT the people pirating cd's, and if they do, they go to hell for it, so no worries.

The digital age is busy inventing new virtual worlds, mapping genomes, mapping memory, building bio robots. Everything that is in between that human wish for eternity and today will be obsolete, and the industry that makes most of it's profit from being "in the way" is the RIAA controlled record industry. The right to own or listen to music is not owned by a corporation, it is a human capacity, and it will evolve. I would seriously consider another way of making a living if I were you.

Re:Christian selection.. (1)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441365)

most certainly NOT the people pirating cd's
Not so sure - many Christians I know copy their CDs, 'inspiring music' etc left right and center under the belief it's Gods word so should be free.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

servies (301423) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440891)

Maybe you should consider to change the target to which you're catering... It seems to me that almost nobody wants the crap you sell...
Allmost all the CD's I buy nowadays I buy online because I can't find them in the regular stores. And most of the stuff they release these days I won't even consider buying. It's all the same commercial crap...

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440933)

This is a very old Troll. It gets all the feeding it needs.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

whistlingtony (691548) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440903)

...... We fought the war on drugs with skill? Anyway... Look, the CD is dead. It seems to me that as a business owner, you should realize that the CD is a dying thing and adjust your business accordingly. Frankly, you seem no better than the media companies, complaining instead of adjusting to the market. Yes, stealing music is illegal. Yes it's wrong. If people want free music, they should pick up an instrument and make their own... Still this doesn't change the way the world works. Adjust or die. Them's the rules. So, ARE you doing the best for your family and your business? It doesn't seem so. Seems that you're out of touch with your customers. That's not good whatever business you're in. Err... Someone thought uploading christian music would be Leet? Uh..... Riiiiight. Snicker. -T p.s. I really hope that entire post was satire.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18440939)

As a famous musician [amazon.com] , I share your pain. But why bother with a blacklist? We just get rid of the problem by making their computers explode. [theinternetparty.org]

Your senator,

Orrin G. Hatch

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18440993)

Maybe the moderation system should support scoring for Effort. I did crack a smile reading this. I also cracked a smile when I realized at least some people are taking it seriously :) People are funny.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441021)

For instance, I own a record store, and my business faces ruin.

What did you do before you sold records, run a buggy-whip factory?

I'm sorry that things aren't going well for you in record business, but should the rest of the world put progress on hold so you can refuse to change with the times?

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (2, Informative)

psykl0n3 (759848) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441099)

Hehe... you would be much better off if you'd kept the original demographic... the people who buy CDs to say they own them even if they don't listen to them :) And start selling that old vinyl, a section of good hip-hop releases, strange electronica and one for metal should do the job... Nowadays every kid got turntables and everyone and their mom is a DJ ;)

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1, Offtopic)

Epeeist (2682) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441115)

> My store specialised in family music - stuff that the whole family could listen to. I don't sell sick stuff like Marilyn Manson or cop-killer rap, and I'm proud to have one of the most extensive Christian rock sections that I know of. ...

> When they came to the counter to make their purchase, I grabbed the little shit by his shirt. "So...you're going to copy this to your friends over The Internet, punk?" I asked him in my best Clint Eastwood/Dirty Harry voice.

How very christian of you.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (-1, Troll)

ajs318 (655362) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441335)

Well, if you take the view that "christian" can be a synonym for "arsehole", or can mean "devoid of one or more of what are usually considered to be the defining qualities of the genre" (as in "christian rock music") then it is, indeed, very christian of him.

"Christian" can also mean psychotic. This may take the form either of mild delusions of an imaginary friend protecting them and/or causing things to happen, aggravated by the cognitive dissonance inherent in such delusions; or of total whackjob sociopathy wherein one actively persuades others to follow a lifestyle on the pretence that failure to do so will result in unspecified punishment.

