The one-and-only RIAA discussion thread [2003 - part one]
06-25-03, 03:58 PM
#51
DVD Talk Hero
The only thing I don't understand about the whole musician without record company business model is who is going to handle all the details of the business? A lot of the musicians will want to sell CD's, but they won't have the start up cash to pay for it. And they will need people who know who to call to get a CD produced, manufactured and marketed. Someone will need to be the middleman and they will want a form of payment to protect them against an album that fails. They will also need to have a lot of cash on hand to pay the costs of creating a CD.
06-25-03, 03:59 PM
#52
Banned
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: PA
Posts: 4,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by al_bundy
The one time a year I get a copied game, I get it from a friend at work and don't share it or play it online.
For those who may get sued over this I suggest visiting www.creditnet.com for some good info about how to fix your credit since it may go into the toilet because of a judgement against you.
RIAA doesn't expect to make any money off this. The key will be to get a little money from each person to cover the costs of this thing, but the judgement on the credit report will screw a person for years to come.
The one time a year I get a copied game, I get it from a friend at work and don't share it or play it online.
For those who may get sued over this I suggest visiting www.creditnet.com for some good info about how to fix your credit since it may go into the toilet because of a judgement against you.
RIAA doesn't expect to make any money off this. The key will be to get a little money from each person to cover the costs of this thing, but the judgement on the credit report will screw a person for years to come.
FS
06-25-03, 04:05 PM
#53
DVD Talk Hero
http://www.transunion.com/content/pa...Glossary.xml#P
https://www.econsumer.equifax.com/co...yterms#letterp
I'm 90% sure that a judgement like this will stay on a credit report for 7 years.
https://www.econsumer.equifax.com/co...yterms#letterp
I'm 90% sure that a judgement like this will stay on a credit report for 7 years.
06-25-03, 04:20 PM
#54
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: NYC
Posts: 17,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by sn9ke_eyes
Now why would they do that ? They've got a business model which has been screwing musicians and consumers alike for decades, why change now ?
Now why would they do that ? They've got a business model which has been screwing musicians and consumers alike for decades, why change now ?
06-25-03, 04:25 PM
#55
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Steel City
Posts: 5,347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm so happy that the majority of bands that I am interested in allow and even promote the free trade of their music. Sure, studio recordings are generally excluded from the policy, but I tend to be more attracted to the live versions anyway.
I've added over 300 CDs to my collection since the beginning of the year, and the RIAA hasn't seen a penny from me (except for that BS percentage they get from buying blank media).
I've added over 300 CDs to my collection since the beginning of the year, and the RIAA hasn't seen a penny from me (except for that BS percentage they get from buying blank media).
06-25-03, 04:38 PM
#56
DVD Talk Hero
In this case the RIAA is going after the people sharing the music and not downloading it. It's a good strategy at least from their point of view. A court judgement that will cost the defendant thousands of $$$ and a black mark on a credit report for a few years will likely make a lot of people think twice about sharing copyrighted music.
Kill of the few sharers and most of the people doing the downloading won't have anywhere to download from.
Kill of the few sharers and most of the people doing the downloading won't have anywhere to download from.
06-25-03, 04:43 PM
#57
Banned
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: PA
Posts: 4,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by al_bundy
http://www.transunion.com/content/pa...Glossary.xml#P
https://www.econsumer.equifax.com/co...yterms#letterp
I'm 90% sure that a judgement like this will stay on a credit report for 7 years.
http://www.transunion.com/content/pa...Glossary.xml#P
https://www.econsumer.equifax.com/co...yterms#letterp
I'm 90% sure that a judgement like this will stay on a credit report for 7 years.
EDIT:
Found it!
Public Records
A credit report's public records section includes:
Tax liens
Bankruptcies
Court judgments (including child support judgments)
Any negative activity in this section reflects poorly on your creditworthiness. Even if an item has been paid in full, the presence of even a one-time occurrence indicates a potential future concern for creditors.
FS
Last edited by FlashStash; 06-25-03 at 04:45 PM.
06-25-03, 05:18 PM
#59
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally posted by al_bundy
Kill of the few sharers and most of the people doing the downloading won't have anywhere to download from.
