Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

RIAA sues a 12 yr old girl.

This is so stupid!!

I would gladly pay and extra $20 a month to have an iron clad privacy guarantee on my internet connection, I think they should be protected as highly as phone tapping is, it should require a court order. Especially given the number of people who dial up using a phone line!!

And if the Record Industry would simply lower its prices!!!! Illegal downloading would drop somewhat considering that 10 million songs were purchased through the Apple iTunes music store for about a dollar a piece! the RIAA needs to get its head out of its you know where and wake up!
 
Re: This is so stupid!!

Originally posted by davidc2182
I would gladly pay and extra $20 a month to have an iron clad privacy guarantee on my internet connection, I think they should be protected as highly as phone tapping is, it should require a court order. Especially given the number of people who dial up using a phone line!!

And if the Record Industry would simply lower its prices!!!! Illegal downloading would drop somewhat considering that 10 million songs were purchased through the Apple iTunes music store for about a dollar a piece! the RIAA needs to get its head out of its you know where and wake up!
Click to expand...
I hear what you're saying... The RIAA is trying to force people to pay one way or another instead attacking the real issue, pricing.

If they allowed people to sample most of a song and download for $.50, I think they'd make people happy...

I'd love to see Apple sign more independent labels and have more musicians move to independent labels...


Ouch... my head hurts (serioulsy).... Tylenol PM kills you the next day.
 
Originally posted by big
well, it seems like this is ludacrious anyways.... but one could be sued for an illigal download made 5 years ago. How do they know someone is downloading music anyways?

is there an illigal porn industry cop lurking somewhere, trying to catch you looking at pretty girls?

this whole thing seems extremely unfigured out, suing a 12 year old little girl....that's just wrong
Click to expand...

Actually there is if you are looking at kiddie porn.
 
Originally posted by big
hmmm, what privacy rights do people have in real life? can we apply these to online services?

ie, if I want to walk around naked in my house, I have that right, and if someone looks through a window, its their loss/win, I can not be tried for public display of nudity...

though if someone saw me chopping up another peron, that would be ok....

no one can tap my phone with out a court order, so why can they tap my internet connection??

whats the line between murder and nudity, or talking on the phone, where I could talk about either of these (free speech).
Click to expand...

Tell that to Matthew McConnaheigh(?) who was arrested for playing bongos in the nude in Austin, Texas. Ever hear of indecent exposure?
 
Originally posted by Macmaniac
Have any of these people sued use macs?? Or are we immune:confused:
maybe 5% ain't so bad.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be surprised if we are immune. We seem to be immune to a lot of bad things.:D

I heard somewhere that it's legal to download music if you delete it within 24 hours and never download the song again. Is that true?
 
Originally posted by XnavxeMiyyep
II heard somewhere that it's legal to download music if you delete it within 24 hours and never download the song again. Is that true?
Click to expand...

no.

still illegal.

arn
 
Originally posted by big
no one can tap my phone with out a court order, so why can they tap my internet connection??
Click to expand...

Well The Patriot Act has given special extra-ordinary powers and bypassed many laws, if they suspect your a 'terriost' (the ever adding term) they can tap everthing, but if they find out your just a ... Music File Sharer they can't used that evidence in a court.


Yeah but I agree, why should a Private Company be given some much money.

Like living out Military guns to an extremist Organization.

:eek:

Originally posted by sedarby
Actually there is if you are looking at kiddie porn.
Click to expand...

Well then you are just a moron and a sicko.

Originally posted by arn
no.

still illegal.

arn
Click to expand...
Yeah, but what is the second part of that argument is debatable:

Downloading, listening, going out and acquiring the CD/Music.

Or downloading for a Backup.
 
Re: This is so stupid!!

Originally posted by davidc2182
And if the Record Industry would simply lower its prices!!!! Illegal downloading would drop somewhat considering that 10 million songs were purchased through the Apple iTunes music store for about a dollar a piece! the RIAA needs to get its head out of its you know where and wake up!
Click to expand...

don't we all wish that CD prices were lower? and also, iTMS sold 10 million songs, but a lot were bought in album form, so they don't have 10 million dollars made.
 