Religion is basically just a crutch that helps people get through the day. Which wouldn't be too bad, in and of itself; we're all fucked-up in our own different ways. Everyone needs a helping hand sometimes. Some people drink, some people smoke, some people take drugs, some people pretend to be small furry animals. Others get religion. But you never hear an alcoholic saying that sober people are going to suffer eternal punishment; you never hear a pot-head saying that non-smokers are going to be damned; and nobody ever says that if you don't pretend to be a small furry animal then you'll suffer from the day you die till the end of the world. There's only one crutch that the people who use it are so weak, they have to try to ram it down everybody else's throat to make themselves look a bit less fucked-up than they really are.

The best advice I can give you is: Keep as far away from christians as you would keep from anyone else who worships a serial killer.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

pxuongl (758399) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441145)

I'll note that the book store just across from my store is doing great business. Unlike CDs, it's harder to copy books over The Internet.
ya, but that's because any dolt can walk to a library and check out a book FOR FREE. So why hasn't the availability of free books from public and college libraries not destroyed the bookstore business? I'd like to maybe venture to guess that you're not selling CD's to the people who are buying CD's.

Also, you can get books for way way cheaper than at a bookstore from places like half (you can get books in almost new condition for a couple bucks) or amazon... and yet with the availability of much cheaper books where you can buy them online and not even have to leave the house, the bookstore across the street is still doing great business. why?

if you happen to be in the san francisco area, walk into any of the record stores by UC Berkeley... notice how you have to sometimes wait in line to get in?

any business major or MBA worth his salt will tell you that a 12 year old business model isn't going to work forever, and you do realize that the 6 yr old kids of these families who used to come to your store + 12 years = 18 years old, right?

"Yeah, dude, that's really lete [sic], you'll get lots of respect."

you can [sic] something stated?

They have fought the War on Drugs with skill, so why not the War on Piracy?

right, that's why this world has been eradicated completely of all illegal drugs! If we use the War on Drugs as a shining example and metric, then you're in for a huge surprise with the War on Piracy.

haha... i can imagine it now... the colombian mp3 cartel... where do i sign?

This evening, my daughters asked me. "Why do the other kids laugh at us?"

you should teach your kids instead not to care about what other people think and that clothes don't make the man (or woman)...

I wanted to tell them the truth - it's because they wear old clothes and have cheap haircuts. I can't afford anything better for them right now.

hey, at least they have clothes and professionally cut hair. do you really think prada purses and day spa salon haircuts will make it better? your kid will just be teased about being stuck up or "the rich kid"

When the kids went to bed, my wife asked me, "Will we be able to keep the house, David?" I just shook my head, and tried to hold back the tears. "I don't know, Jenny. I don't know."

if you were any sort of business man, and used sound financial logic and sound financial planning instead of parroting what cnn money tells you, then you probably won't be in this mess.

I am inspired by artists such as Metallica that have taken a stand against the powerful pirate lobby.

what pirate lobby? can you name them so i can send them nasty letters? i hate pirates too...

and last point... I am inspired by artists such as Metallica may be seen to contradict with I don't sell sick stuff like Marilyn Manson or cop-killer rap, and I'm proud to have one of the most extensive Christian rock sections that I know of.

ya! down with that satan music! but i like how they fight piracy... so... piracy >>>>> satan, so go metallica!

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18441153)

It may be a troll, but it's still good to think that Christian Americans and their families are suffering for their bigoted views.

May I encourage you to take your assault rifle and murder all your family before putting the gun to your head? It would be an act of Christian kindness to the gene pool.

On second thoughts, since I do not happen to live in America, more power to your elbow! Your approach to living with other people is characteristic of all good Americans everywhere.

Once you've finished blacklisting all Iraquis you can start on the Axis of Evil, and keep going until the whole world sings the praises of One Nation under God, armed to the teeth, dispensing Freedom (to buy Coke), Justice (for big corporations), and the American Way (of shooting everyone who disagrees with you) for all.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18441187)

Ok. Since this is an RIAA urban legend propaganda piece, I'll put this forward :

99.9999999% chance propaganda : Sad. Go back to your masters, you grovelling RIAA facists.
0.0000001% chance truth : Well, now you can put that Maters degree in Renaissance Art to work for you, finally, you bearded, tree-hugging twit. And stop breeding ... you're polluting the gene pool.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441357)

Actually, I'm fairly sure it's 99.9999999% satire... Referring to the "skilled" war on drugs? Assault and Battery on underage customers? It's exaggerated in all the right places.

