Speak Out Against RIAA- Only 30000 left

The Electronic Frontier foundation is taking action to stop RIAA violation of rights, privacy, and civil liberties. It will send a letter to congress. We have over 70,000 signatures and we need 100,000. I encourage you to sign this petition to support fair and just legislation and to help file-sharing continue. I do not encourage the illeagal sharing of copyrighted materials, but I support file sharing. This is an issue that needs to be adressed NOW! Eff's letter to congress is below:

"To The United States Congress:
We are the customers and former customers of the member labels of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). We love music and will gladly pay a fair price for it, but we are outraged by the RIAA's tactics in suing ordinary Americans for filesharing.
We condemn the RIAA's choice to force the family of a 12 year-old girl to forfeit $2,000 - money that could have gone to feed, clothe and educate this honor student. We stand with the retirees, parents, children and others who have been caught in the RIAA's line of fire.
We respect reasonable copyright law, but we strongly oppose copyright enforcement that comes at the expense of privacy, due process and fair application of the law.
We urge you, as our representatives in Congress, to stop this madness.
We oppose the recording industry's decision to attack the public, bankrupt its customers and offer false amnesty to those who would impugn themselves. We call instead for a real amnesty: the development of a legal alternative that preserves file-sharing technology while ensuring that artists are fairly compensated.
In signing this petition, we formally request that the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), as representatives of the public interest, be included in any upcoming hearings regarding the proper scope of copyright enforcement in the digital age.
We sincerely thank you for your time. "


What the RIAA is doing is a violation of our civil rights and liberties and of our privacy and security.This website is dedicated to security, and RIAA is violating our security on the internet to make criminals of 60 MILLION Americans by FORCIBLY DEMANDING THAT OUR ISPS HAND OVER OUR PERSONAL INFORMATION WITH A SIMPLE SUBPONEA! After a lawsuit the court ruled that VERIZON and other ISPS did not have to turn over information involentarily. HOWEVER this is still happening! The RIAA is still violating our security on the internet and getting our information which IS in our control if you sign this letter to congress and join the 70,000 people who believe that RIAA is violating our rights, civil liberties, and security.

TO SIGN THE PETITION PLEASE GO TO:
http://www.eff.org/share/petition/

To view information about the war on file sharing visit:
http://www.eff.org/share

to see if your information has been subponead by the RIAA please visit:
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/riaasubpoenas/

to view EFF's full page ad featured in THE ROLLING STONES MAGAZINE please go here:
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/music-to-our-ears.php


Thank you for your time in considering this violation of our security
-unit321

I'd love to sign this petition, but unfortunatly as i don't use any of those p2p programs i'm not really loosing much..
But i do wish you good luck in your fight against the RIIAA..

cheers
f2b:.

.:front2back:. , Regardless if you use these p2p programs or not, thats not the issue. Your apathy towards this is a prime example of what is wrong with privacy rights today. By saying "It doesn't directly involve me" and allowing it to pass you opens the door to other issues which eventually will affect you but by then will be to late. Also, being blinded by the trumpting reasons ( example The Patriot Act ) allows the goverment to remove certain privacy rights with your consent and then use for other motives. There have been several people already convicted under thet terrorist act, none of which have been actual terrorist.

All I am saying is beware of you apathy and really think about the consequences of your actions, or in this case, inactions.

btw I proudly signed the petition.


hjack

Quote:

---

.:front2back:. , Regardless if you use these p2p programs or not, thats not the issue. Your apathy towards this is a prime example of what is wrong with privacy rights today. By saying "It doesn't directly involve me" and allowing it to pass you opens the door to other issues which eventually will affect you but by then will be to late.

---

Could you tell me how in the end this whole fiascoe is going to affect me?

Quote:

---

Could you tell me how in the end this whole fiascoe is going to affect me?

---

he's saying that other issues will evolve from this one that maybe will affect you. And btw: What negative effects affect you by signing the patition ?

Those who would sacrifice freedom for security have neither.


