Unfortunately, the record companies have lobbyists/politicians on their side (at least on the US side), so I’m afraid they’ll be fined the minimum or some low amount they won’t blink twice over.

Why would anyone expect any different of them, and why would anyone expect the courts to side against them?

Trying to figure out what is the “right thing” for the existing media corporations to do is rather like trying to figure out what position and pillow arrangement would be the most comfortable for your seven-year-old daughter to pull a train of twenty-seven escaped convicts.

OH NOES. Now there is a shocking revelation about an INDUSTRY that is geared solely towards it’s own interests, and it’s own interests alone, most of which rather directly equal “Make the most money possible at the smallest cost for US as possible, while not giving a damn just how many other people, lives, souls and livelyhoods get ruined by it”.

Sounds about right to me.

I had surmised that, as a counter to abuse from anti idiots.

[Pardon off topic guys.]

That was referring to the preceding post by “anon” about donating to a legal fund, now post 164 not 162, my reply to the then 162 was held in moderation for some reason, then ended up referring to another post completely by “by The Power of the Magic Poodle” and obviously not relevent to 162 now.

Peace.

HHHEEEEEEEEEHEHEHEHEHEHehehehe!

One of the biggest problems is the dilution of the market that CRIA\RIAA\MPAA have caused themselves with such crappy crappy releases over the last 10-20 years.. They wonder why they lose money ..

#42 you’re WRONG. Now with the internet and so much access to different recording equipment artists can exist and distrubute without the help of a major record label. the artist created their songs LONG before a record label even knew their name and as for promoting themselves, those same bands are some of the hardest workers at getting their name out there and promoting themselves Any band that tours tours tours and builds their following is out their promoting themselves many without a record label backing them and even some with a record label who just takes their music uses it as their own and lets them die out there with no help in promotion.

Anyone who’s read Steve Knopper’s http://www.amazon.com/Appetite-Self-Destruction-Spectacular-Industry-Digital/dp/B002BWQ4SC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1260407567&sr=1-1 book knows exactly how badly artists have been getting ripped off for years before pirates every came along. I only wish more artists would take a stand and do their own thing.

In fact, there’s an indie artist that not only has great music (and a lot of it to boot), but he runs his own business off his website. Check him out here:

Lonely London Lad
http://www.lonelylondonlad.com

> We should stop buying music no matter what. however i though of a plan, we send money directly to the artists with a list of what songs its for. if enough people do this it will get in the mainstream news and show them that we arent downloadign cause were greedy, were downloading cause we hat the RIAA and all they stand for.

The problem is, starlingrock, that most of the jerk-offs downloading music *are* doing it because they’re greedy. Saying you hate the RIAA is a convenient way to make yourselves feel justified when you’re ripping off stuff that other people have created.

e-mail Ernesto.

I’m sure he can happily point you to exactly where you need to go even if not linked on page.

Just click on his name below the items header.

Peace.

PDP

The artist is the one getting ripped off when someone steals their copyrighted work…

RIAA Claims Ownership of All Artist Royalties For Internet Radio

SoundExchange claims it has the right to collect royalties for any artist, no matter if they have signed with an RIAA label or not. ‘SoundExchange (the RIAA) considers any digital performance of a song as falling under their compulsory license. If any artist records a song, SoundExchange has the right to collect royalties for its performance on Internet radio. Artists can offer to download their music for free, but they cannot offer their songs to Internet radio for free … So how it works is that SoundExchange collects money through compulsory royalties from Webcasters and holds onto the money. If a label or artist wants their share of the money, they must become a member of SoundExchange and pay a fee to collect their royalties.

Slashdot.org

(Snarls, barks furiously and chases truthman as he runs away screaming like a little girl)

The other kind of snake oil. ;)

@ Dec 09, 2009 at 01:22, truthman wrote:

if it is OK for you, it is OK for the record companies.

Different context, so not necessarily, but in any case, copyright is already being rejected en masse. Doesn’t seem to work anymore, if it ever did.

Hypothetical live music concert advert:
“Come for the concert, leave with the music.”
Fine print: “personal recording/uploading devices welcomed”

The artist is the one getting ripped off when someone steals their copyrighted work

While I’ve previously suggested to the effect that pure art’s intent is not to make money, it is to make art; I’ll also add that, if you put bread on your table by fishing for cod in the Atlantic and the cod stocks become depleted, it seems time to change fish or career.

…what do you THINK is going to happen if copyrights are done away with? Huge companies will grab stuff and make money off of it.

Well let’s have it happen and see what happens. Maybe we can run a sim.

But is that what they’re already doing under the so-called protection of copyright– grabbing stuff and sitting on it and raking in the cash cows brought forth through copyright (extensions)?

” ‘From a public policy view, we’d ideally like to eliminate patent and copyright laws altogether,’ says Levine, John H. Biggs Distinguished Professor of Economics. ‘There’s plenty of protection for inventors and plenty of protection and opportunities to make money for creators. It’s not that we see this as some sort of charitable act that people are going to invent and create things without earning money. Evidence shows very strongly there are lots of ways to make money without patents and copyright.’

Levine and Boldrin point to students being sued for ‘pirating’ music on the internet and AIDS patients in Africa dying because they cannot afford expensive drugs produced by patent holders as examples of the failure of the current system. Boldrin, the Joseph Gibson Hoyt Distinguished Professor in Arts & Sciences and Chair of the economics department says, ‘Intellectual property is in fact an intellectual monopoly that hinders rather than helps the competitive free market regime that has delivered wealth and innovation to our doorsteps.’

The authors argue that license fees, regulations and patents are now so misused that they drive up the cost of creation and slow down the rate of diffusion of new ideas.”

– Newswise

“Lessig argues that current copyright laws have suppressed creativity and resulted in a read-only Internet culture where one only consumes contents, despite advanced technology that has made creating and contributing to the culture easier. Lessig argues the embracing free culture can enhance the read/write culture development. He claims the arrival of Linux and other open source tools is the proof that such complex technologies can be produced not only under the copyright-tight, corporate control.”

– Wikipedia

“A bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.”
- Hitch Hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy

All things considered though, this reminds me of that little brat from the Simpsons…. Ha-Ha!