RIAA Christmas message to US students
p2pnet news | RIAA News:- Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG’s RIAA has acknowledged the season of goodwill with a Christmas message to university students across America:
Fuck You!
The RIAA has launched another prong of its twisted and bitter campaign against the people who keep the likes of Universal’s Doug Morris (right, with admirer) fat and happy.
Lined up this time are:
Auburn University (13 pre-litigation settlement letters), Brandeis University (12), Georgia Institute of Technology (16), Gustavus Adolphus College (36), Indiana State University (18), Iowa State University (13), Ithaca College (15), Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (16), Louisiana Tech University (15), Mississippi State University (15), Morehead State University (17), Rochester Institute of Technology (12), University of Arizona (14), University of California, Davis (14), University of California, San Diego (17), University of California, Santa Cruz (24), University of Dayton (16), University of Massachusetts at Amherst (30), University of Rochester (15), University of Southern California (33), University of Washington (16), and Western Kentucky University (19).
And the Big 4 think they’re going to get away with it.
But they won’t.
MIT student Erek Speed puts it liked this: “Clearly the strategy of appeasing the RIAA has not worked. It is time to fight back.”
Think ‘critical mass’.
Also See:
Doug Morris – Big 4 music execs, `so out of touch`, November 5, 2007
time to fight back – Fight the RIAA! MIT student, December 7, 2007
Want to help p2pnet stay online? Please click here.
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
December 7th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
I am a fan of yours but I wish you would not use the F word.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
I used to use f**k but what’s the point? ** means ‘uc’. There are all kinds of other euphemisms, but everyone knows exactly what they mean.
IMHO, although it was once a very definite obscenity, unless it’s used very specifically in very specific contexts, it’s now very little more than a common swearword.
Cheers!
December 7th, 2007 at 2:36 pm
wtf? (what the fuck?)
free speech. no censorship.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:52 pm
I can’t stand douchenozzles that whine about hearing/seeing a swear word every now and then.
Sometimes profanity is the only way to adequately and powerfully deliver a message.
And if you don’t like a particular word, that really only is your problem. If you read it or hear it (as you have before), you’ll live. A word can never, EVER cause any measurable harm anybody, no matter how filthy it is.
Fuckcuntshitpiss.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Kudos, Gregory. Everyone thinks stealing is some new market model. It’s such adolescent, collegiate bullshit. Hopefully either 1) these immature children will grow up and gather some ethics and then deserve justice for themselves, or 2) they’ll be caught and prosecuted like Jammie Thomas.
Either way. I’m so sick of their whining that they should be able to steal, I could puke.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
” Either way. Iâm so sick of their whining that they should be able to steal, I could puke. ”
Me too, since nothing is stolen ( for something to be stolen, the victim must lose the
benefits of the stolen item ), and since a download does not equal a lost sale, there
are NO provable damages to the record company.
The RIAA members are the ones that really need to examine their own ethics.
After all, the RIAA member labels have been stealing ( actual theft ) from the artists
and creators for many years, and hold one the few legal monpolies in existence.
Their total lack of any conscience or ethics makes me puke.
Their lapdogs are pukeworthy as well.
The lie oft repeated is not always the truth.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
@Friend of Music:
Copyright infringement isn’t theft, it’s making copies of licensed material. Thus the name copyright. Nothing is stolen. Second, Jammie Thomas wasn’t prosecuted for anything, she was sued in civil court and found liable for copyright infringement. Huge difference between the two. If you cannot even maintain some semblance of what really happened, then please don’t go spouting your ignorant opinions.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
The RIAA is gently and incrementally doing whatever it can to first educate, then warn, eventually notify and finally, mercifully identify and prosecute all within the legal model and with full support of our Department of Justice. The process has been going on for well over 6 years and NO ONE was sued until after five years of warnings. Your parents should be ashamed. You are the first generation of Americans so craven and cowardly and so spoiled with disrespect for our laws and the methods we enjoy (that others have died for) that are already in place to change the laws if we want to. But instead you sneak around and shoplift behind the anonymity of your computers and dormitories, and think you are clever to take whatever you want while whining that others are trying to stop you from doing damage to real world musicians trying to build lives, purchase homes and raise families on the royalties they have properly earned within a fully legal model. Their hard work. Their careers. While you destroy their earned income. You selfish little shits.
