477 more people sued by our best friend...

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by bennetsaysargh, Apr 28, 2004.

  1. macrumors 68020

    bennetsaysargh

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Location:
    New York
    #1
    that's right, on the one year anniversary of itunes, i guess they decided to celebrate.

    link
     
  2. macrumors 6502

    Calvinatir

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2003
    Location:
    LA
    #2
    yea, I ran a direct connect Hub on my campus and it was up for 2 years until 3 students went to the Dean and told him about it...totally weak...
     
  3. macrumors 68040

    Macmaniac

    #3
    And to make sure this illegal file sharing is stopped the RIAA announced today that all Legal File purchasing sites will now charge $2 per song, a little thank you from your buddies at the RIAA :p :p :eek:
     
  4. macrumors 65816

    Dippo

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2003
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    #4

    YEA!!! :p :p :p

    I always wanted to pay more for less!
    You know we have problems when a gallon of gas cost less than a song.
     
  5. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Location:
    England, UK
    #5
    Personally I think the way the RIAA goes about thier 'business' is truly disguisting.

    I personally download a fair bit of music - this will change once we have iTunes Europe though. iTunes is going to really change my download habits. Hopefully they will keep the price sensible for us UK customers.

    While I don't like those that make a business out of selling pirated music, I think p2p has been the best thing to music for quite some time. Hopefully it will make indie artists more popular and get rid of the domination of the big 5 record companies.
     
  6. macrumors 68020

    idkew

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2001
    Location:
    where the concrete to dirt ratio is better
    #6
    i love the riaa.

    they should get a nobel prize for being a friend to all.
     
  7. macrumors 68000

    musicpyrite

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Cape Cod
    #7
    I've heard the RIAA is charging $2 for every song you downlaod, the way iTunes is starting to look (with up to $2.50 per song) it looks like it's almost cheaper to download music illegaly.
     
  8. macrumors 65816

    Dippo

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2003
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    #8
    Assuming a $3000 settlement, then you would have to download 1,200 songs per lawsuit to break even. You would need to download 3,030 songs if you want them at 99 cents, and 12,000 songs if you want them at 25 cents.

    At those rates, the RIAA could just stop making music and turn into a law firm.
     
  9. macrumors 603

    OutThere

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Location:
    NYC
    #9
    I used to download music, but then my hard drive crashed and I lost all my music. Afterwards it was different, and now I only split music with my close friends (CDs that they buy, I rip, and I let them rip CDs I buy, if they want to). If the music couldn't be taken off the CD I'm sure that my close friends would let me borrow the CD to listen to anyway, it's only a matter of having it available when you want it. I don't like Kazaa or Limewire, and I feel really guilty if I ever use some downloading program like that. It feels like the music is greasy or something. Just my opinion. I love the iTMS, and the feel of taking a newly bought CD out of it's case and popping in the car's player. Joy.
     
  10. macrumors 604

    MrMacMan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2001
    Location:
    1 Block away from NYC.
    #10
    *sigh*

    Lets Drain money from customers!

    Yay!



    Dippo -- they are a law firm.

    Its just crazy, they can sue you for a trillion dollars for downloading like 30 songs or some nonsense.
     
  11. macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #11
    Do the execs of the RIAA realize that they are *******s? Or do they go home after work thinking, "Yeah, I think our company is a good wholesome company." :mad:

    BASTARDS! (Warning, link may contain profanity)
     
  12. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Location:
    UK (southern)
    #12
    I actually wrote an essay on this for a Uni degree. Its very interesting - many bands actually like having their music distributed through P2P systems as it spreads the word about them. Many bands also care more about music than money.

    I concluded in the essay that the problem would not go away until there was a viable alternative. I reckon iTunes is that alternative, and I will enjoy using it when it comes to Europe.

    As for me, well I am an old fashioned record collector and I love vinyl! So I just stick to my old records for now - I don't download any music. I don't even have broadband!
     
  13. macrumors 68020

    question fear

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Location:
    The "Garden" state
    #13

    sounds like a really interesting essay.

    go vinyl! i love my records, i go through phases where i only buy new music on vinyl, its just so wonderful...

    Its interesting though, because even when I downloaded music off of kazaa back in my college days, i tried not to download stuff that was widely available on cd (at least not from my favorite bands). I think its all about how you perceive people as well as how $$$ this stuff is getting. i.e. my favorite band sees being an indie band as their job; they go on tour, make records, etc because they love it, but its what they do to support their families and lives. And because their dedication to that is clear in their songs, their websites, and on their tours, I would think twice before downloading a cd of theirs on p2p. Granted, they are the exception....but it leads me to another point. Do you think the movie ads with the stuntmen and stuff work, or do you think its just calling attention to a phenomenon further? When I first saw one of those ads, I figured it would be fairly effective to some degree, but in the theater where I saw Kill Bill 2 half the crowd booed the MPAA ad.
     
  14. macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #14
    It seems like if it is "common knowledge" that artists are getting basically nil from CD sales because of the RIAA, then they really don't take too big of a hit when you illegally download their song. It's just the RIAA that gets hit in the profit. Have you noticed that there are no artists outraged over pirated music? Eminem hasn't done a song about it yet, so obviously he's not too concerned about file traders. I don't see online music tracks having an impact on file traders, and I don't see it having an effect on physical CD sales. I think that the idea of downloading music online is it's own entity that will live or die on the whim of the RIAA's pricing tier. The RIAA is the only corporation I view as inherently more evil than Microsoft. MS just makes crappy products, the RIAA is the most two-faced lie POS I've ever heard of. I hate the RIAA so much that if I were to see an exec, I would spit in his/her face without a second thought.
     
