dcsimg
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33

Thread: RIAA site defaced by hackers

  1. #21
    Senior Member RoadClosed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    3,834
    Yep they are doing a good job dragging in 12 year old girls. Only a small elite group of artist publically support the RIAA. Not every artist feels the same way about their work. I do think the RA has the right to prosecute those who are downloading music but not change existing laws to subject their own agenda through intimidation and threats to destroy private property.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    407
    While i agree with the fact that sharing music online is illegal, this is selective prosecution. if you're going to sue someone with 1000 downloaded songs, they are still breaking the same law as a person who shares 4 or 5 songs. Both are pirating music and stealing form the RIAA. Have them prosecute EVERYONE who shares music. Thats the only way to stop them. Because for every person that the RIAA sues, two more people start downloading. Seriously, when did the RIAA become a law enforcement agency? When the federal government starts suing people, then people will stop. Until then, the RIAA will not put a dent in to piracy.


    slick
    \"Look, Doc, I spent last Tuesday watching fibers on my carpet. And the whole time I was watching my carpet, I was worrying that I, I might vomit. And the whole time, I was thinking, \"I\'m a grown man. I should know what goes on my head.\" And the more I thought about it... the more I realized that I should just blow my brains out and end it all. But then I thought, well, if I thought more about blowing my brains out... I start worrying about what that was going to do to my goddamn carpet. Okay, so, ah-he, that was a GOOD day, Doc. And, and I just want you to give me some pills and let me get on with my life. \" -Roy Waller

  3. #23
    Senior Member RoadClosed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    3,834
    At least in the USA they could go after everyone. I wonder how much of a dent that would actually make on a global scale? You have touched on my point the RIAA is not a law enforcement agency and they are seeking the "powers" to become one - their own.

    Here is somethinge very curious, did you all know the SAME recording companies are using P2P to target market areas? Crazy... they use Big Champagne. Geo-locations where a particular artist is steadily downloaded are targeted with add campaigns. Crazy....

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    125
    I think a round of beers for the group of crackers that did this is in order.

    Who's with me?

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,019
    RoadClosed, you just pointed out an excellent example of "when life gives you lemons, make lemonade"

    I think I'll have a glass myself!!

    EDIT: btw, why is this thread showing as very negative? I see alot of positive ap's?

    EDIT2: vodka? Why yes, as a matter of fact..

  6. #26
    Senior Member RoadClosed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    3,834
    Any Vodka in that? It IS Friday afterall...

  7. #27
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    4
    I'm going to have to agree with RoadClosed here in that not all music artists support the RIAA or have a problem with having their music shared through peer-to-peer, ftp, and or other digital mediums. Being in a local band myself, I think it's great to get my music out there on a global scale which likely wouldn't otherwise through the minimal distribution methods I have access to. The problem I see with the RIAA is their blatant anti stance against p2p without realizing there are some (although maybe not a majority) of people that use music swapping legitimately, and want to get their music to a broader audience.

    Overall, I think music swapping is great if used legally and I don't feel a bunch of bad apples should ruin it for the few of us that use it for our own benefit.

  8. #28
    @ΜĮЙǐЅŦГǻţΩЯ D0pp139an93r's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    St. Petersburg, FL
    Posts
    1,699
    I got a bottle of bourbon we can share for this discussion. Ancient Age actually. Damn fine stuff.

    There are so many sides to this thing though. Are we fighting an unjust organization or are we just causing trouble for a group completely within their rights to do business....

    This is anything but black and white.

    EDIT: /me passes the bottle
    Real security doesn't come with an installer.

  9. #29
    Senior Member Raion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    New York, New York
    Posts
    1,299
    I agree with the hacking of the RIAA website (Not that I encourage hacking) because I feel that the RIAA should send to court those who provide internet users with music not those who download them. Because look at what happened to that 14 year old girl, I read on the news that her mom was paying I think about $20.00/month to download music of the internet and she thought that since she was paying she is perfectly in her rights to download music. But then the RIAA sues her for downloading music off the internet. The RIAA only sues people who cannot fight back but never big companies who have the money to fight back with real lawyers. As I said they should sue the companies who allow the downloading of music and not the users.

  10. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    68
    Many things are legal but unethical.

    And I wouldn't say the courts present alot of recourse, do you call wasting months or years of your life and going into debt just to prove your "innocent" fair?

    I'd say our judicial system is becoming increasingly the injustice system.
    [gloworange]
    find /home/$newbie -name *? | www.google.com 2>/dev/null
    [/gloworange]

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •