The file sharing lawsuit. 750 users served Subpeona's

S

speed

Member
Nov 19, 2001
5,192
26
48
Visit site
Anyone been following the record companies lawsuit( scare tactic)?

Anyone threatened by the lawsuit? I read they now consider just five downloaded songs to be enough. I an american, use ony german file sharing programs- so I hope( a horrble word) I am immune from any future lawsuit.

Anyone else think this is a load of shit- and could only happen in AMerica the land of lawyers, and savage greedy record companies?
 
Profånity said:
You shouldn't download music.
Click to expand...

Downloading music is fine. The band shouldn't be worried about the money anyways. It is about the art they create. Here is the way I look at it. If a band is good and I d/l something by them odds are I will buy the cd anyways. If they suck I don't want to buy the cd. I use filesharing as more of a sneak peak than anything. But I will admit I have d/l whole cds before.
 
I see it this way:

Very little of the music I download falls under the umbrella of the RIAA, so I'm not very concerned. The albums that I do have downloaded from RIAA companies are few and far between (Tori Amos, Sarah Brightman, Tool, etc). They'd sooner target those who have a ton of stupid shit shared. Plus, I only use Kazaa Lite to download video files, and I don't share there.
 
Is it true that you can download and be all right, but you can't share music files? Because right now I just keep what few mp3s (about 9, i usually delete them after I put them on a cd, and yes, I intend to still buy the cd when I can, I think its wrong to own a bunch of burned cd's and not spend a cent for them) I have in another folder....I just wanna know if they are going after the sharers or the downloaders, or both.
 
SunlapseVertigo said:
Is it true that you can download and be all right, but you can't share music files? Because right now I just keep what few mp3s (about 9, i usually delete them after I put them on a cd, and yes, I intend to still buy the cd when I can, I think its wrong to own a bunch of burned cd's and not spend a cent for them) I have in another folder....I just wanna know if they are going after the sharers or the downloaders, or both.
Click to expand...

As far as I know, they are only able to track the providers and not the downloaders. When you share, you make it public just what media you have at the moment, and since Kazaa is being targeted, I'm not taking any chances.

I have over 10,000 media files currently shared, 95% foreign, and most from backwater labels.
 
SunlapseVertigo said:
Is it true that you can download and be all right, but you can't share music files? Because right now I just keep what few mp3s (about 9, i usually delete them after I put them on a cd, and yes, I intend to still buy the cd when I can, I think its wrong to own a bunch of burned cd's and not spend a cent for them) I have in another folder....I just wanna know if they are going after the sharers or the downloaders, or both.
Click to expand...


Yes they are only attacking people who share lots of music, its possible to target downloaders but its a lot harder, so they are using the "if we cut off the source then the problem goes away" tactic for issuing lawsuits. The brand new Kazaa Lite and K++ have a lot of anti RIAA methods, and have some known RIAA i.p. adresses built into them, if one of thoes tries to connect to you in any way (even searching) it will block them out. But i dont listen to enough RIAA music to care enough to protect myself very hard, but i do make sure to educate the masses because the RIAA is a disgrace to music all together
 
sixxswine said:
I would have to agree with this to a certain extent. It's not worth the trouble. I also like how people "justfy" their reasons for doing so.
It's like listening to a drunk "justify" why he needs to get hammered after a long day at the office...
Click to expand...

Worst analogy ever.

Here, let me make it very simple justification.

Normal music listeners get the ability to hear music before they buy it thanks to the radio and TV. As a person who listens to non-RIAA music, we do not get that option. Radio stations and TV channels do not play non-RIAA music, period. If we want to hear something before we buy it we have 2 choices, hunt someone down who owns the cd already (which is hard enough as it is due to the fact that its non-riaa), or download it. I'm not talking metal or non metal here, im talking RIAA vs non RIAA. If you request a non-riaa song on a radio station, no matter how radio friendly it is, unless its a college radio station, it wont be played, end of story.

As a music fan, a musician, and a computer science major, i have been following this whole RIAA vs p2p since napster, and from all ive seen, in my opinion, if the RIAA were to end, peopel would download music less, because it would now make all this non-riaa music available to the public through radio and tv and such, making less of a need to download it to hear it before you buy it. Face it, nobody wants to buy a cd that they have never even heard the band before, and unfortunately (for those who are against downloading), the only option to get out of this mainstream pop garbage is to download music to find new bands.

I dont need to justify it because if i download something and like it, i do buy it (assuming i can actualy find it somewhere other than the internet, i hate internet ordering, im impatient and want cds immediately haha)
 
i hope these lawsuits distinguish the difference from file sharing and downloading provided mp3s. ive got a 20 or so song library, all of which are provided by the bands.
i would hate for people to be screwed by down loading provided songs
 
genocide roach said:
i hope these lawsuits distinguish the difference from file sharing and downloading provided mp3s. ive got a 20 or so song library, all of which are provided by the bands.
i would hate for people to be screwed by down loading provided songs
Click to expand...

Chances are if its provided the band isnt on the RIAA, in that case the RIAA cant touch you. They can only sue you for the songs they own the rights to.
 
The last I've heard, my file sharing program of choice (Soulseek) has not even been mentioned in press releases or complaints of the RIAA. Plus, when I use it, only people I designate can download from me.

Another good alternative is mIRC.
 
Sonicarnal Artist said:
The last I've heard, my file sharing program of choice (Soulseek) has not even been mentioned in press releases or complaints of the RIAA. Plus, when I use it, only people I designate can download from me.

Another good alternative is mIRC.
Click to expand...


If im not mistaken, the reason they cant touch soulseek is because its not american based. They have very little jourisdiction(sp?) outside of the united states because they have found enough legal loopholes for tax evasion to the point that they dont really exist other than in concept haha.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
File Sharing
Replies
2
Views
374
The Classic Metal Show Network
averagem2
A
The Antihero
Wondering....what is DT's stance on file sharing?
Replies
71
Views
5K
Dark Tranquillity
Jolty
J
MEGALOUD
FILE SHARING WEB TORRENTS AND THE EVIL THEY DO.
Replies
3
Views
1K
Nightmare Records
MEGALOUD
M
Reign in Acai
200+ sued
Replies
28
Views
864
General Metal Discussion
hibernal_dream
H
M
Court Rejects Suit Against file sharing
Replies
8
Views
318
Chat
Mosh Kosh
M
Top Bottom