Quake3World

got this in my email today...
so no the RIAA wants to sue college kids.
:icon27:

TO: RIT Students

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is sending notices to
RIT of its intention to subpoena the identity of specific RIT computer
users. This intention is a significant ramp up of the RIAA's efforts to
stop illegal file sharing. RIAA has targeted specific computer accounts used

to access and transmit such files, and issued subpoenas to the service
providers in order to obtain the names and contact information of those
responsible for the file-sharing.

The notices RIT receives are associated with students living in RIT
residences or using the wireless network at RIT. Such notices are in
preparation for a lawsuit against the individuals RIAA believes have
violated copyright law by illegally downloading and uploading music via
file-sharing programs.

RIT policy is not to release the names or contact information of our
computer users unless required to do so by law. Should RIAA pursue legal
action, RIT may be compelled to release the identities of these individuals.

To avoid legal action over inappropriate file-sharing, it is important you
understand the proper use of RIT computing resources. While some
file-sharing is lawful, some file-sharing is not. Some programs used to
download files from the Internet often, unbeknownst to the recipient, turn
the individual's computer into a file-sharing (uploading) server. Even
unknowingly uploading copyrighted works may subject you to legal risk.

they've sued college kids for over a year now, Boston College alone has had 3 or 4 students sued since it began

thats pretty fucked up.

*sigh* Thats just plain suckie!!!!!

Dr_Watson wrote:thats pretty fucked up.

why's that?

+JuggerNaut+ wrote:

Dr_Watson wrote:thats pretty fucked up.

why's that?

it really should be the responsiblity of the university to police its students computer useage.
if they see people doing illegal shit on the network, use the computer ethics form they signed to punish them, and stop the activity.
the RIAA filing lawsuits agains kids that are downloading music is just retarded. especially college kids that download music because they can't afford to buy it... yet.
They're attacking their future customers.
kinda shooting themselves in the foot by making the future upper middle class college educated generation bitter and angry at them.

Because they shouldn't sue people.

PhoeniX wrote:Because they shouldn't sue people.

i'm ok when them suing people that traffic and sell their shit.
but going after joe college student who's already being crushed economically by every other entity just feels wrong.

Dr_Watson wrote:

PhoeniX wrote:Because they shouldn't sue people.

i'm ok when them suing people that traffic and sell their shit.
but going after joe college student who's already being crushed economically by every other entity just feels wrong.

But there are 100 million joe college students who are filling their mp3 players with stolen media. I dont want to get sued but I don't think its fucked up they are going after college students...we ARE the pirated software market...

bitWISE wrote:...but I don't think its fucked up they are going after college students...we ARE the pirated software market...

ding ding.

best way to get around this... borrow music cds from friends. when you or one of your friends buys a new cd, borrow it and rip it. me and some buddies have been doing this for years to circumvent the whole p2p trading issue.

Dr_Watson wrote:

+JuggerNaut+ wrote:

Dr_Watson wrote:thats pretty fucked up.

why's that?

it really should be the responsiblity of the university to police its students computer useage.
if they see people doing illegal shit on the network, use the computer ethics form they signed to punish them, and stop the activity.
the RIAA filing lawsuits agains kids that are downloading music is just retarded. especially college kids that download music because they can't afford to buy it... yet.
They're attacking their future customers.
kinda shooting themselves in the foot by making the future upper middle class college educated generation bitter and angry at them.

It is not the place of the University to actively monitor what it's students do on it's network. Also, such transactions could have originated off campus, and were then further distributed on the LAN.

If you can't afford to buy a car, then you don't steal the car. This is the way capitalism works, and if you single out sections, exempting them from the law, eventually the whole system will collapse. It has been said that music trading has had no relative harmful effect on the music industry and if anything it's been a new way of spreading word about new artists. 50 Cent, for example owes much to the Internet. Some people download a song and say, "Wow, I really like this. Off to the store I go."... Especially when confronted with industry-planted fakes that are there for just that reason, the bait and switch. What really needs addressed and adjusted is the value the industry puts on music. Although production is expensive, I don't think ten tracks are worth $15.99. Even with other incentives like beautiful cover art and extras. (See: TOOL - Lateralus, or any specially bound albums like Amnesiac by Radiohead)

The purpose of a lawsuit is not getting the money, but the damages it will cause to the party as a punishment and therefor influence on them not to trangress again.

The bottom line is, you don't walk into Circle K with a cup from yesterday and fill it up with Lipton again. You don't take a car because you can't afford one. You don't show up at Kracus' mother's house without a nickel.

sirstrongbad wrote:best way to get around this... borrow music cds from friends. when you or one of your friends buys a new cd, borrow it and rip it. me and some buddies have been doing this for years to circumvent the whole p2p trading issue.

While that's still illegal, it is the most stealthy approach to getting free music. When you buy an album, you're buying one aural license. It is meant for your ears only, but the law cannot say anything to you if you play it to a room full of people. Technically, it could be illegal to play music at a party that people have paid an entrance charge for, because that could arguably cover the music as well. The same legalities go for video... It's the reason behind the rebroadcast warning on any sports video or broadcast.

Say you have four friends in your CD swapping group. Each of you buys a CD and trades it around... Let's also say that all CDs are $20.

When all is traded, you would have each spent $5 for one CD of music out of the four total.

Wouldn't it make more sense for the industry to stop lining the pockets of rapists like R. Kelly and murderers like C-Murder so much, and drop the industry-wide value of albums? There are already 'collector's version' DVDs on the market that are sometimes twice as much as the regular DVD, because of the special features and case it comes in.

As far as industry wealth goes, the artists themselves don't have anything to worry about. Big artists are given everything. Jewelers give them all their stuff and the artist becomes a walking advertisement. Clothing companies furnish them with anything they want. Their tricked out cars are usually 40-60% donated. The rims, tires, accessories, paint, effects... All of that is donated.

your points only hold water with me if they're compared to software downloading not music.
i just fail to see any harm at all in people downloading music, something that has been freely available for years off the radio.
comparing stealing someones car to archiving a song is just not the same thing.

and yes, it is the university's responsiblity to monitor its own network.
not legally, but ethically.
the university's network is paid for by the students that use it and don't use it.
so if kids in dorms are doing illegal shit on the camps net connection, its the universities responsibility to prevent it. That way the utility it provides the rest of the students who are abiding by the ethics policies does not come into jepordy.

on a related subject... i have no idea why the RIAA would ever have a need to sue anyone at my school. They offer a plan that students can sign up for, its ~2.99/yr (IIRC) for unlimited song downloads through an online music serivce. (as long as you're on-campus)

-Replicant- wrote:they've sued college kids for over a year now, BC alone has had 3 or 4 students sued since it began

Filesharing is legal in Canada

Jackal wrote:

-Replicant- wrote:they've sued college kids for over a year now, BC alone has had 3 or 4 students sued since it began

Filesharing is legal in Canada

BC is probably the abbreviation for some university in the US, in the context of his statement. or something...

canada > *

sorry, Boston College, not british columbia

AmIdYfReAk wrote:canada > *

ya but you pay like 99% of your taxes to the Gov

Dr_Watson wrote:your points only hold water with me if they're compared to software downloading not music.

Thank you, Supreme Justice Dipshit.

Dr_Watson wrote: i just fail to see any harm at all in people downloading music

Not too much harm out of stealing jelly beans from the candy store in the mall, or stealing grapes from the produce section, but it's still stealing. When millions are doing it, it becomes a problem that cannot be ignored.

Dr_Watson wrote:something that has been freely available for years off the radio.

With commercials. Radio stations (The networks they belong to actually) pay huge licensing fees to play songs in a lot of cases. The same can be said about video rental, where the VHS and DVDs they buy are often two times (or more) the price of a regular store bought DVD.

Dr_Watson wrote:comparing stealing someones car to archiving a song is just not the same thing.

It's the same exact thing. The severity of the punishment is the only difference. It's theft.

Dr_Watson wrote:and yes, it is the university's responsiblity to monitor its own network.

It's network, and use of the network... Not the files on the student's PC. They could come from an outside source, and if some cunt gets smart and names everything Pohs Ydnac Tnec 05.keke and tells his buddies to rename it, it gets even harder.

stocktroll wrote:

AmIdYfReAk wrote:canada > *

ya but you pay like 99% of your taxes to the Gov

sure

stocktroll wrote:

AmIdYfReAk wrote:canada > *

ya but you pay like 99% of your taxes to the Gov

:icon27:

Yeah...

stocktroll wrote:

AmIdYfReAk wrote:canada > *

ya but you pay like 99% of your taxes to the Gov

right, because Americans are known for their vast knowledge and understanding of other countries.

That's odd. I was under the impression that 100% of tax was paid to the government, in just about every country out there.

yeah, who the fuck else are taxes supposed to get paid to?