P2p file sharing increases
p2pnet.net News:- Big Music’s claim that its sue ‘em all campaign is driving people away from sharing files over the p2p networks has once again been seriously questioned.
The latest figures from p2p network research specialists Big Champagne show strong increases in use of popular file sharing nets in the US and globally, despite the fact that last month, the Big Four record label cartel brought the number of people it’s threatening to sue to almost 7,000.
The cartel’s heavily publicized anti-p2p efforts notwithstanding, in November, the average number of people simultaneously logged on to the p2p file sharing networks at any given moment increased significantly from 6,255,986 in October to 7,452,184.
The number of users on p2p networks in the US went up from 4,435,395 in October to 5,445,275 in November.
“While these increases are consistent with the trend we’ve observed in Q4 in previous years, strong growth in the USA in particular has yielded an active (logged-on) p2p user base that’s more than one-third greater than it was in the fourth quarter of last year,” ceo Eric Garland told p2pnet.
Only days after the seven major movie studios decided to mimic the cartel’s attempts to sue people into buying product, the cartel members announced their RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) was going after another 761 ordinary US citizens, deliberately mis-characterized as criminals.
To date, none of the 6,952 men, women and children sued under civil law by the music industry behemoth have appeared in court. They always accept its offer to ’settle’. They have no choice. They simply don’t have the financial or legal resources to stand up to Big Music, although many would like to. This in turn means no case has yet been tried and proven.
Nonetheless, the multi-billion-dollar cartel claims it’s successfully sued thousands of people for allegedly infringing music copyrights.
In the process, the principle Innocent until Proven Guilty goes by the board.
“The lawsuits are an essential educational tool,” says RIAA president Cary Sherman. ”They remind music fans about the law and provide incentives to university administrators to offer legal alternatives.”
The “legal alternatives” are firms backed and supplied by cartel members EMI, UMG, Warner and Sony-BMG.
While the RIAA and identical enforcement units in other countries chase file sharers, who’d happily pay a fair price for downloads, the true criminals continue to get rich, making and selling fake and counterfeit product.
Global monthly average simultaneous users (Big Champagne)
2003 ==> August, 3,847,565; September, 4,319,182; October, 6,142,507; November, 4,392,816; and, December, 5,602,384
2004 ==> January, 6,046,998; February, 6,831,366; March, 7,370,644; April, 7,639,479; May, 7,286,377; June, 7,401,431; July, 7,115,975; August, 6,822,312; September, 6,784,574; October, 6,255,986; and, November, 7,452,184.
Monthly average users, USA
2003 ==> August, 2,630,960; September, 2,891,645; October, 3,764,032; November, 2,498,431; and, December, 3,239,298
2004 ==> January, 3,528,419; February, 4,039,989; March, 4,603,571; April, 4,688,988; May, 4,589,255; June, 4,583,920; July, 4,584,111; August, 4,549,801; September, 4,687,536; October, 4,435,395; and, November, 5,445,2
HOME
December 9th, 2004 at 4:15 pm
With “consumers” and fans being alleniated left, right, and center (RIAA, MPAA, and lately Television too) it’s no wonder at all why the number of people using P2P networks is increasing. People are angry, and getting angrier every day. This is their way of revolting, and shows just how badly the system needs to change. We want it all, we want it when ever we want it, and we want it for a reasonable and fair fee. We don’t want to be controlled by corporations and force fed their crappy content how they want it fed to us. I’m pretty sure they are laughing at us all, and especially the political/court system since that si especially what is allowing them to get away with all this crap. Why go after the real pirates anyways? Not when there is good money to be made by emotionally brutalizing regular folks by forcing them to settle, since they can’t afford to fight back. David and goliath indeed. Yes, it’s quite the nice little racket they have going on, isn’t it? If we’re not careful we’re going to end up much like China, and other countries that censor everything and anything, and if you don’t like it you disappear permanently. Don’t laugh, it can happen. History has shown us time and again that it can. If we let it that is. That’s the the key component.
December 9th, 2004 at 5:39 pm
I’ve seen comments by numerous judges expressing concern over the fact that the plaintifs so heavily outgun would be defendents. They question the ethics but the law binds their hands.
This sorry episode in american history is showing in clear relief a massive and unintended hole in the constitution.
A vast majority of the founding fathers remembered copyright law for what it was at the time, and still is now, a means by which the rich, royal, or politically motivated can stifle dissent or educated choice.
They saw it as a threat to every freedom in the bill of rights, but, recognizing the incentive to science and the arts.. threw that one redeeming quality a bone with an “allowance” for congress to act to protect it. Unfortunately that concession is seen as an unlimited license permitting complete and flagrant nullification of the bill of rights for the financial gain of the moneyed and powerful few.
December 9th, 2004 at 5:43 pm
to that end.. after the united states government is eventually toppled by people increasingly enraged at having their freedom to choose, innovate, and communicate stolen from them.. the next constitution should have clearly deliniated terms of copyright, and a provision which forbids alteration save by plebicite.
December 10th, 2004 at 9:39 pm
Quote> “History has shown us time and again that it can. If we let it that is.”
Let it happen? LET IT?!?! A pretty big portion of our fellow comrades in good ol’ US of A voted George Bush in for a second term. “Let it” indeed. We’re asking for it.
December 11th, 2004 at 7:30 pm
When the purchase cost of downloading falls to $0.25 per song I’ll start to buy; in the meantime I’ll continue to accept whatever benefits technology offers, knowing as long as I download only I’m breaking no laws. Let all “entertainment industries” wake up and smell the coffee, they offer limited, sometimes questionable benefit to our culture; there’s little public support for compensation not reflective of their true value.
Canada
December 12th, 2004 at 5:53 pm
I believe that these commerised industries are not so much looking to stop people downloading, but how can they get in on the act, It was just the same when the TV industry took off, they said then they were going to lose money,but they got in on the act and made more money, I beleive two words can sum it up GREED,and ENVY.
December 12th, 2004 at 5:59 pm
I believe that these commerised industries are not so much looking to stop people downloading, but how can they get in on the act, It was just the same when the TV industry took off, they said then they were going to lose money,but they got in on the act and made more money, I beleive two words can sum it up GREED,and ENVY.
Sandy
February 20th, 2006 at 3:36 pm