RIAA takes a shot at hacking

[jivie]

I'm sure many of you have already came across this article at ZDNET, but for those who haven't, you should take a look.

http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/stor...818346,00.html

I'm proud to say that I haven't bought a CD from any lable who is a member of the RIAA for almost 2 years now.

Do a little research and you'll find that we already pay royalties for copied CDs in the form of a tax, the RIAA was found guilty of price fixing, they are currently in legal battles with 28 states, sales have increased over the past years even though they claim otherwise and they continue to leverage their control of copyrights to wipe out or buy out competition (can you say mp3.com and napster).

[elSicomoro]

I'm not sure how I feel about the whole music-swapping deal. Granted, you can copy music on cassettes (and now burn CDs) from your friends. The computer is just another way of swapping that music.

At the same time, the artists work hard to make that music. The record companies (in most cases) pay for the studio time to record, promotions, etc. Those things cost money. Money rightfully owed.

However, going after music swappers as if they were terrorists is absolutely ridiculous. If anything, prosecute them as thieves for crying out loud.

You know, this wasn't that big of a stink until someone nabbed a rough copy of Metallica's "I Disappear." I mean, it wasn't even released yet. I wonder if they ever figured out who did it.

I'll continue to buy CDs at a store (preferably at Best Buy since they tend to be cheaper there). I like having a good CD and the artwork to go with it. I'm willing to pay $13-15 for that.

[vsp]

Best Buy, my left buttock. If you're going to buy CDs, get them from your local music stores instead of from a chain. It helps ensure that there ARE local music store alternatives out there.

jeff. who'll pay a little more to find a more eclectic selection on the shelves...

[jivie]

true. some people do enjoy the actual merchandise itself (artwork, etc.). but I would like to suggest this, buy the CD you've been wanting through eBay or half.com. you'll save a lot and if you buy from someone with high feedback, you'll get exactly what you was looking for.

or even better, support your local mom & pop used CD store. you'll get better service too.

btw...acutally, the artist is usually responsible for studio time, artwork, promotions, etc.

read this letter from Courtney Love sent to her peers
http://www.boycott-riaa.com/courtney.html

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by jivie
true. some people do enjoy the actual merchandise itself (artwork, etc.). but I would like to suggest this, buy the CD you've been wanting through eBay or half.com. you'll save a lot and if you buy from someone with high feedback, you'll get exactly what you was looking for.

Too risky IMO. Especially in these times. I'm not saying that people on either are all fraudulent, but caveat emptor.

or even better, support your local mom & pop used CD store. you'll get better service too.

Originally posted by vsp
Best Buy, my left buttock. If you're going to buy CDs, get them from your local music stores instead of from a chain. It helps ensure that there ARE local music store alternatives out there.

Jeff, don't think I'm all gooey over Best Buy. I like getting name CDs at Best Buy b/c they tend to be cheaper and it's easy to get to (5 minutes from my house). I love indie stores. Although the service is less than good at times, I enjoy the stores on South Street. I wish I knew of some in this area. If you (or anyone else) know any here in the Far NE/Lower Bucks/Lower Montgomery county area, please let me know.

Originally posted by jivie
btw...acutally, the artist is usually responsible for studio time, artwork, promotions, etc.

In most cases, they get an advance from the record company (e.g. Axl Rose was supposedly given a $10 million advance for the new GnR record). When I lived in St. Louis, Pale Divine was one of the first bands there to get signed to a major (Atlantic). I don't know all the details in their case, but apparently, they had to sell x amount of CDs to break even. The album (which I didn't think was that great anyway) did not fare well, and the band supposedly owed money. They wound up breaking up a few years later.

Courtney's letter is compelling; however, I would say that some of that has to do with her own record label. Several artists have had beefs with Geffen (Courtney Love, Don Henley, Neil Young) and Universal/Vivendi in general (some of the artists cut during the Universal/Polygram merger, The The). Granted, there are probably examples for almost all of them. But if anything, that letter stirs up a conundrum. Do you say "F**k the RIAA!" and go mp3 happy (where no one gets any dough), or do you say, "Gotta buy it!" b/c the artists get SOME money from it?

Touring tends to be the best money maker for bands. Trent apparently kept NIN alive during his battle with TVT by touring quite a bit between 1990-92.

[russotto]

The RIAA is scum, no doubt. But compared to That Mouse Company, they are total pikers. Yeah, the RIAA wants to hack into your computer. But Mouse Co. wants to control all computers:

http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?...46&mode=thread

If MouseCo wins this one, I'm rooting for the Florida Wildfires, the California Mudslides, and the French Truckers next time they come near those theme parks.

BTW, anyone see "The Emperor's New Groove" on ABC? All the commercials, the show, and the network were owned by the same company. When you can do that, you've got serious money.

[mbpark]

Or buy your albums on eBay, since many smaller record stores now sell on there, like the one I bought from for many years, Positively Records, aka posrec@aol.com.

They sell good stuff. And they can order whatever you want.

I avoid HMV, Tower, Best Buy, and the rest of the chains like the plague. Then again, the Sam Goody I used to go to had a lot of people who used the music-sharing to get the latest releases. Heck, PCM used to employ a software pirate guy.

I just buy from the smaller stores because:

a. They actually know you and order for you.
b. They actually know the music.
c. They have a wider selection and no Britney posters.

