RIAA sues 12 year old...

"We understand now that..." (cue card)..." file-sharing the music was..." (cue card) "...illegal...." (cue card) "....You can be sure Brianna...." (cue card) ".... won't be doing it anymore."


Brianna added: "I am sorry for...." (cue card) ".... what I have done. I love music and don't...." (cue card) ".... want to hurt the artists I love."

 

I predict that the evil empire will strike back, in the form of a nasty class action suit by the purloiners of music, citing some kind of RICO statute or some such consumer oriented law.

 

Don't forget about 71 year old Durwood Pickle from Texas. I guess downloading Lefty Frizzell mp3s really piss off the RIAA...

 

The RIAA taking away $2,000 from a family living in the projects. Laws are laws, but this disgusts me.

 

God almighty, the RIAA are assholes.

They and the music industry (essentially the same) are greedy SOBs.

They could have done this the better way, but instead did it the crappy way.

The better way would have been to forget their 'losses' and move on. There is no way in hell they are getting every penny retroactive to whatever. It's intirely unfair to sue people who abuse music services and not immediately pursue those who download one or two songs a month. And even that is unfair.

If they want to be smart, they should press the government for VERY tough laws (not like they're doing it now; just not focusing on it) and then create a new agency to find and shutdown all of (as many as possible really) the file swapping services from day one when a law is ratified.

Until then, good luck guys. I hate the RIAA. I use file swapping services, but I don't download movies or music much if at all. Maybe I get one song per month on average. Rarely ever a movie.

But I guess it's still illegal.

 

Up against the wall, rednecks mothers

 

How much is it costing the RIAA to litigate against all of these offenders?

 

That is just freakin' pathetic. The worst part is that they are probably sitting around high-fiving each other over the busting of children and the elderly. Most of these guys honestly think this is good for them and good for their business.

 

So ya thought ya might like to go to the show.
To feel the warm thrill of confusion, that space cadet glow.
I got me some bad news for you, Sunshine.
Pink isn't well, he stayed back at the hotel,
And he sent us along as a surrugate band.
We're gonna find out where you fans really stand.
Are there any queers in the theatre tonight?
Get 'em up against the wall. -- 'Gainst the wall!
And that one in the spotlight, he don't look right to me.
Get him up against the wall. -- 'Gainst the wall!
And that one looks Jewish, and that one's a coon.
Who let all this riffraff into the room?
There's one smoking a joint, and another with spots!
If I had my way I'd have all of ya shot.

 

Brianna added: "I am sorry for what I have done. I love music and don't want to hurt the artists I love"

The artist responded: "I don't what's more painful: 12 year old girls downloading my music or takin' it up the you know what from my label -- and they ain't even usin' spit, much less lube."

I find it hard to beleive that the RIAA, engaged in a battle "for its very existence" chose to pursue litigation against a 12 year old living in the NYC, as if this settlement would prove to be a boon for thier cause. I hope I get an invite to dance on their grave.

 

The RIAA taking away $2,000 from a family living in the projects. Laws are laws, but this disgusts me.

I guess I missed where being poor made it more OK to steal?

The better way would have been to forget their 'losses' and move on. There is no way in hell they are getting every penny retroactive to whatever. It's intirely unfair to sue people who abuse music services and not immediately pursue those who download one or two songs a month. And even that is unfair.


So if someone steals $20,000 from you and someone else steals $0.02 from you, you don't think its appropriate to go after the first person rather than the second?

If they want to be smart, they should press the government for VERY tough laws (not like they're doing it now; just not focusing on it)

They are working that. It IS possible to fight this battle on two fronts simultaneously.

How much is it costing the RIAA to litigate against all of these offenders?

Does it matter? They have the right to spend their money however they want. If they take a net loss on suing all those people, it was their decision. It's their music, they have the right to protect it, and people want to steal from them, they deal with the consequences.

 

She is a 12 year old for god's sicks!! She probably don't even know what the hell copyright is!!!

These RIAA people are making me sick!!

 

I thought that copyright restricted public use. I don't see anybody selling bootleg CDs. What's the difference between downloading an mp3 and taping a song off the radio, or taping a movie from TV?

 

In these cases, though, the monetary loss is merely theoretical. You can attach a value to it, but that value is not a value the copyright holder lost by having his work copied.

Not that it makes it right or legal, but I just don't think "stealing" is an appropriate term. Stealing, to me, implies that the owner was deprived of something. In these cases, that's only true in theory (assuming that had the person not been able to make the free copy, they would've purchased the music).

Still against the law, but when the loss is theoretical, it seems like the agents for the copyright holders could perhaps be a little more lenient, especially since there are public relations issues involved. They may very well be convincing people that file sharing is very wrong, but they're also sending the message that they're heartless bastards out for nothing more than a buck who would send their own mothers to death row if it meant preventing people from being able to copy music (and, the RIAA has shown an interest in preventing legal copies, as well).

 

I hate the RIAA. I hate them.

Oh, and Chuckles, your signature makes me chuckle .

 

I guess it will be off to the IP masking services....too bad for the RIAA, all they will catch are the people lagging behind the technology curve.

DD

 

my god, bad enough PR that their first batch of victims was a 12 year old in public housing.

But they still made them pay 2g's, even after that faux pas?

Is this man the president of the RIAA?

 

The 'airwaves' are free. You can sit and tape songs off the radio all day but you cannot download an MP3 that someone supplied you. If you want the song bad enough, either wait for the radio to play it and then tape it or go buy the CD.

 

In response to the RIAA's actions on this case (both the suit and the settlement), <a href="http://www.eff.org">I just joined the Electronic Frontier Foundation</a>. This weekend I'm going to write to my congressman, and see what else I can do. This is just ludicrous and flat out wrong on the RIAA's part.

BTW, I read on the <a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/09/10/0046257&mode=thread&tid=141&tid=188&tid=98&tid=99">/.</a> comments section that the girl should actually be covered over the Child Online Protection Act, as it's illegal to collect online information from a child under 13 on the web. I don't know if this is true or not, but it makes sense and just makes the RIAA look worse (as if that is possible!).