EFF Calls RIAA Tactics 'Reign of Terror' 215
nanday writes "What happens when the RIAA prosecutes people for alleged illegal music downloads? In an article on Newsforge (also owned by OSTG), lawyer Ray Beckerman of the Electronic Frontier Foundation explains the RIAA's favorite tactics, and why they play fast and loose with the law. Beckerman also explains why two of these cases may stop the RIAA in its tracks - and what you can do for help." From the article: "In UMG vs. Lindor, the defendant 'is a home house-aid who's never even used a computer,' according to Beckerman. 'She's never operated a computer, she's never even turned on a computer. The only connection she has ever had to a computer is that she has on occasion dusted near the parts that she believes are a computer. And yet she is being pursued as an online distributor in peer-to-peer file sharing.' Since Beckerman became involved in the case after it had gone to federal court, he has tried to learn the details of the charges -- so far with little success. 'The RIAA is trying to conceal the information about how it conducts its investigation,' he says. 'They have stalled every discovery request we've made' -- presumably because to reveal this information would also reveal the weakness of all the similar cases."
This will.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This will.... (Score:2)
Re:This will.... (Score:2)
Re:This will.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This will.... (Score:2, Funny)
So? I'm sure everyone here is in compliance already.
Now I'm confused. (Score:3, Funny)
Does that mean that I dust? Or that I'm anti-dusting? If so, why all the dust?
technology is outstripping Justice's understanding (Score:5, Insightful)
Case in point from the article:
It would be nice to think the courts and the justice system (the jurists) would apply due diligence but for myriad reasons they don't or won't. Considering technology, the RIAA, and the gazillion combinations of playing with digital media it isn't clear a judge could ever be educated enough to understand the technical issues. Instead, the deepest pockets win because they can afford the biggest megaphone -- they've convinced the legal system via FUD that consumers are evil and piracy is rampant and must be stopped.
Problem is, customers aren't evil, piracy is not rampant (yeah, it exists, but it's not the monster the RIAA claims it is), and it doesn't need to be stopped.
My biggest fear is the momentum is too strong, the RIAA has gotten too far along and has won enough battles it's beginning to look like they may win the war. And, the prediction in the article:
is likely to be the outcome.Of course it seems obvious to me the ultimate result of all of this nonsense is the buying public either is so angry at their treatment, or confused by all of the rules and regulations, the promising landscape of new and great electronic gizmos will suffer its own (and hopefully temporary until all the goons leave town) recession. To quote the scathing Paul Thurrott's outrage against Microsoft's false positive to his "piracy", "Ah well". ;-)
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:3, Interesting)
With regards to this: "Considering technology, the RIAA, and the gazillion combinations of playing with digital media it isn't clear a judge could ever be e
Have faith? (Score:5, Insightful)
Most people, when they installed the Sony rootkit, did not even know that they had installed DRM on their machine, what it's purpose was, how to remove it, or even why they should care.
DRMs will be a thing of the past in the next decade, I have faith.
My prediction: DRM will be even more common next decade. CD sales will continue to fall and DRM'd content sales will continue to rise. The difference between you and me, is that I will be trying to raise people's awareness rather than just sitting back and letting it happen.
Re:Have faith? (Score:5, Insightful)
One, we get "good" drm, which is to say, DRM that is both hard to break, and mostly transparent to the user (good quality, not good ethically). Right now DRM is really obvious, it's like a leash, and every time you try to exercise your rights, that leash jerks you up short, causes anger and irritation. It's also easy to break, so the benefits of breaking the DRM and getting full use of the content are way ahead of the actual hassle of breaking the DRM. In my opinion, the best way to get "good" DRM would be to stream everything from central servers, and make it available through a range of wireless integrated devices. This is obviously serious future tech, but the potential exists already, so it's not farfetched.
The other possibility is that the current distribution model will break down as artists opt-out of the restrictive RIAA practices, and some more organic system grows up in its place, where content is not so rabidly protected, and artists are more directly compensated by their fans.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a little of both, in the next 10 years. All these subscription sites are technically crappy implementations of the first concept...Pay a subscription fee and access the music all you want, in any number of crappy non-portable formats. But if you could browse it in your car, or anywhere else through a range of compatible devices interconnected wirelessly? Who gives a damn if you can't copy it, if you can access it any time, from any where? It'd be the death of the physical media sales, so they won't support it for a while to come, but it's the best approach for them. They keep control, they get your money.