I'm signing.

As much as I hate the RIAA, one thing is clear. Copyrights are copyrights. You download **** and do not pay for it, it is your ass.

As I read front2back's post he sympathises with the petition but won't sign it, as it does not affect him...........?

Well I think that he is right on both counts, but for a slightly "technical" reason................

He is Australian, I am English so if we signed (assuming that we agreed) we would effectively "dilute" the impact of the petition as we have no votes in the USA.

Reminds me of the immortal words of the congressman in the song "Charlie Brown" (?)

"I'd like to help you son, but you're too young to vote"

That is all they care about?..........if this issue comes to Europe and Australia (as it almost certainly will) then it will have to be contested under European and Australian laws respectively.

Also, we get very p1$$ed off when you guys tell us how to run our countries, so it would be extremely crass and bad mannered of us not to respect your rights to self determination?

As I see it, this is an American issue, regarding the civil liberties etc. of American Citizens. If you want to internationalise it, then you would have to produce similar petitions in different countries, and present them to the lawmakers in those countries?

just my thoughts

Bah, the EFF assumes, like so many sites on the Internet, that I'm American and therefore live in a state. Besides, I think they get far too panicky about civil rights issues.

nihil: I was just going to say that... doesn't matter if he signs it or not... it won't count.

Unless he has an alter ego that somehow lives in the states...

www.superpages.com

pick a state and last name... you're sure to come up with plenty of alter egos... just be sure to "renew" your ip and clear your cache/cookies everytime. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by alittlebitnumb
As much as I hate the RIAA, one thing is clear. Copyrights are copyrights. You download **** and do not pay for it, it is your ass.

---

The EFF petition doesnt encourage illeagal sharing of copyrighted materials. If you see their site they endorse getting artists paid. all we want is for the RIAA to punish "criminals" fairly and not make violations of our civil rights, liberties and securities.
From the petition:
" We respect reasonable copyright law, but we strongly oppose copyright enforcement that comes at the expense of privacy, due process and fair application of the law "

" We oppose the recording industry's decision to attack the public, bankrupt its customers and offer false amnesty to those who would impugn themselves. We call instead for a real amnesty: the development of a legal alternative that preserves file-sharing technology while ensuring that artists are fairly compensated.
"

" In signing this petition, we formally request that the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), as representatives of the public interest, be included in any upcoming hearings regarding the proper scope of copyright enforcement in the digital age "

They want the artists to get paid, and copyright law to be enforced PROPERLY without violating our security, privacy, and civil rights/liberties. They respect reasonable copyright law. Located at eff.org/share here is a list of artists who make money and endorse file sharing/dont sue users. Te rolling stones said that they as rock stars allready have enough mopney and that kids sharing music on computers is no worry to them.:


_
Artists and labels are already making money from the Net without suing their fans:
• Alanis Morissette
• Ani DiFranco
• Beastie Boys
• Beggars Banquet
• CD Baby
• Chuck D
• David Bowie
• Einsteurzende Neubauten
• Green Day
• Ice T
• Janis Ian
• Justablip Records
• Kristen Hersch
• Less
• Matador Records
• Michael Franti/Spearhead
• Paula Cole
• Pearl Jam
• Phish
• REM
• Sinombre
• Smashing Pumpkins
• Sonic Youth
• Streaming Geeks
• They Might Be Giants
• Ween
• Wilco

end of quoting
EFF sescessfully won a case against MGM when they tried to OUTLAW grockster, a FILE SHARING program that did not explicitly say it PROMOTED ILLEAGAL ACTIVITY. If you look on any p2p network you can find public domain files such as:
The Communists Manifesto
The Hackers Manifesto
SHAKESPEARE
Some concerts from music artists
starter bands demo discs
Public domain music and sound effects
freeware or shareware software that can be distributed
e-books
Tutorials
and many more...
p2p is not what we want to outlaw. It is a wonderfull rescource for the next generation when used properly. All this petition asks is for criminals to be sued fairly, for the riaa to not invade:
privacy
civil rights
liberties
security
and for eff to be able to help with the current situation.
Do you wan't your house to be searched and all your data found without a search warrant or any official reason? What they are doing is a violation of security.

