NEWSFLASH: ILLEGAL TO RIP CDS TO COMPUTER

[Guest]

wrong. you are expected to re-purchase the cd every time it deteriorates... you are stealing money out of their pocket every time you backup your own music collection.
Also, if you wish to listen to your music on any other device than a cd player. you must pay for it again for what ever format you require. No Converting your music, yet again your stealing money out of their pockets!....


One of these days the RIAA is going to bite off more than it can chew. and i will be there laughing at them.

I hope you are joking cause this isn't at all correct.

 

[Guest]

What you all REALLY need to be asking yourselves is how many of those RIAA bastards have MP3 players of their own? ;p

LoL this has to be one of the funiest yet true statements I've read in a while =P

 

[bobbknight]

Ya know when all this suing stuff started I just stopped buying music.
I have a radio, and internet radio, and streaming stuff everywhere.
Who needs to buy music.

 

[warezme]

why people even use p2p....? lame

 

[righteous]

dragabain is correct.

And even if it became "illegal".
After I buy something I'll do whatever the hell I want with it.
The RIAA can kiss my italian anus.

But additionally, if something is available for download, and I want it, I'll download it. They can kiss my ass. If anyone, it's the distributor who is the guilty party, not the downloader.

You can't fault people for downloading anything that is free and available. They use the words "material" and "property" like it's tangible. It's neither. Momma didn't raise no fool.

If it's available, I'm taking it.

If one of us were to invent some type of encryption that makes sharing impossible and it was sitting on someone's server available to them, you can bet your azz they's be taking it, so download whatever you want while you can, and don't be scared of them!!!! They want you to be scared. If you run scared every time they say something new, they win. If you don't, all they do is waste their futile efforts.

Let's not forget that most of this crap is record company driven, and they are complete parasites that screw their artists big to begin with.
Screw them back!

 

[ausch30]

I was just reading a story in the latest issue of CPU where in the 1800's all the English stagecoach companies went to Parliment and protested the new fangled Automobiles for being unsafe and the government agreed and restricted speeds to 4MPH along with other restrictions. The point being that companies always resist changes which effect their current business model rather than changing with the times.

I have had a number of CD's made unusable over the years due to various causes some of which I've bought more than once and now I rip all my CD's to my hard drive so they are safely put away. I don't use and P2P program to share my music or burn discs to give away or sell so in my view there is nothing illegal about what I'm doing. I would love to see how many expensive Disney videos or Shrek videos have been destroyed by children and I can't see any logical argument against allowing the parents the tools to make copies to preserve the original disks.

Unfortunatly the individuals the RIAA and MPAA are picking on are of limited means and the average joe has yet to rise up and fight back. There should be some kind of class action suit against the record and movie companies where we can use our collective power to give us the right do use the media we paid for whatever way we want.

 

[Guest]

dragabain is correct.

And even if it became "illegal".
After I buy something I'll do whatever the hell I want with it.
The RIAA can kiss my italian anus.

But additionally, if something is available for download, and I want it, I'll download it. They can kiss my ass. If anyone, it's the distributor who is the guilty party, not the downloader.

You can't fault people for downloading anything that is free and available. They use the words "material" and "property" like it's tangible. It's neither. Momma didn't raise no fool.

If it's available, I'm taking it.

If one of us were to invent some type of encryption that makes sharing impossible and it was sitting on someone's server available to them, you can bet your azz they's be taking it, so download whatever you want while you can, and don't be scared of them!!!! They want you to be scared. If you run scared every time they say something new, they win. If you don't, all they do is waste their futile efforts.

Let's not forget that most of this crap is record company driven, and they are complete parasites that screw their artists big to begin with.
Screw them back!

LoL ya I can tell by there oooooo so shabby lifestyles they are in Dire times... poor poor music industry and artists. I /cry for them...

NOT !!!

 

[shadowmaster625]

soon it will be illegal to turn off your tv

 

[ausch30]

soon it will be illegal to turn off your tv

It's interesting you said that because they are also fighting against DVR's and the ability to fast forward through commercials. One of the reasons for the cancellation of the TV show "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" was that their prime demographic upper mid to high income families which had DVR's and used them to bypass the shows commercials, the advertising companies complained about the money they were paying for the ad's no one was watching. This is one of the reasons there are more "reality" shows on television than anything else, because they cater to lower income families which are less likely to have DVR's therefore less likely to be able to avoid commercials and the networks recieve larger amounts of advertising money.

 

[engrpiman]

What is a shared folder? I do not have any shared folders but I can access 100% of the files on all 3 hard drives on my desktop from my linux notebook. Does that count ?