As far as the second goes, there have been independant artists and independant labels for years, but they're exploding now, with all the production costs going down. They have so much less to lose, and so much less access to physical media stores, they're trying all kinds of new methods of distribution, and it's not unlikely that some of them will be popular enough to pull in some of the mainstream.
Re:Have faith? (Score:3, Insightful)
Unfortunately I don't think that will happen with the artists. Remember the stink over ticketmaster and their "service charges"? Some artists came out aginst it and swore it was not right but now it is just business as usual. Art
Re:Have faith? (Score:3, Insightful)
Record companies, on the other hand, only have that sort of stranglehold on the retail outlets, and retail outlets have been slumping for years. I think the indies are in a really good posi
Re:Have faith? (Score:2)
i am not so sure. in the past i didnt really care about drm, thought it was a boogie man. then i got a new cell phone. the manual says i can put mp3s as a ring tone - so long as they have the right drm. wtf? granted i only use the vibrate alert. also, i can still record obscure audio clips for my voice mail. but anyway, the point is that if my phone has the ability to play mp3s and use them as a ring tones, i dont want to have to buy those tracks again.
i think more
Re:Have faith? (Score:2)
Set as: allows you to set the MP3 as an alarm tone. MP3 files with DRM (Digital Rights Management) can also be used as a ringtone and a caller ringtone, while files without DRM can only be used as an alarmtone.
though i just found this discussion on a workaround [mobiledia.com] i shouldnt have to jump through hoops to use my device. in the past drm has been invisible. (being forced to w
Steam (Score:3, Interesting)
I hate Steam. I just hate everything about it - clumsy interface, annoying ads, whining message boxes when it can't find the intenet. guess what Steam, I know when I'm connected and when I'm not, but thanks.
Yet I tolerated it so I could play Halflife 2. I have even purchased half-life add-ons that I might not have pu
Re:Have faith? (Score:3, Insightful)
I associate 'having faith' with religious nuts that failed to win an argument using logic so they just claim 'This is true, please just accept it and don't think about it any more.'
Sorry if I jumped to a conclusion.
DRM will only fail if everyone (well, enough of the population that it hurts sales figures) takes a stand against it. If DRM becomes successful, vendor lock-in will be even more of a problem than it is tod
Re:Have faith? (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh really?? And here was me thinking it was just a way to prevent illegal copying...
I have commented on this before [slashdot.org], but it seems that I am the only person on Slashdot that understands that DRM cannot prevent illegal copying.
Re:Have faith? (Score:5, Insightful)
They KNOW they cannot prevent this so-called "piracy" but they want to brainwash me, you, politicians, and of course the children to believe that fair use does not exist, and copyright should never, ever, ever expire and works should never, ever enter the public domain. We don't grant a 10-year, 20-year, 30-year, or even 70-year monopoly on works now. Thanks to DRM and the DMCA, they now have a de-facto state-authorized-yet-unconstitutional unlimited copyright, and they want to reeducate us all to believe that this is how it should be, despite what the constitution states in black and white about the limited duration monopoly.
Re:Have faith? (Score:3, Insightful)
Really, they are only hurting themselves (and artists who only make money from CD sales, like Wendy Carlos [wendycarlos.com]). At this rate, they will sue themselves out of business, because up-and-coming artists will find other ways to make money.
Re:Have faith? (Score:2)
However, the grandparent poster is very correct in tha
Re:Have faith? (Score:2)
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:5, Interesting)
Today geeks are pissed, mostly because we see a dark future if trends continue, and consumers aren't upset by this. However, consumers *will* be upset if trends continue! If DRM moves to a place where consumers choke on it, it will be as dead as Divx, and all technology assoiciated with whatever consumers hated will be dead as well, as fast a a boy-band becomes no longer cool.
I work with engineers who are working on the TCG standards, and there is a lot of awareness of this problem. If, as many Slashdotters fear, Trusted Computing gets used to lock down consumer DRM, then Trusted Computing is dead, and years of work are wasted.
This doesn't mean that DRM is going away, however. There's plenty of room for less intrusive DRM that won't annoy the average customer, but will still seem restrictive to geeks. iTunes is there, more or less, for example.
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:2)
If you have the master keys, however, Trusted Computing is a good thing. Not a big advantage for the home user, though I'm sure someone will cook up a good security product around it, but for the corporate IT guy it will allow far more powerful security policies, and perhaps a final solution to the BritneySpearsNaked.jpg.scr problem.
