Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Music Media

RIAA Sues Audiogalaxy 292

Posted by michael
from the no-quarter-asked-or-given dept.
Frizzled writes "The RIAA has struck again, this time filing suit against Audiogalaxy's "Satellite" file sharing program. (Nevermind that Satellite is loaded with spy-ware ... good riddance)." News.com has a story. The RIAA's press release links to their complaint.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

RIAA Sues Audiogalaxy

Comments Filter:
  • Control vs. Cash (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24, 2002 @10:33PM (#3582741)
    They (record companies) seem determined to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. They'd rather have control than cash.

    I think that they would rather have the cash.

    Its more that they don't understand either the technology (which is probably unstoppable), or their own customers.

    In particular, the major music labels don't seem to understand that:

    1) Some people will pay money anyway for CD's if they like them enough.

    2) Alot more people would buy the music if they sold them directly over the internet.

    I personally believe that their sales would rocket up even at the same profit margins if they just dropped the cost of producing and distributing the CD's from the price of an internet download. This might only be a few dollars cheaper than what you pay to a major music store for the CD.

    So what I think is happening here is the equivalent of what happened to encyclopedia salesmen with encarta. They were so locked in to a large existing sales network with high production costs that they could not bring themselves to cannibalise their own networks to maintain sales. This nearly destroyed the companies (such as britannica) before they finally did a U turn. People were happy to buy an inferior (M$ Encarta - not that it was bad, just less information) product because it was so much cheaper, and almost as good.

    The analogy here of technology hitting an established high premium sales network is pretty tight. And I believe that the outcome will be the same. Eventually the networks will recognise this, and sell music tracks online for alot less than they currently do. They will prosper under this arrangement, although much of their distribution network will have to die in the process.

    For the record, I can see the same thing ultimately happening with video, and a similar process of technological change is occuring with cameras and film. Our home computers will take on all of these tasks. We will still shop, but for production tools (printers, cameras) and 'raw' materials (blank CD's, DVD's high quality paper). Companies that get on this bandwagon will do well (ask Kodak), and those that pretend it isn't happening will go towards the wall (ask britannica!).My 2c worthMichael

    • Re:Control vs. Cash (Score:2, Interesting)

      by speedfreak_5 (546044)
      2) Alot more people would buy the music if they sold them directly over the internet.

      If they just dropped the price of a regular CD to a reasonable amount, I would be happy to buy it. As long as it's not any of that "music" that they whore on TRL.
    • by zaffir (546764)
      2) Alot more people would buy the music if they sold them directly over the internet.

      That is very, very true. And they won't be selling JUST to geeks, either. I know a guy, in his 50s, who uses his computer for e-mail, web browsing, word processing, and music. He's signed up for some music service over the internet where he pays about $1/song. He LOVES it. And he's a "joe sixpack", only a little older.
    • But if it can be banned (by the purchase of law) then the changeover process will be long, drawn out and wastefull- if it happens at all. There will have to be many mayters along the way as well.


    • I think that they would rather have the cash.


      The major players within the music industry largely control that industry. They have spent decades honing the art of the industry. You can be sure control is a part of the business plan.


      As long as that control is maintained, new business plans can be attempted with little risk. Loose control and everything is at risk. The old business plans go out the window. And the new ones could cost the entire business unit and everyone's job.


      Sure the Big Five (and any record company, for that matter) want the cash. But it is their current deathgrip on control of the system that is the biggest assurance that cash is going to come in. It doesn't matter how much cash a new business model might promise. A business model is a risk and if that business model involves giving up control, it is too much a risk no matter what the potential payoff.


      Unless, of course, an external force causes the industry to loose their current level of control despite their wishes.

    • People were happy to buy an inferior (M$ Encarta - not that it was bad, just less information) product because it was so much cheaper, and almost as good. (emphasis mine)

      And also, perhaps, misinformation, with history being colored to suit MS's corporate image. For example, there's this from the March 1998 Dr. Dobb's Journal [ddj.com]: "According to The New Yorker, 'after Microsoft bought the Funk & Wagnalls encyclopedia and turned it into...Encarta...the entry on Bill Gates changed.' The clause 'known as a tough competitor who seems to value winning in a competitive environment over money' was changed to read, 'known for his personal and corporate contributions to charity and educational organizations.'"

  • by dupper (470576) <adamlouis@gmail.com> on Friday May 24, 2002 @10:34PM (#3582747) Journal
    Claims background radio-band noise sounds too much like the new (insert popular shit band here) album. Claims damages worthy of galaxy submitting itself to RIAA Imperial Rule, wants cost of moon-sized battlestation covered.
  • Get WinMX!!! (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    WinMX is much better than anything now. Get the new version 3.1.
  • PDF size (Score:2, Funny)

    by queh (538682)
    3557KB? That's bigger than my Shakira MP3!
  • My version of the Satellite might be old, but it doesn't contain spyware.

    It's probably a few months old.

    AudioGalaxy also has a Linux binary-only version - it doesn't even use XWindows.
    • There is no spyware, and I have the latest version. The install is like 500k. I also monitor everything, and have viewed the dependencies. The worst thing that it has, is a Bonzi buddy icon, which is placed on your desktop, and links to your site. Nothing is accessed...
    • I d/led and installed a (win) version straight from their site a fortnight ago and carefully made sure the 'Run at Startup' option wasn't checked. Even so, it runs stuff at startup, but it's a snap to stop it doing this if you know it's happening (I thought it'd probably still be taking notes from startup so I went looking for it).

      Click Start | Run and type 'msconfig'
      Click on the Startup tab
      Uncheck that prog called fsg-ag_3102 (the program in the file location column that's in the audiogalaxy directory) to neuter the s/w

      Sure, it might still be spying when you run the satellite, but otherwise it affords you a little more privacy.

    • The "included spyware" is just the part of the install where it asks you if you would also like to install Gator. Most people who know what Gator is, just say "no" and don't install it.

      So spyware is a bit of a misnomer.
  • sorry if I look too naiveee.
    I recall seeing the agbrowser and agsatellite stuff on the debian packages list, and I assumed it would be safer than other options.