If'n those were my songs that folks were downloading for free, I would not be receiving the $$ and it could take food out of my children's mouths and clothes off their back.

Many Moons ago, my pappy taught me to walk straight down the middle of the road and never to wavier on integrity. I'm not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't download something I should pay for, without paying for it. In my simple perspective, the honor student didn't fulfill the tenets of honor when she downloaded the files. However, the recognition as a "Honor Student" deals with the GPA. So to what extent is she responsible? I hold the parents far more negligent than the girl. They failed her in their duty and responsibilities as parents. They didn't teach her honor. As we witness more and more the moral decay in our societies what can we expect of our children if we fail them and we are cause of the moral degradation?

cheers

How is it moral degration? The eff WANTS artists to be paid. Some options include:
pay per download
donations
Pyramid schemes (lol)

File sharing isnt just for music, its for videos, texts, documents, presentations, and INFORMATION. Information=knowledge Knowledge=power. p2p is NOT something we want to shut down. What if sony had lost the case and VHS recorders had been outlawed??? Look where we would have been, this is like the sony VHS recorder, it needs to be seen as an opportunity and if it really is bad it should be outlawed later when all the arguements have been put forward. Outlawing p2p is not the solution! you know people are STILL going to share copyrighted and non-copyrighted materials. p2p is an opportunity and it should be treated as so.

Hi,

Quote:

---

If'n those were my songs that folks were downloading for free, I would not be receiving the $$ and it could take food out of my children's mouths and clothes off their back.

---

On slight flaw in that argument IMHO................you are assuming that these people would actually buy the genuine article from a store? I am willing to bet that they would not :( so no-one actually loses revenue.

Where the real problem lies is in counterfeiting (piracy) People actually buy those fake copies...........that DOES cost the industry money. Obviously, the main thrust is at the people who do it big time, but even the amateurs are a problem..............the guy who buys a £11 CD rips it off and sells 4 copies at £3..............that just cost you £37.5, and the government the rest in lost sales tax.

The problem with that is how in hell do you stop it/catch them?...............basically you can't.........the RIAA are effectively urinating into the wind, but they feel that they need to be seen to be doing something? no matter how ineffectual. It is possible to trace file sharers, amateur counterfeiters are virtually impossible.

Another bet I would make is that if I raided every bar, pub, nightclub and disco in this town tomorrow, I would find at least 25% of the CDs were counterfeit...............now that IS an easy target................I can see that coming along quite soon.

In case anyone wonders about my personal position, I once lost a job in the industry due to cutbacks as a result of counterfeiting (NOT file sharing) so I have actually "been there".

just a few more thoughts

EDIT: Unit321, you actually have a useful, proactive idea there...........pay per download would allow the industry to continue to make money from stuff that it is no longer economical to keep in publication?...............better copyright/patent it and sue the RIAA when they try it :D

I knoe services such as napster and itunes offer 99c a song download, and like 11 bucks per album which is very good. But the copy protection makes it hard to transfer from computer to computer. nihl you are right, pirating is where they are losing money, quite frankly i would never buy a cd for 20 bucks, like it is in so many record stores. CDs are too expensive so people downloading songs or burning copies for friends who wouldnt buy them aerent costing the record industries anything, because they aerent losing any money off it. RIAA truly is just peeing in the wind and one of the ways to stop it is to send this letter to congress. You can tell a friend also. Because or RIAA lobbyists nothing has happened yet, but 100,000 strong could decide an election, and can decide the fate of file sharing, rights, civil liberties, and security.

unit321,

Quote:

---

How is it moral degration?

---

I was referring to our society in general and that a large number of parents aren't doing their job! When did it become ok to steal?

Sorry I didn't get back right away, had to reboot and clean some junk out. Nihil told me about Xen so I downloaded it the other day and put it to use right now to clean the junk out. Thanks Nihil, it works great!

Nihil,

Quote:

---

Where the real problem lies is in counterfeiting (piracy)

---

This has been going on for mega years. I'll date myself here, but what the heck! In the late 60's and early 70's folks would share their vinyls with their friends, who would record them on reel to reels and then put them onto cassettes for a nominal fee. And I didn't remember that earlier, must have been a gray moment.... :eek:

Anyway, yep, it's a huge problem and has been for a long time.

cheers

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Relyt
unit321,

I was referring to our society in general and that a large number of parents aren't doing their job! When did it become ok to steal?

---

What were saying is that the record industries are not losing money because many of these people wouldn't but the cd's anyway. Besides if your friend has a book and he leaves it out and you read it while he's in the bathroom is that stealing? Thats p2p networks do, they enable you to "read peoples books" or copy them down to read l8r on. And many of the "books" are public domain anyways.If parents are letting their kids "steal" then wouldn't copying the simpsons from yout TV to a vhs tape be "stealing"? It's the SAME principal. Besiedes EFF supports copyrights, they just dont support the violation of our privacy, civil rights, liberties, andsecurity.

Well,

I actually do not think we are all that far apart here? Obviously I am of an "older generation", and have actually worked in, and lost a job in the industry as an indirect result of piracy. It was cassettes in my day, but I remember tape to tape

There seem to be a number of distinct issues?

1. Finance (I put that first because it is the one I learned about the hard way)
2. Law (What is, or is not legal in your part of the World, protection of intellectual property etc.)
3. Ethics/Morality
4. Constitutional rights

I think that we are pretty much agreed that from a financial viewpoint, it is counterfeiting/piracy that is hitting the industry? that is certainly what cost me my job!

The legal side is much more complex, please forgive me, as I am talking English rules here. Technically it is illegal, unless the material has been put in the public domain. This is like software that is free for private use, but institutions have to pay? I have no problems with file sharing there, as I see no difference in getting it from ABC or XYZ if it can be obtained free of charge anyway.

OK...............into a greyer area..............if someone downloads some stuff and burns a copy for me, it is reasonable that I pay him for the CD and give him the price of a beer or two for taking the trouble, and for the cost of the internet connection that I have saved? This would generally be legal over here, because the person has not "profited", and has not deprived the owners of income.

However, as soon as you take material that has not been released into the public domain, and you start making it available to others, you have most certainly broken the law.

Over here we have a Trading Standards Office whose people spend a lot of time chasing counterfeiters and bootleggers (illegal concert recordings), they go after fake watches, designer clothes, perfumes and the rest. They are supported by the local police and by Customs & Excise officers.

At the moment, this is what the recording industry is interested in, because that is where the revenue is going. File sharing is pretty much ignored because it can also have a publicity boosting effect, and be a perverse form of marketing , with a zero cost :)

Over here, many artistes make their money from concerts, so they like the increase in fans.

From a moral standpoint theft is wrong, there is no question about that, but you really have to take something with a value? I have yet to see anyone brave enough to put a dollar value on the cost of file sharing to the industry.

From the constitutional/civil liberties viewpoint, that depends on your local situation, but is what I understand this petition to be about. I am obviously not qualified to make much comment in that area.

What intrigues me is that the approach is so different between here and the USA, yet the same artistes and companies are involved?

just a few more thoughts

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by .:front2back:.
Could you tell me how in the end this whole fiascoe is going to affect me?

---

Uhhhhh....that would be the part where the recording industry has to get rid of an outdated business model because it has faced the inevitability of an internet-based distribution system. The bonus here would be that you are able to purchase (and download) what YOU WANT TO LISTEN TO instead of the crap that some fat-cat cigar-chompin' s.o.b. who lives in an ivory tower with NO SENSE of reality TELLS YOU TO LISTEN TO.

If that doesn't ring any bells with you, then your vocabulary almost certainly consists of one word....