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:2)
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:2)
"Honestly, the idea of DRMs pisses so many people off that they simply can't stay around for long. The consumer hates not being trusted, and won't buy things that have DRMs. DRMs will be a thing of the past in the next decade, I have faith."
Yet the iTMS is a phenomenal success, while emusic and Maganatune are virtually unknown by the public.
For what it's worth, the iTMS DRM has never bothered me. I can burn as many copies of a playlist as I want to, burn stuff for my car, and listen to it on as many
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Would you allow a technition to fix a photocopyer when he only knows about air conditioning?
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:3, Interesting)
Do not write off the intelligence of a judge or the judge's willingness to learn about the impact of a case simply because we do so with legislators and most of the Exectutive. Judges are very capable of reading amicus briefs. It a judge's business to learn about the relevant facets of their case before a ruling is issued. You aren't implying that all judges know a
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:5, Insightful)
You fail to understand the enemy, and that is why you will lose.
The RIAA and MPAA are not fighthing this fight because they believe piracy is a problem now. They're not spending all this money fighting it because they want to get a couple extra bucks in sales.
They're fighting it because they recognize that p2p has the potential to completely decimate their supply channels by allowing every Tom, Dick, and Harry to interrupt their entire business plan with a mouse clicks.
This is a fact. Whether you believe it will actually happen or not is up for debate, but the RIAA and MPAA do believe that it will, or that it's likely enough that going on this campaign now is in their best interests.
Of course, like any other company that mistreats a cusomter, the simplest solution is to simply cease doing business with them. However, since the majority of people who are aware of this problem seem to be comprised of either theives or theif sympathizers who would rather just keep fueling the fire by stealing music, there's nobody really out there with any effective grassroots campaign to expose this disgraceful behavior.
If you want to put an end to this, the simple answer is to cease all activities involving consumption of the product. Don't steal it, don't buy it, don't listen to it on the radio, and make sure you let everyone know your position and explain why you're taking that position WITHOUT making it sound like you're just whining that you're coming under fire for wanting to steal things.
No income = dead cartel. Very simple equation.
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:3, Funny)
Gee, I hope my " Today's music sucks teh Sh!t " bumper sticker get's the word out.
You won't hear the trunk welds breaking in my car from overcranked trash pop.
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:5, Interesting)
If you dissosciate yourself completely from the RIAA's music, you deliver the message loud and clear that it is the music, not the company that you object to. Sure you can "make sure you let everyone know your position and explain why you're taking that position", but that level of detail doesn't reach the sales figures of the RIAA. Show demand for the music (if there is any demand for it), just not the company's "Reign of Terror". So called piracy boycotts the business model thrusted upon us every time we want to listen to music, but still retains the demand for the music. I know everyone has said it, but give me a good-quality, DRM-free system (read: the system allofmp3.com uses), and I will be generous with my hard-earned cash.
Please note also that boycotting music (or movies for that matter) is not easy for everyone. I love my music, and I couldn't imagine my life without it. Right now, the RIAA could boycott me and I'd come crawling back, humble and submissive, within weeks.
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:2)
"Sure you can "make sure you let everyone know your position and explain why you're taking that position", but that level of detail doesn't reach the sales figures of the RIAA. Show demand for the music (if there is any demand for it), just not the company's "Reign of Terror". So called piracy boycotts the business model thrusted upon us every time we want to listen to music, but still retains the demand for the music."
That's one of the more interesting rationales for piracy I've heard. If I understand
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:2)
If you don't feel strongly enough about the RIAA's policy to make any sacrifices in order to change them, then it's really not as important as you're making it out to be.
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:3, Insightful)
No income = dead cartel. Very simple equation.
Then the RIAA would point to declining record sales as proof of further harm by pira
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:4, Insightful)
Please, cite a source. Any source.
I'm in full agreement with you on the theory that this is the RIAA and MPAA's motivation (though I think it goes deeper than that, and gets a bit darker as they don't merely wish to preseve, but expand their control over distribution), but this is still just what we think the RIAA and MPAA think. It harms our case when we say that this is "a fact".
It's not about what thieves understand (Score:2)
I hope they g
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:2)
Re:p2p thieves = oxymoron (Score:2)
If I remove physical property, I have committed theft. If I walk into a massage parlor and don't pay, I am still using up a quantifiable measure of this person's time that they could otherwise use for a paying customer.
