Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

RIAA To Sue Individual's for File Sharing (This could mean you!!!!)
Miami Herald ^ | 06/25/2003 | Ted Bridis

Posted on 06/25/2003 6:15:06 PM PDT by jimmccleod

Music Labels Step Up Internet Piracy Hunt
TED BRIDIS
Associated Press

WASHINGTON - The embattled music industry disclosed plans Wednesday for an unprecedented escalation in its fight against Internet piracy, threatening to sue hundreds of individual computer users who illegally share music files online.

The Recording Industry Association of America, citing significant sales declines, said it will begin Thursday to search Internet file-sharing networks to identify music fans who offer "substantial" collections of MP3 song files for downloading.

It expects to file at least several hundred lawsuits seeking financial damages within eight to 10 weeks.

Executives for the RIAA, the Washington-based lobbying group that represents major labels, would not say how many songs on a user's computer might qualify for a lawsuit. The new campaign comes just weeks after U.S. appeals court rulings requiring Internet providers to identify subscribers suspected of illegally sharing music and movie files.

The RIAA's president, Cary Sherman, said tens of millions of Internet users of popular file-sharing software after Thursday will expose themselves to "the real risk of having to face the music." He said the RIAA plans only to file lawsuits against Internet users in the United States.

"It's stealing. It's both wrong and illegal," Sherman said. Alluding to the court decisions, Sherman said Internet users who believe they can hide behind an alias online are mistaken. "You are not anonymous," Sherman said. "We're going to begin taking names."

Shopping at a Virgin Megastore in San Francisco, Jason Yoder was planning to delete file-sharing software he uses from his home computer because of the new lawsuit threat. He acknowledged using the Internet recently to find a copy of a rare 1970s soul recording, but he agreed that illegal downloads should be curtailed.

"It's sort of like a serial drunk driver has to have their license taken away at some point," said Yoder, 30.

Sharman Networks Ltd., which makes the popular Kazaa software and operates one of the world's largest file-sharing networks, said in a statement, "It is unfortunate that the RIAA has chosen to declare war on its customers by engaging in protracted and expensive litigation." Sharman said it was interested in a business relationship with music labels and could protect their songs from illegal downloads using technology.

Country songwriter Hugh Prestwood, who has worked with Randy Travis, Trisha Yearwood and Jimmy Buffett, likened the RIAA's effort to a roadside police officer on a busy highway.

"It doesn't take too many tickets to get everybody to obey the speed limit," Prestwood said.

Critics accused the RIAA of resorting to heavy-handed tactics likely to alienate millions of Internet file-sharers.

"This latest effort really indicates the recording industry has lost touch with reality completely," said Fred von Lohmann, a lawyer for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Does anyone think more lawsuits are going to be the answer? Today they have declared war on the American consumer."

Sherman disputed that consumers, who are gradually turning to legitimate Web sites to buy music legally, will object to the industry's latest efforts against pirates.

"You have to look at exactly who are your customers," he said. "You could say the same thing about shoplifters - are you worried about alienating them? All sorts of industries and retailers have come to the conclusion that they need to be able to protect their rights. We have come to the same conclusion."

Mike Godwin of Public Knowledge, a consumer group that has challenged broad crackdowns on file-sharing networks, said Wednesday's announcement was appropriate because it targeted users illegally sharing copyrighted files.

"I'm sure it's going to freak them out," Godwin said. "The free ride is over." He added: "I wouldn't be surprised if at least some people engaged in file-trading decide to resist and try to find ways to thwart the litigation strategy."

The entertainment industry has gradually escalated its fight against piracy. The RIAA has previously sued four college students it accused of making thousands of songs available for illegal downloading on campus networks. But Wednesday's announcement was the first effort to target users who offer music on broadly accessible, public networks.

The Motion Picture Association of America said it supported the efforts, but notably did not indicate it plans to file large numbers of civil lawsuits against Internet users who trade movies online.

MPAA Chief Jack Valenti said in a statement it was "our most sincere desire" to find technology solutions to protect digital copies of movies.

Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., who has proposed giving the entertainment industry new powers to disrupt downloads of pirated music and movies, said the RIAA's actions were overdue. "It's about time," Berman said in a statement. "For too long ... file-traffickers have robbed copyright creators with impunity."

