|
RIAA to stop lawsuits, will instead pressure ISPs
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 20 December, 2008
After suing over 35,000 people since 2002 over music piracy, the RIAA is changing its policy and will discontinue suing individuals over unauthorized music sharing through P2P networks.
With that good news however, comes possibly worse news.
The RIAA is now making agreements with ISPs (Internet Service Providers) that would have the companies send out emails to customers they believe ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
22. December 2008 @ 06:39 |
Link to this message
|
I wonder how the rest of business feels about this?
Wreck the internet just to try to help out the music & movie business?
As always the root of this is a ratcheting up of corporate greed.
We used to be able to record music from the radio, videos from the TV, then we got PVR/DVR but now we're supposed to believe that downloading a TV show or a movie you missed is 'pirating'!?
BS
'Pirates' are the guys at fleamarkets selling dodgy copies of a movie or TV series on DVD.
Private individuals downloading for private non-commercial use is not 'pirating'.
F*ck the MPAA & RIAA and any of the rest of those parasitic b@stards.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
emugamer
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. December 2008 @ 12:30 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by NexGen76:
Originally posted by asilay328:
What I do not understand is that if I am paying for a certain amount of bandwidth from an ISP, they have no business monitoring how I use that. The internet privacy act protects me from that monitoring unless there is a government issued document for such a watching. The RIAA needs to face the fact that file sharing is here to stay and that if they want a piece of the action then they should have hopped onto the Itunes train during the nabster years.
Great point.......
The Internet Privacy Act doesn't exist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Privacy_Act
|
|
LordLiono
Newbie
|
22. December 2008 @ 14:32 |
Link to this message
|
Basically with the new actions of the RIAA, a question came to my attention. The Question was "Can an American get in trouble from their ISP for downloading foreign music?"
To me it really seems unlikely but what do you guys think?
|
|
tin23uk
Junior Member
1 product review
|
22. December 2008 @ 15:30 |
Link to this message
|
to whoever it was above me that said they think this is just the RIAA throwing up the white flag, i totally agree with that, this is there method of realizing their lawsuits aint working and changing tact without looking like chicken sh*ts.
there is no way this is going to work, for isp's to police their networks would be extremely expensive, then when they catch peoplebeing naughty 3 times they have to disconnect them and lose the cash that customer was paying them monthly.
insight broadband (an affiliate of comcast i believe)used a method of calling and emailing the top 5% highest upload bandwidth users per month to harras them and constantly remind them that they were in breach of the TOS and could have your connection disconected, the email would also include a friendly reminder that if your uploading music you could be taken to court. but insight broadband had no knowledge of what you were uploading, for them to keep tabs on everything the top 5% was uploading would have been an expesive venture and one im sure they or any other ISP would want to adopt without a fight.
given the fact that this will probably come to a battle in court with most ISP's i highly doubt the RIAA will win, they aint taking on old mary jane rotten crotch over 10 lil wayne songs this time.
no doubt when they lose this battle they will find another equally annoying method
|
|
ads
Junior Member
|
22. December 2008 @ 16:54 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by atomicxl:
Its about time.
For a long time ISPs have been profiting off of people stealing music and movies. They never asked any questions they just said, "hey this guy is willing to pay more money for a pointlessly fast connection and higher bandwidth caps. I don't know he's doing, I don't wanna know what he's doing. I just wanna fill my pockets up with money and turn a blind eye to anything."
Looks like that attitude is gonna go by the waste side now. Personally, I don't care. I don't think that musicians are Satan and that record labels are the anti-christ. I've been legally buying my music online for months now. If I wanna find a new artist i'll preview mp3s on Amazon or use Pandora.
This new way of approaching piracy ONLY affects crooks and thieves.
If you hate music, don't buy it!!! Don't download it. You'll show the labels that theres no money to be made from what they release and that their is no interest in it. Stealing it shows that they can't make money, but that there are people interested in it (why would you steal music that you hate?) and they'll keep making this crap trying to find new ways of marketing/selling it.
Isp are about makeing money period.. I ran a private game sever and I got phone calls saying I was useing to much bandwith and I replied so what I pay for it.. I wasnt shareing files or anything all I was doing was running 3 private severs off my sever computer and a ftp sever for my files so I could acess my own files from anywere.. In order for them to see what I'm doing they need a warrent as Im running everything behind a firewall they can capture the pacs on the way out but that would be invasion of privacy in order to do that I have been sent a letter from my isp saying I downloaded some torrent I phoned them up and complained... 1 it was some random movie I never heard off and 2 I dont use torrents at all... The only thing i download are patchs and updates and when some of them are 1gig or more i want speed
Look at age of connan installed 32gigs when I played it for 1 month the file was already 42gigs and thats just updates so thats 10gigs in 1 month just to play a game add my game severs and also add me reinstalling windows updates everytime i redo my computer i use 90 gigs a month easy.. now thats a good amount of traffic but do I download music nope do I download games nope... do I download pirate software nope its easyer for me just to buy it then to download it why do I do it im lazy I will go buy a disk instead of downloading 50 to 100 files to get the same program thats priated..
|
Member
1 product review
|
22. December 2008 @ 18:00 |
Link to this message
|
the IPS arnt going to lose money Quote:
The RIAA is now making agreements with ISPs
they would have 2b compensated for there loses!!!