Kill of the few sharers and most of the people doing the downloading won't have anywhere to download from.
I'm sorry, but this is funny. You do realize that every attempt to destroy any P2P site has only resulted in MORE p2p programs poping up. the RIAA's actions really just staple more folks to figure out ways to download. In reality, those who get caught by the RIAA because of this are using outdated p2p that the RIAA has already caught up to.
06-25-03, 05:24 PM
#60
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally posted by al_bundy
They aren't going after sites, but the people sharing the music. $10,000 judgement and a screwed up credit report will be enough to make a lot of people stop sharing music.
They aren't going after sites, but the people sharing the music. $10,000 judgement and a screwed up credit report will be enough to make a lot of people stop sharing music.
06-25-03, 05:53 PM
#61
DVD Talk Hero
This is my whole opinion on the whole mess.
I'm very sure that the RIAA has people whose only job is to infiltrate any new p2p system and computer geeks to find any weak spots in it. There are companies that they contract with that provide these services.
http://www.rangerinc.com/
If the RIAA companies are shooting themselves by doing this, then you will have a lot of pissed off shareholders in the near future and a rethinking of the business model.
The argument that downloading makes people go out and buy CD's doesn't hold up in some cases. The RIAA companies know that their market is teens- age 25 or so. This age group is also most likely to download. I doubt if anyone cares that people are downloading an independent artists that sell 10 CD's a month. My guess is that sales of the top 100 or top 40 are down and RIAA thinks that it's because of downloading. Since the target demographic that buys the product is also the one that downloads it the most I think it's safe to assume that enough people stopped buying CD's because of downloading to get noticed in the board room.
I'm very sure that the RIAA has people whose only job is to infiltrate any new p2p system and computer geeks to find any weak spots in it. There are companies that they contract with that provide these services.
http://www.rangerinc.com/
If the RIAA companies are shooting themselves by doing this, then you will have a lot of pissed off shareholders in the near future and a rethinking of the business model.
The argument that downloading makes people go out and buy CD's doesn't hold up in some cases. The RIAA companies know that their market is teens- age 25 or so. This age group is also most likely to download. I doubt if anyone cares that people are downloading an independent artists that sell 10 CD's a month. My guess is that sales of the top 100 or top 40 are down and RIAA thinks that it's because of downloading. Since the target demographic that buys the product is also the one that downloads it the most I think it's safe to assume that enough people stopped buying CD's because of downloading to get noticed in the board room.
06-25-03, 06:07 PM
#62
DVD Talk Hero
In the past the RIAA has gone after the software and now they are going to go after the people. No one would care if some company goes chap 11 because of a lawsuit. It happened to Napster and other systems popped up. Past strategy didn't stop the source of the music.
In this case if a person gets hit with judgement of thousands of $$$ and bad credit for years it will probably make him/her think twice about doing it in the future. If you start going after the top people sharing the content, the downloaders will look for other sources. As the source of content dries up, the bandwith of the remaining sources will be severely taxed, d/l speeds will slow dramatically and a lot of people will become disillusioned and stop.
And for new systems that pop up, there is this company. But the difference in this case is that the record companies are going after the top sources of the content available for download. Stop people from offering any content and any new system will be a failure no matter how secure it is.
http://www.rangerinc.com/
And in this case we will have to see if law suits will have their desired effect. Personally I think that being forced to pay thousands of $$$ and have my credit screwed up is enough for most people to stop sharing copyrighted content again. No matter how secure a new system is perceived to be.
A legal judgement is no joke. It will destroy your credit for a few years. That means only sub-prime credit cards, sub-prime auto loans, no possibility of a mortgage for a few years, hardship in finding a job, refusal of people to rent you an apartment or a house, and garnishment of wages and assets. If they are able to make a few examples of well off people then word will spread around the internet and others may be scared off. The main objective here is to stop people from sharing content, and not to kill off any p2p system which has failed in the past.
In this case if a person gets hit with judgement of thousands of $$$ and bad credit for years it will probably make him/her think twice about doing it in the future. If you start going after the top people sharing the content, the downloaders will look for other sources. As the source of content dries up, the bandwith of the remaining sources will be severely taxed, d/l speeds will slow dramatically and a lot of people will become disillusioned and stop.