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (2, Interesting)

Jack Sombra (948340) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441249)

I honestly don't know if to take your post seriously or not due to your comments that indicate things like the war on drugs is "successful" (it's not and you are living in la la land if you think it is) but I will give you the benefit of doubt

lets take this point by point

"It was one of those boutique record stores that sell obscure, independent releases that no-one listens to, not even the people that buy them. I decided that to grow the business I'd need to aim for a different demographic, the family market"
Leaving the obscure/rare/independent releases might or might not have been the right idea, really depends on location you are. In the long term though these are the kind of music stores that will last the longest, when all the major music stores are long gone (and they will go within the next 15/20 odd years unless something major happens) these "collectors shops" will still be around. Will they ever make the major money, nope but they will outlast the "digital revolution" for the same reason that some LP stores are around

"CD sales have dropped through the floor. People aren't buying half as many CDs as they did just a year ago....... But there is one, inescapable truth - Internet piracy is mostly to blame......."
Internet piracy has been around for years, it has not had any kind of major boom over the last year or two but remained pretty steady. What has increased dramatically in that period is the take up of MP3 players and legal download sites like itunes. These is the number one reason for your recent falling sales. And got bad news for you, there is nothing you can do about it, it is the way the world is going. LP's got pushed out by tapes, tapes by CD's and now CD's will be replaced by digital downloads

"I don't sell sick stuff like Marilyn Manson or cop-killer rap, and I'm proud to have one of the most extensive Christian rock sections that I know of."
While I can admire your principals and that you have tried sticking to them, please don't try to blame the world because you shot yourself in the foot. You decided to limit your market no one else

"A week ago, an unpleasant experience with pirates gave me an idea. In my store, I overheard a teenage patron talking to his friend.

"Dude, I'm going to put this CD on the Internet right away."

"Yeah, dude, that's really lete [sic], you'll get lots of respect.""
Sorry but I burst out laughing at this little scenario, not just because I generally find kids who talk like this so stupid thats it funny but because it is supposedly happening in a store that does "not sell sick stuff and that has one of the most extensive Christian rock sections around"

Maybe you should have told told them they would get no "respect" for posting this kind of music?

As to your ideas to deal with the situation, I am sorry but they so are laughable that they lead me to believe that you need psychiatric help

"When my girls ask me questions like that, I feel like my heart is being wrenched out of my chest. But knowing that I'm doing the best I can to save my family and my business is some consolation."
You are not doing your best, you picked a dieing market (the writing was on the wall for CD's 12 years ago for those who cared to look), you then decided to limit your customer base even further and now instead of trying to re-expand your customer base,try new ideas and adapt to the market you just want to cry and set up blacklists.

No wonder you support the RIAA, you have the same short-sighted and blinkered mentality as them

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18441295)

This same shit been posted to /. before

Re:I know you hate the RIAA (1)

steveoc (2661) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441401)

Thank you thank you thank you - that was a class act.

I got it.

You brilliantly illuminated the sort of thinking and false assumptions that are holding back progress, and kept a straight face all the way through. Its well done. Writing a good troll is a true art these days, and a well written one makes people think .. and is useful in outlining the absurdity of certain viewpoints.

Right up there with JerryLeeCooper's best.

Thx

Declared guilty? (4, Interesting)

Tim C (15259) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440539)

Somehow I think the judge is upset that the defendant may not have the chance to be declared innocent - that is, that the RIAA appear to be trying to walk away from making a baseless claim without the defendant having the opportunity to have his name cleared officially.

Were that to happen, I wonder if there would be any scope in pursuing a claim for defamation? (No, I don't think I would in that position, but it would almost certainly cross my mind...)

Re:Declared guilty? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18440635)

In defamation cases the burden is on the accuser to show that there was intentional malice against them. They also have to prove that there was actual harm done (financial or opportunity loss) to a reputation that actually exist(ed).
So, unless this divorced mother somehow couldn't get a job because nobody would hire an accused but not proven music pirate, then she probably doesn't have much of a case anyway.

