Posted on 02/06/2005 10:39:00 AM PST by seacapn
Evelyn won't return my phone calls.
So that means she's ignoring me. Or she wants to talk to me, but can't, because the Recording Industry Association of America won't let her.
In December, Evelyn found out she had been targeted by the RIAA in its ever increasing crusade against children, mothers and senior citizens who don't uncheck the "share" option in their peer-to-peer downloading software.
The Daily Texan office received Evelyn's call on the last press day before winter break. She had received a notice from Time Warner stating that they were subpoenaed into releasing her personal information in a New York federal court.
Included in the document was a number to a settlement center where they told her they had counted 956 shared files. If she had 457 less files, then she might have been overlooked by the RIAA, she was told. The company was sending her a packet of settlement documents, and she had 90 days to respond, lest her "Jane Doe" case be upgraded to her real name in court.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailytexanonline.com ...
That's why God made Usenet...
I agree with your #1 post...but for the life of me can't understand what the problem is if they don't go after people with less than 500 shared d-loads. Put the stuff on cd for your own use and be done with it. Geez. Or am I missing something else here?
The RIAA represents the tail of an anachronistic industry. They can subpoena all they want- the future is in home recording and uploading and free distribution and online indie recording sales. They are so gone.
bump
I think the main problem is mistaken identity, or mistaken assertions of how many files were being shared, or mistaken ideas that the shared files are copywritten by the RIAA.
The RIAA's tactic to to intimidate first and hope for a settlement, even against innocent people. That's the fundamental issue.
It is so easy to delay and avoid lawsuits of this kind. People should just relax and explore their options.
wait, you mean that people shoudl be able to take the work of others and distribute it without compensation... that would do wonders to our capitalist system. That article was pathetic and incredibly slanted.
The problem is the way the lawsuits are filed. If 'Josh Smith' steals your car, you can't just file suits against every Josh Smith in the phone book and threaten them until they give you money. That's extortion, which is what the RIAA is doing.
And in my opinion, when the artist is only getting 1-3% (if that's not right, it's close) from sales, then it would seem it's the record companies who are the main offenders and THEY are the ones hurting the capitalism of our country. Contracts be damned. It's a rip for the artists.
And you, of course, are completely unaware that to using the free republic means doing just that (if you believe tort lawyers that is). Look, integrity is putting your values and actions in harmony -having them integrated. Criticizing others for copying, while doing the same shows lack of integrity.
The music mafia is probably a lot more accurate than you'd want to admit.............
Does the RIAA know if the shared files contain copyrighted material?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.