And for new systems that pop up, there is this company. But the difference in this case is that the record companies are going after the top sources of the content available for download. Stop people from offering any content and any new system will be a failure no matter how secure it is.
http://www.rangerinc.com/
And in this case we will have to see if law suits will have their desired effect. Personally I think that being forced to pay thousands of $$$ and have my credit screwed up is enough for most people to stop sharing copyrighted content again. No matter how secure a new system is perceived to be.
A legal judgement is no joke. It will destroy your credit for a few years. That means only sub-prime credit cards, sub-prime auto loans, no possibility of a mortgage for a few years, hardship in finding a job, refusal of people to rent you an apartment or a house, and garnishment of wages and assets. If they are able to make a few examples of well off people then word will spread around the internet and others may be scared off. The main objective here is to stop people from sharing content, and not to kill off any p2p system which has failed in the past.
06-25-03, 06:39 PM
#63
RIAA is going to be RIP if they don't back-off. Or so a little bird told me.
06-25-03, 07:24 PM
#64
Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The land of Toppled Trees. Virginia
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is a really good site to keep yourself informed on the wrong doings of the RIAA.
http://www.boycott-riaa.com/
It has become a sad time for music. I really miss the good ol' days when things were a little less corperate. The RIAA wants to become the Big Brother of music entertainment, with Clear Channel, Ticketmaster, and MTV as thier puppets. One day our consumer freedoms will all but be destroyed, if we keep letting these A-Holes run the show.
http://www.boycott-riaa.com/
It has become a sad time for music. I really miss the good ol' days when things were a little less corperate. The RIAA wants to become the Big Brother of music entertainment, with Clear Channel, Ticketmaster, and MTV as thier puppets. One day our consumer freedoms will all but be destroyed, if we keep letting these A-Holes run the show.
06-25-03, 07:56 PM
#65
Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The recording companies had it good four years ago with the pop craze and retarted people buying crappy music. Afterwards when the pop craze was over( highest sales of the decade) they blamed this for there losses which doesn't hugely contribute. when they make good music at affordable music or retarted people start buying into pop again this will all be over.
06-25-03, 08:07 PM
#66
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, this will put an end to file sharing.
The thing that struck me about the article is that the film industry is keeping themselves at arms length from the idiocy of the RIAA. The film industry knows that if they give consumers a good deal at a fair price, they will keep coming back. DVD's are such a good buy these days, often loaded with more extras than you can shake a stick at, that people are buying them by the armload. I bought the Matrix this week for $9.99. WHAT A VALUE!!. The RIAA is giving you basically the same product for an increased price in some cases as they did fifteen years ago. The answer is staring them right in the face! Truly the inmates are running the asylum.
You know, in any industry there comes a time when the price becomes too exorbatent for the market to bear. For the music industry this is such a time. I haven't bought a CD in over a year and a half. Why? I've been buying more DVD's and video games. And there's simply nothing I absolutley MUST buy. There's more entertainment choices out there today in 2003. I don't HAVE to buy CD's to be entertained.
Another thing that strikes me as asinine is the RIAA is clinging to this dinosauric business model of excess. All business have changed through the years. The auto industry was in the same boat that the music industry was back in the late 70's and early 80's ( I'm going somewhere with this). Detroit was getting eaten alive by the Japanese and the German auto makers. Why? Because Detroit was STILL pumping out vehicles that were inefficient, poor quality, and too expensive. The Germans and Japanese produced cars for a changing American market. It was Lee Iaococa that had the vision to lead the revolution in the auto industry and make Detroit a major player again. The RIAA has no such visionary. They are so afraid of change they are fighting to protect a system that obviously is antiquated.
The thing that struck me about the article is that the film industry is keeping themselves at arms length from the idiocy of the RIAA. The film industry knows that if they give consumers a good deal at a fair price, they will keep coming back. DVD's are such a good buy these days, often loaded with more extras than you can shake a stick at, that people are buying them by the armload. I bought the Matrix this week for $9.99. WHAT A VALUE!!. The RIAA is giving you basically the same product for an increased price in some cases as they did fifteen years ago. The answer is staring them right in the face! Truly the inmates are running the asylum.