Re:Declared guilty? (5, Informative)

Senjutsu (614542) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440805)

No, you're quite incorrect. US courts do not and cannot declare people "innocent", merely "not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" which isn't the same thing.

What the Judge is telling the RIAA here is that, having completed discovery, they can either go to a jury trial and pursue a guilty verdict, or have the case dismissed with prejudice. See, the way everything has worked out for them in this case so far, they've got a snowball's cahnce in hell of winning, and they don't want to lose and set some nasty precedents (like the having to pay court fees for indiscriminately suing people with shitty evidence). What they want to do is back out of the case by dropping it and then suing her again for the same thing, in a different court with different tactics to try to get a better likelihood of winning. The Judge is telling them to either take it to a Jury and lose or be dismissed with prejudice and be unable to sue her again for the same thing. They're fucked either way.

Re:Declared guilty? (5, Interesting)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440987)

They're not really interested in suing her again.

They are, however, interested in avoiding having to pay her legal fees.

In Capitol v. Foster [blogspot.com] it was held that if they dismiss "with prejudice" defendant is a "prevailing party" and therefore eligible for an award of attorneys fees. See July 13, 2006, Order and Decision [ilrweb.com] . (pdf)

Re:Declared guilty? (4, Insightful)

v1 (525388) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441343)

I get the impression that they are actually not too interested in attourney's fees. I believe they are more concerned about people getting declared innocent. Right now I believe their tactic is to sue people and get them to settle, (basically declaring themselves guilty) 100% of the time. They don't want any "not guilty" verdicts to mar their reputation. So if the victim really puts up a fight, the legal system will most likely work the way it's supposed to, and the court will have to find them not guilty. The riaa wil do whatever it can to avoid this, and wants to have the case dropped since it has become clear now that (A) they cannot really win the case (they already actually knew this from the start) and (B) this victim is willing and able to see this case to the bitter end. They are going to pull anything they can to avoid chalking up a "not guilty" verdict on their record. I believe the judge is pissed off that the riaa has wasted the court's time with a case that they knew they could not win in the first place, trying to use the courts to extort money and PR from the victim, and in this case both the victim and the judge are all for a full drag out see-it-to-the-end case.

The riaa uses money to stuff their mattress pad. They could care less about paying one person's attourney's fees. The problem here is if they end up paying THIS woman's attourney, this will send a very loud message to all the other future victims that yes you really can win against the riaa and engaging in a court battle is not going to make you lose your house and your job, as the riaa is trying to scare everyone into believing. Once we get a couple Not Guilty chalked up, the riaa will find there are a lot fewer victims willing to just roll over when the lawyers come calling. Then it will not be a matter of paying one woman's attourney - if they sue 100 ppl a year then they will be paying 95 of them attourney fees, and THIS is going to bust their groove. This is the scenario the riaa is desperately trying to avoid by having this case dropped without prejudice.

Re:Declared guilty? (2, Insightful)

spurious cowherd (104353) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440915)

She IS innocent

AFAIR that's still the law in this country. You're innocent until proven guilty.

Re:Declared guilty? (2, Insightful)

jackbird (721605) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441397)

You're innocent until proven guilty. Actually, the law in this country is that she's neither, since it's a civil case. The jury would find either for the plaintiff or the defendant.

Re:Declared guilty? (2, Insightful)

kcbrown (7426) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441435)

AFAIR that's still the law in this country. You're innocent until proven guilty.

It's not clear to me how much truth there is to that in civil cases, though. They're decided on the "preponderance of evidence".

Frankly, I think civil cases and criminal cases should both be decided based on "evidence beyond a reasonable doubt". Why? Because while a civil case doesn't strip an individual of their freedom, it does strip them of their assets. Those assets were usually acquired through a lot of hard work, so in essence taking those assets is the same as forcing that person to do labor for the benefit of the plaintiff. Slavery, in other words. The only difference is that (some of) the work's already been done. In some cases, the amount involved is more than the defendant can pay, which really does make them a slave of the plaintiff.

