|
-
August 16th, 2008, 12:05 PM
#1
RIAA butt kicked
And about time too. The lady has been awarded the full legal costs.......... her counter case against the RIAA is still pending.
Story is here:
http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/22...s-107-951-riaa
I thought you guys had laws about Organised Crime, Extortion, and Demanding Money With Menaces?
I don't condone piracy or IP theft, but I most certainly don't believe that two wrongs make a right, particularly when the only wrong is on the part of the organisation that purports to want to make things right.
-
August 16th, 2008, 06:36 PM
#2
Four years ago the Recording Industry Association of America alleged that she and her eight year old daughter were downloading gangster rap songs to their home computer.
"Music" like rap is almost entirely based around drum beats from the Winstons, George Clinton, and Afrika Bambaataa (who used drum machines anyway... which is silly)
Last edited by The-Spec; August 16th, 2008 at 06:39 PM.
-
August 17th, 2008, 12:30 PM
#3
Sure,
But that is the IP and plagiarism issue is it not? I see your point that the original material isn't actually original. However, I believe that most "copyright" stuff applies to the actual performance or interpretation of the original IP (score, lyrics, or whatever)?
What I am getting at is there is a subtle distinction between:
1. You are copying my original material into your claimed to be original material.
2. You are performing my original (or owned) material.
3. You are playing my original perfomance of any material.
3. You are distributing, or obtaining that performance without licence.
As I see things, this is all about the law, due process, malicious prosecutions, privacy, and your constitutional rights.
-
August 17th, 2008, 08:47 PM
#4
Yeah, it's extortion plain and simple. Show biz has been
a subsidiary of organized crime for decades.
I came in to the world with nothing. I still have most of it.
-
August 17th, 2008, 08:54 PM
#5
I don't know how much of a relief this really is for
file-sharers. The article says precious little about
the legal arguments and any case law. It'll be
interesting to know more. Any Lexus subscribers
among us?
This may well trigger even more aggressive searches
not just of PC's, but premises too. Obviously the
fallout from this case is logfiles and packet captures
are not enough to determine guilt. So the next step
for the RIAA is....?
And by no means is this case settled. This one'll
go to appeals court. The RIAA has very deep pockets.
Never forget that justice, IN THIS WORLD, is bought,
pure and simple.
Last edited by brokencrow; August 17th, 2008 at 08:57 PM.
“Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.” — Will Rogers
-
August 17th, 2008, 09:39 PM
#6
Oooooh, the $107G's has been paid:
http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16724
The RIAA even called the 8-year-old's school posing as her grandmother:
http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/21...prosecution%20
And that case, and more!
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blo...documents.html
Kill The Sacred Cow.
“Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.” — Will Rogers
-
August 22nd, 2008, 08:40 PM
#7
Hmmmm,
I don't know how much of a relief this really is for
file-sharers. The article says precious little about
the legal arguments and any case law.
Good point! I really don't know, but I suspect that there is no real solace for the hardcore filesharer? They might even lose out, as the RIAA/MPAA is forced to be more focused, more professional............ and compliant with the laws and Constitution of the United States of America
What we need is a nice, meaty, malicious prosecution/ harassment case that sets them back a serious number of millions...........................
The RIAA was also accused of telephoning the child's school and asking to speak to her by pretending to be her grandmother.
Conspiracy to kidnap?.................paedophilia?.................. nah! go for both, nobody would accept their lame excuse
-
August 22nd, 2008, 11:36 PM
#8
 Originally Posted by nihil
Conspiracy to kidnap?.................paedophilia?.................. nah! go for both, nobody would accept their lame excuse 
...fraud.
“Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects.” — Will Rogers
-
August 23rd, 2008, 10:36 AM
#9
Yes, on the face of it, there would seem to be a case to answer there?
1. They attempted to obtain monies to which they were not entitled (by their own admission and the court's ruling).
2. They used deception and identity theft to try to achieve their ends.
-
August 25th, 2008, 03:09 PM
#10
[sarcasm]
Next thing you know they will claim that home cooking is killing the restaurant industry...
Is sharing recipes going to be illegal?
[/sarcasm]
I dislike the RIAA
Computers do not have problems, they have users.
~Cope57
Similar Threads
-
By Red_Asphalt in forum Miscellaneous Security Discussions
Replies: 2
Last Post: October 15th, 2003, 07:29 AM
-
By FamStars&Straps in forum Miscellaneous Security Discussions
Replies: 20
Last Post: October 7th, 2003, 08:12 AM
-
By jared_c in forum AntiOnline's General Chit Chat
Replies: 3
Last Post: January 21st, 2003, 01:26 AM
-
By cwk9 in forum AntiOnline's General Chit Chat
Replies: 4
Last Post: January 13th, 2003, 08:46 AM
-
By jared_c in forum AntiOnline's General Chit Chat
Replies: 4
Last Post: November 27th, 2002, 05:47 AM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|