    I never installed it anyway (at the time modem was not working properly), but this is a bit interesting for me

    can you provide more info on spyware on the linux port?
  • by Sabalon (1684) on Friday May 24, 2002 @10:37PM (#3582760)
    Yes...AudioGalaxy is out there stealing songs?

    And Sears should be held responsiable for all illegal breaking&entering done with a craftsman hammer. And there has already been the Wincherster case. And Buck should be held liable for all knife crimes, and rap for all crimes of insanity, etc...

    What's next - RIAA against Berkeley for creating FTP cause they found an FTP mp3 site? RIAA against DARPA for creating the Internet?
    • You left out the neglence suit against Smith & Wesson (was it?) for the guy that committed suicide by shooting himself...
    • by Anonymous Coward
      How about the RIAA against mouthes ("free speech"), because they could be used to hum copyrighted music? How about the RIAA against lawyers, because they can be used to argue in favor of file sharing?
    • Those are all dumb analogies. A hammer is a tool that is mostly used for legitimate things, only rarely used for crime. Watch the searches on a P2P network, and you'll see that most of the P2P sharing is illegal stuff, with only a tiny amount of legitimate use.
      • So what? The VCR is "legal" based on the fact that it has legitimate uses - so the courts said. It doesn't matter if it has infringing uses if it has legit ones as well.

        What about time base correctors you can get at Best Buy? Mostly used to defeat macrovision.

        Sorry - but what you propose scares me. Lets ban a legit tool if we can find that more than 50% of its usage is illegal?
    • Ha- I think you mean RIAA against Al Gore for creating the Internet...
    • AudioGalaxy was designed and is distributed for the sole purpose of trading MP3s. All the RIAA has to do is prove that the programmers of AudioGalaxy intended to promote music piracy (which they did, I'm certain), and it's a done deal. I don't like the precident being set, but I agree that legally, the RIAA is within its rights, and morally, it's right too (theft is wrong, even if no one else loses out. Welcome to capitalism), at least in the US.

      Canadian laws allow filesharing, according to my interpretation of the downloader being the one to copy the music, not the uploader. Since Canadians are allowed to make copies for their own personal use, but not for others' (I can borrow a friend's CD and copy it, but he can't copy it and give the copy to me); the recording industry would argue that it's the uploader's client that is making the copy by moving it over the network. Sadly, US law is more straightforward.

      --Dan
  • Good Riddance? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Rayonic (462789) on Friday May 24, 2002 @10:38PM (#3582764) Homepage Journal
    Sure, it's riddled with spyware, but every case the RIAA wins against services that could be used to share their songs, the more legal precedence they have to pull more of that bullshit in the future.

    It doesn't matter how much spyware or other nasty stuff AudioGalaxy comes with, they are still on "our side" when it comes to the p2p issue as a whole. You'd better hope they win, though they probably won't.
    • by Arker (91948)

      I just deselected the spyware and it installed happily without it, I hardly see why including it for those that don't mind it means they deserve to be skewered by the RIAA. It's been a great service, I'll be very sorry to see it go.

  • Oh well... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Saeculorum (547931) on Friday May 24, 2002 @10:40PM (#3582769)
    Back to AudioGalaxy's FTP Search [audiogalaxy.com]. It doesn't even need Satellite. However, it might be RIAA's next target, right after other FTP search sites [oth.net].
    • I don't see that happening any time soon. That is like suing google for being able to find pages that might possibly link to copyrighted mp3s. You just can't expect a human to filter though a billion line list scanning for what might be offensive to everybody and anybody.
      • I can. The RIAA has been getting away with "intended illegal use" rather than "potential legal use" as a standard for determining copyright infringement, which has been heavily helped with laws like the DMCA. It's not like Google - 99.9% (completely random estimate) of the MP3s on the FTP servers indexed on AudioGalaxy's FTP server are most likely illegal. While not providing direct links, it does give a list of matching files on each server, allowing just a cut and paste to get to the results. I think it'd be ridiculous to sue them - especially with other "targets" to sue, but remember, common sense was outlawed quite a while ago ;)
  • someone mod the RIAA to redundant..
    they just don't get it, cut off one head, another grows, you can't stop it, you must adapt...but this has been said over and over again, and they won't get it, so its time to wonder what WILL happen to the RIAA
  • by inkswamp (233692) on Friday May 24, 2002 @10:45PM (#3582783)
    This is almost funny. As soon as one file-sharing system goes down, another comes along. Will the RIAA simply continue to sue every file-sharing service? It's ludicrous, but this doesn't strike me as bad. Maybe it will give others time to figure out a new digital distribution system to supplant the old business model so fervently and pointlessly protected by the RIAA. Let them go down fighting for a hopelessly outdated system while others make progress establishing the new.

    --Rick
  • lol gotta love that quote.

    I suppose this is as opposed to how a first year fine arts student could defeat cd copy protection with a felt tip pen.
  • What spyware is AG bundled with? I haven't noticed anything ...
  • by Innomi (566928) on Friday May 24, 2002 @10:54PM (#3582806)
    RIAA's business model is starting to look at lot like rambus...
    • I just visited the website. Something I don't understand. I did not find any content belonging to the RIAA & Co. There appears to be no peer to peer theft of RIAA controlled content. All I could find was Indi labels with samples and links to buy the content. Just what exactly is it the RIAA is suing over? Are they just making noise because someone decided to produce content and not include them? Are these bands that they rejected. Do these bands have contracts with RIAA to only sell to them? I'll have to see if I can find the details of the lawsuit. I would think most courts would toss this one out.
  • I like this game. RIAA go after one service...another pops up and takes its place. Bye Napster...now it's AG's turn. Actually, I don't feel "sorry" for AG at all..they always screwed their users.

    So, which is the next big service? Hrm, I think I should go and start one in Iraq! j/k

  • I think it's a shame that they want to shut this down, since it can open up different genres to people generating more money for them(There is some pretty good atmospheric drum and bass on AG), which is all that those greedy bastards care about, obviously. Major music distribution shouldn't be led around by one entity like it is now; we know what kind of problems that can lead to. (DMCA, SSSCA or CBDTPA, etc.)