Mitch

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by russotto
The RIAA is scum, no doubt. But compared to That Mouse Company, they are total pikers. Yeah, the RIAA wants to hack into your computer. But Mouse Co. wants to control all computers

Do you think Walt ever envisioned this?

[jaguar]

A: fear the SSSCA, for if it passes it stands to be 1000x more damaging than the DMCA and virtually outlaws OSS software.

B: Recording companies fuck artists. They force them to produce X number of cds, make them shoulder much of the cost often and take much more than 50% of the profit.

The advent of digital movies/music/books/whatever is interesting because it changes the fundamental basis our economy works on. Supply and demand. Finite supply means it is valuable because there is a limited amount of it available, to make a book you need X meters of paper etc. Finite resources are needed to make a product.

Along comes digital (yes I know it has nothing to do with DIGITAL technology itself, it’s just a convenient title). It is possible to make 1000000 copies of a song without using any finite resources, sure electricity is used but that is in the end about it, and that is infinite.

What the RIAA haven't realized is that people are going to follow laws of economics and say well gee, if I can get this for free with no cost to anyone, why should I pay for it? Infinite supply = lower value.

It will be interesting; the RIAA is desperately trying to stop the flow of technology, because it’s going to hurt their bottom lines big-time, recent attempts are getting truly ridiculous such as trying to make them completely exempt from normal law for the purpose of protecting their copyright???

Yes the initial music creation etc costs money but beyond that there are no justifiable costs to producing digital music.

Eventfully prices will reach a new level, it'll take time with the movie and recording industries dragging their heels but it will happen.

Then along comes nanotech and it all starts again, with physical objects. *This* is the start of a new revolution.

I agree artists should be paid, I wish someone could invent a reasonable system where artists can encode songs directly, and release them somewhere when you pay for them directly; choose your tracks, no bullshit. Cut out the middle man I say, they only cause problems, in the case of the RIAA they would happily (and have tried to) shit in the constitution to maintain their profit. America’s founders had a lot to say about this stuff, I’m sure they (and Walt Disney) are spinning in their graves.


As for the RIAA attempting a kind of DOS thingy, I find it hilarious. That’s like the RIAA trying to take out the worlds best marksmen in a pistol dual. If we continue to fight technology can not be owned, never will any company be able to totally control systems, and while people willing to fight exist the fight will go on. Its a big fight, and one that will define the society we make in the 21st centaury, are we going to be dominated by corporate interests or will we wrest our governments back out of the hands of big business? I'm going to start a related thread in politics on a related issue.

[russotto]

Originally posted by jaguar
As for the RIAA attempting a kind of DOS thingy, I find it hilarious. That’s like the RIAA trying to take out the worlds best marksmen in a pistol dual.

Except that if the RIAA has their way, if they win the duel they are OK, and if the other guy wins, they get arrested.

Although, if their legislation passed, our hypothetical black-hat could write a copyrighted document, put RIAA's address in his Outlook address book, "accidentally" infect himself with SIRCAM, allowing SIRCAM to send the document to the RIAA. Then he could burn down every bit of data in the RIAA's machines in an attempt to remove his copyrighted material.

(no, it would never work; laws like this are always interpreted to help only those who paid for them)

[jaguar]

Exactly, hacking is only legal if u can bribe congress =)

Well i'd relate it to the hacked satelite disk cards war. They can't fin though legal means so they sue technological means, a fair fight. The internet is still a wild place and closing down all file sharing systems is impossible though legal warfare(although i notice my curant fav audiogalaxy have started blocking copyright material, ah well, next service here i come) so they try tech means.

Except that if the RIAA has their way, if they win the duel they are OK, and if the other guy wins, they get arrested.

Haven't seen an arrest come out of sharing networks yes. Even hardcore warez trading is pretty much immune.

[jivie]

Originally posted by jaguar
Haven't seen an arrest come out of sharing networks yes. Even hardcore warez trading is pretty much immune.

maybe not the sharing networks, but I seem to recall an Oklahoma University student that was.

[russotto]

Originally posted by jivie


maybe not the sharing networks, but I seem to recall an Oklahoma University student that was.

Hmm. Something's missing in that story. Specifically, any mentions of a search warrant. While universities often claim to be a law unto themselves and pooh-pooh warrant requirements for searching dorms (a claim not always accepted by the courts), seizing and searching the student's computer is another matter.

[jaguar]

In KOra its worse, students now usually carry thier MP3s on removable drives for quick removal now...crazy..

Case of a guy here who created a parody of a police website who was raided and had his hardware taken as "evidence" when they finalyl realised that *shock horror* there was no legal basis for taking it they were stil llegally able to hang on to it for a year, fuckers.

On the flipside one of the best blokes i know is high up drugsquad so not all cops are bad, just the dumb ones =)

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by russotto
While universities often claim to be a law unto themselves and pooh-pooh warrant requirements for searching dorms (a claim not always accepted by the courts), seizing and searching the student's computer is another matter.

When I was a Community Advisor at Southeast, we had some leeway in what could be done. If we wanted to go into a student's room, all we needed was a witness. Of course, we had to announce "C.A. coming in!" Pfft...

That being said, we could only bust people for what they had in plain sight (i.e. no peeking under blankets and the like). Every now and then, if it were something a bit more serious, University Police would be called in (who were sworn officers of the City of Cape Girardeau). I think the worst I ever busted on was alcohol in the rooms and community furniture in people's rooms. I can't recall (in my 3 semesters there) anything serious enough to require actual city police to come in.