PDA

View Full Version : RIAA at it again...



Ntwotrance
01-21-2004, 12:55 PM
For those using LimeWire for your music file share the RIAA is currently targeting IPs of Limewire users.....:yuk:

Ntwotrance
01-21-2004, 01:25 PM
right now they seem to be only targeting high transfer users....

Ntwotrance
01-21-2004, 02:13 PM
both

HighRoller
01-21-2004, 02:18 PM
From what I heard they are targeting users with over 800 files and the emphasis is on the "sharing" part of it. These guys kill me. The top five record companies have been in collusion to keep album prices high for years and they wonder why people want to download stuff. These Aholes rival the oil companies with their greed!

mirvin
01-21-2004, 02:20 PM
No comment;)

boatnam2
01-21-2004, 02:23 PM
Hey marcus, its Goldy. Hey it was great to see you at my party you dawg.

rvrhlic
01-21-2004, 02:29 PM
they will only target you if you are sharing files. They cannot track you if you are only downloading there is no technology for they YET. If you use Kazza Lite ++ it give the whomever bad ip ranges so that IF you are targeted, they will get a bogus IP from your machine which your ISP cannot trace back to you.
There are a bunch of other bonuses using that particular program. I have been using it for about a month and i have not had to re-download a song ye because if was a spoof song.
rvrhlic

572Daytona
01-21-2004, 04:05 PM
From what I understand is that so far all of the lawsuits that they've filed have been against song sharers, not downloaders. I guess they figure if they dry up the source they won't have to worry about the downloaders anymore. But don't be so naive to believe thought that you can't be tracked if all you do is download. Spoofed IP or not you can still be tracked by your MAC address.
I also don't feel it is worth the risk, not only can you face civil fines it is also a criminal offense so you could be risking jail time. I simply refuse to buy any music whether I can download it or not. I was reading something last week that they have a new format of CD's that are copy protected so that you can't rip MP3's from the songs. Instead they are putting the .mp3 files encrypted on the CD in addition to to the normal audio track so you could load them to your MP3 player if need. Now the artists are whining saying they should be entitled twice the revenue for each CD sold since it has 2 of each song on it. :rolleyes:

PerfectionDtail
01-21-2004, 04:19 PM
Cant you keep making new folders that are only accessible to other users? That way you never have more than 50 songs others can share from. I don't know much about this, but if 800 is the #, then can't you just keep making new music folders and make the new folder, every time you make one, the only one with access to other users.
I am also assuming that if you only have 20-30 songs per folder and that it the one they go after you for, couldn't you just go buy the CD's and they have no case against you? In my mind, if you purchased the CD that the song is on, what difference does it make if you download it? Their whole argument is about not purchasing CD's isn't it, so if you actually have the CD, is there no case?

mirvin
01-21-2004, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by PerfectionDtail
I am also assuming that if you only have 20-30 songs per folder and that it the one they go after you for, couldn't you just go buy the CD's and they have no case against you? In my mind, if you purchased the CD that the song is on, what difference does it make if you download it? Their whole argument is about not purchasing CD's isn't it, so if you actually have the CD, is there no case?
Copyright/ Intellectual property laws state that you own a cd not the material on it. You can by law make yourself a copy but once you distribute it you've violated the law. ;)

572Daytona
01-21-2004, 04:54 PM
It isn't clear whether you are allowed to make a backup copy of a CD or an MP3 for you own personal use even if you own the CD. It is argued that it may fall under the fair use provisions of copyright law but it hasn't been tested. And if the record companies have there way it will be illegal to do even that. It is legal to record a copy of you music onto a casette tape since a special provision was made whereby every blank tape sold in the US has royalties built in that get paid back to the record companies.
In one of the earlier cases a women tried the argument that she owned the CD's but the RIAA was able to prove that some of the MP3's on here computer had originated on Napster as they compared to files that they had downloaded on Napster and archived. See the following: http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/7816

1stepcloser
01-21-2004, 05:00 PM
XM Radio
No hassle.

Mandelon
01-21-2004, 05:46 PM
I use winmx and quit sharing. Now I am only a taker, not a giver. :(

ssmike
01-21-2004, 09:30 PM
Originally posted by 1stepcloser
XM Radio
No hassle.
This is the best advice in the whole thread... :)
This whold debate comes down to how much someone is willing to RISK to download illegally.
Make no mistake that file sharing IS illegal. None of the clever arguments put forth on this board can dispute this.
(Believe me, I'm an attorney and have reviewed the DMCA)
Having said that, the chance that any one person will get sued and be forced to settle with the RIAA for $2-5K is slim.
But what is it worth? If I was sued, I could lose my law license and means of earning an income.........Not worth it for some stupid songs.
What are you going to risk to engage in this conduct??

schiada96
01-21-2004, 10:34 PM
Originally posted by ssmike
This is the best advice in the whole thread... :)
This whold debate comes down to how much someone is willing to RISK to download illegally.
Make no mistake that file sharing IS illegal. None of the clever arguments put forth on this board can dispute this.
(Believe me, I'm an attorney and have reviewed the DMCA)
Having said that, the chance that any one person will get sued and be forced to settle with the RIAA for $2-5K is slim.
But what is it worth? If I was sued, I could lose my law license and means of earning an income.........Not worth it for some stupid songs.
What are you going to risk to engage in this conduct??
I don't know if its worth it but over the years I've purchased a lot of music provided by the Riaa. And some of the crap that I bought on poor material has failed over the years Do I have to pay again for what I have allready? Being a attorney how would you know what I have paid for before or not. Where does fair use come into play here.