http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALqyDHDnOCI

Probably the ’snuffling’ sound of his nose buried up the Label execs butts.

Funny you would say that. ALL the label artists were once independent.

Labels won’t give you what you want without taking your firstborn.

It is NOT illegal to “make available” music files! Sheesh, show me the law that says it is. What everyone tiptoes around, and what the REAL issue is, is the fact that the people the RIAA wants to chat with are the downloaders — not the uploaders — but they cannot find the downloaders easily so they go the coward’s route and sue the low-hanging fruit…the uploaders, most of whom do so unwittingly due to the default share mode of p2p software.

There are “fair-use” reasons for downloading music files as well. A person’s intent can not be determined just because they downloaded a song. Journalists, to grab the obvious, are permitted to not only do this for review purposes, but can publish a portion of the song also!

The major portions of the Copyright Act center around whether or not the person is making money from their actions. Because file-sharing is a free activity, that is another case of the law not keeping up with technology, and consumers should not be punished or sued for their actions when there is no law preventing them from doing it.

And with computer-illiterate jury members believing what the mainstream media trumpets, of course they will say uploaders are guilty. Hell, according to RIAA management from the recent trial it is illegal to even COPY a CD you purchased?? Obviously they never read the Copyright Act which states that it is ALWAYS permitted for the consumer to make an “archival backup copy” of any media they’ve legally purchased.

As I’ve stated before, the solution is IRC (Google it) — along with proxies and PeerGuardian (update it frequently) you are safer than 99.9% of all the other people using the Internet.

“All these articles are read by the converted.”

That’s why I recently started running mainstream entertainment stories. I figured they’d bring in readers who might not be familiar with the kinds of posts and issues which show up here.

That aside, I know for a fact lot of mainstream print and electronic media people drop by, and quite a few ‘new’ people find p2pnet on Goo-Goo and the like.

So hopefully, it’s not all wasted effort. And anyway, some members of the choir can also be heard elsewhere

Cheers!

We don’t need no litigation
What we need is price control
No pile of garbage to treat us as
Big 4, leave our songs alone
Hey! Big 4! Leave our songs alone
All in all it’s just another dick in the hole

The only way we, as downloaders, will be able to prevent the RIAA (and mpaa) from suing is coming up with (or more) advanced encryption methods or secure delivery systems that are fast and enable multiple peers to share file(s) the way bittorrent does but with security. Current methods are inadequte or people refuse to take the time to learn how to use a new application and as a result, the application has very little peers to download from, if any at all depending on the nature of it. The courts are not going to back us. At least not in the USA. They are old fuckers (some of you are old too… fuckers) and as such, they have no basis on which to judge the complex nature of file sharing. ie it’s technical aspects or the culture surrounding the p2p “movement”. Mainstream America could give a damn about (for that matter, know of) p2pnet or any other p2p, file sharing, or whatever anti-riaa,mpaa news site. All these articles are read by the converted. Preaching to the choir I believe it’s called. Laws will not be passed in favor of downloaders simply because money is law. I’ve tried to get my point across as clear as possible. I’m tired and I’m tired.