 

[chyort]

I hope you are joking cause this isn't at all correct.

clearly

 

[rgeist554]

MPAA Pwned

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060124-6036.html

...
Dick later learned that the MPAA made copies of the film to distribute them to its employees, despite the MPAA's stance on unauthorized copying. Ah, there's nothing like the smell of hypocrisy in the morning—apparently the prohibition against copying films without the copyright owner's consent doesn't apply to the MPAA. A lawyer for the MPAA justified the organization's apparent hypocrisy by saying that Dick had invaded the privacy of some MPAA staffers, which justified the MPAA's actions.
...

and...

www.break.com/index/mpaa-illegally-copies-filmmakers-movie.html

:lol: Hypocrites.

 

[Guest]

It's interesting you said that because they are also fighting against DVR's and the ability to fast forward through commercials. One of the reasons for the cancellation of the TV show "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" was that their prime demographic upper mid to high income families which had DVR's and used them to bypass the shows commercials, the advertising companies complained about the money they were paying for the ad's no one was watching. This is one of the reasons there are more "reality" shows on television than anything else, because they cater to lower income families which are less likely to have DVR's therefore less likely to be able to avoid commercials and the networks recieve larger amounts of advertising money.

They are going to have to do advertising through TV show / movie Integration all the time if they want to plug in their products

LoL... ouch we are gonna be forced to watch shows with 25% built in commercials. But on the other hand there will be no more commercials... oooh but wait, no more beer and washroom breaks....

 

[bombasschicken]

Anyone notice that the RIAA is making a "Landmark" case from someone who shared 54 songs?? I litteraly have 20,000+ songs on my drive. I KNOW there are people out there with 10x that. And they went after some little guy with 54 songs, you would think they would track down someone like me right? Espically if this is going to be 'the case' that desides this...

 

[spaztic7]

I have a belly button.

 

[pkquat]

Someone needs to counter sue. I can honestly say that over half my purchases were the result of someone sharing a tape (a long long time ago), CD, or MP3. I listened to it and liked it, so I bought it to support the artist. I should get "credit" for those because if I never heard them I would not have purchased them. I have also told friends about various CD's etc thus advertising a promoting which I never got paid for.

I also just thought the radio stations do not pay full fare for each CD or song they play. They only pay a fraction of it, and sometimes that fee is paid by the record company to help promote the song or CD.

I'd pay maybe 10 cents a song extra at most - $1.00 per CD to make copies for personal use. That would not be too un reasonable, but as others have posted they RIAA is essentially encouraging people to pirate or purchase music not under their control. The only people that loose are the artists.

 

[warezme]

I have a belly button.

LOL!

mine is overclocked with lint...., oh wait thats overstuffed with lint

 

[TyroneShoelaces]

why people even use p2p....? lame

Sorry, I just found this comment funny... since his/her username is "warezme".

-TyShoe

 

[Rew017]

To the numerous posts referencing the RIAA going after any one of the hardware or software companies that produce technology to make this possible, there is already a legal precedent set. A precedent that makes legal action against hardware or software companies unlikely. While I hate referencing wikipedia, it is a good summary of the information in this case:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._of_America_v._Universal_City_Studios,_Inc.

However, since then the DMCA (digital millennium copyright act) has made some modifications that could effect interpretation of the betamax case and fair use. In order for any of the afformentioned companies to be held liable, it must be shown that the "intended use, or only significant commercial use, is to bypass an access or copy control put in place by a copyright owner." This was tested in court in the cases against napster, grokster, and others. It remains to be seen how effectively this could be applied against hardware companies in court presently.

As to suing the individual for ripping files onto his computer, I am assuming that their arguement is he needed to bypass copyright control put in place by the copyright holder in order to do this. According to the DMCA, this is now illegal. If this legal battle is successful, it is foreseeable that the RIAA could target the manufacturers or software providers that made this activity possible.

 

[cardio]

And don't hum any music you've bought either. Someone who doesn't own that CD might hear it.

 

[Guest]

And don't hum any music you've bought either. Someone who doesn't own that CD might hear it.

LoL humming would be illegal since it is just another format of the original music. You could be sued.

 

[enewmen]

they would have trouble suing microsoft, apple, etc for including software for ripping CD's

I will love to see the RIAA try to sue microsoft, apple, samsung, sony, etc.
As others have said..

 

[enewmen]

:lol: They can NEVER stop people from pirating.... NEVER.... hackers are always finding ways to break copyrights, etc.

PS: Just run Linux + Proxy + IP Blocker. Gotta love Linux

Actually Microsoft and others have tried to stop mass piracy on large organizations in various countries before. The outcome was they just started legally using free Linux and Star Office. Microsort withdrew.

 

[tamalero]

the problem is, RIIA MPAA lawyers + stupid judges = more stupid legal abusive behavior.

remember the case where the "RAM" (as in memory)
was claimed to be "proof" by ajudge and that it shouldnt be erased? XD

 

[Whiznot]

If ripping CDs is a crime why doesn't the RIAA try to have providers of DAE software prosecuted. Obviously Bill Gates and Steve Jobs should go straight to jail without passing Go.