Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Music Industry Prepares to Sue Yahoo China 133

magicchex writes "According to their chairman, John Kennedy, the International Federation of the Phonographic Industries (IFPI) is preparing to sue Yahoo China unless negotiations are agreed upon which satisfy the IFPI. Yahoo China is the second most popular search engine in China, with the frontrunner, Baidu, already involved in an ongoing lawsuit brought by the IFPI. The BBC article is vague in its description of what exactly Yahoo China would be sued for, mentioning that it provides links to pirated music tracks but not explaining this any further other than a statement that 'a simple search on Yahoo China found mp3 files of recent releases for direct download within a few clicks.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Music Industry Prepares to Sue Yahoo China

Comments Filter:
  • I'm sure... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by corychristison ( 951993 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @07:57AM (#15655731)
    'a simple search on Yahoo China found mp3 files of recent releases for direct download within a few clicks.'
    I'm sure a search on most forms of search engines would produce similar results. Why does Yahoo China get the can for this?
    • Re:I'm sure... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Macthorpe ( 960048 )
      Because companies based in America have better lawyers?

      That's seriously the only reason I can think of.
      • They do?

        I can't see US lawyers doing very well in a Chinese court..
        • Not the best assumption.

          The first I in IFPI means International. Who says they only have American lawyers? Simple reasoning would state that from the name they have a lot of different lawyers in different countries and that they have the resources to be good ones.
        • I'm pretty sure the parent meant: the IFPI is less quick to sue American companies because the American companies have better lawyers to defend them (than the Chinese companies). That is, the IFPI choosing to sue Chinese companies rather than American companies.
    • Re:I'm sure... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Xiroth ( 917768 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @08:10AM (#15655759)
      In fact, you could probably get to a site with direct downloads of pirated mp3s within 'a few clicks' from the IPFI's site. If this kind of justification is sufficient, maybe they should just sue the entire internet.
    • Re:I'm sure... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by LiquidCoooled ( 634315 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @08:11AM (#15655761) Homepage Journal
      You would be surprised.
      It used to be the case, but now it seems to be getting harder (at least on google)
      Theres more spam and lyrics and legal sites coming up tops.

      By the time you find anything your on page 97 and searching in foreign languages on random domains.

      I just gave an example of looking for a specific ebook and not managing to find it by direct filename and other common things on google, but managing to get it very easily from yahoo.
      • Re:I'm sure... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by sm62704 ( 957197 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @09:50AM (#15656134) Journal
        You can't even find ligitimate MP3s on Google.

        Try to find this file [gotshoo.com]. It's a song by my friends Posamist [posamist.com] named "Silky Smooth".

        Search for "posamist silky smooth" (no quotes) and you only get links to some old shit on K5 mentioning the song and band. You won't find the MP3, even though I linked to all their MP3s on my (Google indexed) blog September of last year.

        Which is what the RIAA/MPAA want. A Yahoo search DOES return the file, it's the fourth result. What was that about Google not being evil again?
        • Re:I'm sure... (Score:5, Informative)

          by Haeleth ( 414428 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @10:30AM (#15656278) Journal
          Search for "posamist silky smooth" (no quotes) and you only get links to some old shit on K5 mentioning the song and band. You won't find the MP3, even though I linked to all their MP3s on my (Google indexed) blog September of last year.
          Which is what the RIAA/MPAA want. A Yahoo search DOES return the file, it's the fourth result. What was that about Google not being evil again?


          Um. I searched for "posamist silky smooth" (no quotes) on Google, and the third result was this [gotshoo.com]. Is that the MP3 you're talking about, or are there two bands called Posamist who have released songs called Silky Smooth?

          And even if I hadn't been able to find the MP3 you named on Google in three clicks, I'm not sure exactly how that would make Google "evil". Evil is when you contribute to human suffering, not when you don't index binary files on your text search engine.
          • Re:I'm sure... (Score:1, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward
            I'm not sure exactly how that would make Google "evil". Evil is when you contribute to human suffering, not when you don't index binary files on your text search engine.

            Well, if Google succeeds in affecting this non-RIAA artist's livelihood by caving into the RIAA's demands to censor all MP3s, that doesn't exactly sound like kindness. But I guess that artist can get probably get a job doing something else, and the RIAA will have one less competitor to worry about.