BAAA-AAAAA

unit321, no matter how much you talk out of your ass, that's what it is. You yourself have stated:

Quote:

---

Located at eff.org/share here is a list of artists who make money and endorse file sharing/dont sue users. Te rolling stones said that they as rock stars allready have enough mopney and that kids sharing music on computers is no worry to them.

---

A large percentage of files being traded on p2p are illegal no matter how much you argue otherwise. Not just songs, but software, literary works, and other ****. Yes, p2p can be good but it can be used for illegal just like anything else. The only difference here is people are trying to find a happy medium in which to trade and regulate. Again, p2p is widely unregulated, and is hard to regulate because of the sheer size of some networks and numbers of files being shared.

As for people searching your shared directory for files being a fellow p2p'er or the FBI/RIAA, you have opened your shared folder to the world to download **** from you.

And that is exactly the point. Look at it this way... you may not like the police looking through your **** without a warrant, but it is like having a free givaway of illegal contraband with a giant sign saying "GRAB YOUR FREE STOLEN ITEMS HERE" that may grab the attention of a cop or two. I do not understand the mentality.

So you download and take the risks, or like you sdaid look for things that are not illegal. What's really funny is, how many care to look for Hamlet?

Not many people may look for hamlet, but it's out there. A student or a teacher may want to find it. That is like asking it of a bookstore. Ask any manager of a bookstore why they carry hamlet and it seems like a proposterus question, but why is it normal to ask it of a p2p network? The eff petition simply asks for fair and just treatment and tracking down of criminals and for a fair and just look at the issues presented. It doesn't present any solutions to the current p2p problems. All we want is a fair and just evaluation of the problems at hand and then a good and balanced solution to the problems at hand. the petition doesnt mention wether p2p is good or bad, just how the RIAA is catching pirates. You wouldnt want somebody searching your house wiuthout a warrant or reason? If you do, move to indonesia or share your music library.

All I'm asking is that you take a fair and balanced look at the problem adressed in the petition and then decide wether you want to sign it or not. This is about how the RIAA violates our privacy, civil rights, civil liberties, and our security.

It seems to me that a major part of the problem is the failure to clearly distinguish between CRIMINAL law and CIVIL law?

As I have mentioned, over here we have the Trading Standards Office, the Police, and the Customs & Excise (don't confuse them with US Customs, our guys have more sweeping powers than your IRS :eek: ) enforcing the criminal side of things, with quite a lot of success. This deals with the piracy/smuggling/counterfeiting side of things. Cases are presented by our Crown Prosecution Service (something like your DAs I think?).

If a body such as the RIAA interfered in this, they would be spending time in "the big house" with bubba :D Obstructing the course of justice, witholding evidence and conspiracy are also criminal offences here.

On the civil side of things, when you buy software or an entertainment product, there is small print that constitutes the contract that you have made with the producer of that item. That is CONTRACT law. There are also laws to protect the intellectual property of artistes/producers which is COPYRIGHT law.

Copyright cases are invariably between artistes/producers and involve stealing eachother's ideas.

So that leaves us with Contract Law. Now, in England you have to be 18 years old to enter into a legally binding contract...................but anyone with the money can go and buy a CD. The only way to enforce the contract would be to refuse to sell the product to anyone under 18.........it would be an interesting way for an entire industry to commit suicide?

You must bear in mind that in England, the parents are NOT responsible for the actions of their children in these matters, and any contractual rights were waived when the product was sold to someone of non-contractual age.

Now, about P2P..........I believe that stands for "person to person", like if I send an e-mail to a friend with a song attached. When someone uploads thousands of items and invites any Tom , Dick or Harry to come and help themselves, that is not P2P..............that is taking the p1$$

If you are 18 or over, you could be taken to court under CONTRACT law, but it would be a civil court and would have to be conducted as such. There would be no law enforcement involvement.

It seems to me that the RIAA are attempting to obtain quasi law enforcement powers, and that is what the petition is about? They are after all, a commercial, civilian organisation.