December 7th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
Drive out into the country where there are thousands of unattended farm stands with cash boxes. Good people have always responded to trust with more trust, until now. College kids today have distinguished themselves in a special way. They create byzantine “justifications” instead of just purchasing what they want. They still take the corn and tomatoes. They just drive away without leaving anything in the box.
December 7th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
Dreddsnik said: since nothing is stolen ( for something to be stolen, the victim must lose the benefits of the stolen item ), and since a download does not equal a lost sale, there are NO provable damages to the record company.
What rubbish. The courts sorted this out in two different cases well over three years ago. Do your homework and study the Grokster and Napster cases. BOTH of your silly assertions were found utterly false in precedent setting cases. Really, colleges are turning out such self-important morons these days.
December 7th, 2007 at 5:38 pm
*sigh*
Most court rulings prove fuck-all. They enforce various interpretations of laws and are internally inconsistent.
Downloads DO NOT equal lost sales. There are links several independent studies on this very site that prove this.
I’ll trust what researchers have to say over smarmy lawyers. And if you disagree, well fucking sue me, jackass.
December 7th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
Ok but are the artists that work so hard to make all this great music, being paid the money that they should, by the buisness? And what about the writers strike?
December 7th, 2007 at 5:57 pm
” And if you disagree, well fucking sue me, jackass.”
I don’t have to. Stay on the outlaw side of things if you want, your time is running out and I couldn’t care less. You’ll be caught eventually. All criminals are. Jammie thought she was so smart and it was a JURY, not some “smarmy lawyer” who convicted her. And last Tuesday the DOJ threw her appeal out. She’s on the hook for well over $225K now. Good riddance to her. You’ll be next. What you don’t want to understand is that law is what we have. Courts are what we use to figure this stuff out. Precedents seriously count, whether you like them or not. Law enforcement couldn’t give two shits about your little Robin Hood bullshit musings, go whine to your Mom. And the ISP’s are turning you in because it is well into their best interests to do so. Don’t you folks read? YOU are the “dinosaurs”. France and the EU are way ahead of us on this. Three times caught infringing in France and you are off the network. Yep, yer done. Later, and that’s coming here eventually. You are part of a dying breed, son, like the outlaws in the wild west before it was settled. Enjoy yourself while you can, but as a lawyer I recommend you pay your $3500 settlement when you get caught. Jammie would likely agree about now. She’ll be sending cash to the RIAA until the day she dies. I love this system because it’s thoughtful, incremental and FAIR. Take your chances, silly child.
December 7th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
Is UrbanLawyer Cary, Mitch or Jonathon? Or a lesser RIAA hack?
December 7th, 2007 at 6:11 pm
“Youâll be caught eventually. All criminals are.”
Really. Since when. Ever read the crime stats on how many REAL crimes are never solved. And since many crimes are never even detected or reported………..oh whats the use.
December 7th, 2007 at 6:33 pm
“Is UrbanLawyer Cary, Mitch or Jonathon? Or a lesser RIAA hack?”
No, and don’t work for the RIAA. I represent musicians. The irony is that you so-called “fans” are giving the musicians a bigger fucking than the industry ever did.
And listen to you, a college-educate boasting about how you’ll never be caught. You sound like a high school drop-out car thief.
December 7th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
LOL @ UrbanLawyer. Yeah, right. With all the millions and millions of people swapping copyrighted files right now as we speak, you think that they are ALL going to get apprehended and sued into paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in court?
Oh man…
It’s not even about “the good fight” or however you interpret it. I can tell you don’t really understand that internet file swapping (of copyrighted and non-copyrighted) material is going to be around forever now in one form or another, like it or not. The numbers of people doing it are growing daily, and how many people are actually getting sued because of it? Seriously, it’s like trying to prohibit alcohol or stop people from selling street drugs – it’s not working!
December 7th, 2007 at 6:45 pm
I FUCKING HATE LAWYERS. YOU TWAT.
YOU AND THE RIAA AND MPAA CAN GO SUCK A BIG FAT HAIRY GORILLA’S COCK.
(I FUCKING HOPE I DIDN’T FUCKING OFFEND ANYONE WITH MY FUCKING LANGUAGE.)