          • And even if I hadn't been able to find the MP3 you named on Google in three clicks, I'm not sure exactly how that would make Google "evil". Evil is when you contribute to human suffering, not when you don't index binary files on your text search engine.

            Ok, maybe not evil, but not very helpful either. Many people claim that Google is the best search engine. What this story tends to indicate is that Yahoo beats it handily if you happen to be searching for MP3s. That means Google is either purposely screwin

        • http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=rapidshare+fu ll+album [google.com] I found a 50 cents album in a few clicks from this query. ops... sorry... Think they will now sue slashdot also.
        • You won't find the MP3, even though I linked to all their MP3s on my (Google indexed) blog September of last year.

          If Google thinks your website (or section of the site) is a blog, they don't index it in their primary index. Instead, you'll have to go to "Blog Search" on a second page at Google's site.

          (I suspect that Google looks for an RSS/Atom feed file to make the determination.)
      • Re:I'm sure... (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        It depends how you search. Queries like intitle:index.of <keyword> mp3 seem pretty successful. If you want even less crap add last.modified
      • That has nothing to do with mp3, it has to do with Google not able to get good results anymore in general.
      • Re:I'm sure... (Score:3, Informative)

        by Kev_Stewart ( 737140 )
        Those seeking free music use a combination of Google and file hosting services like Rapidshare. Go to Google and type the title of the album in quotes, followed by 'rapidshare.de/files' and bingo. Most of the time the result returns at least one link to a rar file containing the album you searched for.

        Works with movies too.

        Not that one should ever condone such a thing :)
      • Re:I'm sure... (Score:4, Informative)

        by jambarama ( 784670 ) <jambarama&gmail,com> on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @04:09PM (#15657422) Homepage Journal
        You can still find anything on google, it just takes a little more know-how. For example, add this string to your search intitle:index.of +"mp3" -htm -html -php -asp "Last Modified". Just add the band or song in quotes and you'll be amazed at how much more accurate it'll make an mp3 search. For example - a search for Gorillaz & Feel Good Inc [google.com] turns up quite a few copies of the MP3. The filetype:mp3 command works well too.

        The same goes for any filetype. Google is doing well at giving copyrighted materials low rankings, their livelihood depends on it, but as long as they index everything, everything is available.
    • Re:I'm sure... (Score:5, Informative)

      by snafu109 ( 852770 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @08:16AM (#15655781)
      From another article [bloomberg.com]:

      The federation is also considering using a new Chinese law that came into effect July 1 that fines distributors of illegally copied music, movies and other material over the Internet as much as 100,000 yuan ($12,500). As of today, Chinese search engines operated by Yahoo China and Baidu.com provide links to other Web sites hosting illegally copied songs.

      The law says a Web site is jointly liable with the host of the pirated files for infringement ``if it knows or should know that the work, performance or sound or video recording linked to was infringing.''

      Apparently there is no such law in Western countries.
      • Re:I'm sure... (Score:2, Insightful)

        by the_xaqster ( 877576 )

        The law says a Web site is jointly liable with the host of the pirated files for infringement ``if it knows or should know that the work, performance or sound or video recording linked to was infringing.''

        Who decides what the website should know? If you link to a website with a bunch of mp3's called My_Talk1.mp3, My_Talk2.mp3, .... , My_Talk20.mp3 and it turns out My_Talk5.mp3 is a Madonna track, can you be prosecuted because you should have checked? Who draws the line and where?

        Seems like you could e

      • Re:I'm sure... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by ScrewMaster ( 602015 )
        Apparently there is no such law in Western countries.

        For good reason, but there's a lot of interest here in the U.S. to try and end that immunity. Of course, if they do succeed in making engines responsible for linked content it will simply end search engines, which wouldn't bother some people one bit. China's government is in the unenviable position of wanting all the benefits of free flow of information provided by search without the perceived liabilities. What's unfortunate is that their perceptions o
    • Re:I'm sure... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by nurb432 ( 527695 )
      Because the are the largest, and are prone to cave into demands from other people perhaps?

      Im sure that if they win this, and get some $ of it, they will start going after smaller fish ( that still have an international presence )
    • Re:I'm sure... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by c ( 8461 ) <beauregardcp@gmail.com> on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @08:30AM (#15655829)

      Why does Yahoo China get the can for this?

      Because Yahoo China has demonstrated that they're able and willing to filter search results, pass off user account information to anyone who asks, and generally behave like asshats. Which means they totally lose the "we're just an innocent little search engine, we can't filter our output, it'd be a major hardship" common-carrier type of defense.

      That's probably not the reason, but it would be about what they deserve...

      c.

    • Re:I'm sure... (Score:3, Interesting)

      Just to play devil's advocate...

      If Yahoo China can supress results based on edicts from the "mean old Chinese government," perhaps the music industry is going to say "Well now, you clealy CAN filter the results if you want to or are forced to. We want you to filter out links to illgotten content that we own. If you don't, you're contributing to the problem and have some liability."

      That's the flip side of caving in to search engine filtering. The slope is quite slippery....
    • Re:I'm sure... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by xtracto ( 837672 )
      Behold the power of the copyright infringing search engine called GOOGLE [google.com]

      My question is, isnt Yahoo! USA the same company as Yahoo! China? cant they "provide" their lawyers force?
    • You know I believe there are only something like 6 clicks of separation between anything on the Internet.
    • If you're looking for crappy pop music:

      http://music.yahoo.com.cn/ [yahoo.com.cn]

      Set it for mp3, and most of the links actually work to download! I've used this to uhm.. explore some files before.

      I think this might just be what they're suing over.
    • Why does Yahoo China get the can for this?

      Maybe they need the advertising...
    • Because they have the money and an American presense. The guys doing the actual hosting of illegal-in-America files have less money and are harder to sue.
  • by joe 155 ( 937621 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @07:57AM (#15655733) Journal
    you can't go sueing search engines because they contain links to links of pirated mp3s... thats just what a search engine does... it seems the only way to avoid this would be to manually go through every web page, download all the mp3s that you can get to and check that they are not pirated... of course if the were you'd get sued anyway...
    • by Jah-Wren Ryel ( 80510 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @08:06AM (#15655752)
      you can't go sueing search engines because they contain links to links of pirated mp3s... thats just what a search engine does... it seems the only way to avoid this would be to manually go through every web page, download all the mp3s that you can get to and check that they are not pirated...

      What's wrong with that? If it saves the life of one innocent child, isn't it worth it? We must do our patriotic duty to make sure there are no links to links to links and especialy no circular links to pirated materials anywhere on the net. Do your part good citizen and help to assure that the children of RIAA executives are assured a bright future!
      • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @08:15AM (#15655777)
        It's "war against Communist Pirating China" this time, not "think of the children". Don't switch hypes too much, please, people might catch on.
        • Actually, it's the "War on Terror." It seems that illegal free pirated mp3s are a huge source of funding for terrorists. Remember, every time you get an mp3 off of gnutella, it funds terrorism in Iraq (the only place in the world with terrorists right now, thanks to our clever plan to lure them all there and distract them).
      • Recent insider testimony has determined that from the RIAA website, users are able to access a search engine with only a few clicks. RIAA CEO Mitch Bainwol subsequently imploded. More horrifying details tongiht at 11.

        <Warning the above post may or may not be fiction>
    • well... it's more direct than that- the reason they are suing Yahoo China is in my sig (last I checked it was, otherwise go to http://music.yahoo.com.cn/ [yahoo.com.cn] to see what I mean)- click the link and use it to look for an MP3- direct link, no clicking through loads of spam or ads- click the result and a media player will pop up with a download link too. I hope that Yahoo wins- I couldn't possibly bear to lose this valuable resource.
  • by KiloByte ( 825081 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @07:57AM (#15655734)
    I really didn't expect we'll live until the days when an evil totalitarian regime will be in some regards better than the US.

    On the other hand, it may be a good idea to attach a generator to G. Washington's, T. Jefferson's and co coffins. Just think of the free energy!
    • On the other hand, it may be a good idea to attach a generator to G. Washington's, T. Jefferson's and co coffins. Just think of the free energy! I've already tried that, sorry. A situation like this can only get them to spin the generators at approximately 3RPM, which produces hardly enough power to light a Maglight. And unfortunately, it would appear that events similar to this do not produce a cumulative effect; that is, only the greatest event produces an effect, and the potential of all lesser events
    • I really didn't expect we'll live until the days when an evil totalitarian regime will be in some regards better than the US.