    And on the spyware issue, I switched OSes, with AG on another drive and spyware on C drive, so my copy has no spyware attached to it (VX2.dll was erased).
  • The reason most people download mp3s is because they only want a few songs from an entire album. (there are some exceptions where someone will get the whole album). The fact is, a lot of CDs produced only come with 5 or less "playable" songs. The rest just suck. (they're just there to fill in tracks). I remember when artists made CDs that you could play straight from the first to the last track. The RIAA should do more research on why people dont like CDs and make it worth spending $12-16.99 for it instead of blaming lost profits on the Internet
  • by martinflack (107386) on Friday May 24, 2002 @11:25PM (#3582881)
    First time I read it I thought it said "RIAA sues the galaxy". Funny thing is, I didn't think it was strange.
  • Turbopoo (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Graymalkin (13732)
    What is most entertaining about the RIAA's continuing legal attacks is they are obviously attacking these companies with legal fees rather than substantitive claims and then turning around and flat out denying it. The problem legally with AG, Napster, and Kazaa is they have to maintain servers somewhere that not only distribute programs to share MP3s but also facilitate in their transfer. What none of these companies have managed to do is show a court that their software can be used for anything besides piracy* and in reality they can't be despite specious claims to the contrary. AG is going to fold under just like Kazaa did because there is no way their VC is going to hold out under the RIAA's assault, unless of course they have a retained attorney that works cheap.

    It will be interesting to see what happens next after AG goes down, the biggest network left that I know of is Gnutella and with that the RIAA faces a pretty tough battle. The Gnutella network was not specifically designed for MP3 sharing and there is no single company responsible for its maintenance. If they did try to bring a suit against it it would be interesting how they could attack GPL'ed code.

    * Yes trading MP3s or movies without paying for them is piracy. Unless you made it yourself or own the distribution rights to it, you giving it to other people isn't legal. The home recording act and time shifting statutes don't let you make recordings for distribution, only personal use. That is fair use. Kazaa, Napster, and AG aren't promoting fair use they ARE promoting piracy. It may seem unfair that you can't go download any song you want for free but those are the breaks. If you want cheap CDs buy them cheap either used or from swap meets. Mixing a CD for a friend can be fair use, a 70 gig MP3 collection downloaded entirely from some sharing service is not. Copying a CD you own to put in your car so your original doesn't get fucked up is fair use, downloading and watching AoTC instead of paying for it in some way is not.
  • I like AudioGalaxy (Score:4, Interesting)

    by GuNgA-DiN (17556) on Friday May 24, 2002 @11:38PM (#3582904)
    It's too bad... I like the program. I joined their "Gold" program for like $2.75 a month you get access to faster servers and better quality downloads. I've been happy with it. I always find what I want. A song pops into my head -- and 5 minutes later: I'm listening to it. I wish that all of these dying companies would open-source their code. Since they will be getting a new asshole from the RIAA and the US legal system anyway they might as well "leak" the source to the Net. That way a 1000 new networks could spring up in their place. The further we spread the RIAA the weaker they get! Muahahahahahahahaha!
    • by krogoth (134320) <<ten.tendnarag> <ta> <todhsals>> on Saturday May 25, 2002 @12:31AM (#3583032) Homepage
      One of the things I like the most is the Linux client. I doubt it comes with any Internet Explorer plugins, but just in case I run it under an ordinary account, so it can't do too much. It's a nice background client instead of those useless, slow and sometimes ugly GUIs that most clients have, and the web-based interface makes it very easy to find what you want and get a good copy. It also has send groups - I get every Essential Mix and new music regularly without having to do anything.
    • I like the program too. My favorite feature is the client and the scheduler were separate. I could schedule downloads from work, go home, and there they were. Simple. Effective. Also lots of songs.
      The RIAA will win if they can use the Napster rulings here. Audiogalaxy blocks songs that are copyrighted, but there are always more songs with different titles, and whoever is in charge of blocking songs only gets the popular (eminem and the like) artists. The less popular, and IMO better artists, are untouched.
  • I'm glad my newest favorite band is european, if i dont miss my guess that means not one thin cent of it goes to the xxAA
  • to use a non-centralized network, such as Gnutella. All of these centralized networks (a la Napster, AG, etc.), while very good (AG tended to have a very large variety of music), are sitting ducks for the RIAA/MPAA to come after them. Centralized networks are too easy to kill, and it's raising the RIAA's spirits after each "victory". These people need to face something that is impossible to defeat, so they are forced to seriously reconsider what they're doing.

    Also, if you're a Windows user and feel like trying Gnutella allow me to recommend Gnucleus, a GPL'd Gnutella client with Ultrapeers, file hashing no spyware, and multisource downloading. Check out http://www.gnucleus.net. Linux or other users, there are a plethora of clients available, such as Limewire (written in Java).
  • Big deal (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dh003i (203189) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (i300hd)> on Friday May 24, 2002 @11:45PM (#3582919) Homepage Journal
    Audiogalaxy, KazaaLite, aren't great compared to P2P Limewire. LimeWire and other true P2P (completely decentralized) software can't be regulated or banned. Not only that, but its getting better in terms of speed and reliability; also, its getting more users, and LimeWire's usually the place I go to find rare songs, like "Now You Suck," by the Yeastie Girls.

    I still use KazaaLite in tandem with LimeWire, but LimeWire is becoming more and more my primary option. Not to mention, its RMS-friendly, since it uses the GNU GPL.

    That of course doesn't justify the RIAA/MPAA's actions. Centralized services for distribution should not be held responsible for the content being distributed, not any more than ISP's should have to micro-monitor their users. File-sharing services can be used for many many purposes, most of which have nothing to do with sharing copyrighted works. Since the pattern seems to be like Wack-a-mole -- where RIAA/MPAA sue one file-sharing service, then another pops up -- perhaps eventually we'll get a SANE ruling from a judge who isn't paid for and owned by big money.
  • After seeing what happened to Napster [napster.com] ...

    Now knowing what is going to happen with Audiogalaxy [audiogalaxy.com] ... (the tea leaves haven't been wrong yet) ...

    Is there ANY software that cannot be sued into oblivion? I know that GNUtella is open source ... but couldn't that be sued as well?

