RIAA lawsuits, Unfair, unjust, and communist. Options

[sikdragon]

I just did some research finally and found out that the RIAA is only sueing people who shared more than 1000 files.
I was under the impression if it was people who had a lot of music on their computer. Don't you feel a lot safer now?

[*kryogenix*]

yes. because fewer people will pirate music now.

piracy is bad, people need to eat.

[sikdragon]

piracy is bad, sharing music isnt.

[queen]

i don't understand how it's communist. riaa sueing individuals is more of an example of capitalist greed ;o

[sikdragon]

lol in the 50's everything bad was red.

[*lolita kitty*]

uhm im not understanding
hah

[xl0vejunkiix]

much better.
well i dont really dowload music like i used to.. it sucks that they are doing that. they earn enough money as it is, i dont get it.

[inlonelinessidie]

i don't understand how it's communist.  riaa sueing individuals is more of an example of capitalist greed ;o

Yeah, I still don't understand how communism got into this topic. Anyhow, I too was under the impression that whomever had a ton of music on their computer were going to be sued. I guess we've been had. Don't you love how they used fear to stop most people from downloading a ton of music?

[sikdragon]

yup, this country is so messed up.

[angel-roh]

that's messed up... that's reallie messed up... RIAA sux... hehe well good thing i dont have more than 1000 whew... but ayy... i thought singers became a singer just to share their voice and just to get money, right?? i mean i wanted to be a singer so ppls can listen to my voice and become famous and such... T_T well i guess there is a lot of selfish singers out there sigh

[sikdragon]

its not even the singers it is their representatives who tell the singers what their interests are.

[Caustic]

that's messed up... that's reallie messed up... RIAA sux... hehe well good thing i dont have more than 1000 whew... but ayy... i thought singers became a singer just to share their voice and just to get money, right?? i mean i wanted to be a singer so ppls can listen to my voice and become famous and such... T_T well i guess there is a lot of selfish singers out there sigh

Singers don't become singers to get their music stolen.

[MasterNe0]

I don't care for the RIAA. Some ISP Providers like VERIZON DSL are fighting the RIAA since RIAA are breaking people privacy and will not give the RIAA verizon users address or anything. They still in court and been fighting and fighting so no worries for me.

[*kryogenix*]

piracy is bad, sharing music isnt.

breaking copyright laws is bad.

that's messed up... that's reallie messed up... RIAA sux... hehe well good thing i dont have more than 1000 whew... but ayy... i thought singers became a singer just to share their voice and just to get money, right?? i mean i wanted to be a singer so ppls can listen to my voice and become famous and such... T_T well i guess there is a lot of selfish singers out there sigh

singers have to eat too.

[*tweeak*]

Singers don't become singers to get their music stolen.

its not stolen because people arent taking credit for the music themselves. the way music has become so overpriced has made people not want to pay for it, hence, downloading.

and if they have to eat, they can either get another job like everyone who hasnt made it big yet or move back in with their parents =D

sorry, i feel no sympathy for the "singers" who get their music "stolen" because they make more than enough money as it is, and they should sing not for money but because they love it

and, uh, communism??! pshh

[*kryogenix*]

its not stolen because people arent taking credit for the music themselves. the way music has become so overpriced has made people not want to pay for it, hence, downloading.

and if they have to eat, they can either get another job like everyone who hasnt made it big yet or move back in with their parents =D

sorry, i feel no sympathy for the "singers" who get their music "stolen" because they make more than enough money as it is, and they should sing not for money but because they love it

and, uh, communism??! pshh

that argument is weak.

So what if they make enough money? What about the smaller bands, unsigned bands, etc.? Do you realize how discouraging it is to new artists? they put in their sweat and blood into creating an album, only to have some 10 year old girl download it for free. And did you know they have to spend a lot of money too? The record label takes a lot of money away from the artist.

[nyctophiliac]

i don't understand this? lol

[*corizzle20*]

i dont understand this either

[shawty_redd]

oh i thought it was anyone that just downloaded alot.
man do i feel alot better now

[*Podomaht*]

that argument is weak.

So what if they make enough money? What about the smaller bands, unsigned bands, etc.? Do you realize how discouraging it is to new artists? they put in their sweat and blood into creating an album, only to have some 10 year old girl download it for free. And did you know they have to spend a lot of money too? The record label takes a lot of money away from the artist.

Most of it nowadays isn't really "sweat" and "blood."

Just them sucking in air. Yes, it does take away money, but the bigger bands don't even wince about losing that money lost in recording.

Smaller bands get support from companys.

RIAA needs to remove the dildo from their ass'.

[*kryogenix*]

no, the pirates should stop pirating music.

the "they make a lot of money anyway" argument doesn't work. [sarcasm]I decide I'll kill a few people. since there's a lot of people in the world, it's not like it would matter. [/sarcasm]

[queen]

its not stolen because people arent taking credit for the music themselves. the way music has become so overpriced has made people not want to pay for it, hence, downloading.

it's still a violation of copyright law. under the digital millenium copyright act of 1998, it's forbidden to duplicate digital audio (the original copyright laws already protect any audio and video from being duplicated without permission, the dmca just extended that protection onto the internet). any .mp3 or .rm or any other media filetypes for that matter are simply DUPLICATES.

and there ARE people out there who dl instrumentals just to record their own uglyass vocal chords on top of them. it's great to express your creativity in that way, but it's still a disrespect to the music artists out there.

it's a very delicate issue since americans want freedom of speech AND protection of their works.

...and isn't there already a topic about this under debate? ;o

[*tweeak*]

that argument is weak.

So what if they make enough money? What about the smaller bands, unsigned bands, etc.? Do you realize how discouraging it is to new artists? they put in their sweat and blood into creating an album, only to have some 10 year old girl download it for free. And did you know they have to spend a lot of money too? The record label takes a lot of money away from the artist.

perhaps it was a weak argument, and i am fully aware that record companies take a large amount of the profit, but half the music these days is completely synthetic and so the "artists" hardly have to put forth much effort. take britney spears for example. all her new music is completely synthetic and computerized and she barely even sounds human. compare that to her older albums, and as produced as they may be, you can tell the difference between what has been processed and what she actually sang. the people who work behinds the scene are the ones who really deserve the credit, because what are singers these days beside pretty faces anyway? and ashlee simpson. have you heard her live?? ahhh!!! but so if these artist who supposedly worked so hard to put their sweat and blood into their albums can no longer profit, then they can find another way to make a living just like everyone else. the smaller, unsigned bands should be well aware that they cannot count fully on their undiscovered music to support them, and downloading my actually be a good way for them to get their music out there and noticed. the useless britney and ashlee simpson types deserve nothing more than what profit they recieve, and i would not pay anything more than the $1.99 a month my win-mx costs me to hear their over produced singing. bands with talent who deserve for people to buy their albums are less commonly found on music sharing programs and so i end up buying their cds anyway. also, half the music listening i do is while im on the computer anyway, so its far easier to have all my music in one place than to look for discs. and as good a potential idea paying for download songs is, its not practical because what if you discover the song isnt what you thought it was? or your parents wont let you pay for stuff on the internet, like mine? downloading full albums may not be right, but if you only want a few songs then its the only way to go that makes sense

[faithin_felix]

nope, because i dont share files.

[DesperateXMeasur...]

You are quite the random one, aren't you?