      People have been making excuses for evil totalitarian regimes (attempting to prove that they are better in at least some respects) since time immemorial. Stop me if you've heard some of these before: "at least they make the trains run on time," "at least they provide free health-care," "at least they provide free education," "there is no famine over there [wikipedia.org]," "the people seem to enjoy

    • Hey, the Founding Fathers did their part for our Republic, I don't think it's fair to ask them to provide for our power needs as well. A much more appropriate way of generating "free" energy would be to mount an MHD generator to the side of the Congressional building, indeed any structure where politicians regularly congregrate. The sheer quantity of plasma, I mean, hot air flowing from such a gathering could easily supply light and heat for several small villages.
  • In other news (Score:5, Interesting)

    by giorgiofr ( 887762 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @08:00AM (#15655740)
    Search engines can be used to search for possibly illegal stuff.
    Mail can be used to send possibly illegal objects.
    Roads can be used to go to some possibily illegal destination.
    Weapons can be used to kill someone, possibly in an illegal way.
    Phones can be used to call someone and say possibily illegal things.

    Unless we want to take care of all the above mentioned "problems", I don't see why we should be concerned with search engines and specifically single them out.
    Oh wait, they have lotsa money. Now I understand.
  • by HaydnH ( 877214 )
    "Yahoo China found mp3 files of recent releases for direct download within a few clicks."

    How's this different from any other search engine [google.co.uk] (try the 3rd link and 1 more click!)?? Why aren't other search engines being sued?

    Haydn.
    • Because they already failed in every western court trying to do this.
      Now they can gamble in Chinese court and, who knows, they might even win!
    • Cause Google does no evil!
    • I love the phrasing to... "in a few clicks" it's very Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon.
    • How's this different from any other search engine (try the 3rd link and 1 more click!)??

      Maybe you were more persistent than me, but all I saw at your link was a bunch of spam, dead links and promises of free dowloads, but no actual MP3 files. I'm sure they can be found, but the SEO scumbags have done a good job of making it hard to find.

    • So with Google you can find Madonna's shitty music, but you can't find a file like Posamist's Loom Up [gotshoo.com], even though it's a legal download that the band WANTS you to have?

      They have four CD's worth of MP3s for free download, none googleable.

      Pretty much proves what I've been saying all along - the RIAA/IFPI isn't trying to keep Madonna and Metallica off the internet, they want to keep you from hearing Posamist and The Station [thestationmusic.com] (Whose FLAC files on archive.org can't be sucessfully googled for, either).
      • Except, of course, that's completely wrong. A google search for
        posamist mp3
        #2 and #3 results link directly to the pages with the download links on them.

        "the station" flac
        #1 result is to their archive.org pages

        So, if anyone actually wanted those files, google would be able to show them where they were.
    • Those links only contain samples ala a few hundred kilobytes, no different from what for example iTunes or amazon.com offers. They seem to be legal for some reason. In addition, "Frozen" contained no Madonna, only the background track. Strange.
  • It contains references to piracy, how it is done, and where it is done ? They should be sued outright !

    America shouldnt let morons to be president of anything, neither the country, nor corporations or organisations.
  • I was looking for a pdb (ebook) of snowcrash recently and whilst its getting harder to find things using google, yahoo came up with results for it.

    Now this just isn't right, can I sue google for NOT finding the things I'm looking for?

    Speaking of lawsuits for stupid things, can I sue yahoo myself for their stupid new frontpage?

    I thought the slash redesign was a bit wonky, but the yahoo one actually does make my eyes bleed, it keeps sliding downwards under some java shit which makes me feel sick. Anyway, I'v
  • by Anonymous Coward
    they need to read the google hacking book, or even search the net for simple google hacks.

    intitle:index.of "mp3" +"INSERT BAND HERE" -htm -html -php -asp "Last Modified"
  • Miguel de Cervantes will be happy to see that his Don Quixote de la Mancha is alive and well, albeit in Britain...

    But who's playing Sancho Panza? Tony Blair?

  • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @08:18AM (#15655789)
    Ya know, the world's turned upside down when China is sued by a "free world" organisation for having too much liberty on something...
    • Ya know, the world's turned upside down when China is sued by a "free world" organisation for having too much liberty on something...

      Fair enough, but consider this: any issue can be framed in terms of liberty. For example, you could say that white Americans no longer have the "liberty" to own other Americans (black), or that Germans no longer have the "liberty" to kill Jews with impunity; however, it is not entirely intellectually honest to do so. China will eventually enforce I.P. laws; the only question

      • Umm... then maybe it's time for the US to actually produce stuff with the IP they have instead of relying on the export of it? A system based on immaterial values can't survive for long. For reference, check the Soviet system.
      • has worthwhile I.P. to protect

        Meaningless. All things can be labelled "property" and made valuable by defining the rules appropriately.

        The government could say I have the right to charge anybody who has a shit. That would be a very valuable intellectual property indeed. Doesn't mean that it's desirable or of net benefit to society to organise the rules that way.

        The same reasoning applies to the USA exporting "their" "intellectual property". If the rest of the world decides the USA's fanatical view o

      • "any issue can be framed in terms of liberty"

        You know, even the most cursory readup on libertarianism tears down that strawman.

        Intellectual 'property' is a coercive government granted monopoly. The issue is pretty black and white from a liberty point of view; most informed (and intellectually 'honest') arguments in favour of it are based upon utilitarian aspects (ie, (mistaken belief, imo), that it drives a higher rate of development, etc).

        "the U.S. does not export much beside I.P.; if you have any sense of
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @08:21AM (#15655797)
    Yahoo China differs from other search engines (and from other Yahoo editions) by offering a quite comprehensive MP3 search with direct download links at http://music.yahoo.com.cn/ [yahoo.com.cn]

    Examples?
    http://music.yahoo.com.cn/search.html?pid=ysearch& source=ysearch_music_result_topsearch&p=nelly+furt ado&mimetype=all [yahoo.com.cn]
    http://music.yahoo.com.cn/search.html?pid=ysearch& source=ysearch_music_result_topsearch&p=shakira&mi metype=all [yahoo.com.cn]
  • Is it just me or does anyone else always read International Federation of the Phonographic Industries (IFPI) as
    International Federation of the Pornographic Industries (IFPI)
    Hehe.. guess its just me..
  • The time to change your fecking business model was 10 years ago.
    • Why bother? they have found a great model for keeping themselves relevant: Have the laws rewritten globally so that everyone becomes a criminal or is assisting in criminal activity. Sue anything that moves. Demonize anyone that opposes you and start massive PR campaigns to convince society that you are right, eventhough it makes everyone else a criminal.
      • Why bother? they have found a great model for keeping themselves relevant: Have the laws rewritten globally so that everyone becomes a criminal or is assisting in criminal activity. Sue anything that moves. Demonize anyone that opposes you and start massive PR campaigns to convince society that you are right, eventhough it makes everyone else a criminal.

        The problem with that is it only enriches lawyers. Suing people who don't have anywhere near the financial resources to match the recording industry le

  • Unbelievable (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Linux_ho ( 205887 ) on Tuesday July 04, 2006 @08:40AM (#15655860) Homepage
    "Yahoo just helped us find like a dozen music pirates in about ten minutes. Thanks, Yahoo! Oh hey, it's kinda tricky to track down these international guys. Bad Yahoo! Bad Bad Yahoo!" If all the search engines colluded with illegal content distributors by hiding their stashes, these morons (and law enforcement) would have to write their own search engines to find them.
  • I mean...thanks for the advertisement!

    Actually, as it turns out, it doesn't look to be any better than the western counterpart. Then again, maybe all those sites I couldn't read were full of songs, but I doubt it.

  • ... to be proactive in protecting other people's copyrights? Especially considering that they don't host the content? What a disturbin precedent.
  • Here a snippet of code and if you use it, here is an example: of the result when entering a random name: Metallica as a tryout [google.co.uk]

    <script language="javascript">
    function doSearch() {
    document.all.searchg.q.value = '"' + document.all.searchg.q_.value + '" intitle:index.of mp3 -html -htm -php -asp -txt -pls';
    return true;
    }
    </script>

    <form onsubmit="return(doSearch());" name="searchg" method="get" action="http://www.google.co.uk/search" target="_top"

  • Where the hell do they think this will go. I guess they have starving lawyers because all they will end up doing is feeding ambulance chasers. They don't have a lick of sense do they? Even if they survive the years this will be drawn out and they get a favorable judgement,there isn't anyone for them to go to make a settlement stick. Hell, they couldn't even get an injunction to stick right now. This is just a fancy form of suicide, much like the form that SCO is performing in its little gavotte with IBM.
  • That would be like me walking into a police department and saying, "Here's a list of some illegal crack houses in town for you to bust" and the cops arrest me for providing that information. Wouldn't the SMART thing to do be bust the crack houses and THANK me?
    • Not quite, it is more like running a business where pot heads can go and find where the closest pot dealer is.