December 7th, 2007 at 7:25 pm
Why argue with the lawyer …..after all the only worse thing you can be in this world other than some scum sucking corp. fuckhead…..is a lawer. They are the worse of the worse….they steal more from people than anyone. Educated or not…lawyers are like actors…..overpaid egotistical….FUCKHEADS. There…got my to fucks in.
December 7th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
The fucking lawyers are pissed because these cases are going to eventually be thrown out of court. How than will they make their money? They will all have to find another way to suck the blood from society.
December 8th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
1. Each individual case has its own unique circumstances. They should be evaluated based on those circumstances, not based on the fact that some other case had X or Y things happen, or came to Z conclusions about N.
2. File sharing *IS* different from theft. It does not inherently deprive anyone of property; rather, it can create new “property” on demand. To equate file sharing to a “lost sale” which is a more applicable term than outright “theft,” there must be clear and well-researched evidence that shows that the duplication of a file from one person’s computer to another is causing some form of net loss to the party claiming damages.
3. From my own research, I have consistently found studies showing that the sharing of a song is *beneficial* to the RIAA, rather than detrimental. Studies showing otherwise are almost always commissioned by an RIAA-linked sponsor, or have fundamental flaws in their methodology.
4. I would be willing to go out on a limb and state that, since research causes a NET INCREASE IN SONG AND RECORD SALES, the current trends are inverse of what they should be: the file sharers should be getting paid by the RIAA for promoting their products, rather than being sued by the RIAA for “engaging in theft.” Jammie Thomas, if she did allow file sharing to take place, should be paid by the RIAA for boosting their sales.
5. Because the ultimate requirement of a lawsuit is that “a claim be stated upon which relief may be granted,” I would quickly point to the research if I was in a similar situation, and show that my actions likely caused a benefit to the RIAA rather than damages. You can’t sue someone for damaging you if their actions are bringing you far more net gains than you would have had otherwise.
6. I would put it to UrbanLawyer that people get away with crimes all the time. I know of a fellow who was burned alive in his business, tied to a chair, and they never found the perpetrator. It’s about 10 years later now, and the case is still open. For every one criminal that is caught and plastered all over the news, there are far more that get away with it. Look for some “illegal street racing” videos on p2p networks and you’ll see quite a few getaways caught on tape that, for some reason, DID NOT MAKE IT ON THE “AMERICA’S WILDEST POLICE CHASES” or whatever those shows are being called now. Notice how they only show people who get caught? Likewise, they never even bothered looking for the fucktwat that broke my car window to steal a $5 bill that fell out of someone’s pocket in my passenger’s seat. Things happen every day that no one can do anything about…but in the case of “file sharing” and whatnot, it’s more of a grassroots underground social movement than a bunch of car windows being broken to steal a $5, and ironically the RIAA that refuses to change their business model to suit this movement STILL stood to gain HEAPS of income from it despite their unwillingness to change…until they started suing people for doing it.
George Carlin said it best: shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, tits.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_dirty_words
December 8th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
“Stay on the outlaw side of things if you want, your time is running out”
It is you who are staying on the outlaw side of things by trampling our institutions, our constitution, corrupting, our governement, our justice and frankly the time has more than running out for you.
If you think that we will either again buy any crap from a piece of shit like you; you are delusional!
You don’t represent the artists. You don’t represent anyone and you have a consensus against you. You represent only yourself!
Why we and will support the true artists, you can keep the Britney slut, the Madona Crap
and the Dr Shit as well as your moral depravation and you intelectual shit for yourself.
You are a parasite and soon we will send you and your nasty friends to Gitmo.
We will be torture by forcing you to listen to britney slut days and night until you
redeem yourself! And no we will not pay any copyright fee for that!
December 8th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
To the Gregory, OldHeadSez UrbanLawyer and over Chitman, Glueman, and HAsshole parasites:
Your are a bunch of RIAA trolls. Tel you bosses to start running NOW!
Because we are comming.
December 8th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
“Three times caught infringing in France and you are off the network”
And how are they going to find the “”"”infringeeeeerrrr”"”" may I ask?
Did you heard about Mute, Tor or Ant? Thess Frenchs are idiots and you are an idiot too. This is why you have to be a parasite I guest.
December 8th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
” To the Gregory, OldHeadSez UrbanLawyer ”
Same person.
A time honored troll technique that creates the appearance of cohesive support.
Read the posts carefully and it becomes clear. Paid RIAA shill.
December 8th, 2007 at 3:13 pm
Yep. I’ve never seen so much tyrannical bullshit being spewed by that many people before. He’s got to be the same guy.
Jon, (or any other site admin) is there any way you can ban their IP address? I know that doesn’t really solve anything, but there’s gotta be some way you can filter the trolling, spam, etc.
December 8th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
I took the liberty of fixing the post made by Gregory:
The RIAA is carelessly and thoughtlessly doing whatever it can to first manipulate, then threaten, eventually subpoena and finally, mercilessly identify through the means of extortion and persecute the few out of hundreds of millions that are unlucky enough to get caught within the illegal model and with full support through bribery of our Department of Justice. The process has been going on for well over 6 years and NO ONE was sued until we lost our case against Grokster. Our marketing team should be ashamed. We are the first generation of businesses so craven and cowardly and so spoiled with disrespect for the laws and the methods that citizens enjoy (that others have died for) that are already in place, so we change the laws if we want to, because we have all the money it takes to manipulate the legal infrastructure. But instead we sneak around and shoplift behind the corporate strength of our monopolies and corrupt business practices, and think we are clever to take whatever we want while whining that others are trying to stop us from doing damage to real world musicians and consumers trying to build lives, purchase homes and raise families on the measly royalties they have been given, but would have earned more within a fully legal model. Their hard work. Their careers. While we destroy their earned income. What selfish little shits we are.
December 8th, 2007 at 7:34 pm
@UrbanLawyer:
Are you really that ignorant or do you just choose to be online? Jammie Thomas wasn’t convicted of anything, that is a criminal case, not civil. Second, she hasn’t appealed yet you twit. She has a post trial motion before the courts. Third, the DOJ can’t throw out an appeal even if they wanted to. It’s the whole seperation of powers granted by the constitution. The DOJ is under the exectutive branch of government while the courts are under the judicial, therefore the DOJ can’t tell the courts whether they can or cannot take a case. I figured since you are an attorney you would know this from law school. Guess some education is worth more than others and if I were you I would ask for a refund.
December 8th, 2007 at 8:33 pm
FUCKING KILL THE FUCKING LAWYERS.
December 8th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
I believe this guy IS corporate musician. And that explains everything.
December 9th, 2007 at 6:42 am
” I figured since you are an attorney you would know this from law school. ”
He’s not an attorney.
His complete misinterpretation of the Grokster Decision demonstrates that.
On the internet you can be whomever you want.
I’m Batman.
December 9th, 2007 at 12:48 pm
I believe Batman’s post the most. After all, he IS Batman!
December 9th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
The only thing you represent, UrbanLawyer, is $$$$$.
End of story. You’re just like the MAFIAA types who claim to represent their
artists, etc., when all they do is screw them (and the consumer) over.
December 9th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
it’s well past time to stop feeding the trolls, don’t you think?
December 9th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
You said Jammie was in a civil trial only and that she âwasnât convictedâ of a criminal offense. You stand corrected.
December 5, 2007 01:48 PM
The Minnesota mother who vowed to fight the Recording Industry Association of America after she was convicted of illegally downloading copyrighted music now has another heavyweight to contend with. The U.S. Justice Department has sided with the RIAA and a jury’s $222,000 judgment against Jammie Thomas for illegally downloading and sharing copyrighted music. The amount breaks down to $9,250 per song. A clause in the Copyright Act allows fines up to $150,000 per illegally downloaded song.â Jammie caught a break.
To those of you who demand that there is no linkage between file sharing and a 14 billion dollar loss last year (and the loss of 71,000 jobs in the industry to date) you can tell that to your Mom. The courts see the link and have acted upon it consistently, so we donât really care if you acknowledge it or not.
To the fellow who asked âhow will infringers be caught?â I suggest you read up on it. Itâs all over the web. France is just the first model. The ISPâs are the obvious pinch point, (try getting on the network without one), and they operate under government agency. At the end of the day, the government wonât have to require anything, the ISPâs will do it to get out from under the huge burden of the illegal network traffic. Comcast is already slowing/blocking Bit Torrent. Eventually they all will.
Itâs well established by now that you do not have rights to use the network however you see fit and there is no such thing as anonymity anymore unless you work through the CIA servers. Encryption will inevitably be licensed. Filematching software will look at everything going up and down and âprobable causeâ will allow this for the same reasons why State Troopers are allowed to hide behind signs with radar guns. If any part of the file matches it will either be blocked entirely (and youâll be warned along the lines of the âthree stikes and you are off the network modelâ) or it will be allowed to go through with the prevailing purchase price added to your next months bill. Youâll pay it or youâll be gone. It always makes us laugh here when you guys say a criminal activity âwonât ever be stopped.â NASA has a databank that quantifies the known universe and matches minute to minute to discover tiny changes. I think a list of copyrighted material at the ISP portals is doable. Like highway speeding, enough folks will be routinely caught that it will suppress illegal activity. Only real fools will eventually do it. And now that real fines are part of the equation youâll be in serious debt someday and convicted of a crime, unable to get a car or home loan. Hey, your call.
And to the rest of you, if you really wanted to send a message to the industry, all you had to do was stop purchasing their product. Sadly, you are stealing it instead. Yes, there will always be those who fervently believe this isnât âstealingâ and that they are somehow morally entitled to a path outside the law. You entertain us and you make us rich. We all know what happens to folks like you sooner or later. While we sort this out case by case and use intellect to marginalize criminal behavior, you bray your drunken frat-boy rights to possess without payment as it all closes in around you. You wanna hurt me? Stop doing it. Iâm growing wealthy on cases like this.
My mission is to help creatives find a way back to being paid for what they create through their work and bring to market. You are killing them by taking it all and not paying at all. Clearly this will not go on forever. But the truly sad legacy of p2p filesharing of stolen entertainment content is not only what you are doing to musicians and authors, it will be internet tollgates at all the ISP’s, top-heavy legislation and a drenching of advertising and law enforcement on what was first imagined to be a free and cool shared network. Every single bit and byte will be scrutinized and a wonderful paradigm will be lost to your acts of entitled irresponsibility. Like it or not, the law counts for something in our country. When the network becomes a police state, youâll have no one to blame but yourselves.
December 9th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
” itâs well past time to stop feeding the trolls, donât you think? ”
Absolutely
December 9th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
” And to the rest of you, if you really wanted to send a message to the industry, all you had to do was stop purchasing their product. ”
Correct.
That’s what we are doing, and it’s having an effect.
Not buying, and not downloading is costing RIAA members money.
Of course, they claim its ALL because of file sharing, a falsehood that has been debunked
by US studies and one canadian study.
The boycott is killing them
not filesharing.
The lie oft repeated is still not the truth.
December 9th, 2007 at 5:13 pm
Things like this …
http://torrentfreak.com/charity-forced-to-pay-copyright-police-so-kids-can-sing-071209/
.. produce no consumer backlash at all .. right ???
I know that makes me want to run right out and buy buy buy
December 9th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
from an artist ..
” PÃ¥l asked 50 Cent: âHow are G-Unit Records doing in these times of file-sharing?
âNot so good.â he responded. âThe advances in technology impacts everyone, and we all must adapt. Most of all hip-hop, a style of music dependent upon a youthful audience. This market consists of individuals embracing innovations faster than the fans of classical and jazz music.â
âWhat is important for the music industry to understand is that this really doesnât hurt the artists.â
Thats quite a statement. Organizations like the RIAA are always talking about how the artists get hurt by file-sharing but 50 Cent clearly doesnât agree. In fact, he appears to appreciate the value of a good fan, whether he buys or file-shares his music, as he explains:
âA young fan may be just as devout and dedicated no matter if he bought it or stole it.â
Indeed. Itâs been said time and time again – get the music out there by any which way, fill the gigs and capitalize on the merchandising and ends will meet. 50 Cent agrees:
âThe concerts are crowded and the industry must understand that they have to manage all the 360 degrees around an artist. They, (the industry), have to maximize their income from concerts and merchandise. It is the only way they can get their marketing money back.â
He finishes up: âThe main problem is that the artists are not getting as much help developing as before file-sharing. They are now learning to peddle ringtones, not recordsâ he said. ”
Sounds like the problem is the Labels , doesn’t it.