    The main reason that Napster got it so bad, was that the directory listings were centrallized. Audiogalaxy, KaZaA, and others changed this, so that there is no centrallized database, but the people who write the software are being sued ...

    About the only way to be "judgement proof" in this day and age would to release software (with or without source) anonymously.

    Would this be possible ... ???

  • is it me... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by coene (554338)
    or is the RIAA/MPAA winning these battles? They've knocked out everyone so far. Through hook, crook, or whatever, Napster, Kazza, etc. have fallen. How soon until they try to pursue Gnutella?
  • by Saeger (456549) <farrellj@gmai l . c om> on Saturday May 25, 2002 @12:08AM (#3582984) Homepage
    The RIAA can sue the tool-makers until they're blue in the face, and the MPAA can bribe congress for dinosaur-life-extention-acts until they're... extinct, but, the thing that scares me the most is the power that ISPs have that the XXAA's don't.

    The best way to kill file-sharing -- along with the baby in the bathwater (i.e. VOIP, gaming, and other legit uses of broadband) -- would be if the MegaISPs (who don't have to play nice by sharing their lines) started capping and/or metering bandwidth at obscene overage rates to make serving anything extremely cost prohibitive.

    For added "protection" they could also start blocking any traffic that doesn't look like "good consumer" behavior. e.g: "Dear Joe Suspect: Even though you paid our insane rates for the 1.4Gigs of bandwidth you used last week, we noticed that it was all encrypted. This simply won't do. Consider yourself on notice buster!"

    Good thing wireless can't be monopolized...

    --

  • by Yo Grark (465041) on Saturday May 25, 2002 @12:08AM (#3582985)
    Been pirating from the RIAA since I was but ten and three, And I don't think I've missed single MP3, Just this old hard drive's space to lose, Now, I don't blame them cause they've gone and sued, But the stupidest thing they ever did, Was claim all their actions protected revenue.

    Well, they must o' thought that is quite a joke, And it got a lot of laughs from a' lots of folk, It seems I've downloaded my whole life through. Some napster clone would die and I'd get red And some p2p'd openup and they'rd songs to multithread I tell ya, my life had nothing to do with their "revenue"

    Well, I grew up quick and I grew up l33t, My hacking got hard and my wits got street, I'd roam backdoor to backdoor to hide my name. But I made a vow to the moon and stars That I'd search the databases and systems far And kill that connection before it got too lame

    Well, just finished with a shell I had since mid-July And I just kissed my DSL connection bye-bye I just battled a round of security with big blue At an old cybercafe in case they pulled the lud's, There at a table, spewing FUD Sat the dirty, mangy dog that "protected" the RIAA's Revenue

    Well, I knew that snake was a lawyer so bad From the way he jumped up and down so mad Cause Kazzaa Lite was installed on every rented PC, no lie.... He was big and bent and gray and old, And I looked at him and my blood ran cold And I said: "How dare you say you protect the rights and reveue of all the bands, they only see a cent or two! All he let out was a "sigh"

    That pissed me off and Well, I hit him hard right between the eyes And he went down, but to my surprise, He come up with a lawsuit in hand, and the court date was in early next year But I called right back and marked him the theif, And he forced the conversation into the non-witnessed street Acronym'in and a' cursing, I finally made him leer

    I tell ya, I've stolen identities of tougher men But I really can't remember when, He tricked like a mule and presented Pocket PC and filed Another suit as he said I'd pay for this fuss, He went for his digital pen and initialed first, He stood there lookin' at me and I saw him smile.

    And he said: "Son, this world is rough And if an Association is gonna make it, their legal gotta be tough And they know you'll never help the Music Monopoly along. One by one we'll take away your songs, and give you enough time to say goodbye We work with the Telco's so you'll pay high And have no choice, our over-priced CD's you'll buy And from those sales the RIAA's goes on strong"

    He said: "Now you just fought one hell of a fight And I know you hate me, and you got the right To report me now, and I wouldn't blame you if you do. But ya ought to thank me, before your case is tried, For the l33t circles, and coding skillz in ya eye Cause I'm the son-of-a-bitch that forces you underground when I yell "Sue.'"

    I got all choked up and I threw down my palm And I recognized his crooked law, and it was there that I saw That everytime he sue'd it's True. My skillz improve, and my knack gets better Every time I find a P2P that's l33ter, and in the end, even though I think I win, The RIAA gets stats, and make then facts to continue their evil daze... And if I ever have a son, I think I'm gonna teach him better ways... Like buying DVD's from George and software from Bill..

    Nah, the RIAA can kiss my ass cause I'll continue to pirate over prized CD's and warez and start to use linux just in spite, and support local artists with all my might,
    and maybe after a generation or two...

    Their greed'll thin, and freedom will win, And we'll finally, finally, exhaust all their grounds to Sue.

    -Yo Grark

    *--Would read a lot better without slashdot telling me "Your comment had too few characters per line (currently 34.2)"--*
    • by jcsehak (559709) on Saturday May 25, 2002 @04:26AM (#3583420) Homepage
      That was so cool I had to make a recording [rootrecords.org] of it. If this pisses you off, I'll take it off the site, but what I'd really like to do is make it public domain. Nothing educates the public like a catchy song (one of the many reasons Woody Guthrie was the man). I'd also like to give you proper credit, of course. It could probably stand another take or two, and some more practice, but it's great for a few hours' work. I had to edit the words a bit to make them more singable. Here's my revised version:

      Been pirating from the RIAA since I was ten and three, and I don't think I've missed a single MP3, Just this old hard drive's space to lose,
      Now, it isn't just the fact that they sued, it's the stupidest thing they ever did, was to claim that their actions protected revenues.

      Well, they must o' thought that is quite a joke, And it got a lot of laughs from a' lots of folk, It seems I've downloaded my whole life through.
      Hell, I never even thought of it as wrong, cause I'd buy more CDs after hearing more songs, I tell ya, it had nothing to do with their "revenue"

      Well, I grew up quick and I grew up l33t, My hacking got hard and my wits got street, I'd roam backdoor to backdoor to hide my name.
      But I made a vow to the moon and stars That I'd search the databases and systems far And kill that connection before it got too lame

      Well, just finished with a shell I had since July, I kissed my DSL connection goodbye and I battled a round of security with big blue
      At an old cybercafe in case they pulled the lud's, There at a table, spewing FUD Sat the dirty, mangy dog that "protected" the RIAA's Revenue

      Well, I knew that snake was a lawyer so bad From the way he jumped up and down so mad cause Kazzaa Lite was installed on every PC, it's true
      He was big and bent and gray and old, And I looked at him and my blood ran cold And I said: "If you're defending your bands, how come all the money goes to you?"

