Music sharing!

[GSLeloo]

Once again my CWA class has made me think!

So we're reading this article is Newsweek how they charged 260 people with this lawsuit and are "trying" to charge each person $150k per song they have downloaded on their computer.

For me it's a bit scary to think that I'd be charged like... a couple of million and I only have 40 songs downloaded. I don't even have enough money to pay for college, let alone that.

It also seems to just be a scare tactic of the music company to make us too scared to share music still. So what do you guys think? Will you still share music and download songs?

[SpunGirl]

I still download off WINMX. My parents called me, freaking out because there's a zillion songs on their home computer downloaded from Napster when I lived there. I told them not to worry about it, I can't imagine they'd go as far back as when Napster was still active.

Besides, any court would find it completely ridiculous to charge EACH person 150k for EACH song. If they were going to realistically charge for it, it should be the cost of a CD (around $17.99) per song at the MOST. I can't imagine a company could fairly argue that one person downloading one song had lost them 150k.

-K

[Bobmuhthol]

Yes. I have 130 songs and 70 videos, including The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers and The Warriors. Too bad the RIAA can't connect to me because I uninstalled KaZaA.

[Bobmuhthol]

And if you think you should be sued for $18 because it's the price of a CD you failed law school.

You're being charged for piracy, not the cost of a CD. People who go to jail on charges of theft don't offer to pay $1000 for the item they stole. Not successfully, anyway.

[Artha]

Unless you have 1000 songs, you don't really need to worry. Also, if you get Kazaa lite, you can block RIAA servers.

And, if they decided to sue everyone, it would take them atleast 400 years.

[Scott]

I have over 10,000 songs and a bunch of video's (except they are on a seperate HD) on my computer. I don't care much.

[Bobmuhthol]

KaZaA Lite doesn't block RIAA. KaZaA K++ 2.4.0+ does. I know from extensive research (I had to reinstall KaZaA and spent two hours doing it.)

[Fabled]

Greed is a terrible thing.

[Solkern]

Its soo funny Matalica or whatever gets all pissed about napster, but they dont give two shits about kazaa kinda cute, music SHOULD be free i have no more to say

[Faellyn]

Right, the $150k is actually a penalty, not a fee, they are punishing them and trying to make a point, not make their money back. My family and I used Napster some when it was on and Kazaa some recently, but we have stopped, although it doesn't stop us from copying CD's for each other and all of our friends who want one.... I don't think the music industry realizes that although they might lose some money on a few singles I wouldn't buy an album for, they also gain money from people using music sharing to preview songs to see if it will be worth it to buy the $18.00 CD.

[Fabled]

Originally posted by GSLeloo
Once again my CWA class has made me think!

So we're reading this article is Newsweek how they charged 260 people with this lawsuit and are "trying" to charge each person $150k per song they have downloaded on their computer.

I looked up that story and read that they agreed to dismiss the charges if they agreed to delete the songs off of their computer and not pirate anymore.

Oh and the youngest person they were charging was 9 years old!

What is the World coming to?

[Scott]

12 years old was the youngest I think. Her parents agreed to pay $2,000 I heard too.

[Betheny]

I download music. Why? Why the hell would I buy an album that sucks ass? I want to make sure the thing is good before I get it.

But I DO buy the albums. Why? I like the pretty pictures.

[Bobmuhthol]

They don't deserve my money. Buying CDs is for poor people.

[Solkern]

Buy from best buy all there cs are like 9-15 even new ones!

[SpunGirl]

I didn't go to law school, Bob, so it would be really hard for me to fail it.

What I'm saying is that fine is excessive. It's not like a littering fine of $1000 or whatever that they use as a deterrent. As I understand it, the money from the suit would go to the music companies, not the local government (as a normal fine would).

150k per song is simply excessive.

-K

[Bobmuhthol]

They sold The Sims for $50 when it came out. It was available at a wholesale warehouse for $30. Best Buy became Bobmuhthol Enemy #1.

[Bobmuhthol]

SpunGirl, do me a favor. Own the rights to every music contract. Then not get paid shit because you aren't selling any albums. The reason: File sharing. You're not going to be happy.

[imported_Kranar]

320 movies and 1200 MP3s.

Not worried one bit, but then again the Canadian version of the RIAA doesn't give a damn about Napster or KaZaa... atleast not yet.

[Betheny]

Hey, Bob. Show me proof that p2p and music sharing has hurt record sales.

[Lord Deprav]

For all yah law schoolies out there (working on it myself) piracy is only illegal when you don't give the requested retail on the item your purchasing. If you look at this statement kinda deeply...its basically stating downloading music is both leagal and ethical when you pay your dues to the record company/artist. I admit I download music. But I pay all fees to the artist/record company that I do so. And I think all of you should rethink your statements before admitting on a message board that you are doing illegal activities because you could get a hefty fine if the government decides to trace back your statements.

Deprav
Who has descent advice.

[Bobmuhthol]

Originally posted by Kranar
320 movies and 1200 MP3s.

There's your answer, Maimara.

[Fabled]

I doubt that those in the music industry are hurting or barely able to make ends meet.

[Lord Deprav]

Oh yeah, by the way the people who got busted had over 1000 songs on their computer and were file sharing. The fourth Amendment, which has now become a worthless one, didn't stop police officials from searching their homes under probable cause.

Deprav

[Betheny]

Bob, that's like McDonald's saying they're going broke because people use too many ketchup packets.

It's also RETARDED.

[Artha]

The musicians aren't hurt at all, just evil bastard organisations like the RIAA, who are directly responsable for CDs costing so much.

[Betheny]

I hear you bitching about how the music industry is getting cornholed... but... uh. Wasn't there a lawsuit not that long ago, a class action lawsuit filed by purchasers of compact discs against those that manufacture them?

[Back]

FREE BRIANNA LAHARA!!!

[GSLeloo]

The way they said they're doing it is like... they'll put out a song or something and when you download it it basically searches your computer and then when someone uploads it it somehow goes back to them... who the hell knows but it's when someone uploads from you, not you downloading.

And that's how they got the list, just names and addresses with no idea how old the people were. It's really ridiculous.

[SpunGirl]

Originally posted by Bobmuhthol
SpunGirl, do me a favor. Own the rights to every music contract. Then not get paid shit because you aren't selling any albums. The reason: File sharing. You're not going to be happy.

I'd love to do you that favor, because I WOULD make a ton of money. People still buy CDs. I do it quite a bit, even though I also download quite a bit.

File sharing has not sent Metallica, or anyone else, to the poor house. Show me the picture of a famous recording artisit living in a dumpster or even (gasp!) a commonplace apartment BECAUSE of file sharing.

-K

[SpunGirl]

File sharing on the internet is no different than recording a song on tape off the radio, which I used to do all the time as a kid.

-K

[Edaarin]

We're in a recession, and they're upset that sales for CD's that cost $18 has gone down 9% in a period of WEAK artists? Bullshit.