Originally posted by MrMacman
Downloading, listening, going out and acquiring the CD/Music.

Or downloading for a Backup.
Click to expand...

on downloading, listening and going out and getting the CD... i'm sure it's not a problem if you buy every song you downloaded... but how about those you don't? i understand that you may download with the intent of purchasing... but what if you don't? if you are going to buy all the songs you download anyway, why not go out and just buy them?

i never understood this backup stuff. it sounds to me like an excuse to allow downloading...

the thing is, if your walkman ate your tape, you weren't entitled to a backup... you can make your own backup, sure, but you couldn't obtain a backup from elsewhere... now with the technology such that you can get a backup even if you've never made a backup yourself and you may not even have the original anymmore, are you still entitled to downloading it and using it?

when you buy a cd, are you buying the right to own the song for your use or are you buying the right to the song carried on the particular cd you purchased?
 
Originally posted by big
no one can tap my phone with out a court order, so why can they tap my internet connection??
Click to expand...

They're not tapping, they're tracing. They find out that someone downloaded or shared a song with someone and then they trace you down. They don't bug your connection and wait for you to do something illegal.
 
This sucks...
Girl, 12, settles downloading lawsuit

WASHINGTON - A 12-year-old girl who was among the first to be sued by the record industry for sharing music over the Internet is off the hook after her mother agreed Tuesday to pay $2,000 to settle the lawsuit.
Click to expand...
The press was so much better with the RIAA being as out of control lawsuit machine.
 
Originally posted by Knox
"It turns out that Brianna's mum paid a $29.99 service charge to KaZaA for the company's music service. Brianna, however, thought this meant she could download songs at will. How naive!"

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/32731.html referencing http://nypost.com/news/regionalnews/5349.htm
Click to expand...

Naive? Ah, she's 12 for christ's sake :rolleyes:

This is stupid and ridiculous. Also, just wipe your mp3s off your drive if you get a notice. Where's their proof? This is a lawsuit and they would have to prove something other then that you downloaded something. If you didn't share anything you are fine as the last I heard. So if you are getting music turn off sharing. I read somewhere else this morning that grandkids downloaded music on their grandpa's computer on weekend visits. Now he has to fork up the cash and skip nearly 6 months of his heart medication, kidney medication, and his viagra pills to afford settling the lawsuit.
 
Re: This is so stupid!!

Originally posted by davidc2182
I would gladly pay and extra $20 a month to have an iron clad privacy guarantee on my internet connection, I think they should be protected as highly as phone tapping is, it should require a court order. Especially given the number of people who dial up using a phone line!!
Click to expand...

Aren't there programs or methods of preventing people from tracking your internet access and usage? I agree. They shouldn't be able to file random lawsuits against people. They should have to have probably cause and ask for a warrant. Even though file sharing is illegal, Internet access should be like telephone conversations - accessible only with a warrant.

If anyone knows of software or hardware or other methods of preventing people from tracking you internet access, please let me know.
 
CNN is reporting that she settled for $2000. (or $2 a song.) I bet she wishes she had a Mac now. She could have bought them all for half of that price!
 
Originally posted by jxyama
on downloading, listening and going out and getting the CD... i'm sure it's not a problem if you buy every song you downloaded... but how about those you don't? i understand that you may download with the intent of purchasing... but what if you don't? if you are going to buy all the songs you download anyway, why not go out and just buy them?

i never understood this backup stuff. it sounds to me like an excuse to allow downloading...
Click to expand...

Its all hazy, but backup is even more hazy...

I let my friend borrow my CD, I know my friend... I would never see that CD again, so I made a backup, no not from the CD I purchased, but from someone elses across the web.

Illegal?
Legal?

No one knows.


Anyway their argument sucks.

Piracy is stopping people from legally obtaining music.

