RIAA sues another 750
p2pnet.net News:- Incredibly, the Big Four music cartel is suing yet 750 mothers and fathers and their children for sharing music online.
The latest wave of “federal litigation” targets is made up of, “computer users across the nation, including 25 students at 13 universities, according to the Recording Industry Association of America, the trade group for the largest music companies,” says an Associated Press story, going on:
“The RIAA claims the defendants used university computer networks to distribute copyrighted recordings on unauthorized peer-to-peer services, including eDonkey, Kazaa, LimeWire and Grokster.
“Separately, the RIAA also sued 213 people in 34 states and Washington D.C. who had already been identified in earlier litigation but failed to settle their cases.”
“Federal litigation.” Sounds almost official, doesn’t it?
In fact, this is nothing more than a vast, hard-core, multi-billion-dollar conglomerate continuing to wage a futile war against technology it can’t control – and the 6,191 people caught up in it are victims.
So far, not one of them has appeared in court since Big Music launched its relentless sue ‘em all campaign a little more than a year ago.
That’s because the RIAA always offers them a chance to ’settle’, knowing full well none of these very ordinary people has the resources to take Big Music on in a court fight.
Late last year, when the RIAA began its sue ‘em all campaign, one of the first people to be pilloried, New York student Lorraine Sullivan, told p2pnet she learned she was expected to turn up in court from a reporter and it took the RIAA a further seven days before she heard from them officially.
“If I knew the rest of my life wouldn’t be ruined and that I wouldn’t have this huge financial thing hanging over my head, I’d stand up to them,” Lorraine Sullivan told us. “But I can’t take the risk.”
To date, “1,207 defendants have settled their cases out of court, the RIAA said,” according to AP, which goes on:
“While some surveys have shown the number of people engaging in file-sharing has declined since the RIAA began its legal assault, other data show millions continue to share music, movies and software online.”
Not only do they continue to do so, their numbers are steadily increasing, as p2pnet recently revealed in statistics from music industry research company Big Champagne, and as a new study confirms.
“In general we observe that P2P activity has not diminished. On the contrary, P2P traffic represents a significant amount of Internet traffic and is likely to continue to grow in the future RIAA behavior notwithstanding,” it states.
The report, Is P2P dying or just hiding?, was prepared by by CAIDA ( Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis), SDSC (San Diego Supercomputer Center) and the University of California at San Diego and Riverside.
P2pnet has been told the RIAA has tried to shrug it off, claiming the results are based on ‘spoofs‘ rather than actual p2p use.
It’s long gone time some of the publicly funded organizations that claim to stand for civil rights took one or more cases up.
In the meanwhile, the Big Music cartel will continue to ride rough-shod over people around the world with no one to stand up to it, although victims in the eastern Pennsylvania federal court district will benefit slightly from a decision recently made by Judge Cynthia M. Rufe.
Before the ISPs turn names over to Big Music, they must first send notices to the alleged file sharers advising them of their rights. In the rest of the US, “The RIAA sends similar notices advising defendants of settlement options before proceeding with a case but at that stage the trade group’s lawyers have already discovered the identity of the defendant,” adds AP.
Ironically, the RIAA today launches its newest music awards – for downloads.
===================
See:-
federal litigation – Recording industry sues another 750 computer users, Associated Press, October 28, 2004
resources – Big Music vs Ordinary Folks, p2pnet, August 20, 2004
Lorraine Sullivan – RIAA victim says she has to settle, p2pnet
recently revealed – New p2p file sharing stats, p2pnet, October 23, 2004
new study – P2p file sharing is thriving, p2pnet, October 27, 2004
spoofs – P2p study flawed says RIAA, p2pnet, October 28, 2004
around the world – Big Music anti-piracy war, p2pnet, October 7, 2004
October 29th, 2004 at 9:08 am
Money rules the world!
The richer gets rich, and the poor continues to get poor.
The last century that passed and the one we are living in now, people call it “Modern times”, But there is nothing new.
Imagine the RIAA as the King and the people who buy their music as the peasants. In medieval times u were forced to be payed taxes to the king, and even if u payed taxes, sometimes u were arrested, because a neighbor, might say ur a heretic or anything.
But as History told, us, revolutions occured and all that changed.
The RIAA better learn from history or otherwise a virtual end awaits them in a virtual palace surrounded and doomed by their peasants.
October 29th, 2004 at 8:44 pm
I wish people would talk about the real issue behind file-sharing, and not the smoke-screen about lost corporate profits.
The reason the RIAA doesn’t want you to copy music is because it rocks the boat of their industry. They aren’t about making good music and offering variety. Just the opposite.
The RIAA makes it’s money on producing and promoting new acts. It’s that simple. They produce this years artists to sound and look like last years artists because it’s a winning formula. (Capitalism is about betting money on a sure thing and reducing risk.) There are so many companies and vested interests that win with this formula, that they don’t want to change. The RIAA is watering down American Music just to make a buck. Also, they make more from their artists making commercials, public appearances, etc. than they do actually selling CD’s. This is where the money is- a canned celebrity with contracts in tow, not selling CD’s.
They freak out over file sharing because they don’t want people to decide for themselves what music to listen to. I can’t find music from the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, or 90’s that’s not “Greatest Hits” or “Oldies.” But I can get on the internet and find a vast variety. By making this choice I’ve undercut the RIAA and it’s cronies.
File sharing isn’t about lost corporate profits, it’s about the public making up it’s own mind what to listen to.
October 29th, 2004 at 11:54 pm
Despite the fact the RIAA sue ‘em all campaign is having zero effect on p2p file sharing,
Actually, the CAIDA’s research stated levels were comparable to last year. If the RIAA put no effort into stopping P2P, levels would be much greater for sure. So say they have zero effect is wrong…
November 1st, 2004 at 8:31 pm
What is ur problem huh why dont u let people donload song for free u punkssss
November 1st, 2004 at 8:31 pm
I think you RIAA people should except the fact that you lost the trial and downloading is cool!
November 1st, 2004 at 8:32 pm
What is ur problem huh why dont u let people donload song for free u punkssss
November 1st, 2004 at 8:32 pm
whats your problem why cant we listen to music you guys are dum and stupid ass hole
November 3rd, 2004 at 5:46 pm
In my perspective, the RIAA should stop doing all this suing and just live with it. They should learn to accept what has happened because they canât do anything about it even if they think they can, because the supreme court has made a decision and people do not change their decision very quickly. It would probably take years of campaigning for the court to change their opinion. I also think that RIAA is trying to do what they think is best. They are stuck and are tangled with many problems regarding music download. They know they will soon go out of business if they donât put a stop to this. This decision was not made correctly. I know, for one, that I want to be able to download music for free knowing that I wonât get sued or in trouble. I also understand RIAAâs viewpoint what they are trying to say is that they will go out of business and may no longer be able to provide those songs people want to download for free. I am not taking sides but just saying that the RIAA is not exactly wrong but not exactly right. They are not right suing people after a decision is made but they are not wrong trying to express their opinion and putting all their effort to saving the company. I am not sure who is wrong or right but I know one thing for sure that the court did not make a fair decision and did not look at both viewpoints carefully.So this is my perspective on this issue and I think the court should also take this issue seriously and look at all the facts and which way they will end up with each decision. They could maybe even put a law on new songs or a limit to the number of songs downloaded, but they should do something.