      I was so pissed off I hit him between the eyes And he went down, but to my surprise, He come up with a lawsuit in his hand
      But I called right back and marked him the theif, And he forced the conversation into the non-witnessed street Acronym'in and a' cursing, I made my stand

      I tell ya, I've stolen identities of tougher men But I really can't remember when, He tricked like a mule, brought out a Pocket PC and filed
      Another suit, he said I'd pay for this fuss, He went for his digital pen and initialed first, He stood there lookin' at me and I saw him smile.

      And he said: "Son, this world is rough And if an Association is gonna make it, their legal gotta be tough and you know, to keep the Music Monopoly along.
      We'll crush independents until they die, we'll overexpose until you buy and from those sales major labels go on strong"

      He said: "Now you just fought one hell of a fight And I know you hate me, and you got the right To report me now, and I wouldn't blame you if you do.
      But ya ought to thank me, before your case is tried, For the l33t circles, and coding skillz in ya eye Cause I'm the son-of-a-bitch that forces you underground when I yell "Sue.'"

      I got all choked up and I threw down my palm And I recognized his crooked law, and I saw that everytime he sue'd it's true.
      My skillz improve, and my knack gets better every time I find a P2P that's l33ter, but in the end, even though I think I win, we all still lose

      Cause the RIAA has got control over music, congress and America's soul and if you want to download, sample or even use
      any music you've bought and paid for, without fail, you'll be fined and put in jail, all in the name of their goddam revenues

      I think about him every time I see, a young coder writing stuff that's free, And if I ever have a son, I think I'm gonna teach him...

      to fight the corporations from a legal and political standpoint, so he won't need to hack, and support free music with all his back, and maybe after a generation or two
      Their greed'll thin, and freedom will win, sampling songs won't be a sin, and we'll have taken and farmed all their grounds to sue.
    • I'm thinking that was supposed to be to the tune of "American Pie," right? (Quite cool, I thought).

      I just think it needs a verse in there somewhere saying "Bye Bye, _______..." so we'd all know ;)

      Otherwise, superelite work!
  • Not An Easy Case? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mckelveyf (263317) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (fyevlekcm)> on Saturday May 25, 2002 @12:09AM (#3582986)
    I have been using Audiogalaxy for quite sometime now and have actually been pretty happy with it. But I think its structure may make it a harder target for the RIAA than something like Kazaa or Napster. Audiogalaxy already has built in copy protecting. Audiogalaxy has and is preventing a user from downloading certain more main stream songs. You can't get alot of music off Audiogalaxy. This fact is poorly criticized in section 3 of the RIAA statement where it compares its copy-protection to a fishnet filtering water. Also many artists are hosted by Audiogalaxy and it provides the user with a link to buy the album. This is in direct conflict with the RIAA claim that Audiogalaxy has "the ability to download entire sound recording albums, cover artwork..." As well for a fileshare program Audiogalaxy has been one of the most supportive of underground bands and community exchange. Just look at the monthly columns to see why the RIAA is sueing. The bands that are reviewed and advertised on Audiogalaxy are usually ones that aren't controlled by major labels. Although I won't defend the spyware, to me audiogalaxy was the first filesharing that was starting to actually look more like an alternative to the major labels.

    fenn
    • Re:Not An Easy Case? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by uebernewby (149493) on Saturday May 25, 2002 @07:04AM (#3583608) Homepage
      Audiogalaxy is, as they say, da shit: contrary to your claim you *can* get a lot of music on it, just not of the regular, mainstream RIAA crap variety. So I don't see why the RIAA is trying to sue them: their songs are already banned! Sure, some users give creative names to their files to bypass the system, but that can't be worrisome - a creative name means the file won't be found.

      Perhaps they're afraid AudioGalaxy is turning RIAA listening folks into indie heads? There's a ton of obscure electronica on AudioGalaxy ready for the taking. Get hooked on that and you'll never be buying a Sony CD again (interestingly enough, btw, even somewhat mainstream electronica, such as Aphex Twin, is banned).
  • After the .bomb fiasco would you be interested in pushing for a web based service?

    I'm not saying the music industry would implode, highly unlikely, but I understand why they may still be clutching at their "tried and true" ways.

    Even if it is outdated.
  • Why AG? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BreakWindows (442819) on Saturday May 25, 2002 @12:15AM (#3582996) Homepage
    It's odd they'd go after AudioGalaxy, considering other filesharing apps don't work to promote artists in the way it does. AG will (or try to) block you from downloading songs where someone has complained, suggest other artists and genres that may appeal and have a message board for discussing each musician. Seems better than just getting mp3's off napster.

    I don't see how the RIAA can claim, with a straight face, that the copyrighted-song blocking was 'not as good as a first year CS student'. They've done the best you can realistically do with keyword blocking, without blocking others in the crossfire. For example:

    The Cars, Drive = blocked.

    According to the RIAA, if the band "Drive" releases a song called "Cars", it should be denied. Given the combinations of keywords, you'd be blocking pretty much everything that isn't obscure and unique, like "the Crucifucks", "Tumor Circus", "Cockmonger" or "Republican Buttocks".

    They also have some light content-based filtering. I haven't researched this, but I think it goes by the ID3 tag. It seems to be used mostly to combat misspellings. Obviously, the RIAA's example was the worst-case scenario.

    They've really done a fair amount of filtering, and enough in the other areas to show they aren't just a napster clone (which wouldn't be a bad thing by my standards). It seems they just want any type of music far away from computers, because it's easier to control than to just come up with cooler ideas and incentive for people to buy. I suppose it's also easier than releasing something better than the pussified swill I hear booming by from people's car radios.

