How to foil the RIAA

[Petros]

Re: Re: How to foil the RIAA

Originally posted by TwoZigzagColt45
downloading copyrighted music is stealing
simple enough for you ?

Actually, downloading copyrighted music is copyright infrigement. Taking something so that the owner can't use it is stealing. Both crimes, but different ways to perform them and with different names. Why do we have a term called "copyright infringement" if it is theft? I will call it "copyright infringement" since the law calls it that.

 

[muzikool]

Seems like enough people might be interested enough in reading this article so I'll post it here. It is a bit lengthy, but it is very interesting, and it might answer some of the questions in this thread... or at least provide more insight. If you don't want to read the whole article, then at least read through the RIAA section.

http://www.cdbaby.net/articles/courtney_love.html

 

[2z]

copyright infringement


http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/iclp/hr2265.html

 

[gonaads]

Re: Re: Re: How to foil the RIAA

Originally posted by HandyBuddy
Actually, downloading copyrighted music is copyright infrigement. Taking something so that the owner can't use it is stealing. Both crimes, but different ways to perform them and with different names. Why do we have a term called "copyright infringement" if it is theft? I will call it "copyright infringement" since the law calls it that.

That is quite correct... The situation is that the RIAA has put this issue into such a spin that everyone now thinks it is "stealing".

If you go by the letter of the law it is and always has been "Copyright Infringement" and nothing else. The way the RIAA will have you see it is that someone is "stealing". Which is not correct by the way the laws are written. You can argue all you want the points of this but legally it is only "Copywright Infringement".

The RIAA is more pissed because the Music Industry Companies are not getting the big chunck of money they are use to getting from there cut of a Recording Artist's product, ie... CD, LP, Tape. If the Recording Artists should do what some have already done and go online and sell direct to the consumer then the RIAA is dead. They (the RIAA) don't want that. The RIAA has beat into the public that it is theft, they have made out these people as nasty evil criminals. If the laws are spelled out so well as to "Copyright Infringment" then why do they need to put this spin on it to suit their own agenda?

 

[thebear]

Re: Re: Re: Re: How to foil the RIAA

Originally posted by gonaads
That is quite correct... The situation is that the RIAA has put this issue into such a spin that everyone now thinks it is "stealing".

If you go by the letter of the law it is and always has been "Copyright Infringement" and nothing else. The way the RIAA will have you see it is that someone is "stealing". Which is not correct by the way the laws are written. You can argue all you want the points of this but legally it is only "Copywright Infringement".

The RIAA is more pissed because the Music Industry Companies are not getting the big chunck of money they are use to getting from there cut of a Recording Artist's product, ie... CD, LP, Tape. If the Recording Artists should do what some have already done and go online and sell direct to the consumer then the RIAA is dead. They (the RIAA) don't want that. The RIAA has beat into the public that it is theft, they have made out these people as nasty evil criminals. If the laws are spelled out so well as to "Copyright Infringment" then why do they need to put this spin on it to suit their own agenda?

for the RIAA it is a double edge-sword, by beating it into the public that we are stealing - they begin to alienate their own consumers which no industry can afford to do. Times have changed, and the record industry will have to change with it. What i mean is when the airplane first started gaining popularity, it killed the shipping industry because nobody would rather spend 5 days on the seas over 5 hours on a plane. What did they do? They reinvented themselves into the Cruise Lines of today, this is what the record industry needs to do.

 

[muzikool]

All I've got to say is that the RIAA has an interesting business model these days. "Let's sue our own customers!" What a great idea.

Could it possibly be that: a) the current economy is a factor in music sales, or b) the industry (for the most part) is putting out utter crap!? Nope, not possible.

 

[Petros]

Originally posted by muzikool
All I've got to say is that the RIAA has an interesting business model these days. "Let's sue our own customers!" What a great idea.

Could it possibly be that: a) the current economy is a factor in music sales, or b) the industry (for the most part) is putting out utter crap!? Nope, not possible.

Exactly! "Instead of adapting, let's litigate!" How long will that last before a judge (who probably has downloaded every Gordon Lightfoot mp3 he could find) gets fed up?

 

[Maveric169]

Well, I think RIAA and the rest of the music industry, and the movie industry as well has been shown that there current tatics are not going to work......EVER. They need to remake the whole system for online internet buying. Customers need to be able to sample the music on cd's, and the ability to order just 1 song or more from a cd and pay a fair price for the songs that they purchase. I ALWAYS try before i buy. After buying video games, DVD's and tons of worthless cd's with 1 good song, and 16 crap songs, i won't buy it other wise. 99% of the music, movies, ect that I have I have purchased. There are about 5 songs which I refuse to pay $26 dollars or more for 1 stinkin song. It was the only good song on the whole CD.

The few companies that had the vision to see the future of music industry and tried to start this type of service was sued into oblivion by RIAA. If the artists are not willing to stand up for themselfs against RIAA, then there with RIAA. And I don't care if they get a dime then or not.

RIAA has become Nazi stormtroopers for the media industry, and think because there really the only game in town that they can do what ever they want and no one can challenge them. And they have so much of your money and mine, that if you do stand up to them, they will just keep you in the courts till your broke and don't have a leg to stand on. You will be eat Raman while they eat lobster and drink Dom., And they will just laugh all the way to the bank.

RIAA is the reason that people don't care if there stealing or not.
but that is just my $.02 worth

 

[Mr. Ass]

I just want to make a point here that (correct me if im wrong) hasnt been said yet. By downloading music you are NOT stealing from the artist because the artist has already been paid. Most artists are paid through contracts, not the amount of cd's sold. Were not stealing from the RIAA either, they just represent the record companies, and no, were not stealing from them either, they make their money when they sell the records to the stores (Tower, virgin megastore, ect.) the money (very little money) we are taking away from the industry via downloading is being taken from the income the music stores are making. Im not saying its bad to pirate (i got close to a thousand, and yes, i do share) my philosiphy is that when the record labels give ME a good enough reason to pay 15-20 dollars for a cd i'll be more then happy to do it.

 

[CCJohn]

I think the music industry deserves all this punishment. They price fixed their CDs during the 1990s and we, consumers, are getting back our moneys worth.

 

[gonaads]

It's called the "greedy get greedier and get richer"

When is enough enough?

 

[dave holbon]

Lets get some facts straight;

Stealing has no legal meaning at least here in the UK. The act of theft does, and in order to prove in law, requires the “known thief” intended to permanently deprive the proven legal owner of the said object. If all this can’t be proved it is not theft.

Copyright infringements have never been regarded as theft but the word stealing could be applied to this but as it has no legal standing never is. These are all non-criminal actions and require the complainant (usually a record company or it’s agents) to institute legal proceedings against an individual; this can include Limited Companies or Corporate entities, which are regarded as individuals by the law in this case.

The legal costs involved in prosecuting individuals whom download music where a possible copyright infringement is suspected, from the Internet via (Kazza for instance) is not feasible as the cost’s outweigh the returns. The body’s governing these infringements know this and rely on fear and intimidation or some highly advertised prosecutions of (say) Mrs Mop in Durham, for downloading Danny Kay’s songs and then being sent to prison for three months. Cases of this nature here in the UK are already underway.

In the end I’ve heard all this before when VHS video recorders first became popular.

The fact is it just can’t be stopped and everyone knows it.