Posted on 07/04/2006 7:00:49 AM PDT by Fawn
Louise: "No these are not my songs." They are however downloaded right onto her computer.
Louise:"I was embarrassed when they gave me a print out of these songs."
She got this printout because of lawyers. She also got this letter telling her she was being sued for copyright infringement.
Parents, there are other popular file sharing programs you need to know about:
Morpheus: morpheus.com
Kazaa: www.kazaa.com
Bearshare: www.bearshare.com
Limewire: www.limewire.com
Louise: "I was in shock..I was stunned."
The letter is part of a music industry crackdown.Singers, songwriters and music companies tired of people downloading and burning copies of music without paying.
The letter to Louise says: "Copyright theft is not a victimless crime. Not just recording artists and songwriters but session players, sound engineers, cd plant workers, wharehouse personnel, record store clerks...that depend on sale of recordings to earn a living."
Louise: "I didn't intentionally try to take money from these people...I didn't know what was going on!"
Louise says it was her 16 year old doing the downloading. But that doesn't matter--these lawyers are offering to settle for a price.
Louise: "3700....I dont have 3700."
But Louise has to pay even though she had no idea, this music has been hanging around on her harddrive. Louise says her son didn't know that downloading the songs was illegal either but because she didn't take the music industry's first settlement offer the price has now gone up: 4500 or they will take her to court.
Interestingly enough, during our investigating today, we found the country of Austrailia has banned the use of Kazaa. And guess where Kazaa's parent company is located?
You guessed it! Sydney, Australia.
Cost under $10...
Are you saying that the bands were not allowed to play or cover popular songs? It all had to be original music? Just about every bar I've been in with a band is covering popular songs, have a few friends that are players and have never heard this.
Thats right!!!!!!
Your points regarding copyright are correct. However, I dispute the notion that copyright protection voids the legal rights of an individual that the RIAA decides to target. See my post 116.
I do feel that even though they have the right to protect their material, the solution is not the present approach. Being in the right will not protect the industry from changes in technology. They must figure ways to adapt and cash in on these changes. Suing the crap out of a lot of people is not going to further their long term interests.
Friend of my stepped in front of a car that was supposed to yield the right of way to the pedestrian. The car almost didn't stop. His rational was that he had the legal right of way at that intersection. My comment was, yep you are right. You could very well be dead right. Is it worth it?
The RIAA is not going to win the war this way.
That's not The ONLY thing they(The Music Industry)don't know about!!!!
Sheeet. I get a letter telling me not to erase files on my drive, what is the first thing I am going to do?
The FBI sends a letter to a congressman telling him to save all files for them to look at, you can hear the shredder a block away.
None of which addresses my point. The person being forced to prove a negative: that they did not DL music.
Why the attempt at personal insult? FYI, I long ago stopped confusing my music with making money. I play for the love of the instrument and because I love music. I generate income stream in other ways.
As far as Peabody is concerned, you don't know what you are talking about.
You are changing the subject. What is being discussed is the purloining of recorded music, not these other side issues you have mentioned.
Nonsense!
Quality has nothing to do with it; the crime is making the copyrighted intellectual property freely available for unlicensed distribution - that very simple point seems impossible for some folks to get a grip on. It isn't the music, it isn't the copying, it isn't the listening, its the illegal distribution.
How does this help?
Thanks mom. Really I subscribe to the philosophy that you donwnload at your own risk. If you're careful, and don't share your music directly (Kazaa, etc.) then you're pretty well safe from lawsuits. Plus the normal stuff, hardware firewalls, virus protection etc.
Some artists and some of my favourite artists actually LIKE the fact that their music is being downloaded (i.e. Our Lady Peace). They just want their music to be heard.
My ethics are my concern, if you'd like to continue to question my conservatism let's take it to PM.
"We quit playing the radio in the public areas of our business because of this potential extortion. We also switched to NOAA weather radio, in place of music on hold. I have enough paperwork, license fees, and regulations to deal with. No need to expose myself to more."
Yes...God forbid one of your customers hear a catchy tune in your business on the radio and then decide to go buy the CD.
They should consider it free advertising.
If a company develops a color, why not lease it out? Aren't all creators equal or or some more equal than others?
A song writer is no different than a color designer, or a photographer as they are all artists, why shouldn't they all be compensated for public showings of their property?
The RIAA are thugs. I don't download music either.
I am appalled at the stupidity of the RIAA. I could go on for a long time about how they creatd the problem and how they use thug means. I won't. I don't need to. Everyone, even you already knows all this.
BTW if you're having trouble selling songs, blame the RIAA. They're making it harder and harder for you.
Sounds like he has reasonable grounds to sue for restraint of trade. (IANAL)
"Congratulations to each of you for your tortured situational ethics.
The folks at DU would be proud.
The people who get tagged for these fines deserve it, period."
-- --
In all that little, whining, crybaby, tantrum-throwing grandstanding of yours, I didn't see you even once discredit or disprove any of my assertions.
No kidding! Makes those songs $0.09...or even a quarter, make sure whole catalogs are available and they'll see hundreds of my $$$$$!
If you remember the rationalization for this was to keep Mickey Mouse from being exploited in evil ways.
I can tell you for a fact during WW II there were plenty of Mickey & Minnie porno mini comics around.
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.