When a song i
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately I think you are wrong.
If you were right then people would have got rid of their crashing, malware prone MS desktops years ago. As it is they moan and groan, but still don't switch to anything better.
I think the same will be true about restrictions management. People will grumble but accept it as normal. It is only the activists who will attempt to do something about and they stand a good chance of being dismissed by the (bought) legislators who can point to the fact that most people accept and are therefore happy with the situation (yes, I do know there is a non seqitur there).
Nice use of the Oxford comma by the way.
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:2)
I don't think thats a good analogy. The typical highschool/college students of today have figured out how to share music,etc because the results only affect them. They don't deal with chaging the PC operating system, because they are not allowed to, and understand (correctly or incorrectly) that for a job they have to learn to deal with windows. They won't need to learn to deal with DRM in the workplace unless they are a disc
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:2)
Reasoning by analogy is always tricky
I think it is a matter of expectation. With a car or a washing machine people expect it to just work for a very large amount of time and they accept occasional breakages due to wear and tear.
With anything to do with computers the expectation is that very much lower, breakage is the normal state of affairs. So anything that prevents you playing media on your PC will just be accepted.
The only place I can see people become angry w
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:5, Interesting)
So I'll ask, where were the clerks, if this account is correct? Federal clerkships are fairly prestigious, and many clerks are young enough to have direct exposure to this technology. Are they not doing the research? I'm fairly certain any due diligence by the judge would be carried out by the clerks on these matters.
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:2)
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:2)
With the exception of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (which hears patent appeals), most federal clerks are political science or English majors who have no background for understanding technology (other than perhaps being p2p users themselves). The fact is, and has always been, that in any legal dispute, there will be Ph.D experts from MIT or Stanford (dependi
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree that there is a problem with judges not compeltely understanding technology, but they are taught to be open minded. Remember that a lot of the people dues by the RIAA are guilty. Just because many of us feel things should be different does not change the fact that some of these people are violating the law. However I do not believe that the legal actions of the RIAA are in the spirit of American jurisprudence, nor do they meet the required burden of proof.
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:2)
Now some people are standing up against the RIAA, saying: bring it on, and see w
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:2)
I had a conversation not long ago with someone who was clearly a very bright state Supreme Court justice. It was scary. On the one hand, at least when one gets high enough in the system, the judges are, for the most part anyway, pretty bright. The problem is that (from my single data point) they think they are bright enough that they understand technical detail -- when in fact they are more or less clueless. It's kind of like watching "Nova" or "Horizon" and thinking that by dint
Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand (Score:2)
Yeah, more sharing of your music could really help with that problem of "becoming invisible".
One trouble with P2P is you have to know something exists before you can search for it. I never had much luck with random searching. Could be there's a heap of good music out there that I don't even know exists. I must admit I am totally incapable of determining whether I'll like some music if I've never heard it or heard of it or the artists and have only an album cover to look at. 'Tis a little pricey to buy
Countersuit (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Countersuit (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Countersuit (Score:2)
Re:Countersuit (Score:2)
It's winning the suit that is hard. Absolutely no guarantee that you could do that before you ran out of money.
Why is anyone surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why is anyone surprised? (Score:3, Informative)
As opposed to where? Many countries pay taxes on all CD-R's purchased regardless of purpose. Face it, government everywhere is for sale, and the RIAA clones in most countries exploit the fact.
Non-RIAA Labels of the World, Unite! (Score:5, Interesting)
So why can't they generate some sort of composite publicity for their activities? Why can't they call themselves soemthing fun like "AWESOME" (Association of Wedding Evil SOBs Out of the Music Enterprise) and run press releases like the RIAA? Donate some money to the EFF? Have some benefit concerts to Kill the RIAA?
Get your acts together, people! Let's synergize our paradigms, or something! Go go go!
Re:Non-RIAA Labels of the World, Unite! (Score:2)
So, they are getting married?
Re:Non-RIAA Labels of the World, Unite! (Score:4, Informative)
They do. In the UK there's the Association of Independent Music [wikipedia.org], and in Australia there's AIR [air.org.au]. In Canada there's CIRPA [cirpa.ca], and in the US there's the A2IM [com.com]. I found these by taking a few seconds to goodle on "independent record labels."
Many, if not most of them, do issue press releases, as you suggest.
I suspect that while the indie labels aren't suing people left and right, they may not be as pro-piracy as you expect. I knew a fellow once who ran an indie record label. He had ten employees and paid himself the princely sum of $20K per year. When x% of the population opted to pirate rather than buy a CD from a major label, all it meant was that somebody you never heard of got laid off or didn't get a raise that year. When his artists' works started showing up on the P2P services, it meant that he had to lay off his friends. Although it's the major labels (through their mouthpiece, the RIAA) make the most noise about piracy, the large RIAA-affiliated labels are actually more resilient to piracy, while the indie labels often run on razor-thin budgets. We can talk about how piracy actually helps the artist because it gets their music out there, we might buy a shirt or go to a concert, etc. but the reality for the tiny 10-person labels (who put up the cash to fund the CDS and who rely on sales to stay in business) is that they must pay the rent and pay their employees each month -- no exceptions, no excuses. If income isn't meeting expenses, it's simply not enough that some 17-year-old in Minnesota loves the copy of your CD that he got via BitTorrent.
Re:Non-RIAA Labels of the World, Unite! (Score:3, Interesting)
I would add, although you eluded to this, that the way to combat the **AA behavior is not to pirate but to spend your money on CDs and DVDs produced by labels that follow your personal ethics. It will require educating yourself on the various labels and companies but if you truly believe in a solution that is what you MUST do.
Companies must SEE solid numbers showing what consumers want and what they will tolerate. So long as people still buy, they have not found the lim
Desperation (Score:3, Informative)
Podcasting, Internet radio, and independent music are the new Davids fighting this Goliath and as each one becomes more and more popular in mainstream culture you can guarantee that the RIAA will look for ways to shut it all down (they're already trying with podcasts and streaming radio under the guise of royalties) or infilitrate these new forms of media with their commercial garbage. And yet again, they'll be unsuccessful just as they have been with cassette tapes and recordable CDs.
In the end, they'll be as irrelevant as an 8-track player.
Linux? (Score:4, Funny)
Imagine if Linux had to go through something like this...
Copying Music in General (Score:4, Funny)
Should I be worried?
Re:Copying Music in General (Score:3, Funny)
Well, having just posted a confession to potentially millions of witnesses, now you should be worried...
Re:Copying Music in General (Score:2)
But what am I to do?
You sometimes drive me crazy
But I worry about you
I know it makes no difference
To what you're going through
But I see the tip of the iceberg
And I worry about you..."
Re:Copying Music in General (Score:2)
http://www.neilpeart.net/news/index.html [neilpeart.net]
He picks up scraps of information ---
He's adept at adaptation
'Cause for strangers and arrangers
Constant change is here to stay
Re:Copying Music in General (Score:2)
The more things change, the more they remain the same.
Re:Copying Music in General (Score:2)
I've said it before and I'll say it again... (Score:4, Interesting)
If they don't want people illegially distributing their music, that's fine with me. That's what the law says, and changing the law is going to be tough. Is there response extreme given the crime? Of course, but you have to admit it's hard to deter people from downloading music - the odds of being caught and punished are still extremely low. We think they shouldn't be doing this, but remember from their point of view they want to stop this behavior. The only question then becomes what it will take to stop it. Secondary damage to sales (if any) doesn't seem to phase them much.
The only way we'll EVER win this is to cut the RIAA out of the picture. There are folks doing free music out there - let's get organized and promote the good ones! Just like open source software - don't pirate commercial software, do it right and create free alternatives. In the end, everyone's happier.
Admittedly, the creative/artistic community seems to function differently than the software folks - look at how many game engines there are, vs. high quality maps/data for said engines. I expect high quality free music might also be a bit unusual, but that's no reason not to try and start a new social trend.
We don't like Microsoft because of their software and business practices - all right, we're doing something about that. Not pirating Windows, but creating alternatives and using them. Let's do the same with music - if we're correct about the low quality of product being promoted by the large commercial groups (debatable - I personally don't think there are any useful univeral quality metrics that will decide what is enjoyable to all people, but I'll go with it here for the sake of argument) it shouldn't be impossible for folks with the time and hobby interest out there to put something together.
Let's establish a non-commercial Americal Idol type phenomena - people can compete for rating on the internet, and the most successful of those might be able to start playing live concerts, selling professional quality CDs with covers/etc. and other things that actually generate revenue. (I can't say I care for the way Americal Idol works, but we should pay attention to the techniques they are using to identify people that America wants to hear sing).
iRate radio has some good ideas, but I think they should utilize bittorrent technology and start building more of a community structure than just scraping free music websites. Lets do this right - don't fight the RIAA on their own turf. They can use the legal system to beat us over the head - they've got the $$ to do it. So let's not let them dictate the terms of engagement - let's take both the long term solution and the moral high ground. THAT's the way to fight, and the only real hope I see for success.
Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again... (Score:3, Insightful)
I suggest that for a popular musician, there is more than enough money in touring, etc to become very wealthy, and a semi-popular one could easily make a living. The only trouble is that doesn't leave anything for the record company execs to get rich on. The argument in the past of course has been that the record company is needed to promote, fund and make the artist popular in the first place. (An unpleasant side effect of this is that the same parasites get to choose what gets to be
Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again... (Score:2, Informative)
Yes! Boycott RIAA and make your own music. (Score:2)
Do you think that the artists aren't aware of what their "label" and the RIAA are doing? Of course they're aware, and they're hoping that they'll get paid as a result! Do you think that the artist doesn't wish you would just buy the stupid album? No matter what they say, if they're producing through RIAA-associated labels then they are hoping to reap RIAA-associated benefits.
Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again... (Score:2)
Sure, there will always be some purists who pursue the art form for its own sake, but there are too many out there who want success and will sign contracts without thinking about file sharing, RIAA/c
Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again... (Score:2)
Re:I've said it before and I'll say it again... (Score:3, Interesting)
Does this mean (Score:4, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
The copyright industry is a menace (Score:3, Insightful)
First, they are a prime mover behind laws mandating a long audit trail (e.g., two years) recording who accesses which web sites. (Child porn is the other common motivation.) To date, this has been more of an issue in Europe than the US.
Second, there's a huge threat going forward as Layer 7 inspection by ISPs becomes commonplace [monashreport.com]. At that point, it will be at least theoretically possible to harass somebody for ANYTHING they download, upload, whatever, because intermediaries such as ISPs will have complete access to that information.
Just wondering... (Score:4, Interesting)
She can't recognize a computer?!?!? (Score:4, Insightful)
Ok, maybe she hasn't used a computer before.. Thats fine, but unless this person is uncontrollably stupid "dusted near the parts that she believes are a computer." How many people in a normal society would even be able to recongnize a computer! I think this person is playing extra stupid as part of her defense.
Re:She can't recognize a computer?!?!? (Score:3, Informative)
"Ok, maybe she hasn't used a computer before.. Thats fine, but unless this person is uncontrollably stupid "dusted near the parts that she believes are a computer." How many people in a normal society would even be able to recongnize a computer! I think this person is playing extra stupid as part of her defense."
What TFA article doesn't mention is that Beckermen is her lawyer. And yeah, he's exagerating the hell out of the situation for sympathy. Which is what he's expected to do as a lawyer, so I hav
Re:She can't recognize a computer?!?!? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:She can't recognize a computer?!?!? (Score:2)
Tactics in court (Score:5, Insightful)
1. They pay, because the accusation says "Pay or it gets more expensive", even if they didn't do anything.
2. They go to court where the case is immediately dropped by the RIAA unless they REALLY hold some evidence.
Now mix in that the average judge knows jack about internet or the way it works (I only say "tubes". Ok, no judge but a politicians, but similar species and cranium). To make matters worse, many judges refuse to hire experts to get an informed input about it and instead rely on hearsay or what accuser and defender claim would be true. It's stunning that the judges don't even bother considering that either of them could be lying to win his case (again an example where in the presence of computers usually intelligent people turn into gullible morons).
This makes trials more gambling than anything resembling justice. Justice has the problem, like many parts of the legal branch, that the advent of the internet and computers in law and crime changed a lot of parameters. Most of all they changed that a lot of the things happening in and around computers cannot be grasped with "common sense" (not that it was all that common in court rooms... but I ramble).
In "normal" cases where everyday things are happening, judges can cast a sound and sensible verdict even if they don't know too much about the underlying matter. If a customer and a mechanic are going to court over breaks that should've been fixed and weren't, a judge can make a fair decision based on looking for parallels that he can understand.
Those parallels don't exist in a world that is very artificial and virtual, where property can be multiplied without any quality loss, immediately and inifinitly.