The RIAA said its lawyers will file lawsuits initially against people with the largest collections of music files they can find online. U.S. copyright laws allow for damages of $750 to $150,000 for each song offered illegally on a person's computer, but Sherman said the RIAA will be open to settlement proposals from defendants.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Technical
KEYWORDS: bearshare; filesharing; grokster; kazaa; limewire; morpheus; music; napster; riaa
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 321-337 next last
To: BkBinder
is an individual in violation of the law if: a)that individual offers for download copyrighted music; and, b)owns legal copies of each song that he offers for that download?

Yes. The law prohibits unauthorized distribution of copyrighted work. Owning a legal copy does not change that.

21 posted on 06/25/2003 6:43:59 PM PDT by wizzler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: wizzler
Thanks!!
22 posted on 06/25/2003 6:45:19 PM PDT by BkBinder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: BkBinder
Yer welcome!
23 posted on 06/25/2003 6:45:59 PM PDT by wizzler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ReagansShinyHair
However, how would they ever proove that it was me who downloaded the songs? Any guest could have come over, used my computer to check their email, and downloaded some songs that I don't have legal CDs to. There is absolutely no way for them to prove that it was a particular person.

They will use the same court-approved reasoning that the feds use in the failed war on drugs. It's your computer, your house, your internet connection...therefore your house, computer and anything connected to it will be thiers to take from you. Whether or not you actually DID anything wrong is of no concern...welcome to 21st century Amerika.

24 posted on 06/25/2003 6:52:46 PM PDT by Orangedog (Soccer-Moms are the biggest threat to your freedoms and the republic !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: wizzler
The law prohibits unauthorized distribution of copyrighted work. Owning a legal copy does not change that.

OK, I have a file server at home and keep available my whole collection of music so that when I am at work, i can type in my static IP address and listen to my own music. That way the employer doesn't get mad about streaming audio, and I don't have to worry about co-workers pilfering my original CDs.

Am I in violation?

Unbeknownst to me, some doofus's web crawler discovers my hoard of MP3's and moments later is publishing my IP address on his website. Soon thousands of ne're do wells are maxing out the bandwidth of my personal home webserver. Will I be sucessfully sued or will I just be pissed off because I am having a devil of a time retrieving my own files to listen that afternoon?

25 posted on 06/25/2003 6:55:59 PM PDT by Dr Warmoose (Just don't leave any brass with your fingerprints on it behind, OK?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: jimmccleod
This is an open invitation to the RIAA: Go ahead. Sue me for downloading music. I will get a lawyer that will prove your case so blatently foolish that it will immediately be thrown out of court. Will you're at it, why don't you ban CD-RW's, DVD-Writers, and most importantly, my TIVO unit. You people are a joke. Why don't you just admit it and get it over with: The RIAA (yes, that means you, the RIAA) is a greedy money grubbing organization that is going downhill fast. Unfortunately, it's not going downhill over file trading. It's going downhill because CD's are so G'dam expensive. Even so, I still buy CD's of my favorite artists, and I buy a lot of them, and MP3's usually help me initiate these purchases. The steps you are taking now is a company's feverishly last resort to save itself. It won't work. It will just continue to make you look like the bad guys, and the money grubbing organization that you are. In fact, you remind me of the Democrats.
26 posted on 06/25/2003 6:56:47 PM PDT by rs79bm (Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jhoffa_
GOOD!

I'll dance a jig of glee when the lawyers eventually turn on you for some assinine reason! $150,000 for having one mp3 on your PC?! A SONG?! Get a grip, Gustov...no one likes file-nazi's.
27 posted on 06/25/2003 6:57:03 PM PDT by Orangedog (Soccer-Moms are the biggest threat to your freedoms and the republic !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rs79bm
Just curious: Do you know what the RIAA is?
28 posted on 06/25/2003 6:58:16 PM PDT by wizzler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: wizzler
It's the Recording Industry Association of America. And thanks for asking. Just curious, are you one of their representatives?
29 posted on 06/25/2003 7:00:16 PM PDT by rs79bm (Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog

There's nothing "assinine" about busting thieves.

Personally, I don't care if it's a million bucks and your right eye..

Just don't steal and you'll be fine.

30 posted on 06/25/2003 7:01:37 PM PDT by Jhoffa_ (Hey you kids, get off my lawn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: jimmccleod
I just download, don't share. I am fine according to this.
31 posted on 06/25/2003 7:04:48 PM PDT by rwfromkansas ("There is dust enough on some of your Bibles to write 'damnation' with your fingers." C.H. Spurgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jhoffa_
I'll bet you were the kid in 6th grade English class who always reminded the teacher on Friday afternoon that she forgot to assign homework, aren't you?
32 posted on 06/25/2003 7:05:04 PM PDT by Orangedog (Soccer-Moms are the biggest threat to your freedoms and the republic !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: wizzler
U.S. copyright laws allow for damages of $750 to $150,000 for each song offered illegally on a person's computer, but Sherman said the RIAA will be open to settlement proposals from defendants.

So does this mean they are going after the uploaders or the downloaders? What if you only have a few MP3's on your computer, and you're not actually sharing those files, per se?
33 posted on 06/25/2003 7:05:18 PM PDT by rs79bm (Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Jhoffa_
I just love these threads..

"But, but.. It's supposed to be about the music.. "man" and my like, uh.. "RIGHT" to it and stuff. I have a god given right to steal this because I want it! I want it! Do you hear me? And it's so easy, it doesn't feel like stealing.. So, there! And if you don't like it, then something's wrong with you.. because like, everyone's doing it.. "man" And those recording people, like, have "too much" money "man" And, yeah.. I'm a Conservative. Conservatives steal too, right?"

34 posted on 06/25/2003 7:05:51 PM PDT by Jhoffa_ (Hey you kids, get off my lawn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog
They will use the same court-approved reasoning that the feds use in the failed war on drugs.

Except computers are not illegal to own, and computers are often shared. It's not the same as drugs, where you would most likely have known that they were in your house/car/purse. How would you be expected to know if someone downloaded a few songs and left them on there for someone to share? It's not as though everyone checks that every day.

35 posted on 06/25/2003 7:05:58 PM PDT by ReagansShinyHair
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Henrietta
I made a point in another thread about this, I'll repeat it briefly here.

I believe all artists and writers should be protected from plagiarism, which is itself a form of fraud. I think that they should be protected from ALTERATIONS of their work, so that the book or song can be reasonably be believed to be the original intent of the artist(except for satire.)

I do not believe it was the intent of the Founders or the accepted knowledge at the time that you have unlimited control over your art-form even after it is completed.

The RIAA is a cartel, and seeks the power of the State to enforce its cartel status. The artists DO have control over their product, all the way to electronic transfer. No one on P2P systems claims that they are the original artist, nor do they perpetrate fraud(the only ones that do are the RIAA plants that put out altered files), nor do they profit or even sell the files.

The files are simply copied data. I don't believe the artist or the RIAA has the right to control even IT technology with intellectual copyright laws. I don't see how that was their intent.
36 posted on 06/25/2003 7:06:40 PM PDT by Skywalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #37 Removed by Moderator

To: Jhoffa_; Orangedog
No, actually I was the kid who would toss you down the stairs for remarks like that..

Prone to acts of violence, yes, thievery, never.

38 posted on 06/25/2003 7:11:09 PM PDT by new cruelty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: rs79bm
It's the Recording Industry Association of America. And thanks for asking. Just curious, are you one of their representatives?

No, actually, I'm not. I see you've posted quite a bit about Hillary Clinton's book. Are you on her staff?

I asked if you knew what the RIAA is because you called it a company, as well as "a money-grubbing organization." The RIAA is not a company; it is a nonprofit trade group.

39 posted on 06/25/2003 7:11:14 PM PDT by wizzler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Jhoffa_
But, but.. It's supposed to be about the music.. "man" and my like, uh.. "RIGHT" to it and stuff. I have a god given right to steal this because I want it!

Hypothetical: What if I went out and bought a couple dozen CD's, and converted all those to MP3 format on my home computer, because I like the ease of use of playing them on my Real Audio or Windows media player. (Keep in mind that I bought these CD's). Subsequently, I now have about 80 MP3's on my home computer, which I made from the twelve CD's I purchased. Now, here's my point that would hold up in court anyday: If I can show proof that I own these CD's, then how can the RIAA sue me for liability damages? I don't think they can. Let's bring up another point. What if I downloaded a certain song from a sharing program, or what have you, listened to the song, and then went out and bought the CD. Would the RIAA disapprove of this?
40 posted on 06/25/2003 7:14:45 PM PDT by rs79bm (Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 321-337 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson