Post #117,254
9/9/03 3:05:19 PM
|
The RIAA sees the face of evil, and it's a 12-year-old girl.
From the [link|http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/32731.html|Register] "I got really scared. My stomach is all turning," Brianna told the Post. "I thought it was OK to download music because my mom paid a service fee for it. Out of all people, why did they pick me?"
It turns out that Brianna's mum paid a $29.99 service charge to KaZaA for the company's music service. Brianna, however, thought this meant she could download songs at will. How naive!
|
Post #117,280
9/9/03 6:32:03 PM
|
You tell me...
How a 12 year-old is going to understand tomes of copyright law?
Even among my 20-something friends, downloading music is just "natural". They live on KaZaa, before that on Napster.
This is a bunch of 50-something RIAA babyboomer lawyer suits telling rebellious teens and 20's that they are going to BUY music. The suits will win, but will piss off most of the 20-somethings.
Then, the 20-somethings will start looking for "free-download" artists and there will be a great revival in music, again. "Ding Dong, Mettalica's Dead".
Sorry, but I really see a generational gap in this one. It will be interesting.
Glen Austin
|
Post #117,603
9/12/03 9:02:11 AM
|
Pay for download is still experimental.
For the RIAA stooge companies, that is.
There was a discussion on ABC Radio National this morning about this and one of the guests made the point that the record companies are still trying to figure out what the general public want. Their pay-for-music services were subscription based. Meanwhile, Apple setup iTunes as a pay-per-tune service. Witness the comparative success... The same guest also mentioned the range of available songs also influenced the success: they have to target the computer-savvy with disposable income, basically, to kick-start this sort of thing.
Wade.
Is it enough to love Is it enough to breathe Somebody rip my heart out And leave me here to bleed
| | Is it enough to die Somebody save my life I'd rather be Anything but Ordinary Please
| -- "Anything but Ordinary" by Avril Lavigne. |
|
Post #117,319
9/10/03 8:19:45 AM
9/10/03 8:21:35 AM
|
Settlement
Mom will pay $2000 to the RIAA thugs to keep her daughter out of trouble.
Daughter will not be back on the Internet for a long time to come.
[link|http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=528&ncid=528&e=3&u=/ap/20030910/ap_on_en_mu/downloading_music|Mother Pays RIAA Thugs]
Edited by gdaustin
Sept. 10, 2003, 08:21:35 AM EDT
|
Post #117,323
9/10/03 8:27:42 AM
|
Right Or Wrong...
...the fact remains that the RIAA managed to sue a 12-year old girl from the projects.
[link|http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=77865&cid=6918260|This comment] sums things up nicely.
Peter [link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire] [link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal] [link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #117,324
9/10/03 8:30:16 AM
|
Horns of dilemma...
...release me.
[link|http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=77865&cid=6917453|http://yro.slashdot....77865&cid=6917453]
On the one hand, infringing copyright is wrong. No question about that.
On the other hand, he's got one hell of a point.
Peter [link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire] [link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal] [link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #117,379
9/10/03 5:44:21 PM
|
Double entendre even, in this concise rant
(From your second link) Re:Hmmm... Justice? (Score:1) by binary paladin (684759) on Wednesday September 10, @03:21AM (#6919034) You're focusing on the wrong part of the story. There's two problems that have gotten out of hand, not just one. That's the worst part of this. Artists should get paid, I agree. However nailing a 12-year-old in the projects for $2000 doesn't solve anything.
Treating the symptoms of a disease instead of the cause will never cure anything.
The recording industry is another just another screw everyone organization. They screw the people the buy their music, the people the make the music and everyone in between. I'll use the simplest label I can here, they're bad. That's one letter less than "evil." They're that too.
And did she steal their property? What is the definition of theft? What is the definition of property? Did she think her actions were wrong? Was there any mens rea?
If it's theft, shouldn't it be pursued in a criminal matter and not a civil matter? If they really feel they're being stolen from, why not charge people with a crime as opposed to this civil bullshit? Because it's easier to step on people in the civil circuits, particularly for corporations and such. . . . .
The gentleman has succinctly summarized in this one sentence, the Largest US Scam du jour, and ever since we began the Corporate-AMA: allopathic medicine is as single-mindset oriented as {this entire utterly disgusting RIAA travesty is mired in lazy digital-think Right/Wrong}. But look: a 'people' who have, thus far gone along with a First Strike attack on a pipsqueak country, via trumped-up bogus rationale -- are 'we' apt to take on the RIAA and its relatively non- life-threatening Vulture Capitalism of usual kind, --while ignoring THAT? 'We' are, more and more often of late - Disgusting as the Model for any sentient collection of bugs, even.
|
Post #117,337
9/10/03 11:05:56 AM
|
This is a symptom
of rational structures run amok, and of the rationalist technocrats within them avoiding their responsibility to use judgement in their actions. Because it's art, and popular art besides, it's one that affects a large part of the populace. However, one can find numerous examples of this in all areas, including business, government, journalism, and education.
It's the slavish devotion to the "universally right answer", arrived at by ideological means, that leads to situations like this, leavened by the greed of the actors within the institutions that undertake actions like this.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca] [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Post #117,338
9/10/03 11:11:32 AM
|
Puff Daddy
...is not a fucking artist.
Read the final line of my second linked SlashPost:
"And the next time you call yourself an "artist", I want you to remember that art is for everyone and is priceless. You're worth $15. "
Peter [link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire] [link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal] [link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #117,340
9/10/03 11:15:54 AM
|
Yes, that was a good one
The redefinition of "artist" from its conceptual melding of craft and creativity to its current definition as part of the industrial process is one of the things I'm talking about when speak of a slavish devotion to process in the absence of judgement and common sense.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca] [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Post #117,380
9/10/03 5:45:56 PM
|
Love. It.
|