So then, how could they blame downloader’s for downloading pirated stuff if this were made the case? Saying that downloader’s (not uploader’s) can get fined or even jailed JUST FOR D/L the pirated file is utter BS…

That’s why it’s NOT done in masses, and most people are still not in jail for downloading.

Kids should basically be safe, but their not…Some aren’t, most are because they (MPAA/RIAA) know it’s not possible for them to go to court and say “BECAUSE this person downloaded this particular file, it has ended in a loss for such and such company” When in fact, those bastards don’t know for a fact that the downloader would’ve bought it if they had no means to get it for free. Which is why they want a new law!! Even when there’s no proof to govern it.

They say their losing hundreds of billions of dollars every year to people downloading, when actually, their biggest loss is because of the source pirate and not the downloader ^^.. Or the movie or song is just utter crap and will make no sales even if their were no pirated copies…They can’t read the future, so how can they predict a loss…? What, because they made 17 million last year, and this so called new album is loads better, but only made 3 million? Is that the proof that someone downloading it was the cause and not there own lyrics, or shitty genre? Maybe they should change styles, better yet, maybe they should get a job at the supermarket?

The source pirate is the problem, not the downloader. - Fucking 17th century noobs. RIAA and MPAA can get fucked. So can Pepsi for selling sugar that kills, and apple for giving us the opportunity to get things as easy as it is.

Who made the first commercially available OS usable to make this possible, Im sure it was Apple…Or was it Microshaft? The fucks that pwn half the planet from stealing from others to create these BS OS’s in the first place.

(Apple “Ill rip him off” > o/ - MS and Ill rip him off >\o then we’ll make it possible for him > \o/ to rip them off > o/ but we’ll say “NOT TO BE USED FOR ILLEGAL PURPOSES TO COVER OUR ARSES.”)

BUT wait wait, lets make a device that actually caters for those MP3 formats as well CALLED IFUCKINGPODS. Then one year later, come up with a plan that makes us even more money, and a more closed code that only OUR portables can play, then sell those too, then create contracts with artists and sell their shit in our format to cater for the new breed. Then lets make an iPOD center with iTUNES and say its legal this way, but not that way (yet, they catered for them not long ago, when it wasn’t possible to download an MP3 legally, yet the player was created.)

A kid is going to die in Africa, he has no food or water, a multi-billionaire walks past him, drops his water bottle that he filled up with free water from a tap someone else owned in another country, and says “Don’t touch it, Ill be back tomorrow to see if its still there” the kid looks at it and says to him/herself, “What a greedy POS” but still has a little taste to survive, because he’s sure that guy can survive without it and it was right there, so why not? (I know it is a necessity and entertainment is not, but it holds the same principal and point GREED.)

Wait wait, lets create a weapon of mass destruction, and say “DO NOT TOUCH, POSSIBLE TO KILL ENTIRE PLANETS.” If you push this read button, it goes bang. But, Ill sell it to you for a good price if you really want to own the rights to it, Bush says to his rich friend Osama. If you got the cash, you get the goods. Who gives a shit who you blow up, I got more and can blow your entire country to bits.

Does Linkin park really deserve to buy a solid gold Hummer? Or a diamond studded pool for making shit music? being born with the talent he/she was gifted with? Leaving other less talented less educated people who had no chance at life to fall under them and be known as a middleclass person because of a certain defect they couldn’t help?

Don’t blame kids for the problem, you fucks started it because you got greedy, and you got bit in the arse. You pricks disgust me with your greed, everything should be free, even food and water that someone worked hard to produce.

Greed is the root of all evil.

This world is built on greed, and you got served, deal with it..

And you wanna know something funny?

I myself am a musician, (not signed to a label) that promotes his music online. (no i wont advertise so dont stress) and you know what? all this just makes me sick, i earn roughly 20 - 30 cents of that .75 they would make and all this shit does is make me want to make music less and less, i would love people to download it, i dont know many people who download music and dont buy a cd anyway…… most actually want to know what it sounds like first, how many of you have bought a cd for upwards of 30 dollars and found out… “hey this is absolute crap”

To me this is just another sign that with the increasing strength of the “Digital Age” we are becoming “digitalis indefensis”

Soon enough the only music ill be hearing is that I make myself, music is something EVERYONE Should be able to hear anytime they like, download/ tape it onto a cassette/ whatever…..

I can understand reselling a product you haven’t paid for (and don’t have a business to sell it) as wrong, afterall people go to a hell of a lot of trouble (and money) to set up cd stores etc.

but these were kids we’re talking about? ok i know people are capable of anything, but at the age of 13 are you thinking “oh im gonna download 20gb of music and make a million” or are you thinking like a 13 year old?

my sister for instance, worries about school, friends, etc and so on.
grrrr i feel like im rambling (which i probably am) but this just…..

*breaks a few random useless objects*

Next you’ll be ID tagged, we won’t have money, you just work and swipe your arm at the counter, and get your “balance”
i.e 140 dollars shopping = 23.5 hours work
downloading music “illegally”, theyll pick up on your tag, and bill you 20,000 hours + community service And/or an ad campaign in which your made to look like a juvenile deluinqent pushing drugs on the streets to make a quick buck.

The world has gone to hell long ago, I just can’t believe people want to try and dig us all a deeper grave.

Give me my guitar anyday, at least it won’t sue me for “illegally writing riffs”

I am trying to reach Jon Newton to let him know, the California District Attorney’s Association, now holding their annual conference, in Napa California, June 28 to July 2, has accepted money from the RIAA, to pay for the banquet dinner.

I tried the contact info but got a returned mail. Not sure how to contact him, somebody please help.

The web site is www.cdaa.org When you get the main page, click on 2004 conference, and then scroll to end of page.

Politician taking money from big industry is perfectly legal, but there is question of conflict of interest when prosecutors do it. Fortunately, if the word can be gotten out, it may disqualify those same DAs from prosecuting file sharers.

Obviously, you need a California lawyer to advise on this, but its’ something all those charged must be informed of.

The children involved get a check for their involvement with the advertisement. Probably to offset legal costs and such. But it cannot be ignored that they are compensated. How well they are compensated is a matter of debate.

Now for the image of the children. How many people have seen Viagra commercials on tv? How about vaginal fungicidal creams? Do the people who act those roles get the stigma of having a vaginal infection or erectile dysfunction? Probably not. They are reckognized as actors.

The children were never convicted of anything. In so saying, there is NO LEGAL RECORD of their legal misconduct. Period. As far as the legal world and most people not in the know is concerned, this is a publicity thing and as far as anyone cares, those children could have been actors.

The fact is that the parents signed a waiver/release/contract. It isn’t like Pepsi and Apple went and forced them to sign anything. The RIAA might have and probably did, but the parents decided on it and the children played their roles in the commercial, got paid, and probably have a certain level of 15 minute fame to get them bit parts in another commercial/ad/modelling work.

The fact of the matter is that there will be nothing to haunt these children later in life because there is no documentable item that they have violated any laws. The parents’ records may be a different matter, but that’s them.

Whether there will be any lawsuits after this will be a matter of what the contract wording was. Ie, did they waive away their rights?

But that’s for a lawyer to decide.

Here’s food for thought:

If you are truly so concerned about their image, petition. Go write letters to your representatives. Go picket in front of the respective offices and headquarters of the businesses involved. Go boycott pepsi/riaa/apple products if you are so inclined. But before you do any of that, why not get in touch with the children involved in the ad and find out what their thoughts and opinions were? How about their parents’ opinions?

They might actually see this as a great end to a surprisingly bad situation.

maybe you meant “the shopowner”?? if you can’t type shut up f*cktard! you’re probably a thief yourself, they broke the law, didn’t you hear me?

The law you idiot, the thing bad people break!

—–

Now that I’ve expressed 60% of the expected replies, please come up with something worth posting.

Is it strange that they broke the law the riaa/mpaa lobbied into existens themselves? Ever considered whether laws can be wrong? Besides, noticed how these kids weren’t even tried in court? How they were bullied (who can afford such a lawsuit?) into settling?

Do you seriously believe artists (besides madonna/metallica) can make a living from the record companies? Well, think again. Check things up. You might be surprised.

Why shouldn’t you STEAL a candybar? Because then the shoplifter will lose a candybar. Man, aren’t these things COMPLICATED?

Or perhaps it is bad because the shopowner can’t sell you one, because you already got one? Like it would be if you could COPY it.

The ONLY thing that the industry loses when someone copies music, is a POTENTIAL customer. How much music do you think these poor kids could afford today anyway?

Or wait, maybe the goal is to make sure people get as little music as possible, because it will matter BIG TIME if these kids who can’t afford music anyway downloads it or not. So let’s sue them out of their future. They’re thieves after all. Probably support the mafia too.

Yes, them thieving coppits. They will not have it. My preciouzzzzz

That same summer ‘Apple’ gave Samsung a cash injection of $200 million. For LCD monitor technology - Look it up.

Does that mean Apple ‘owns’ Samsung?

“if you don’t admit that your an idiot”

When you learn the difference between “your” and “you’re,” you might have the right to call someone else an idiot.

Until then, you’re just another fourteen-year-old with a bad attitude.

http://nmc.siu.edu/~pepsi/

Note: Looking for mirrors to my site!

A Few other points: ‘AAC that only the iPod can play’ just flat out wrong, you can burn the music to CD and play it in your car, you can listen it on your computer or hook up your computer to a serero system and listen to it that way, and yes other MP3 players do play the AAC format. This is just more FUD from the MS backed mobile audio player market trying to force the WMA standard on everyone.

I do beleive that this is a Pepsi Co. promotoion. We’ve all seen Apple’s recent style in comercials, PowerBooks, iPod, etc.. This is clearly not an Apple produced comerical. They are paying Apple $0.99 for each song that is redeemed, not for each cap that is put out into circulation. I read that Pepsi only expects 20% - 30% of the caps to be redeemed. I’m not saying Apple isn’t a part of this promition, but if you must blame someone than lets put most of the blame where most of the blame is due. Pepsi.

Must go now, they’re ‘persuading’ me to go down to work now.