The bottom line is that in both civil and criminal cases, government coercion is being used to strip someone of something that was once theirs. Government coercion should never be used for that unless the evidence supports it beyond a reasonable doubt.

That only a "preponderance of evidence" is required to invoke that government power is one of the reasons the system in the U.S. is the "legal system" and not the "justice system".

Talk about your all time backfire (1)

stoneycoder (1020591) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440545)

haha, didn't see that one coming did you, ya litigious bastards. Now you're actually going to have to come of with proof of your bullshit claims, good luck. Here's an laughable quote from some jerkwad in response to the defendants claim that someone else (the neighbor kid) downloaded the songs.

"The chances of it not being the right person or someone in that household are slim,"
-Stanley Pierre-Louis, senior vice president for legal affairs at the RIAA.

Yeah, be afraid of the RIAA, they must have some secret CIA shit that allows them to know exactly what person was sitting at the computer based upon an IP address.

"from the catch-22 dept" (3, Insightful)

philovivero (321158) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440599)

You know, I don't think it's a catch-22 if you jump into the water, insult everyone in earshot, and piss them off so that they all hate you. I think that's called painting yourself in a corner.

So who's gonna extend a helping hand and get the RIAA out of the corner? I guess it's time for another metaphor. The metaphor of the drowning man.

Re:"from the catch-22 dept" (1)

devnulljapan (316200) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440807)

I guess it's time for another metaphor. The metaphor of the drowning man
No, where the RIAA are concerned, I think I much prefer the kick in the nuts metaphor [slashdot.org] .

Re:"from the catch-22 dept" (0)

ResidntGeek (772730) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440841)

There's really no way to tell what is and isn't a catch-22. I don't even have to show you Catch 22.

Re:"from the catch-22 dept" (4, Insightful)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441009)

Even moreso, the RIAA seems to be trying to walk away from the case and leaving the defendant poorer due to legal costs.
Imagine the effect if future victims of the RIAA know that if they try to defend themselves in court, they'll lose money no matter what.
If that isn't a chilling effect, then I don't know what is.

Re:"from the catch-22 dept" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18441259)

Which begs the question how do you stop a RIAA-lawyer drowning?

A: Take your foot off his head

If there's an out-of-court settlement now... (2, Interesting)

jkrise (535370) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440645)

would case-law still be deemed to have been made? The only reason for dropping cases that aren't going favourably could be to avoid case-law being made.

Also, if merely providing internet access facilities to others makes one guilty of the uses / activities done on that IP, then many IT firms have reasons to be seriously worried. Malware and Service Packs are downloaded over the same IP and the same protocols. It will be almost impossible to operate any net-enabled firm at all.

Re:If there's an out-of-court settlement now... (1)

Omnifarious (11933) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440701)

She's a fool to go for an out-of-court settlement now. Not unless RIAA gives her some huge sum of money (> her attorney fees + $100000), and that's a whole different kind of precedent.

Re:If there's an out-of-court settlement now... (4, Insightful)

jkrise (535370) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440729)

Not unless RIAA gives her some huge sum of money (> her attorney fees + $100000), and that's a whole different kind of precedent.

You could add a coupla' zeroes to that figure, and the RIAA might still settle outside court, if it precludes case-law being made. This case will make the law that the mere possession or proviioning of an ip-address does not mkae one guilty of copyright violations over that ip-address. Many IT firms and ISPs will breathe easy once the case-law is made.

I would love it but for other reason... (3, Insightful)

xtracto (837672) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441363)

You see, if lawyers starting realising that it is possible to get fees from RIAA lawsuits they are more likely to accept defending the normal people without asking for payment (what is the term for that?). Lawyers are like sharks and if they see that RIAA (that huge a$$ociation with $hitload$ of ca$h) starts bleeding some cash for lawyers they will be very attracted to defend this people.

Every new sued person is a potential new job for a lawyer.

Re:If there's an out-of-court settlement now... (1)

Original Replica (908688) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440801)

Not unless RIAA gives her some huge sum of money (> her attorney fees + $100000),

Um, Dr.Evil, $100,000 isn't that much money any more. Anything less than $10 million is beans with this kind of publicity. She should ride it out to a legal precedent, then write a book and do some talk show appearences.