Just my slant on it

I signed the petition because I'm tired of seeing crap like this:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06/04/biometric_drm/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06...drm_interview/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04...st_price_hike/

And what I find amusing is that the RIAA believes these things will work somehow. What if you use a small stamp to press the play button on the iVue and then basically give the iVue and stamp to a friend so they can listen to the music too. That's gotten around the music sharing problem on the iVue platform itself and all anyone has to do is build a coupling device for the iVue that will stream the music into a computer and then record it as a .wav file and encode it as an .mp3, at which point the DRM is effectively defeated. It's like they decide to take fancy new technology for a whirl without actually knowing how to implement it. They just don't understand that the market is now different. If people are going to be able to get music for free and you can't trace them or hunt down who gave them the music, you have to offer incentives for them to purchase music. iTunes is a great example of this type of thing and I strongly support the HYMN (Hear Your Music aNywhere) project which allows people that have legally purchased music from the iTunes store to listen to that music on the platform of their choice. I actually don't buy that much music, nor do I use any p2p clients. The only 'illegal' thing I've ever done is record the audio output from my tv into my computer for a few songs that I particularly liked. However, I do buy merchandise from those groups, which I feel more than recoups the loss of me not buying a CD for the one song I wanted to listen to. I'd rather record a bunch of songs from a band off of a broadcast and send them $20 than buy a CD (i don't know who gets that $20). However, the MPAA is now making moves to make it illegal to have copies of broadcasts, and civil action could be taken against you by the broadcaster (even if the material is in the public domain). Blech at that.

The only problem with this petition is that they're only getting 100,000 signatures. Let's see...in the US, there's close to 300 million people. So, 100,000 represents about 1/3000 of the population of the US. Let's say that only half of the US is affected by this, that still only makes a representation of about 1/1500, not statistically significant by any means (well, unless you're doing a gallop poll for presidential elections :P)

there are 60 MILLION p2p user in the US alone, im sure atleast 40 MILLION of tjhem would sign it, but the problem is THEY DONT KNOW ABOUT IT. Im starting a ad-campaign, to get the message out. The 100,000 is small, but it cant make a difference, EFF has had petitions that are small or the same size that have made a difference. If we could get 40 MILLION to sign a petition we would strike gold! The only problem is that people need to know about it. If anybody is WILLING to donate adspace on the web, on a magazine, in a book, on a radio/tv broadcast etc. PLEASE tell me, just send me an IM or a PM.
AIM:setidude321
YIM:alexunit321
MSN:[email protected]
We have 60 million potential signers, what are we waiting for?

I am not signing it because the idea is simply stupid. People will download, RIAA will bitch, people will scream invasion of privacy. While the fight might be fair and just, to me is a waste of time.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by unit321
Im starting a ad-campaign, to get the message out.

---

Good for you... just remember that AO isn't a place to advertise.

Quote:

---

If we could get 40 MILLION to sign a petition we would strike gold! The only problem is that people need to know about it.

---

Sorry to burst your bubble, but you are not likely to get 40 million people to sign anything. Heck, it's hard enough getting them to sign a simple ballot paper over here, and then they only have to put a cross on a piece of paper. I can't think of many issues where 40 million people would be willing to actually stand up and protest against them, and the RIAA stunt certainly isn't one of them.

there are (reportedly by the EFF) 60 MILLION p2p users... why wouldnt they sign this petition?

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by unit321
there are (reportedly by the EFF) 60 MILLION p2p users... why wouldnt they sign this petition?

---

There are 60 million people in the UK, why wouldn't they vote? (ok, so not all of them are on the electoral register but even then turnout is usually below 50%). Two reasons: apathy and laziness, most people who fileshare probably don't give a damn about either the RIAA or the EFF. You are unlikely to get two thirds of them to do anything as a whole.

im just curious but is this like some kind of way for the RIAA to get even more people down...you know, you sign and they might think ur suspicious and so they go after ya?