<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Big 4 record labels vs Eircom</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15718/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15718</link>
	<description>p2pnet.net - reader powered</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:11:09 -0300</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Eric Johnston</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15718/comment-page-1#comment-433286</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Johnston</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 00:45:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15718#comment-433286</guid>
		<description>In other words, they&#039;d be happy with a sizable cut of ISP profits. How can they claim ISPs are partly liable when they are blaming and suing their customers for full liability at the same time? You can&#039;t get compensation for something, and then go elsewhere demanding compensation for the exact same thing. It&#039;s like if a kid had to pay a fine for loitering, the &quot;crime&quot; has been compensated for. Can they then turn around and look at getting money out of his parents also for the same offense, and maybe his relatives also?

Yet that&#039;s exactly what they are trying to do. Get their fingers into every pie, regardless of right or wrong, justifiable or not. Why bother looking for proof when you can just sue everyone if you can get away with it.

I didn&#039;t think EMI was so bad before, but if they want any hope of restoring their reputation they need to disassociate themselves from these Jesuits</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In other words, they&#8217;d be happy with a sizable cut of ISP profits. How can they claim ISPs are partly liable when they are blaming and suing their customers for full liability at the same time? You can&#8217;t get compensation for something, and then go elsewhere demanding compensation for the exact same thing. It&#8217;s like if a kid had to pay a fine for loitering, the &#8220;crime&#8221; has been compensated for. Can they then turn around and look at getting money out of his parents also for the same offense, and maybe his relatives also?</p>
<p>Yet that&#8217;s exactly what they are trying to do. Get their fingers into every pie, regardless of right or wrong, justifiable or not. Why bother looking for proof when you can just sue everyone if you can get away with it.</p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t think EMI was so bad before, but if they want any hope of restoring their reputation they need to disassociate themselves from these Jesuits</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gabriel</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15718/comment-page-1#comment-431775</link>
		<dc:creator>Gabriel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 03:21:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15718#comment-431775</guid>
		<description>RIAA, Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG are starting to sound more like Scientology Extortion Cult!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RIAA, Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG are starting to sound more like Scientology Extortion Cult!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>