  15. macrumors 6502a

    leftbanke7

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Location:
    West Valley City, Utah
    #15
    Have you forgotten about Metallica? And just because an artist hasn't been vocal about it doesn't necessarily mean that they aren't outraged by it.

    However, I am pretty much sure that the RIAA is just looking after their own rear ends and trying to tell John Q. Public that their actions are solely intended for the artists. The whole RIAA/P2P issue reminds me a lot of the BCS/Non-BCS college football issue. The BCS tries to tell us that they are looking out for the best interests of the traditions of college football and the "student-athletes" but they are much more interested in lining their own pockets. If schools like Utah, Boise State and North Texas and their conferences suddenly became powerhouses and schools like Miami, Ohio St. and USC had a sudden decline, the BCS would switch around fast as can be.

    Capitalism has its positive side, however it also has it negative side and it seems that a good portion of the negative is hovering around the entertainment industry as a whole.
     
  16. macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #16
    That sucks. I don't know why people can't keep out of others' business...I mean, jeez, it's downloading! I know it's sketchy, but it's not some moral travesty worth report. Heck, it's not even that much a negative economic effect for the RIAA.

    One thing I don't understand is why the RIAA ignores evidence that downloading does not negatively affect music sales and continues to waste its money, time, and resources prosecuting downloaders. If it really wants to scapegoat, that's fine, but it's costing the RIAA a lot of money. You'd think it would want to find the real reason record sales are low and do what it can to fix it.

    My argument, though, is that the economy is still not great and record sales are one of the first things to go. If you're worried about putting food on the table, then you're probably not going to go out there and buy the latest musical stylings of Britney Spears. That's just a hunch. All these comparisons of record sales to 1998 levels or 2000 levels are just bogus. The RIAA acts as if the only variable there is downloading. I would call a national downturn in the economy a pretty big variable simply to ignore.

    Stupidity...You gotta love it.
     
  17. macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #17
    But you can't sue the economy ;)
     
  18. macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #18
    Fair enough. But at what cost is the RIAA going after 12 year olds? Getting two thousand bucks from some toddler isn't paying the fees for these corporate attorneys.

    I'm not questioning that the RIAA is on some sort of symbolic crusade. What I am questioning is the economic justification for it. This endeavor doesn't seem to make sense for the RIAA itself!
     
  19. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2003
    Location:
    Wonderland
    #19
    Get educated, use the power of your $

    For all who are disgusted by the RIAA's fear-mongering tactics (that few musicians truly support), check out the great site http://www.downhillbattle.org/ and check out the RIAA radar (http://www.magnetbox.com/riaa/) to check your purchases before you buy them. Every RIAA-member's CD that you buy tells them that you support their lawsuits as each label belonging to the RIAA pays serious dues to be a member of such a horrible organization. Support independant musicians and labels that don't believe in strong-arming the public, artists, and industry collusion. Your purchases make a difference...

    --Sincere
     
  20. macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #20
    Browsing that downhillbattle.org site I ran across this.

    This guy seems to be certainly of the highest caliber of intelligence :rolleyes:
     
  21. macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #21
    If I were to buys CDs (which I rarely do), I would buy the CDs on the basis of my preference for the musician, not out of some sort of political statement. I hate the RIAA as much as the next guy, but I like some of the music of its sold-our-souls-to-the-devil artists. Sure, if I liked an independent artist, then I'd buy the music, but if I didn't, I wouldn't throw my hard-earned cash in that direction just to say "F U RIAA!"

    But as I said, I'm not going to buy CDs anyway.
     
  22. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #22
    hey guess what...you could always just ignore the RIAA summons to court. Brian Konar? he doesn't live here anymore :p.

    seriously though...i've just decided i'll download songs from now on. Screw iTMS or anyone who cooperates with RIAA. If I have the choice of paying for the loss of freedom with my purchase...or share my collection for free? hmm...it's such a hard choice! (note: sarcasm). I need to geto ut of this country.
     
  23. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #23
    if you didn't know, music labels are disgustingly rich...they can cauterize their wounds with cash (similar to the U.S. government, we're losing the war in Iraq? throw cash on it!) they may be losing tons of money per lawsuit, but the mental impact it has on your average computer user is easily worth it. A motivated P2P'r could D/L $500 worth of music in a few hours. Get a couple hundred thousand of them going, and that's big bucks moving around. Now if you could get 50% of them to stop by scaring them with lawsuits, you've saved yourself millions (theoretically) even though u spent several hundred thousand. Unfortunately I don't see their cash well drying up anytime soon.
     
  24. macrumors 68000

    musicpyrite

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Cape Cod
    #24
    *sob*

    It's just so......beautiful

    I hat the RIAA, and so does everybody else (mostly) I know.
     
  25. macrumors 6502a

    Sparky's

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    #25
    Anyone out there remember when a record album was $2.00. I started my collection in the mid '60s and now have over 500 LPs, 300 CDs and no telling how many tapes. It really fries my a** to think that you can buy CDs today for about ¢.10 apiece, and the the cost of the song???= $19.95 for a CD? Why do these artists think they have to have so much money from you and me when I can't see any increase in my wages there's are going through the roof. As far as I'm concerned all this piracy is just the tip of the iceberg in bringing them down to our level.
     

Share This Page