Any way if thay disconect you just go some where else!!!
35k ppl sued in 6 years is not many ppl :)
|
|
PS260
Newbie
|
23. December 2008 @ 09:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
The only reason people want a high internet speed is for piracy.
|
|
emugamer
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
23. December 2008 @ 10:24 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by PS260:
The only reason people want a high internet speed is for piracy.
I will assume that you are joking.
But if you are not and truly believe what you said, have you considered the numerous legit streaming video sites, including Netflix, Blockbuster, even Youtube. Then you have online gaming (PS3, XBOX 360), as well as the download and video services MS and Sony provide. Try downloading a PS3 demo or game from the Playstation Network Store on a dial-up connection. I would assuming you prefer dial-up, since that is really the only alternative to high-speed (yes, DSL is technically "high speed"). Maybe you are content with just checking your Juno email and waiting for each image on a website to slowly appear from the top down over the course of minutes. Or maybe you like the funny sound a dial-up modem makes trying to connect. I have to admit, it's a bit nostalgic for me (/wipes a teary eye).
|
|
dabagboy
Newbie
|
23. December 2008 @ 10:32 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by susieqbbb:
First off.
This is illegal this violates the internet protection act.
Which states unless a company has a warrent at any time they are not allowed to search a users computer.
in order to obtain such information.
they would have to search your machine via ip address.
without a warrent any seized property would be unimissable in a court of law.
ROFLMAO Wow, great advise from an attorney who cannot spell or understand basic grammar.
Would you be willing to represent me if I'm sued?
"warrent any seized property would be unimissable"
just like Wow...
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
23. December 2008 @ 11:33 |
Link to this message
|
dabagboy, susie is correct enough that is why RIAA is ramping down the litigation. They lost many case because their evedance was obtained illeagaly. The litigation engine was supposed to have been self sustaining. With the run of "bad luck". The engine has been a money pit.
Susie, you deserve a cookie!
ematrix, I know Cox and probably Virgin hack computers. I have seen 'a letter'. I asked the person that recieved it to send it to the EFF. The Virgin letter was not self incriminating but it is likely they were doing the same. Assume if you P2P your computer is being inventoried. I am not sure what they are going to do with that info.
That is why the RIAA dropped out of the ring. To make a good case you need to break the law. A good lawyer can get you out of either a poor case or a good case with ileagal evivence.
Anyone have a secure firewall for M$? You want the software made by a company that will not give the back door over to these guys.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 23. December 2008 @ 11:44
|
Member
|
23. December 2008 @ 13:50 |
Link to this message
|
What's a matter RIAA? The little girl in the hospital you sued wasn't vulnerable enough for you? Did you run out of 80 year old blind women to sue?
Folks (for those who don't know)
Chane your eMule/Azureus/whatever folder name to something funky. Use PeerGuardian, use a firewall w/port blocks. Nobody is getting to you.
My ISP can't get past the public IP they assigned to me. Even if they could and even if they managed to start a scan, my net sniffer would pop up a red flag the size of Texas while my Defense program would shut it down immediately.
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
23. December 2008 @ 14:34 |
Link to this message
|
ChiefBrdy, what sniffer do you use. The guy that was sent an inventory of video he downloaded to his hard drive had both a personal firewall and a router fire wall. He was using forced encryption for his flows. He was more secure than most of us. Not that getting a letter is a biggie. He had gotten the must haves long ago so he will probably retire.
|
Member
1 product review
|
24. December 2008 @ 01:19 |
Link to this message
|
@ ChiefBrdy...
Quote:
Nobody is getting to you.
dude i work 4 an ISP dont underestmate what we can do, its OURservers and cable etc... ur useing...?
i dont think u know much at all!!... :)
but if u think ur safe... fell free u think that!!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 24. December 2008 @ 01:24
|
Senior Member
|
24. December 2008 @ 01:46 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
If the RIAA really wants to stop piracy, then they should distribute there media in a non-digital format......LOL
40 years ago we swapped albums and used tape decks to share music.
No one seemed to care either. Taping songs and albums from FM radio was commonplace. Every major radio station would have an album hour which basically allowed one to tape the whole album without commercial interruption. No one cared.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 24. December 2008 @ 01:47
|
|
nalljr
Newbie
|
24. December 2008 @ 04:58 |
Link to this message
|
ISP's will not yield to RIAA request.
Lets assume the ISP agreed with RIAA request.
1: They will waste manpower and time; to monitor and to send email to users to stop using P2P that the majority will ignore (additional manpower meaning additional cost for ISP).
2: Lets say they terminate the ISP service of their users, the user will just go to another ISP (loss of customer meaning loss of profit)
ISP companies are not that dumb to agree to such ridiculous, time-wasting, expensive request.