You know, in any industry there comes a time when the price becomes too exorbatent for the market to bear. For the music industry this is such a time. I haven't bought a CD in over a year and a half. Why? I've been buying more DVD's and video games. And there's simply nothing I absolutley MUST buy. There's more entertainment choices out there today in 2003. I don't HAVE to buy CD's to be entertained.
Another thing that strikes me as asinine is the RIAA is clinging to this dinosauric business model of excess. All business have changed through the years. The auto industry was in the same boat that the music industry was back in the late 70's and early 80's ( I'm going somewhere with this). Detroit was getting eaten alive by the Japanese and the German auto makers. Why? Because Detroit was STILL pumping out vehicles that were inefficient, poor quality, and too expensive. The Germans and Japanese produced cars for a changing American market. It was Lee Iaococa that had the vision to lead the revolution in the auto industry and make Detroit a major player again. The RIAA has no such visionary. They are so afraid of change they are fighting to protect a system that obviously is antiquated.
06-25-03, 08:27 PM
#67
DVD Talk Legend
It may not be a smart move.. but are they really alienating potential customers when they file lawsuits?
What I mean, is if they are going after people who do substantial sharing... chances are that person doesn't have 10,000+ mp3s because he bought them all.
In my opinion, the RIAA has every right to protect their property & profits. They may be choosing the wrong way to do it -- but it is their property -- so let them.
The RIAA doesn't get a whole lot of my business anyway. I listen to mostly Indie bands.
What I mean, is if they are going after people who do substantial sharing... chances are that person doesn't have 10,000+ mp3s because he bought them all.
In my opinion, the RIAA has every right to protect their property & profits. They may be choosing the wrong way to do it -- but it is their property -- so let them.
The RIAA doesn't get a whole lot of my business anyway. I listen to mostly Indie bands.
06-25-03, 08:45 PM
#68
DVD Talk Hero
Originally posted by Captain Harlock
Yeah, this will put an end to file sharing.
The thing that struck me about the article is that the film industry is keeping themselves at arms length from the idiocy of the RIAA. The film industry knows that if they give consumers a good deal at a fair price, they will keep coming back. DVD's are such a good buy these days, often loaded with more extras than you can shake a stick at, that people are buying them by the armload. I bought the Matrix this week for $9.99. WHAT A VALUE!!. The RIAA is giving you basically the same product for an increased price in some cases as they did fifteen years ago. The answer is staring them right in the face! Truly the inmates are running the asylum.
You know, in any industry there comes a time when the price becomes too exorbatent for the market to bear. For the music industry this is such a time. I haven't bought a CD in over a year and a half. Why? I've been buying more DVD's and video games. And there's simply nothing I absolutley MUST buy. There's more entertainment choices out there today in 2003. I don't HAVE to buy CD's to be entertained.
Another thing that strikes me as asinine is the RIAA is clinging to this dinosauric business model of excess. All business have changed through the years. The auto industry was in the same boat that the music industry was back in the late 70's and early 80's ( I'm going somewhere with this). Detroit was getting eaten alive by the Japanese and the German auto makers. Why? Because Detroit was STILL pumping out vehicles that were inefficient, poor quality, and too expensive. The Germans and Japanese produced cars for a changing American market. It was Lee Iaococa that had the vision to lead the revolution in the auto industry and make Detroit a major player again. The RIAA has no such visionary. They are so afraid of change they are fighting to protect a system that obviously is antiquated.
Yeah, this will put an end to file sharing.
The thing that struck me about the article is that the film industry is keeping themselves at arms length from the idiocy of the RIAA. The film industry knows that if they give consumers a good deal at a fair price, they will keep coming back. DVD's are such a good buy these days, often loaded with more extras than you can shake a stick at, that people are buying them by the armload. I bought the Matrix this week for $9.99. WHAT A VALUE!!. The RIAA is giving you basically the same product for an increased price in some cases as they did fifteen years ago. The answer is staring them right in the face! Truly the inmates are running the asylum.