Re:If there's an out-of-court settlement now... (1)

pla (258480) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440769)

would case-law still be deemed to have been made? The only reason for dropping cases that aren't going favourably could be to avoid case-law being made.

IANAL, of course. But as I understand it, this wouldn't do much to create an anti-RIAA "case law" anyway, even if she flat-out wins.

Simply put, the RIAA has squat while she has an overwhelming abundance of evidence in her favor. While we may suspect the same conditions apply in at least a few of the other RIAA suits, I really have little doubt that the vast majority of people the RIAA has sued really did share music.

At best, this might set a precedent for the RIAA paying when proven wrong. That might tighten up the set of cases they actually take beyond the fire-and-forget extortion request stage, but they'll still have no shortage of "guilty" targets to keep going after.

The core problem here comes from copyright law that treats a nearly ubiquitous, noncommercial act as a rather severe (usually civil) offense. As much as we may object to the RIAA's tactics, they unfortunately have the luxury of picking the fattest fish from a barrel, and have the law (basically) on their side. In this particular suit, they went too far, but that won't generalize well.

Fighting the last war (4, Interesting)

Budenny (888916) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440651)

They don't realize that the enemy is not file sharing or people getting their content for free. The real enemy is people buying only the tracks they want, and so lowering the average value of a purchase. The great thing about an LP/CD from a company point of view is that it was a bundle at a high price. This is a key difference between movie downloads and music downloads.

It is very hard to see how they get around this one. Prosecuting people will not take care of the move to singles. They probably cannot raise the price of the singles. It is hard to see how they ever reinstate the album purchase to where it was.

Yes, its tough. And they are not helping themselves by focussing on a completely different problem from the real one.

That's why they want iTunes to sell 99 tracks (4, Informative)

ToastyKen (10169) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440791)

I think they DO believe that individual track sales hurts them, and it's public knowledge that they've been trying to convince Apple to let them sell popular singles for more than 99¢ for a while now, but Apple has not been budging because they think that would turn people off of iTunes altogether.

I download albums (4, Interesting)

DuncanE (35734) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440981)

Damn I already moded this discussion, but I feel I need to post....

I prefer to download whole albums, either legally or through dubious means (*cough* allofmp3 *cough*). I think it gives a better indication of the artist and the art they perform.

I hear a song I like via a friend or the radio (I'm on Oz so we have tripleJ/classicFm/Digg ... Google if you dont know what I mean). Almost always the album is similar in quality to the single and often I hear songs I love that just would get airplay EVER.

I would happily pay for all my music album downloads if I could choose my bit rate, the files were DRM free and the price was reasonable lower than the cost of a CD (*cough* allofmp3 *cough*).

eMusic.com (1)

argent (18001) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441389)

You can get it all, DRM-free, less than the cost of a CD, and legal.

Re:Fighting the last war (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440947)

What happens if the defendant just.... dies? Does the case just get closed? Is it worth it for the RIAA to spend a few thousand dollars to just kill her and avoid precedent from being established?

Re:Fighting the last war (1)

ajs318 (655362) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441277)

Given that she was a defendant in an ongoing court case, it would almost certainly be treated as Death in Suspicious Circumstances.

Re:Fighting the last war (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18441093)

They don't realize that the enemy is not file sharing or people getting their content for free. The real enemy is people buying only the tracks they want, and so lowering the average value of a purchase. The great thing about an LP/CD from a company point of view is that it was a bundle at a high price. This is a key difference between movie downloads and music downloads.
The fact that they have been selling "filler" CD's with only one or two good tracks on it for years, thus forcing people to buy the whole CD for those songs, has nothing to do with people now buying only the one or two good tracks?
IMHO they (the music industry in general) have been getting away with this tactic for far too long now anyway. I think that I should decide what songs I want on my CD/MP3 player, etc.
Also, I wouldn't really be calling the people who are buying those one or two tracks "the enemy". That's not really a wise move from a marketing perspective - at least they're buying music!

you suck (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18440677)

my immediate reaction after reading about tom (mediasentry) and these riaaa bastards from ass
"mwhaha... you suck, you so suck."
the wikipedia article i read (today) is fantastic. these mediasentry people 'tom' are a complete joke! what a bunch of sloppy bastards.
mwhahaha.