He’s not the only artist to know this.
More and more are speaking out.
December 9th, 2007 at 5:21 pm
source
http://torrentfreak.com/50cent-file-sharing-doesnt-hurt-the-artists-071208/
December 9th, 2007 at 6:36 pm
@UrbanLawyer
You really must enjoy pretending in your little fantasy game. First, Jammie Thomas was not convicted of anything. To be convicted, she must have charges brought against her in CRIMINAL court and lose. This case is the recording industry sued her in CIVIL court. So she is not CONVICTED of anything, she was FOUND LIABLE for copyright infringement. No amount of media articles you find that say otherwise throw at us will change that fact. And yes, the media is wrong sometimes. Please, do some research into both criminal and civil court cases and you too might realize the differences.
Second, do you honestly think file sharing is doing more damage to the record labels or suing their own customers might have more of an impact? There are now 3 independent studies, all of them included in different articles here on this very site, that show file sharing doesn’t hurt record sales but in fact HELPS BOOST SALES. How can you explain that? I say, if you bite the hand that feeds you, the hand stops feeding you. Period.
December 9th, 2007 at 11:33 pm
It is interesting to see this whining by the RIAA and MPAA about file sharing.
I remember when groups like this whined about how Video (now DVD) and Record (now CDs) rentals would kill the market, because no one would buy the product anymore (I am not sure how bad the backlash was in the US, because I was living overseas then).
Each organization was sure that these “evil” rentals would kill the market, and no one would every buy their product again.
The truth, however, is that DVD/CD sales are doing well, even with the ever increasing number of Rentals.
So what it comes down to, is the classical “the sky is falling” syndrome, by people who are too uneducated/clueless about what is happening in the world around them.
I know from experience, people who will buy DVD/CDs will buy them whether or not they have seen/listened to them before (and there is a higher chance that they will buy it if they liked what they saw/listened to).
On the other hand, people who don’t buy DVD/CDs won’t buy them, no matter what the situation is: Some may wait to watch the movie in the $1 theater night, or wait until the local Movie channels show it, or even watch it with a friend who bought it. As for music, all you need to do, is turn the radio knob, or borrow the CD from a friend. Personally, I have not found many pieces of music that I would want to buy, much less buy the full album, because I have lost interest in much of the recent music.
Now when the product is then SOLD by a person, that is a whole new ballgame. Many people who “buy” this legitimate product, feel that they have “purchased” the product, so they don’t need to buy the “official” product. This will cause a loss of sale, as well as put money in the pockets of those who do not have the right to make money off of the product.
So it comes to this main point
“Loss of Sale”
Maybe the **AA’s of the world should be worrying about the true copyright offenders who are trying to make a buck off of other people’s work, than trying to extort cash from people.
On another note, I will have to say that I am not sure about the laws in the US or Canada, but where I live, misrepresenting yourself as a lawyer has very severe consequences, and as many people know, the Internet is not as anonymous as people would like to think.
Just my two cents
I am not a lawyer, laws and regulations may vary in your state, country
December 10th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
Readerâs Write said:
â…..file sharing doesnât hurt record sales but in fact HELPS BOOST SALES. How can you explain that? I say, if you bite the hand that feeds you, the hand stops feeding you. Periodâ
Yes, well bullshit yourself as you wish. Weâre down 14 billion a year at the moment. I say when music procurement stays about on par as it currently is and the 14 plus billion in annual revenue returns and then we see the INCREASE ON TOP OF THAT, that illegal downloading supposedly creates…..THEN youâll have a point.
Until then, my clients, mostly studio and touring guys…… their yearly income used to average about 2/3âs royalties, one-third active recording, playing out and touring. Royalty is done now because you kids are fucking musicians senselessly. Most of my clients are down to 35%-40% (plus minus) of their income from 5 years ago. They are slowly losing their homes, their kids canât go to college, they are being forced to do without health insurance and things like that. I deal with this mess everyday. You are taking, possessing, enjoying, and paying nothing. You are fucking the artists raw, and you call yourselves fans.
We have words for kids like you but âfansâ is not one of them.