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
24. December 2008 @ 08:30 |
Link to this message
|
slickwill, I guess they could sell sheet music but vinyl is being shared. If you can play the music you can capture the sound and digitize it. The RIAA needs to sell the music for a fair price if they want to compete with free. They are some that will never buy music if they can get it for free. I bet if they sold HiFi DRM free music for 10% of what they are selling music for now they would not be worring about pirates.
Good one kingy1213! I would tend to believe you. A techie with a fair tool set may not stand much of a chance. ISPs have finally spent some money and hired some pros. They have funds so they have great tools.
On the other hand, a hacker or any truly devious person who takes the time to cover their tracks will fool you every time. 99% of the P2P users lack the needed discipline to cover their tracks that well.
I suspect the RIAA will have little influence on the ISPs. The ISPs are a business. Business is all about the bottom line. Unless the RIAA gives them money, they will not do them many favors. I suspect the ISPs have a better idea who is doing what on their network than the RIAA does. It stands to reason that they would hire qualified persons in a counter P2P effort as apposed to the RIAA who hired incompetents. How else would the RIAA be going after printers and dead persons? Their whole effort reeked of incompetance. It would be moronic to assume a technical outfit like an ISP would be so stupid as to hire the dregs like the RIAA did.
The RIAA aside, the ISPs need to control P2P. Uncontrolled P2P could clog the internet. They need to realize a large portion of their customers have broadband with P2P in mind. The ISPs should give those users band width when it does not interfere with business. Then they will not be waging war with their customers. The RIAA is a shining example of what not to do. Those sick bastards aren?t interested in profits only in raping the public. It is obvious they prefer to go out of business instead of providing the public with a fair deal.
The RIAA will continue to work on changing the laws taking P2P out of the grey area and make it illegal. I do not count them out of the picture. They are far more dangerous now that they will be shifting their efforts.
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
24. December 2008 @ 11:27 |
Link to this message
|
F*ck the RIAA and all their BS.
Here's the real problem
Quote:
According to a new study, of the 13m songs available for sale on the internet last year, more than 10m failed to find a single buyer.
The research, conducted by the MCPS-PRS's Will Page and Andrew Bud, brings us that much closer to proving Sturgeon's Law ? that 90% of everything is crap. It also provides evidence for the famous old rock critic adage ? your favourite band sucks.
More importantly, these findings challenge the "long tail" theory that diverse, specialised items ? though individually less popular - will together outsell mainstream "hits".
Page is the chief economist at the MCPS-PRS Alliance, a not-for-profit royalty collection agency. According to his and Bud's research, 80% of all revenue came from about 52,000 tracks ? the "hits" that powered the music industry. Broken down by album, only 173,000 of the 1.23m available albums were ever purchased ? leaving 85% without a single copy sold.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2008/dec/23/music-sell-sales
The shovel sh!t and wonder why people are not interested.
|
|
emugamer
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
26. December 2008 @ 10:04 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Quote:
If the RIAA really wants to stop piracy, then they should distribute there media in a non-digital format......LOL
40 years ago we swapped albums and used tape decks to share music.
No one seemed to care either. Taping songs and albums from FM radio was commonplace. Every major radio station would have an album hour which basically allowed one to tape the whole album without commercial interruption. No one cared.
Heck, I was doing that until the early-mid 90's.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. December 2008 @ 10:53 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If the RIAA really wants to stop piracy, then they should distribute there media in a non-digital format......LOL
40 years ago we swapped albums and used tape decks to share music.
No one seemed to care either. Taping songs and albums from FM radio was commonplace. Every major radio station would have an album hour which basically allowed one to tape the whole album without commercial interruption. No one cared.
Heck, I was doing that until the early-mid 90's.
8track came out in the what 60s?
The recorder version of it was hell from what I have been told, so cassettes are more late 70s than anything else.
We as a media going society have only really had self recording devices for the last 30 years, or mid 70s.
With the age of digital protection we are losing are common sense rights, akin to how when planes came into use farmers claimed they owned the sky above them this of cores was silly, today we need a reformation of end user rights and copy right needs to be overhauled to focus solely on profits made from the right'd work and not the mere distribution of it.
|
Senior Member
|
2. January 2009 @ 02:23 |
Link to this message
|
So, a University has kids downloading on there internet. The Uni can't find who downloads, the RIAA tells the ISP that they need to do something, for example cap or shut down.. The Uni loses net or slower speed, then the ISP most likely gets sued, because if they don't listen to the RIAA they get sued? So a lose, lose situation.. The RIAA are a joke.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Mez
AfterDawn Addict
|
7. January 2009 @ 09:27 |
Link to this message
|
I wouldn't lose sleep over that. Often universities own there own trunk built before there was a web. The RIAA ran into their very first snaffoo when they ordered them to give up the names of the students whose IP addresses were on lists. Most called their bluff and said No. That was the end of that. The RIAA had no legal right to force the issue. Now with lap tops and wifi universities have tried to not know who is doing what making any process to uncover students abusing the system very slow and painful. With the RIAA losing clout, I think your worry is a non issue at least for the next year or two. The RIAA will need more power to do much. With the loss of their funding, CD sales dropped 20% last year and 15% the year before, they are starting to feel the strain.
|