    --
    PS: both AG for linux, and the other linux version called xsatellite are spyware free. The official AG linux binary is still supported.
  • by emkman (467368) on Saturday May 25, 2002 @12:31AM (#3583034)
    Audiogalaxy does not contain spyware, nor does it require the use of spyware. The "official" audiogalaxy client however, does contain spyware, but only from version .609 and on. I use .608W for instance. It is 100% functional, and contains no spyware. Here is a download link. [omicro.com.br] Furthermore, audiogalaxy is a pretty much open protocol. There are a number of 3rd party clients, for various operating system, which are spyware/adware free. Some are AGStream [ractive.ch], OpenAG [mac.com], and Sputnix [biggerplanet.com]. Quit complaining if you are too lazy to use google and/or download another client, so you can get free mp3s without the company making any money.
    • Download AudioGalaxy Lite (from the people who brought you KazaaLite)!
      http://www.kazaalite.com/nuked/module s.php?op=modl oad&name=Downloads&file=index&req=viewdownloaddeta ils&lid=5&ttitle=Audiogalaxy_Satellite_Version_060 9W

      Also, the AG linux client isn't spied out...
    • Actually, I had no trouble deleting the GME.exe and CMEII.exe stuff from my registry and hard drive, so at least they don't make it too hard for you to create your own Lite version...
  • by bovril (260284) <centreneptuneNO@SPAMyahoo.com.au> on Saturday May 25, 2002 @12:55AM (#3583091) Homepage

    Snipped from the latest bit of news on the weezer [weezer.com] site.

    ...a fan writes: "I flicked on Mtv this morning as I was getting ready for school around 7am and Mtv News came on, talking about how Eminem was completely against the use of the internet for the purpose of downloading free music. His argument was that it was taking money away from the artist. The announcer then went on to say that on the other end of the spectrum was Weezer, who released most of their songs from their new album (Maladroit) on their website many months before it even came out! They had a few quotes from Rivers too. Since Maladroit is doing so well (#3!), Weezer is living proof that downloading music online has actually helped record sales by getting their music out there and waking people up to their music." ---Melissa

    It's anecdotal, I know. But I'd say that the RIAA spends more money on lawyers than the industry loses as a result of file sharing... They should probably cut Audiogalaxy in on the profits rather than sue them.

  • Cry me a river... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by KernelHappy (517524) on Saturday May 25, 2002 @01:22AM (#3583169) Homepage
    Did anyone happen to catch 20/20 last night (Friday)? They had a piece about how radio stations take payola through indy promoters, blah blah blah. The interesting part was seeing Hillary Rosens fat head up there crying about how it costs the record labels so much and that there should be new laws to make it illegal, I'm just bawling my eyes out for them. I wonder how much of a discount consumers would see if such legistlation was put into place.

    To be fair most the focus of the segment was mostly about how it prevents smaller labels/artists from getting radio play regardless of how good their music may be, which is a bad thing.

    Personally I think its great that the RIAA is taking a stance against this. Lets see, first the RIAA pisses of geeks, then consumers, now they piss off the radio stations, if we get lucky they'll shoot themselves in the foot and piss off the artists and labels too.
    • RIAA...
      if we get lucky they'll shoot themselves in the foot and piss off the artists and labels too.


      Oh, they've been crapping all over the artists right from the start.

      They'll never piss off the labels though, because the RIAA *is* the labels. RIAA is a cartel [google.com].

      (Link is to the cool experimental LABS.Google.com :)

      -
  • A lot of people are saying "great, let them sue each new network and then a new one will spring up in its place." There is a slight problem with that. Everytime a new network goes up the *AA has 1 more "reason" why their congressmen should make a law that will wipe out freedom. While it might seem we are winning the cat and mouse game we are getting close to finding ourselves in a corner with each new step.
  • IIRC, back in 95...

    AG was:

    - written/maintained by someone at U of Texas.
    - sort of an FTP search engine BUT much better than ftpsearch.ntnu.no
    - would list how often an FTP was online (pretty trick back then).

    and my personal favorite:

    - you had to access it through some hidden directory on a commercial website.

    Those were the days. I didn't even care about bandwidth because I could download a few MP2/MP3s simultanously (gotta love campus EtherNet).

    Perhaps I am remembering some of this incorrectly as I did drink excessively during undergrad. Would someone confirm this because I'd hate to think it was much cooler than it really was.
  • So AG is the latest victim, it's actually quite amusing, since Audiogalaxy first of all just started out as an FTP searching database (ah... memories) and is probably the least guilty of ALL the filesharing software, especially since when a record company would ask them not to share certain songs, THEY WOULD BLOODY WELL COMPLY and block the songs.

    Who's running the show? The Purple Id Frog?

    I imagine the RIAA board room conversations are something like this:

    Lawyer: "Well, we've defeated Kazaa. All that's really left is a couple of unstable and small programs that are really ineffectual."
    RIAA: "WAR! SEX! COOKIES!!!!! [crackfiend.org]"
    Lawyer: "What's left to defeat?"
    RIAA: "WAR! SEX! COOKIES!!!!! [crackfiend.org]"
    Laywer: "Well... there's still audiogalaxy but..."
    RIAA: "WAR! SEX! COOKIES!!!!! [crackfiend.org]"
    Lawyer: "They've done everything we've asked them to! What're we gonna charge them with?"
    RIAA: "WAR! SEX! COOKIES!!!!! [crackfiend.org]"
    Lawyer: "I'll get the work order."
  • by Dr. Awktagon (233360) on Saturday May 25, 2002 @02:01AM (#3583217) Homepage

    Like Napster, Audiogalaxy seeks to profit from its [music sharing :)] system by building an extensive user base to attract advertisers and investment dollars.

    RIAA Exec #1: Bob, how's our new "file-sharing" service coming along, you know, the one that grants users the right to listen to a song on one computer for 30 minutes a day, all for $9.99 a month, and if you violate the terms of service, the FBI is notified directly?

    RIAA Exec #2: *clik clik* Hmm, it's coming along okay Sue, three people have signed up in the past month alone. Not bad but we just can't seem to get volume of users we were predicting.