December 10th, 2007 at 11:00 pm
UrbanLawyer is right, you know. Fuck you assholes and your filesharing!
Because of you rotten kids, our favorite artists are starving.
Robert Plant is down to his last $60 million dollars! He had to get back together with Led Zeppelin just to make ends meet.
*sniff*
December 11th, 2007 at 4:19 am
FUCK!
i warned you. you’ve over-fed the troll!!
STOP, DROP AND COVER, PEOPLE!
LOOK OUT! HE’S GONNA BLOW!
December 11th, 2007 at 6:48 am
” LOOK OUT! HEâS GONNA BLOW! ”
and he’s gonna do it to carey sherman
December 11th, 2007 at 9:33 am
UrbanLawyer – maybe you’re down $14 billion in sales because people already own the CD versions of ‘Appetite for Destruction’, ‘Rumours’, and ‘The Joshua Tree’ and refuse to buy them again?
I can’t speak for everyone else, but I own hundreds of CDs. And most of it is from replacing my vinyl & cassettes with the CD versions of those albums between 1995-2000. Since 2000 I’ve bought maybe 5 new release CDs per year AT MOST. Maybe sales are down because people already filled their back catalogues and are spending their entertainment dollars elsewhere? I can believe that filesharing would increase the liklihood that someone would buy a new relase CD… but anyone would have a tough time selling $14 billion worth of new release CDs with all the horrible bands that are being churned out these days.
For sure I buy more DVDs than anything right now (HMV has more DVDs on display than CDs these days), but I’m not buying as many DVDs lately as I’ve pretty much replaced my entire old VHS movie collection, too.
It sounds like the rise of the CD in the 1990s gave the industry a false sense of security, causing them to set their expectations too high. Now they are using the internet as a scapegoat.
December 11th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
“FUCK!
i warned you. youâve over-fed the troll!!
STOP, DROP AND COVER, PEOPLE!
LOOK OUT! HEâS GONNA BLOW!”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Stop!!!! HOHOHOHOHOHOHAHAHAHAHA Oh my god, I think I pissed myself!!! That’s awesome!
December 12th, 2007 at 2:30 am
“Most of my clients are down to 35%-40% (plus minus)”
Is that true?
Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Victory is near! MIlitary strategists claim than once you destroy 50% of the enemy army you win the war because they can no longer attack you or even defend themselves.
Continue the boycott! Down with the parasites!
Charge!
December 12th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
UrbanLawyer – “You are taking, possessing, enjoying, and paying nothing.”
First of all, if you want to call yourself a lawyer, you’re going to have to prove it. None of us is required to take your word for it, and I doubt we will.
Second of all, your statement isn’t quite correct. In order to download one EP by Wil Deynes (who gave his permission for the content to be shared), I have to pay $520 in rent, $90 for electricity, $35 for cable internet, and have to have the computer pre-existing. And that’s just for this month. That’s $645 just for one month’s access to the Internet.
Just because I’m not paying the RIAA $15 for a seven-song CD that I may not even enjoy doesn’t mean money didn’t go toward the obtaining of said seven songs. Besides, I’m more likely to actually buy a hard copy of the disk now, because I downloaded it, listened to it, and I like it.
If you claim that file sharing hurts downloads, provide actual documentation representing your claim. I have a hunch that says you won’t be able to, and that you’ll claim that you don’t have to. If you do, remember that I’ve won.
December 12th, 2007 at 7:24 pm
” If you claim that file sharing hurts downloads, provide actual documentation representing your claim. I have a hunch that says you wonât be able to, and that youâll claim that you donât have to. ”
This is their entire strategy.
Use their financial weight to make their victim cave, so the RIAA won’t
have to show any proof, since they actually have none.
You’ll see be checking out http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/
The they have a long history of fighting against showing ANY evidence,
and dropping the case when their hand is forced.
They only keep going if the case is handled by a select few judges, ( judges Trager and Levy, to name a couple ).
In the Jammie Thomas case they won without having to provide ANY evidence that
ANYONE other than themselves downloaded anything.
This is the chief reason they do this in CIVIL court instead of CRIMINAL court
The burden of proof in criminal court would destroy their case.
As long as they have the right judge, they can ‘win’ without proof.
Visit that site
.
You’ll see a WHOLE lot more losses by the RIAA than wins.
