Comments on: RIAA writes to Judge McMahon http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6169 p2pnet.net - reader powered Thu, 08 Jan 2009 05:23:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6169#comment-19772 Reader's Write Fri, 09 Sep 2005 05:49:52 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6169#comment-19772 I find most of this very interesting. I really feel for those that are jacked in an attempt to extort money from them. Most of it is without proof other than an ip number and an alleged list. I think that if these sort of attempts at extortion get to be regular that there will be some very interesting side effects. Most likely stuff the RIAA and majors don't want to become public knowledge. Ideas come to mind, like who really owns the copyright? The artists assume that they have give the ownership for a limited time. That in the end they still own it once the time runs out. I think you will probably find that the artists name is no where on the copyright and that the sole ownership belongs to the cartels. If this is so, it could likely raise another legal storm with the artists. How did they obtain the info? Did they violate the DMCA laws by hacking propriety software to do so? Did they do it in-house or did they hire it done? What methods were used by whoever got the info and can it be duplicated or verified? Each of these questions are leading and go to other places as you can be sure that none of them are going to be easy answers. (at least for those that wish to hide such types of disclosure.) Exactly what is the connection with Loudeye in the spreading of bad files, virusii and trojans? That Loudeye is on the payroll is a given and Loudeye has at least once publicly announced that they were doing such activities. The question becomes one of if they were directed to do so on commission. Likely this could blow up in their faces with the laws on the books to deal with hackers and malware writers. Lately you haven't heard much public spash about it but all those "bad files" are still out there so you know that the activity is continuing. There are so many interesting questions to be answered out of this. Much of it would help the public to defend themselves against the tactics they are using once info is obtained on exactly how, where, and who does what. Much of this info has been very carefully gaurded by the cartels in the process and a lot of thought was put into how to impliment it without giving out a lot of the "how we did it". It will take court cases to bring this info to the forefront and that they have avoided as much as possible. I find most of this very interesting. I really feel for those that are jacked in an attempt to extort money from them. Most of it is without proof other than an ip number and an alleged list. I think that if these sort of attempts at extortion get to be regular that there will be some very interesting side effects. Most likely stuff the RIAA and majors don’t want to become public knowledge.

Ideas come to mind, like who really owns the copyright? The artists assume that they have give the ownership for a limited time. That in the end they still own it once the time runs out. I think you will probably find that the artists name is no where on the copyright and that the sole ownership belongs to the cartels. If this is so, it could likely raise another legal storm with the artists.

How did they obtain the info? Did they violate the DMCA laws by hacking propriety software to do so? Did they do it in-house or did they hire it done? What methods were used by whoever got the info and can it be duplicated or verified? Each of these questions are leading and go to other places as you can be sure that none of them are going to be easy answers. (at least for those that wish to hide such types of disclosure.)

Exactly what is the connection with Loudeye in the spreading of bad files, virusii and trojans? That Loudeye is on the payroll is a given and Loudeye has at least once publicly announced that they were doing such activities. The question becomes one of if they were directed to do so on commission. Likely this could blow up in their faces with the laws on the books to deal with hackers and malware writers. Lately you haven’t heard much public spash about it but all those “bad files” are still out there so you know that the activity is continuing.

There are so many interesting questions to be answered out of this. Much of it would help the public to defend themselves against the tactics they are using once info is obtained on exactly how, where, and who does what.

Much of this info has been very carefully gaurded by the cartels in the process and a lot of thought was put into how to impliment it without giving out a lot of the “how we did it”. It will take court cases to bring this info to the forefront and that they have avoided as much as possible.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6169#comment-19771 Reader's Write Fri, 09 Sep 2005 04:07:32 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6169#comment-19771 If this court exercise proves that the collection evidence is insufficient, and it's the same evidence all the settlements were based on, maybe all of the sued will start a class action lawsuit. That would tip the scales because the number of people they have settled with is so high, a huge settlement would hurt them financially and in public relations. I have waited so long for someone to do this. I personally don't think the RIAA will be able to prove it's case on the basis of damaging infringement. FIGHT TEH POWER!!! If this court exercise proves that the collection evidence is insufficient, and it’s the same evidence all the settlements were based on, maybe all of the sued will start a class action lawsuit. That would tip the scales because the number of people they have settled with is so high, a huge settlement would hurt them financially and in public relations. I have waited so long for someone to do this. I personally don’t think the RIAA will be able to prove it’s case on the basis of damaging infringement.

FIGHT TEH POWER!!!

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6169#comment-19765 Reader's Write Thu, 08 Sep 2005 22:31:36 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6169#comment-19765 I wonder if they'll submit those papers along with a little "mystery envelope" filled with strange green pieces of paper. I wonder if they’ll submit those papers along with a little “mystery envelope” filled with strange green pieces of
paper.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6169#comment-19750 Reader's Write Thu, 08 Sep 2005 16:25:18 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6169#comment-19750 You know, that´s a good idea. If you win, then the whole lawsuites goes up into the air, and no one will fear them again. If she ¨loses¨, that is if she is fined a few hundred bucks, then other people will say, fuck I´m not settling, I´d rather go to court. I can afford to lose a few hundred, and hey I might win which means that I might be rewarded for this frivalous lawsuit. Hope she wins though, it´ll be better that way! You know, that´s a good idea.

If you win, then the whole lawsuites goes up into the air, and no one will fear them again.

If she ¨loses¨, that is if she is fined a few hundred bucks, then other people will say, fuck I´m not settling, I´d rather go to court. I can afford to lose a few hundred, and hey I might win which means that I might be rewarded for this frivalous lawsuit.

Hope she wins though, it´ll be better that way!

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6169#comment-19747 Reader's Write Thu, 08 Sep 2005 14:14:38 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6169#comment-19747 They shit scared. They think they can tell the court what can and can not be done. Well done to judge, it such suprise that he told them I am the boss here, not them! Even if she did lose, which shouldn't I wouldn't suprised if judge only order here to pay damages in reagion of about $200(Yes two hundred). Also after this it could really start to get fun. If people who have agreed to pay RIAA threats could start get pissed off because they were told if dont pay up they would sue and win more. They could have good resion they to be able to sue RIAA back, for lot more they had to pay back. They shit scared. They think they can tell the court what can and can not be done. Well done to judge, it such suprise that he told them I am the boss here, not them!

Even if she did lose, which shouldn’t I wouldn’t suprised if judge only order here to pay damages in reagion of about $200(Yes two hundred).

Also after this it could really start to get fun. If people who have agreed to pay RIAA threats could start get pissed off because they were told if dont pay up they would sue and win more. They could have good resion they to be able to sue RIAA back, for lot more they had to pay back.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6169#comment-19728 Reader's Write Thu, 08 Sep 2005 05:32:25 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/6169#comment-19728 They are running scared. And with good reason, as this case is built on pure circumstantial evidence. I will be interested to see the methods the RIAA used to capture this information, and the reliability of it. How can we be certain their records are correct? How can we be certain they aren't just inventing logs and information to procecute people? I want to see this hard evidence! They are running scared. And with good reason, as this case is built on pure circumstantial evidence.

I will be interested to see the methods the RIAA used to capture this information, and the reliability of it. How can we be certain their records are correct? How can we be certain they aren’t just inventing logs and information to procecute people?

I want to see this hard evidence!

]]>