      Then the question is this: is it easier to bust 1000 pot dealers, half of whom are anonymous or untracable, or the guy who helps everyone find them? They are just trying to "fix the glitch" (in office space speak) by cutting off the dealers from traffic (and thus revenue) and hoping that they go away on their own.

      That part makes sense to me. What doesnt make sense is why they have chose yahoo
      • is it easier to bust 1000 pot dealers, half of whom are anonymous or untracable, or the guy who helps everyone find them?

        Well, if the guy who helps everyone find them really does help everyone find them, then it will be really easy to bust them, as they will be neither anonymous nor untraceable. The gpp's point here was that Yahoo!'s service has great value for the music industry's efforts to enforce its IP. I guess the music industry's position is that they'd prefer to have security through obscurity.

  • In related news, the music industry is suing itself for its recent press story which informs people that Yahoo! China [yahoo.com] is the best search engine to use to find mp3s on the web, thereby pointing people to music that's only a few clicks (plus one) away.
  • Am I the only one here who has kept reading these headlines and wondering what the hell the porno biz is doing suing people left and right, and how is it supposed to be tied to music?
    • No, every time there's a story about the IFPI, somebody points that out. I see by your UID that you're a relatively new member, so I'm guessing this is the first time you've read an IFPI story.

      I think there's also a "BPI" (British Phonographic Industry) that similarly confounds some Slashdotters. Lots of younger Slashdotters are also surprised by the word "phonograph" in the organization name and don't understand why an organization would have such an archaic word in their title. I guess young people h

  • That it would be the Chinese that would get to crush these bastards. With the iTunes case in France and the now China taking a big dump on the international RIAA, they are soon going to be mooter than a lawyer in Judge Roy Bean's court... :) It seems the international community will not stand to have it's citizens dictated to by some corporate scum. This will be interesting, I can't wait to see this play out...
  • OK, so they can easily search out sites with warez MP3's. With the exemption of sites like the pirate bay, wouldn't this make it easier (with government co-operation) to shut down said sites... at least a bit easier than tracking down P2P users with dynamic IP's. I suppose that there is likely little co-operation from the Chinese gov't on Chinese sites, but I had heard previously that there had shut down a few users here and there already.
  • good luck with that.
  • Lets ask this on this July 4th... what did our founding fathers think when they gave so many rights to the businesses of America, making them a collective individual under law? Did they expect to be giving power to some "music industry" yet to exist in their times to become a voracious self-palliating industry of corporate vultures preying upon the weak [slashdot.org] and the innocent [slashdot.org]?
  • ... when the first thing your mind reads in "IFPA" is "International Federation of *Pornographic* Artists"??? Someone give me a cup of coffee. Please.
  • Kim Jong Il: IFPI? Oh no! Oh, herro. Great to see you again, IFPI!
    IFPI: Mr. Il, I was supposed to be allowed to inspect your palace today, but your guards won't let me enter certain areas.
    Kim Jong Il: IFPI, IFPI, IFPI! We've been frew this a dozen times. I don't have any pirated music, OK IFPI?
    IFPI: Then let me look around, so I can ease the IFPI's collective mind. I'm sorry, but the IFPI must be firm with you. Let me in, or else.
    Kim Jong Il: Or else what?
    IFPI: Or else we will be very angry with you... and
  • Greedy IFPI asshats: "Lets see here, if 1 in 3 people on the planet are Chinese and if each Chinese person has pirated William Hung's abulm worth about $9 at Wal-mart, multiply that by the exchange rate you owe us 144 BILLION YUAN ($18 B USD)"

    Chinese Ambassador: "No way in Hell are we going to pay! ARRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!! Make these Europeans walk the plank and fall into the Hell of the Hungry Sharks!"

    /In deed!
  • John Kennedy of the IFPI. Insert JFK reference if you have any.

The only difference between a car salesman and a computer salesman is that the car salesman knows he's lying.

Working...