COURT: RIAA CAN'T HAVE NAMES OF DOWNLOADERS

Drudge Report ^

[rit]

Federal appeals court on Friday rejected efforts by recording industry to compel nation's Internet providers to identify subscribers accused of illegally distributing music online.

[Merdoug]

I do not work for the RIAA. If I did, I would not have to live paycheck to paycheck. I think the RIAA are ripping off people with high prices. They are gouging people on the price of CD's. Greedy corporations is the norm in America. HOWEVER, the artist who wrote or sang the music has a right to make a living. I'm not talking about artists no longer living: I mean people trying to live NOW. When you or I download their music and don't buy it, we are getting something without paying for it. They are doing their work without reward. No one would want that. I'm not concerned about the fat-cats; but even they have a right to be paid for what they do. It's only right. If I go to a concert, I am paying to hear someone sing. They are selling their "talent", and I am buying the right to listen to it. If I snuck in without paying and listened to it, it wouldn't be right because they could not earn a living that way. As I said, prices for CD's are too high, but no one is forcing me to buy it. And most of today's "music" is garbage anyway! :)

[antaresequity]

Kazaa is sooo "2000."

So true. The mirc bots arent ever mentioned, and they account for the bulk of transfer at this time...I believe...

Kaaza, Napster and the rest of those infected programs with all their pop up crap and ad-worms are so lame...

XDCC spy, and Packet news....of course downloading copyright stuff is a big NO NO and nobody here ever does it.

[Revolting cat!]

Over the years I have copied, re-recorded, downloaded, gave away, individual song recordings and entire albums. One dangerous career criminal, the RIAA and their mouthpieces would say! At the same time, I have bought copies of record albums, the same ones, in two, three different formats, not getting any discounts for the 2nd and 3rd copies which I should have gotten according to the perfect logic presented by the defenders of the RIAA.

I know I've bought two copies of Bob Dylan's Blonde on Blonde. And I know that Bob Dylan himself probably didn't get 50 cents of my money, and he certainly got less than the record store owner or the mafioso record distributor. This past month, Bob Dylan's record company has been telling me via advertisements and rock critic lackeys on payola, to forget it, to never mind, that CD version of the album you've got mister, has inferior, unacceptable sound, we have just remixed it for ya, and it now "sounds glorious", you can hear Al Kooper breathing on it, so run to the record store and buy a copy at three times the list price of the original LP.

Quite a racket, isn't it?

[mylife]

Quite a racket, isn't it?

Yup! I have purchased Aphodites Child's double LP "666" 4 times now and am in need of a 5th copy.

By the way 666 is a musical interpretation of "Revelations" lucky thing the church didnt sue.

[AntiGuv]

The conjunction in that sentence was an and, not an or.

[LisaMalia]

XDCC spy, and Packet news....of course downloading copyright stuff is a big NO NO and nobody here ever does it.

Not me, ever again. I've learned my lesson. Really. I promise.

[Arkinsaw]

Those who download without paying are stealing and what I call "digital welfare" whores.

Yawn. I generally download non-hit songs from albums to preview them so I can see if I want to buy the album. I don't buy albums based on hits and want to hear everything on them before purchasing. If the rest of the stuff on the album sucks, which it generally does, I will just delete it and buy nothing. If the album is good I will go buy it.

I usually do this for used CD's. I only buy used CD's because regular prices on CD's are so outrageous.

From time to time I download something to listen to and get rid of it after I have had my fill which is essentially no damn different than listening to it on the radio. Generally the songs I do this with are 30 year old songs. For instance, I get a hankering for "Battle of New Orleans" and "Sink the Bismarck", download them. Listen to them. Get rid of them. I would NEVER purchase a CD with this stuff on it. Never. Nobody loses a dime off of it. I do the same thing with some old 70's music. We download it, laugh at it, and then delete it. We would never actually purchase even a used CD of it.

You can call that digital welfare whore if you want. But the fact is that nobody loses a thin dime. Some folks probably turn off their cable tv when they have guests so the guests don't inadvertantly steal the signal meant for their brains only.

[nuffsenuff]

The music industry, filled with liberal hypocrites, gets a taste of their own medicine.

Priceless.

[ConservativeMan55]

A HELL YEAH BUMP!!!!!

[ConservativeMan55]

Its not stealing anymore, LOL!

[clouda]

Good News Ping!!!

[hoosierham]

So is it against the law to record songs on the casstte recorder BUILT INTO several of my radios ? And why not feed the FM stereo audio into mycomputer? Wait,maybe this is why the djs always chatter over the end and beginning of every song!

[NotJustAnotherPrettyFace]

Bump and a bookmark.

[tsomer]

Intellectual property isn't the same thing as actual physical property.

Ask youself why patents are only good for 10 years while copyrights have been extended to 99 years.

Damn right! The RIAA would can the air you breathe and sell it to you if it could.

[nonliberal]

I would disagree. The reason people download is not because they cannot afford a CD but becuase there is so much crap out there that just is not worth buying.

[tsomer]

This is an excellent analogy.

You create an original color lithograph--say, a beautiful landscape--and print up an edition of 100.

If you use actual stones and oversee production and hand number and sign each print this may be worth the 100 bucks, even much more. The 2000 edition lithographs you often see advertised, which are photo-mechanically reproduced, are worthless as collector's items.

Let's say someone gets ahold of your original...making his own identical (but perhaps not perfect) copy of it.

I would have no problem here.

And now he's got it. He can undersell you, or he can just give it away. Your prints stop selling cold.

Tough luck for me, and tough luck for the buyers:

1: They're buying junk, they may as well clip magazine pictures. Before you go to buy any print, carry a magnifier and look for the dot matrix characteristic of photo-mechanical reproduction.

2: Somebody is suckering my suckers. Unless I've got some goons to kneecap my competitor, I've got no recourse-- except for one thing-- educate my customers and stand behind my work.

Has the music industry ever done this, to anyone's memory?

[longtermmemmory]

and california would have an air tax within the hour.

[Houmatt]

I was wondering if by chance you posted this with the knowledge "Happy Birthday To You" is a copyrighted song, under the ownership of Sir Paul McCartney.

[Houmatt]

Dearest John:

Your mother.

Sincerely Yours,
Houmatt

[John Robertson]

"I am a 100-percent diehard conservative. That means I am pro-life, pro-gun, pro-death penalty, anti-tax, anti-socialism, and despise the likes of Bill and Hillary Clinton, Tom Daschle and Dick Gephardt with a passion that words can never describe.
I also believe that the best place for a pedophile or a rapist is a jail cell, where they can spend eternity. But if we cannot keep them in prison, we the public have a basic, fundamental right to know where and who these people are.

I am a firm believer in the use of common sense and personal responsibility. If you put a cup of hot coffee between your legs, remove the lid and burn yourself, that is YOUR fault. It is YOUR fault if you get fat from eating fast food. It is YOUR fault if you get cancer from smoking cigarettes. I think abhorrent and abnormal sexual behavior does not belong in the public square, the church, or public schools. Period."

Despite all that--and even knowing if someone tried to take my property or living from me I'd want to kill him--I have no problem stealing other people's property and then doing all sorts of pretzel-logic to justify it. And, in this case, writing something I think is incredibly pithy.