An end to RIAA?

While sitting on my butt, I began to think of ways to legally prevent RIAA from suing you. Yes, Im sure most will say in reply to this post that not illegally downloading music is the best solution, and it is, but, most people wont heed that warning. I thought, just like porn sites post an 18+ to enter button, why cant kazaa and the such post something like if you work for riaa or a subsidiary, you may not enter. I know of sites that dont allow you to enter if you are from a competing company, so why cant they say something like that. Also, you can disqualify someone from entering a contest if they work for the same company; that is legal as well. What about putting "certificates", stating that if you are from RIAA, you may not enter your own personal computer. Kind of like blocking IP addresses from websites. If you go around that, you, the person who entered the site "illegally" is in trouble. Just curious about your (collectively) opinions and if anyone is in the legal field, please respond back. Thanks.

I think you need a valid reason to stop people entering a site or using a peice of software.
i.e, a competeing company or under the legal age to view the site or something along them lines.

The reason porn sites put the 18+ enter button is because its obviously illegal for people under that age to view the site and the law says you have to make minors aware of the fact they will be breaking the law if they view the site.

I dont think Kaaza can put a, you cant use this software if you are in the RIAA clause in to their licence agreement because they will not be breaking any laws by installing kaaza and have no comercial gains to be had by installing/using/anaylizing or doing what ever they do to catch people downloading music, they are only "upholding the law"

Im not saying it wouldnt be a good idea, i use kaaza regulary my self, but i dont think they would get away with it, unfortunatley.

I'm not a law expert in anyway, but a website is private property. If the AO guy tells me never to come back here and post, and I make a new screen name and do that, I believe I can get into legal trouble. So I believe Kazaa could put a clause in that states if you work for the RIAA or a subsidiery, or a band that is affiliated with the RIAA, or in the immediate family of the RIAA, and that information gathered from Kazaa may not be released or used in anyway without the authorization of the owner of Kazaa/Sherman networks, the person who the information belongs/pertains to, three of their immediate family members, and half a million people who are part of the Kazaa network and do not violate the afformentioned criteria. I may not be a lawer, but thats confusing :)
-It is I, me-

Just because you place a "disclaimer" saying "if you are......." doesn't prevent anyone from doing anything in this world..... I can come and find out who you are, then use that information to find you and get you "legally". Disclaimers mean crap when you are "playing games" with the people who, in the final analysis, make the rules.....

If you want to play the game.... Play it from a place where they can't get you.... Otherwise, your batting a losing wicket...... They'll get you sure as you breath if they want you......

The other thing I was thinking about, if RIAA does/can put a disclaimer, that then they become a private sector, and no longer a public server, and in turn can be sued themselves by RIAA. My point though is RIAA isnt a government agency to my knowledge. So I guess I will wait until the day that RIAA gets sued for invasion of privacy in someways. Also, why cant the ISP (since RIAA is getting their info from them) make a total anonymous ISP. Meaning whatever you do, there is no logs etc. period. And that no information of IP addresses is kept and they are always being changed.

I can't remember who, but some filesharing network is suing the RIAA because of violations of its service agreement, which prohibit the intentional sharing of corrupted files. Have you ever downloaded a corrupt music file? This is probably because the RIAA is flooding fileshating networks with bogus files to make it more difficult for you.

And if filesharing networks did use a condition like that, assuming it was legal, the next step would be to use search warrant to supercede that condition, which is one step closer to invading home computers to look for pirate music.

TY Striek, they will innevitably get sued (RIAA) for crossing the legal line. Its just amatter of time money and a damn good attorney. The techy age has fallen into the hands of money hungry people just like everything else...money makes the world go round.

An argument would be, "So if I run a meth lab in my basement, all I have to do is put a big sign with red letters that says, 'NO COPS ALLOWED' on my door to keep me from getting in trouble?" Dont get me wrong, I want free music too, but you have to attack all side of the issue to get a solid case.

I think its Kazaa that was suing the RIAA, could be wrong though.

Quote:

---

why cant kazaa and the such post something like if you work for riaa or a subsidiary, you may not enter.

---

Even if you could use a disclaimer, that would not stop the RIAA.
[/QUOTE]

Quote:

---

So I guess I will wait until the day that RIAA gets sued for invasion of privacy in someways

---

You say the RIAA will get sued for invasion of privacy, I seriously doubt this. Thanks to the Patriot act we will soon have no privacy. The RIAA will win in the short run and lose in the long run. I don't know about you, but I haven't bought a single ablum or plan to buy one since this stupid witch hunt began. I think that most people will stop buying music entirely, which will lead to the downfall of the RIAA anyway. Screw the DMCA and RIAA!!!

Quick finalization to this post....I just wanna say a big thanks to you all that have participated and have given me more of an insite to this troublesome issue....and finally....redhawk..i couldnt have said it better...SCREW them all lol

An important issue here is that downloading music is NOT illegal. Sharing the music is the illegal aspect.

If you get sued, merely claim that you are too stupid to secure your system in order to prevent remote users from having access to your files.

Additionally since many file sharing clients automatically include file sharing as well, if the RIAA accesses your shared files you could in theory counter sue for their accessing your system i a manner "outside of normal use" much like how accessing a system that is infected with a trojan is illegal.

The counter suit would be a bit of a struggle and would actually fall under criminal charges, so good luck with that, but I see it as highly unlikely that the RIAA can prove in court that you are required to be a computer security expert in order to own digital music.

catch

PS. It was ruled a few years back that user requirement site disclaimers and agreements are not binding. However "outside of normal use" is a very real issue and is used for things like prosecuting people for running port/vulnerability scans as well as violating simple to exploit systems like the asp. issue.

Quote:

---

Additionally since many file sharing clients automatically include file sharing as well, if the RIAA accesses your shared files you could in theory counter sue for their accessing your system i a manner "outside of normal use" much like how accessing a system that is infected with a trojan is illegal.

---

So if they download your files with the intention of sueing you, they can get in trouble for, as you said, "outside of normal use"?

Like I said, that would be an uphill battle, and you need to win the first case about not knowning how to secure your system. The reason is that first case is used as proof that you were not intending to share your files and the RIAA took advantage of that security hole.

catch