Posted on 02/06/2007 9:17:22 AM PST by dbehsman
In its running legal battle against unauthorized downloaders, five recording companies have sued an Augusta man in federal court claiming he illegally pirated and shared copyrighted music.
Scott Hinds, 23, is a defendant in one of a number of lawsuits by Recording Industry of America affiliates seeking to halt illegal sharing of copyrighted songs -- a once-widespread practice some maintain was "fair use," encouraged by certain computer software.
As artists attempt to regain control of their music -- and reap profits from sales -- recording industry spokeswoman Amanda Hunter said 18,000 individuals have been sued in similar lawsuits since September 2003, but Hinds is one of only six defendants in Maine.
(Excerpt) Read more at morningsentinel.mainetoday.com ...
The RIAA doesn't have a clue. Suing your consumer base is always a great idea. /s
They are a mile wide and an inch deep.
The top ten or so albums for the year are majors. The rest are indie labels.
The indies continue to grow, and the 'majors' continue to shrink. Eventually, you'll have to rename them.
Huh-wha? What does the recording idustry have to do with the artists having control over their music. If anything, the RIAA has been working on stripping the artists of their rights and control. Stealing the music is bad - but don't pretend that the RIAA is protecting the writers, singers and musicians.
Or, MAFIAA for short.
The article goes on to say that the man in question downloaded 5 songs. And for each song he is facing a $750 fine.
Isn't that a little extreme? If someone stole a candy bar from a store, should the store try to extort $750 from the thief? Who would be the worse thief in that case? The person who tried to steal a candy bar, or the stores lawyer who tries to steal $750 from the thief?
Imagine that. Copyright holders wanting their copyrights enforced. What an outrage.
Here is a useful link, the top 100 non-RIAA albums:
http://www.riaaradar.com/zeitgeist_topamazonsafe.asp
Of course, there are those who will think it puzzling this is a .asp.....
Works for me. Next time he can get out the crowbar, pry open his wallet, and pay the exorbitant sum of 89 cents and buy the damn song.
He broke Federal Law, haul him into Federal court and have him pay up.
If he doesn't respect our Federal Laws over property, perhaps China is a more accomodating place for the activites he engages in.
http://music.download.com/
All free, all legal.
Do you think he'd be likely to do it again if it was only a $25 fine?
The RIAA needs to be broken up with an antitrust suit. Until that day, only buy independent music. Hit them in the pocketbook.
Paying $.89 for a song? Is that too much to ask?
BTW, I'm a music publisher.
I don't disagree with that premise. I advise anyone who has written original songs NOT to let them get out of his/her own control (i.e. distributed by another publisher). That way, the songwriter gets a higher percentage of the deserved royalties.
If they don't give the rights to the RIAA cartel, they can't get on the radio, which is in bed with the record companies in a payola scam. And if they can't get on the radio, they can't have a career. Both the stations and the RIAA know that. So they loan the artists tons of money to record, front a small amount of payola to get them airplay, and drop them like a bad habit if they don't instantly hit. Then they're in debt to the record cartel for more than they can ever pay back, and more often than not, the cartel controls the songs. And they say WE'RE stealing? I think not.
So for 10 songs 10 bucks? Nope, too much. When CD albums are 5 bucks I'd be glad to start buying them again.
Oh, and generate some decent music.
I can't stand these people who steal music.
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.