Bush admits p2p file sharing
p2p news / p2pnet: RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) chieftain Mitch Bainwol today hand-delivered a p2p file sharing subpoena to US president George W. Bush, say sources.
George W. has been video-taped openly admitting he plays music by The Beatles on the BushPod.
The Big Four Organized Music cartel’s RIAA is now after him for stealing copyrighted downloads.
“We have to be seen to be scrupulously fair,” says Bainwol. “We’ve subpoenaed more than 18,000 men, women and children for doing the same thing, so we can hardly ignore Predent Bush’s transgressions, even if he is our leader.”
Recordings by The Beatles are sacrosanct and the remaining Beatles have only just agree to allow the band’s works to be posted online.
You can see the Sky.com video of Bush admitting that he’s a file sharing thief here, and just to be safe, we also have a copy here.
April 17th, 2006 at 8:34 pm
just curious
April 17th, 2006 at 8:36 pm
I think its also possible that he ripped a Beatles CD which he owns right? Last time I checked Beatles CDs were still for sale without DRM. Is there evidence he downloaded the songs from an illegal file sharing network? No? This article is silly IMO.
April 17th, 2006 at 8:42 pm
the point was not that he was doing something illegal but that the RIAA was claiming it isnt fair use if the beatles dont allow the authorization of their cds ripped to mp3.
April 17th, 2006 at 8:57 pm
I agree that it is silly to suggest that it is a copyright violation to rip your own CDs and put them on your own portable players — all without the permission of the copyright holder. The problem is that this sillyness is exactly what the RIAA has been claiming.
Hopefully the president won’t find the issue silly, and will deal with it property – by getting the law clarified that you are allowed to time, space and device-shift content which you have legally received, and that you can always do this without additional permission or payment to a copyright holder.
April 17th, 2006 at 9:03 pm
Surely he bought the Beatles tracks from AllOfMp3 with a little help from his good friend Putin.
April 17th, 2006 at 9:06 pm
The article claimed however, that he was guilty of P2P, not of ripping copyrighted material.
April 17th, 2006 at 9:26 pm
I also checked the RIAA site, and I believe ripping the copyrighted material is OK. Check The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 (AHRA). Anyway, he has broken the law in other more important ways, obviously.
April 17th, 2006 at 10:13 pm
you’ve got to be kidding me. how is anyone supposed to take this site seriously when spreading such misinformation? nowhere is p2p mentioned in the interview.
April 17th, 2006 at 10:32 pm
Does any one have any other confirmation of this story? It looks like (from a search on Google News) that this is the only site with the story.
So I’m just wondering if someone just saw the clip and decided to make up a story?
Also, is it true that the RIAA have said that ripping your CDs to your iPod is illegal? And if that is true, has it been held up in court / have they sued anyone for ripping their CDs to their iPod?
April 17th, 2006 at 10:40 pm
Now Bush knows what is hapenning in America, I hope. Thanks to, you guessed it, Bush himself.
April 17th, 2006 at 11:09 pm
I wonder…
What would happen…if members of Congress(Along with the Supreme Court), both Democratic and Republican, are also sued by the RIAA for the same reason as Bush?
April 17th, 2006 at 11:09 pm
I wonder…
What would happen…if members of Congress(Along with the Supreme Court), both Democratic and Republican, are also sued by the RIAA for the same reason as Bush?
April 17th, 2006 at 11:52 pm
hahahaha stupid bush
April 18th, 2006 at 2:08 am
This story comes from this Boing Boing post and it is satirical .
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/04/16/gw_bushs_ipod_contai.html
April 18th, 2006 at 2:33 am
This is basicly a story that has been ripped from Cory Doctorow at Boing Boing ,Sure this is satire but at least quote your sources p2pnet.
“GW Bush’s iPod contains “illegal” (according to RIAA) music
In the video linked below, we see that President Bush’s iPod contains songs by the Beatles; since no Beatles songs have been licensed for the iTunes Music Store yet, these must have come from ripped CDs. Remember last February, when the RIAA told a federal agency that ripping CDs is illegal? I wonder if they’ll bring charges.
Nor does the fact that permission to make a copy in particular circumstances is often or even routinely granted, necessarily establish that the copying is a fair use when the copyright owner withholds that authorization. In this regard, the statement attributed to counsel for copyright owners in the MGM v. Grokster case is simply a statement about authorization, not about fair use. ”
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/04/16/gw_bushs_ipod_contai.html
April 18th, 2006 at 2:35 am
It is not the perogative of the copyright holder to specify what constitutes “fair use” for any of their copyrighted works. Fair use is broadly and rather vaguely defined when compared to other laws that either permit or prohibit behavior or activity. The concept of Fair Use evolves over time as new technologies are developed and employed in the creative process and to create new, possibly derivative, material.
A copyright holder is perfectly free to permit the use of their work(s) in a manner which normally might be considered infringement. Such a case would be the Grateful Dead allowing fans attending concerts to record their live performances. Furthermore, trading, swapping, exchanging, and selling such ‘bootlegs’ is allowed. In such a case, the proper term to use to characterize such an exception is “permission.”
Once again we see where the RIAA wants to play the semantics game in staking out a position whereby fair use must be “authorized” by the copyright holder, particularly where there isn’t legal precedent for an extremely narrowly defined instances that EXACTLY matches the circumstances in the precedence setting case. Thus, anything involving new technology will require ‘authorization’, as enforced by DRM. Evidently, we should all pay another time for the ‘privilege’ of using new techology. What a crock!
–TG
PS: Does anyone else see the irony in President Bush uploading Beatles music for the White House PR stunt to an iPod considering all of the recent legal wrangling?
April 18th, 2006 at 2:38 am
uhmmm. isn’t it legal to rip music to your ipod? he didn’t necessarily download it.
April 18th, 2006 at 2:52 am
I can’t comment on what the RIAA considers to be illegal or not or whether President Bush has any files on his iPod that are or are not considered illegal, but I can say with 100% certainty that the RIAA has not (yet) sued the President. I would not be surprised if they did, but it has not happened as yet.
April 18th, 2006 at 2:55 am
This is the real backgrond to this story and Jon should of included these links in his story so you kids dont get confused or wet your pants that GWB is going to sued by the RIAA .
The RIAA have recently stated that format shifting and time shifting are not authorisation. The Beatles and other copyright owners have not authorised their content to be converted digitaly for download ,so the RIAA are arguing in a recent DCMA filing to the US Copyright Office that authoriseation superceeds Fair Use .
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004409.php
As part of the on-going DMCA rule-making proceedings, the RIAA and other copyright industry associations submitted a filing that included this gem as part of their argument that space-shifting and format-shifting do not count as noninfringing uses, even when you are talking about making copies of your own CDs:
“Nor does the fact that permission to make a copy in particular circumstances is often or even routinely granted, necessarily establish that the copying is a fair use when the copyright owner withholds that authorization. In this regard, the statement attributed to counsel for copyright owners in the MGM v. Grokster case is simply a statement about authorization, not about fair use.”
For those who may not remember, here’s what Don Verrilli said to the Supreme Court last year:
“The record companies, my clients, have said, for some time now, and it’s been on their website for some time now, that it’s perfectly lawful to take a CD that you’ve purchased, upload it onto your computer, put it onto your iPod.”
The RIAA contradics these statements on their own website
“If you choose to take your own CDs and make copies for yourself on your computer or portable music player, that’s great. It’s your music and we want you to enjoy it at home, at work, in the car and on the jogging trail.”
http://www.riaa.com/issues/ask/default.asp#stand
April 18th, 2006 at 6:12 am
April 18th, 2006 at 7:24 am
erm what is the problem as long has he has the original cd’s then there is no problem??
April 18th, 2006 at 11:06 am
Actually, it didn’t come from BoingBoing, but it is satirical and BoingBoing did indeed have a post.
And No, George W isn’t really being sued. But does he have shares in Apple, do you think? And if he does, should he be impeached for abusing his position?
Cheers!
April 18th, 2006 at 11:19 am
“PS: Does anyone else see the irony in President Bush uploading Beatles music for the White House PR stunt to an iPod considering all of the recent legal wrangling?”
What about the irony of a country (USA) claiming to be the beacon of democracy taking over an oil rich country (Irak) because the president of the country is a tyrant that is not allied to the USA, when allied tyrants are elsewhere helped, finance and otherwise supported?
What’s a Beatles song compared to a country?
April 18th, 2006 at 1:59 pm
They didn’t take them over you prat!
If america just wanted oil would have just taken it and got out, they wouldn’t have bothered setting up a government that is answerable to their people.
In arab countries that is rare!
April 18th, 2006 at 5:14 pm
They would pay the “settlement” out of their back pocket and think nothing of it.
April 18th, 2006 at 5:49 pm
“If america just wanted oil would have just taken it and got out, they wouldn’t have bothered setting up a government that is answerable to their people.”
How about answering a few questions.
Are you saying that an American president has a mandate to setup the government of other countries?
Are you saying that it is not the people of each country that must decide if they want to change their government?
What happened to the sovereignty of the pople?
Some foreign power is over that sovereignty of the people?
Just how long do you think it takes to get the oil out of Irak?
Do you really think that the government that Bush is trying to set up in Irak is not answerable to him? Then what are the milirary bases in Irak for, protecting the people of irak or the American interests?
Are you aware that American public funds, by law, can only be used for public purposes for the benefit of the Amercan people? Only the American people.
April 18th, 2006 at 11:31 pm
Actually, according th RIAA, ripping music from a cd onto your ipod doesn’t constitute fair use. I would have to say that this story is complete B.S.
April 19th, 2006 at 6:00 am
Im no lawer but it seems like I remember reading somewhere that the president of the USA enjoys some type of blanket immunity from being sued (the only exception being impeachment) while in office.
LamerX
April 20th, 2006 at 3:45 am
Your site use to be a source of some good cutting edge stories, but you have gradually lost credibility, and your articles have become less and less reliable a bit like a real crappy tabloid.
April 25th, 2006 at 5:00 am
Ha Ha thats cool.Hey Bush careful my man the RIAA will sue you.Yeah right.Hey Mr.President can I download from your p2p filesharing program sir?
April 26th, 2006 at 4:50 am
I wonder…
What would happen…if members of Congress(Along with the Supreme Court), both Democratic and Republican, are also sued by the RIAA for the same reason as Bush?
Hillarys collection of lesbian music would be outed!!
And maybe they’d do something along the lines of a rico investigation..
April 30th, 2006 at 12:01 pm
I’ve just seen the video, where does it say that he downloads illegally from p2p? Do you assume everyone that has an ipod downloads illegally? I’m trying not to be rude here but please get your facts right before posting comments like this. I dont condone false news articles not in newspapers and not online.
April 30th, 2006 at 12:02 pm
I’ve just seen the video, where does it say that he downloads illegally from p2p? Do you assume everyone that has an ipod downloads illegally? I’m trying not to be rude here but please get your facts right before posting comments like this. I dont condone false news articles not in newspapers and not online.
June 1st, 2006 at 2:53 pm
beatle’s music is not available online.
and, according to riaa, riping cd’s is ilegal.
so do the math.