That's why judges are out of their league when dealing with the 'net, computers and IP. And that's why we get unjust and unsensible court orders. And that's why companies who can afford pepperspray sueing do it.
a fun if possibly illegal idea (Score:5, Funny)
2) Using those identities, set up bank accounts, rent a cheap apartment or office somewhere, get broadband, hook up a computer with P2P software and loaded with songs. Use the identities to set up websites where people can download songs. Infringe on those copyrights!!!!!!
3) Watch the ensuing hilarity as the RIAA sues it's own heads for infringement.
Re:a fun if possibly illegal idea (Score:2)
4) ???
5) Profit!
(I know I know... should be a four step plan not five. Couldn't resist though)
Hm... What if... (Score:2)
This is the point where Beckerman and the EFF prefer to intervene in a case. They try to point out that "any real pirate would never leave the meta-data [and] would be using someone else's Internet access account," Beckerman says. "Even seeing the shared file folder doesn't tell you which computer it resided on, because you're seeing files from a group of computers that are connected."
To translate in layman terms: (Score:2)
The memes of justice are build with cases, not lawbooks.
If an organisation can successfully win 1000's of cases then these memes of justice are changed towards their favour.
Then justice thinks that these organisations are right.
I wonder why people need many words to explain simple facts of life.
Stupidity is not terrorism (Score:4, Insightful)
Over a hundred years ago Marx wrote, "What party in the opposition has not been called communistic?" or words to that effect (quoting from memory--dunno where my copy of the Communist Manifesto has got to.) For most of the century that followed it was safe in some circles to paint anything you didn't like--union organization, civil rights protests, anti-war activity, to name but a few--as "communist."
Today, we see the same trend with "terrorist". I have seen and heard accusations of "terrorism" against patent trolls, aggressive commercial competitors, angry former spouses...you name it. Terrorism is the trendy term-of-the-day for anyone you don't much like.
I'm tempted to put in some fairly obvious but sure-to-be-modded-flamebait links to stories on current events that might accurately be described as a "reign of terror" against "defenseless people", just to contrast these with the legal manueverings of the RIAA. I'm sure readers can think up their own links, which will vary depending on political persausion, but in every case they will involve stories where innocent people are living in fear of being killed by bombs, rockets, swords and guns. THAT is a "reign of terror", and I'm damned sure that most of those people would change places with the folks being sued by the RIAA in a moment.
So please, could we stop the hysteria and quit calling everything we don't like "terrorism"?
'Reign of Terror' ... Oh Please (Score:3, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Why does the RIAA does the ivestigation? (Score:3, Interesting)
Eff hates RIAA, Water still wet. (Score:2)
On a side note, when is the article title writer coming back? The last couple days have been pretty sub par and most of the time missed a crucial piece of data, or changed a word to a non synonym.
Appropriate (Score:2, Funny)
I'm not an EFF spokesman (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I Would Assume... (Score:2)
Re:Bad day (Score:3, Informative)
Oh come on man! You just...(strike up the chords)
had a bad day
You're taking one down
You sing a sad song just to turn it around
You say you don't know
You tell me don't lie
You work up a smile and you go for a ride
You had a bad day
The camera don't lie
You're coming back down and you really don't mind
You had a bad day
You had a bad day
Sorry, I just wanted to remind you of how bad music is these days.
You're beautif
Re:Bad day (Score:2)
This is the first decade without a strong defining genre. The 90's had grunge, the late 80's had hair rock, the 80's had pop, the 70's had disco and the 60's had rock.
In the 2000's we had Bananas - B-A-N-A-N-A-S
Yeah, it's friggin' bad. Still some gems out there though like Pearl Jam and Tool...
Re:Bad day (Score:3, Funny)
You have illegally distributed the lyrics to Daniel Powter's song entitled "Bad Day", to an estimated 50,000 Slashdot users. As you must be aware, Warner Brothers owns the exclusive publishing rights to a plethora of popular music, including "Bad Day". The law entitles us to collect damages of $100,000 per illegally-distributed copy. Your bill comes to $5,000,000,000. Will that be cash or charge?
Sincerely,
Warner Brothers
Re:Bad day (Score:2)
If I can't pay, do you guys have a debter's prison I can attend?
Re:Bad news, good news (Score:2)
Guess what... you just realized that you got old. The vericose veins should start popping up any day now.
Oh, and GET OFF MY LAWN!