    RIAA Exec #1: Actually one of those was me, and the other two were Hillary. We need to figure out what type of file sharing service people really want. If only there was some kind of "model" or "prototype" we could study. If only we could figure out some way to use the internet to profit from a music sharing system by building an extensive user base to attract advertisers and investment dollars. If only there was some way to do that.

    RIAA Exec #2: I have no idea. To be honest I'm not even sure what the internet is, isn't it like a modem? I heard that once. Oh well, it's 1pm already, the work day is over, time to go golfing!

    RIAA Exec #1: Good thing, my brain hurts.

    • RIAA Exec #2: *clik clik* Hmm, it's coming along okay Sue, three people have signed up in the past month alone. Not bad but we just can't seem to get volume of users we were predicting.
      "Sue" is a pretty name for a RIAA exec...
  • source code (Score:2, Interesting)

    by puck71 (223721)
    I could be wrong, but I seem to remember they used to have the source code for the Satellite posted. This was a couple years ago, before it was a phenomenon, and I can't find a copy of it or anything, but I just seem to remember there being source code posted. Can anyone set me straight? I'm probably wrong but I wanted to throw it out there.
  • Open Audiogalaxy? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DanThe1Man (46872) on Saturday May 25, 2002 @02:10AM (#3583237)
    Remember when Napster got into all the legal troubles that things like 'Open Nap' and Napagator became popular to access non offical open source servers? Why can't the same thing happen with Audiogalaxy? I know at least part of their code is open source, so that would help.

    It would also be nice because AG blocked a lot of popular songs from being downloaded, and I'm sure the open servers wouldn't do that.
  • "...the RIAA works to protect intellectual property rights worldwide and the First Amendment rights of artists..."

    Can we use this to our advantadge, say -> get emminem to do a cover of one of the decss songs on his next album? Id love to see the brain freeze at the RIAA ->

    support "fist amendment rights of artists" (code word for: we wanna be able to say whatever obsenities kids will pay for -- remember kids, music isn't cool if it dosen't offend your parents)

    OR

    support draconian legislation that will benefit us in the long term.

    Since its been proven the riaa cant think think more then about 30 seconds into the future, they're gonna go for option #1, and Id love to see the RIAA and the MPAA destroy eachother in a battle of the titans:D

  • by shd99004 (317968) on Saturday May 25, 2002 @02:38AM (#3583285) Homepage
    I can share music and files in many many ways, and i can get it with different kinds of software, webbrowsers, FTP clients, etc etc. As I said in another comment... file sharing software doesn't violate copyrights, people violate copyrights. They have no right stopping this software or any other except viruses.
  • by Rogerborg (306625) on Saturday May 25, 2002 @03:36AM (#3583370) Homepage

    Follow Kazaa. Set up a shell company on some Pacific island, and when (not if, when) the Big Lawsuit hits, sell the name and assets, and fold the US operation. Rinse and repeat until there are no US based technology companies left.

    Sad, sad situation, but when the [MPA|RIA|BS]A can buy (nearly) any law they like and change the rules of the game whenever they feel like it, the only way to win is not to play in their schoolyard.

  • It's all well and good to download and burn top 20 artists who make squillions every time they burp, but what do you say to a struggling artist like a friend of mine who has released just one solitary CD? I see her get together with her band and rehearse, I see how little she gets paid for singing in small-time pubs, and then I see people trading her music Online.

    How can she survive if no-one is buying her music? I try to tell her she is getting valuable exposure by being traded on Kazaa et al, but she is not really keen to get exposure if it only leads to more people illegally downloading her music. It doesn't seem to encourage many people to her gigs.

    She is unlikely to ever gross dollar one, but at one time people like her could still make some money on the side through their music to help earn some money while she is at university.

    Is file sharing supposed to make music only for the elite, who can afford to have people steal their creativity?

    I can't believe the RIAA is going about this the right way, given that since they began their campaign file trading has been steadily increasing, but something has to be done.

    I constantly hear the the RIAA doesn't have the right "business model". Can anyone tell me what the right business model might be for my friend?
    • by RickHunter (103108) on Saturday May 25, 2002 @07:24AM (#3583641)

      Whoever modded the above as insightful or interesting is an illiterate idiot.

      Read the rest of the thread. Even on 4+, there's at least two comments talking about AudioGalaxy's promotion and review system for independant artists. The parent post seems to rather conveniently ignore this. If your friend wants to make money off music, maybe she should try contacting them and see what they can do. Or try one of the other sites that does stuff like this. (Allowing artists to sell albums directly to fans)

    • The truth of the matter is that musicians have been struggling for years before file sharing came along.(Pause to let that sink in)

      If she's not getting airplay on radio (which is unlikely)the file sharing and the net is the great field leveler. Since the majors pay to put their music on the radio, unless daddy is filthy rich, she'll never get on. I know it's been cliched to death but "Think outside the box".

      The chances of making a living were small to begin with. Tell your friend to put together a website, put the cd on CDBABY [cdbaby.com] put a song or two and a sampler of the CD on a Music Community website such as DMusic.Com [dmusic.com] Get her CD in Amazon.Com's Advantage program [amazon.com].

      Put the website on everything, have email list signup sheets every where she plays, and use the things. Promote, promote, promote. Create a small steady market for her work. Contrary to what the major labels would have you beleive, you don't need to sell millions of CDs to make a living. (well, you do if you work for them). If your friend wants to be a "rock star" tell her to hang up the music and concentrate on something that pays, like fry cook at McDonalds, but if she plays for the love of playing, has some talent, and promotes her work, prices her CD reasonably, and treats it like a business (put together a business plan), she'll see progress. The fact that her stuff is being traded on file sharing networks tells you that there is a demand, and that people like her music.

      How accessable to those fans to purchase? Can they buy it easily? Can they buy it online? Does she have distribution? Check out Redeye [redeyeusa.com] for distribution (although it looks like their website got hacked) they distribute to record stores nationwide, Barnes and Noble, Books a Million, etc....

    • by Anonymous Coward
      The cold, hard, facts about trying to make money from being a musician are that it is a very hard thing to make a living out of: you either keep your artistic integrity and eke out the rest of your career like a pauper, or get marketing savvy and money behind you and you sell out. Hardly anybody gets to do both.