Lets look at the current factors the RIAA does not even LOOK at:
1) Our economy Tanked, no one has money. No one with little money to spare is gonna blow their money on Music, SORRY RIAA you aren't ahead of 'food' on my most important list.
2) No good music releases? Maybe people are sick of the same exact crappy songs?
3) People want a better way of getting the songs.
 
Re: Re: This is so stupid!!

Originally posted by bennetsaysargh
don't we all wish that CD prices were lower? and also, iTMS sold 10 million songs, but a lot were bought in album form, so they don't have 10 million dollars made.
Click to expand...

that's why i said about a dollar a song!;)
 
Originally posted by pgwalsh
I think Kazaa should be responsible as they are charging a fee for the service; in her case.
Click to expand...

but they can't be held accountable because P2P has legitimate uses. If you choose to use a product or service that has legal uses for an illegal purpose, that's on you, not on the supplier of the service. Napster was different because they were actually keeping music on their own servers...
 
i still think they are not going to get anywhere with this. Ever heard the saying, "If theres a will, thers a way?" im sure you have. If people want to download music anonymously, they will find a way to do it. No doubt about it. Until cds are below 5-7$ new, not on sale, they will not see any rise in cds sales, especially with the economy the way it is.
 
RIAA needs to change focus!

What RIAA should do was to work their butts of to get their music on the Internet legally (iTMS for Mac&Windows WORLDWIDE or other working services). Instead they focus a lot of energy and time and money on sueing the very people that are music lovers and potential customers. Everyone with just a month of buisness school would know that this is something you just don't do!

Besides, if they want to sue someone, they should sue people making money off these songs by selling millions of illegal copies.

Just a thougth...
 
Originally posted by robbieduncan
Sueing a 12 year old is wrong (and probably impossible) but I found her mothers coment very interesting "It's not like we were doing anything illegal". Downloading music is illegal. Perhaps people need to stop and think before they break the law?
Click to expand...

downloading music isn't illegal. i thought that if you own the CD you are entitled to have a digital copy of the CD, or individual tracks. so in the case of the girl downloading music, if she owned the CD's then she is in the clear, but the people uploading to her are breaking the law by distributing pirated music.

obviously she didn't own CD's for any of the music she was downloading, but she must have downloaded a hell of alot to get the RIAA on her back.

i don't feel sorry for her. she broke the law, she (her parents more likely) have to pay for her actions.

kids can't just be allowed to be let loose on the net or they'll just end up making heaps of trouble for their parents.
 
Well if the mother really did not know it was illegal, the US gov should do a law that all P2P software has to say in big clear letters when it loads up, something like, 'Downloading content you do that own is illegal''.

Then people out there that think it is legal will stop doing it. I know one family that until recently thought it was legal, people seem to think that because it is so easy to do, it must be legal.
 
Re: Re: This is so stupid!!

Originally posted by ColoJohnBoy
Aren't there programs or methods of preventing people from tracking your internet access and usage? I agree. They shouldn't be able to file random lawsuits against people. They should have to have probably cause and ask for a warrant. Even though file sharing is illegal, Internet access should be like telephone conversations - accessible only with a warrant.

If anyone knows of software or hardware or other methods of preventing people from tracking you internet access, please let me know.
Click to expand...

What RIAA is likely doing is simply requesting songs through kazaa or other p2p networks and then tracing the violators down once they show 1000 or more shares. Essentially, you're committing an illegal act while they watch, similar to telling someone over the phone that you plan on committing a crime. They're not bugging or tapping you, you have actually connected with them and told them you're sharing.

So unless you get rid of your IP address, you're not going to stop the RIAA. And if you do that, you won't have an internet connection to worry about. Obscuring your IP address through a router won't help either. They still can trace it to your router.

(The method described is not necessarily the method used by the RIAA. It, however, seems to be the most likely and most legal way for the RIAA to get you. If anyone knows better, I'd love to find out)
 
To me, this is much like the people who steal cable. If u want to go after a source for it, go to the manufacturer of the tools which allow to do the stealing first.

This 12 year old, it's frivolous IMO. I can believe, though, that they went after her. It's just sad they decided to make an example of her. :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back