Vexatious litigation (2, Interesting)

gerrysteele (927030) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440709)

Surely this fits the bill of Vexatious litigation? The fact that they have done this kind of thing over and over. Should they really not be taken down over this? Are there no US regulatory legal authorities that look out for people's interests?

Re:Vexatious litigation (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 7 years ago | (#18440857)

The laws aren't exactly written to benifit "the people" it seems. Go figure.

Re:Vexatious litigation (1)

Dragonslicer (991472) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441239)

Are there no US regulatory legal authorities that look out for people's interests?
You must be new here. Welcome to the United States.

Ruling against the tactic (5, Interesting)

SirGarlon (845873) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441079)

INAL but really I regard this as a ruling against RIAA's bullying tactics.

It appears to me they are trying to draw out the costs of the case through two years of pre-trial discovery. The idea appears to be simply to bankrupt the defense and/or intimidate potential future defendants (i.e. the public) by showing that they don't have to go to trial in order to financially ruin their victim. Seems to occur commonly enough whenever one party in a case has especially deep pockets and the other doesn't.

What the judge is saying is, the RIAA can't just run up a huge legal bill and walk away. Score one for the little guy.

I'd love to be buying albums again (2)

codefrog (302314) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441117)

I haven't paid for recorded music in a long time, and will not do so again until things change for the better.
I eagerly await the day when
1) DRM-free files or CDs cost less than DVD movies (around $5 US would be just fine for an album)
2) The mafiaa isn't insulting/threatening/suing us. ... when that happens I'll be happy to go back to the pre-net ways of using available cash to fill my closet or HD with music, and shopping in bricks-or-no-bricks stores for music.

Re:I'd love to be buying albums again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18441155)

You've obviously never been involved in putting out a CD. $5 retail price would mean a wholesale cost of between $2 and $3. The cost per disc to press a thousand CDs is about $1. That's for the pretty crappy packaging (no booklet, spot color on the cover, no color on the tray card, text-only on the disc itself) at a cheapest plant. With a profit of $1 per disc you'll put every independent label out in the country out of business, or at the very least make it impossible for them to actually make a living off it.

You've also made it even harder for an independent artist to make any kind of money from selling their CDs. Sure, shows are an artist's main source of income, but a record that sells a thousand copies in a year will get the artists a nice (but not huge) check.

The only folks who could afford to sell CDs with that kind of margin are the major labels who press tens of thousands of discs at a time, knocking the per-disc price down to $.50 or less. But on the flip, the major label artists would be incredibly fucked when it comes to royalties. I'd imagine that it would be literally impossible for any major label bands to pay back their advance.

Re:I'd love to be buying albums again (3, Informative)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441415)

Hello astroturfer.
Even with $40/CD the artist gets less than $0.10/CD

Re:I'd love to be buying albums again (1)

filet0fish (1002137) | more than 7 years ago | (#18441463)

In 2001 I was able to get a cd duplicated for under $1 a disc for a run of only 500. Total cost for the project including packaging and licensing for the cover songs, which was about 1/4 of the budget, put the per disc cost at just under $2 a disc. If the music we'd recorded on there was better, we could have made a decent profit selling them at $5. It's not that hard to make a profit off cd sales if there's no record label taking a cut.

In regards to the grandparent's post, there are plenty of places to get DRM free music at a decent price. I get mine from emusic for an average of $3 per album. Just use the RIAARadar site before making a purchase so you can be assured your money is going towards the labels and artists who are not involved in the mafiAA tactics.

RIAA Should Pay. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18441183)

IANAL, but anytime a corporation sues an individual, and is wrong,
the corporation should pay double or triple the fees back to the individual.

With the Individual actually getting the money.

A woman stands alone against a team of lawyers.
Suffers two years of this legal mumbo-jumbo.
And then RIAA wants to just walk away from it?

No.

Make 'em pay!

THIS fP FOR GNAA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18441241)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

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