      Everybody who complains about free file sharing causing them loss of income seem to be either:

      1. Dickheads like Eminem and Metallica, who expect to rake in the spondoolies every time they fart. These guys suck.

      2. Complete nobodies who complain about "losing" money from free sharing... get a grip! The chances that you'd be making money if free file sharing didn't exist are remote anyway, and you're probably using free file sharing as a scapegoat. These guys suck just as bad. I say to the OP: /chances/ are that your friend is in this category.

      Music is generally /not/ a career to go into if you want to make money, unless you have a marketable image, have good marketing behind you, and are prepared to sell out. For every Madonna, you have 1000 unknown artists, each with more /raw musical talent/ in their little finger than she has in her whole body. If having money is so important to you (and it is to most people), then you'd be better off studying really hard and getting a good job that you like and that pays well. Or you can bet the farm on the slim chance that you get to be a rock star one day. I think it's stupid to complain when you find that you can't have your cake and eat it too.

      It doesn't matter whether you're living in the 1950's and buying vinyl from the local music shop, or living in the year 2020 and getting all your music in Ogg/Vorbis form from the 'net, the performers who have the big bucks behind them will win out every time... always has been, always will be. That's the way the world works.
    • by Alan Cox (27532) on Saturday May 25, 2002 @08:55AM (#3583799) Homepage
      Audiogalaxy was actually helping small artists sell stuff. People who *wanted* their stuff on it to get URL's known and for people to buy actual albums. That seems to me much more likely -why- the RIAA wanted to sue them.

      After all if there are alternatives to the kind of contracts the big media companies push who is going to sign up with the big boys ?

    • Tell her to take the time to set up a paypal account and host mp3s on audiogalaxy and kazaa that have a small advertisement that says if they like her they can send money to a paypal account.
    • How do people find bands/musicians to like? It's about accessing their ears and engaging their minds, libidos, and/or lifestyles. Releasing a cd is neither necessary nor sufficient for the engagement. Your friend needs fans. Your friend needs to distribute her best songs so that people will hear them and will show up at a nearby show. Your friend needs to book the shows, do advance work with press and radio and people/fans who will publicize the show and bring out a draw, load up a van and do the shows, put together and execute a show that kills and is unique (whether there's five or a thousand in the room), hang around after the show and make contact with any one who discovered your friend's music that night and let them know she appreciates the support.

      And the thing is, that still might not work!

      But the questions, as she develops her business model, are: what are her goals, how much will she give and how much is she willing to forsake. Staying in the game is the best approach to gaining opportunities.

      One other comment, people trade her mp3s but don't go to the shows and buy the cd. So why no connection? Are they the wrong audience (and so they weren't going to buy the cd any way) or are they paying attention but still haven't heard "it" yet? There will always be people who want to take, and the real fans give. Go develop real fans. Indifference is the real career-killer. Someone listened -- a start was made.
    • She is unlikely to ever gross dollar one

      Tell her to sign up here. [slashdot.org] She makes dollar number one with CD sale number one. The CD's are "free" plus $4.95 S&H.

      -
  • The RIAA is suing again, because they have won every case so far. So, while the legal system is on their side, why go after all the "pirate" networks and software companies?

    However, the RIAA's (and the MPAA's) legal blitzkrieg will come to a halt when either someone with sufficient money or power fights back, or every P2P network is invisible. I hope it it the former, as a good legal slapdown would help all the cases that follow.

    I hope that when the RIAA runs out of P2P companies to sue, they go after Time-Warner Cable or AOL. That would be fun to watch.

  • by jdreed1024 (443938) on Saturday May 25, 2002 @05:41AM (#3583520)
    (Nevermind that Satellite is loaded with spy-ware ... good riddance).

    They came for Napster, and I did not speak up, because I did not use Napster.
    They came for Audiogalaxy, and I did not speak up, because it had spyware.
    They came for Limewire, and I did not speak up, because I did not like the Java client.
    Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak up.

  • Spyware (Score:2, Informative)

    by LiENUS (207736)
    If you run linux theres a guarenteed spyware free client (its open source) called Free Audio Galaxy Satellite available at http://pumjttwccjhamzza.sess.tty0.org/page/fags/ [tty0.org]
  • This has been a long time coming, I suppose; it made no sense to watch Napster fail, when Audiogalaxy was doing the same thing, only better.

    I have to say that I'm sad about it. Even with the spyware (easily removed with certain utilities, though odious in principle), Audiogalaxy was my favorite file sharing service. The widest and deepest variety of songs could be found on Audiogalaxy -- both new bands and old bands that I had always wanted to hear. I could never find non-mainstream bands like Tear It Up, Scarlet's Well, Jellyroll Rockheads, and the Eastside Suicides (if you've never heard of these bands, that's my point) on services like Kazaa and Morpheus, but Audiogalaxy had nearly everything. And maybe this sounds like a cliche at this point, but, speaking as a music fan, when I find an MP3 that I like, my next step is almost always to purchase the record.

    If Audiogalaxy is shut down, the net result will probably be that I and many other music fans will buy less, not more. Not that the major record labels will mind, because I stopped buying their dreck a long time ago.

  • Frivolous suits (Score:3, Interesting)

    by terrymr (316118) <terrymr@@@gmail...com> on Saturday May 25, 2002 @12:29PM (#3584382)
    I'm still trying to figure out why the judge didn't get mad and toss the napster suit after all BMG one of the plaintiffs owns Napster the defendent - which is almost exactly like suing yourself.
  • Audiogalaxy.com... was taken to court today by songwriters, music publishers, and the recording industry

    Oh my god! The songwriters are going after them too!
    I used to think the files sharing services were the goodguys who were only being attacked by evil recording and publishing industries.

    The lawsuit was filed in federal court in New York on Friday by the Recording Industry of America (RIAA), on behalf of its member labels, and the National Music Publishers Association, Inc. (NMPA)

    Oh wait, nevermind. The reporter was was using a bit of "creative licence" to emphasize his point that filesharers are EVIL PIRATES. It really is only big industry behind this lawsuit.

    -

"There is nothing new under the sun, but there are lots of old things we don't know yet." -Ambrose Bierce

Working...