( They shouldn’t do the victory dance over Jammie thomas just yet .. that appeal is
in the works ).
December 12th, 2007 at 9:19 pm
“Use their financial weight to make their victim cave, so the RIAA wonât
have to show any proof, since they actually have none.”
And to think, these people are supported by those who call downloading “an ethical breach“.
December 14th, 2007 at 9:01 pm
quote: Weâre down 14 billion a year at the moment.
——————-
I love it. I’ve not bought a music offering in a long time. I’ve went on a boycott and will not support their methods of business. It is nice to hear others feel the same way and the negative publicity generated by the sue’em all is getting the attention it needs in the proper form; which is to say the customers are becoming non-customers. It is my sincere hope to see the music industry as it now exists burned to the ground, lock, stock, and barrel in hopes that what rises from the ashes might be able to hear what the customer wants. Those in charge now haven’t a clue if it deviates from their own desires.
Thank you for the best news I’ve heard today!
December 14th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
What’s ironic is that the RIAA understand the idea behind data less than me! Considering that I’m a twelve-year-old seventh-grader in Plano, Texas, that sad. The internet is a network of servers; there isn’t a central chokepoint where you can stop stuff. There is a reason that you can always find warez on the net. Filing lawsuits isn’t going to do anything, as most people are unfazed by the spam wave.
The RIAA need to take their head out of the sand, and face reality. Physical crap is becoming obsolete, and why go somewhere when you can get what you want at home? Wake up!
December 15th, 2007 at 5:14 pm
One more distress call since I can’t find a way to email P2pnets admin asking him to share a story.
Every Filesharer in the universe needs to Download Ben’s Guide, if you can’t afford the best lawyer, find a way to protect yourself on your own when downloading and sharing.
So all File-Sharers, I am Sending A 2ND P2P distress Call>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please share Ben’s Guide, I am sorry for sounding like a advertiser but I need p2pnet to talk about my guide, Please p2pnet I wanna protect the P2P Communities for no-profit, I wanna protect people from lawsuits, I am here to help.
December 30th, 2007 at 3:36 am
Why do all industries consider that profits always need to increase, and that they can’t drop ? When they make profits, these companies are happy to say : We took risks because we believe in our artists and because we took risks we now receive the money that we earned for taking these risks. And then when these PROFITS decrease (we’re not even talking about losing money, we’re talking about winning less money) they can’t believe it and try to find a criminal group responsible for this. Profits have to drop, it is an important part of our economic system; if profits of old 1900-1910 storeholders didn’t drop, you couldn’t now go to a shopping center and find thousands of article, you would still be stuck to go to the village’s general store to have a choice between 50 items. Every big change in our society is accompanied by some people losing, others winning. Here we have UrbanLawyer, a member of the losing group, hired by them to diffuse propaganda.
And we can’t say the music industry didn’t had it easy. Look at what they offer. Nothing really better than what was recorded on old vinyls 60 years ago. Some may argue it’s even worse. Can you name me an industry that made big profits over 60 years without changing anything major in its model ? I can’t. It’s a shame, I feel like they’re laughing at us. And while these guys were sitting on their big chunks of money, thinking that it would grow forever, some geniuses were working day and night on one of the biggest invention of humanity in the world of communications since printing : Internet. And that was just the beginning, some 15 years ago. In 7 years, it became available for more and more people. Beginning of the millenium, the P2P protocols were invented and evolved. Around 2005, we were already starting to talk about Web 2.0. Youtube came out, bittorrent, TV was available on the net, Mediawiki was invented, opening possibilities that humanity had never known before. And while this was happening, while the new generation was diversifying their methods of communication and the entertainment offer was growing, these guys were sitting on their big pile of money, thinking about who could be the next artist that would allow them to redo the same recipe they’d been doing for years, a recipe that had brought constant and regular profits over more than 60 years : the tubes, the diffusion on radio, videoclips, and then the selling of vinyls, cassettes, or CDs, the show tickets… Music is eternal. Music industry is not. Humans have probably been doing rythmic sounds for 20,000 years now, and you’ve been selling this shit for only 60 years. In the history of music, you are a wink. Music doesn’t need you. You are the last ashes of a civilization that has been burned down, and wind will blow you.