You know, in any industry there comes a time when the price becomes too exorbatent for the market to bear. For the music industry this is such a time. I haven't bought a CD in over a year and a half. Why? I've been buying more DVD's and video games. And there's simply nothing I absolutley MUST buy. There's more entertainment choices out there today in 2003. I don't HAVE to buy CD's to be entertained.
Another thing that strikes me as asinine is the RIAA is clinging to this dinosauric business model of excess. All business have changed through the years. The auto industry was in the same boat that the music industry was back in the late 70's and early 80's ( I'm going somewhere with this). Detroit was getting eaten alive by the Japanese and the German auto makers. Why? Because Detroit was STILL pumping out vehicles that were inefficient, poor quality, and too expensive. The Germans and Japanese produced cars for a changing American market. It was Lee Iaococa that had the vision to lead the revolution in the auto industry and make Detroit a major player again. The RIAA has no such visionary. They are so afraid of change they are fighting to protect a system that obviously is antiquated.
With music it's different. In the 1990's it seemed like everybody sounded like Nirvana, Pearl Jam or Green Day. If you didn't know the name of the band playing the song it didn't matter since it all sounded the same. Then came the boy bands, Brittney, Christina Aguilera and others and they all sounded and looked the same too. If you watch MTV then you'll see that everyone sounds and looks the same.
I guess people got bored and stopped buying music. I'm against sharing and don't care if RIAA sues these people, but they only have themselves to blame. It seems every generation of music there are a few original bands in every genre and most others just copy them.
06-25-03, 08:56 PM
#69
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Al_Bundy, I tend to agree with you that the RIAA and other groups hire hackers to combat hackers. DDOS attacks on new PSP sites are rampant. either that or it's rival groups fighting each other out.
06-25-03, 09:09 PM
#70
DVD Talk Hero
I originally saw this story posted on slashdot, and someone made a good observation. Since the people sharing don't make any money off it, they will be easily scared with threats of huge legal penalties.
06-25-03, 09:10 PM
#71
DVD Talk Ruler
Would this work?
"I had no idea there were songs on my computer available for download. I think someone hacked into my system and placed them there. I was wondering why my internet access was so slow."
Is this not the MO of most hackers? To break into someone's computer and use them for another purpose (DOS attack for example). I remember (and it may still happen) that pirates would find vunerable systems and put a hidden warez directory in their ftp server directory and share all kinds of files that way. I wonder if the "I got hacked" approach would work in court. If nothing else it could tie the case up for a week causing the RIAA thousands of dollars in lawyer fees to eventually get your $750.
"I had no idea there were songs on my computer available for download. I think someone hacked into my system and placed them there. I was wondering why my internet access was so slow."
Is this not the MO of most hackers? To break into someone's computer and use them for another purpose (DOS attack for example). I remember (and it may still happen) that pirates would find vunerable systems and put a hidden warez directory in their ftp server directory and share all kinds of files that way. I wonder if the "I got hacked" approach would work in court. If nothing else it could tie the case up for a week causing the RIAA thousands of dollars in lawyer fees to eventually get your $750.
06-25-03, 09:14 PM
#72
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 6,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by al_bundy
The argument that downloading makes people go out and buy CD's doesn't hold up in some cases.
The argument that downloading makes people go out and buy CD's doesn't hold up in some cases.
I do it because I'm tired of the tactics of the RIAA and I refuse to give more money to them. The funniest thing is, I bought more CDs during 1999 than I have at any other time in my life -- exactly the same time I was downloading about 600 MB a week through Napster.
It's hard, there have been at least three or four CDs this year alone that I would really like to buy, but I simply can't. I'd love to have the new Evanescence and I'd love to have access to the MetallicaVault (which I'd have to buy St. Anger to access). I could certainly download both, but I haven't. I don't buy CDs, and I don't (usually) use p2p.
06-25-03, 09:19 PM
#73
DVD Talk Hero
I used to buy that much too, but stopped because there is nothing to buy. Everything in every genre sounds the same. And a lot of stuff in the rock genre sounds just like The Ramones. It's boring listening to it. The CD's that I bought 3 years was stuff from the 1980's and a few early 1990's.
But I did hear of Widespread Panic on CNBC and I might buy them in the near future.
But I did hear of Widespread Panic on CNBC and I might buy them in the near future.