The RIAA goes too far?

[Senor Ding Dong]

[url]http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/kr/20030909/lo_krnewyork/suedforasong[/url]


The RIAA is getting REALLY desperate. I mean REALLY.

[Nate]

Yes, it is. They should have sued KaZaA at most, because if KaZA is getting money, then they aren't paying trhe artist, they should be sued. I hope they get sued back for character harrasment and...what else..some other stuff, too. I would.

[hansolowannabe]

These scumbags are just looking for something to do. They must not have a lot to do. Douchebags.

[Semjaza]

Kazaa just connects people. It has no control over what they share or send. It's not as if Kazaa is the only program to be used anyway. In the past, most of the people they seem to go after either host or download things from FTPs. They mostly seem interested in the uploaders though.

I mean come on, it says the 60 people they targetted downloaded over 1,000 songs. 1,000 songs. That's a lot of stuff considering most CDs contain on average about 14 tracks. I think at some point, these people just need to go outside and buy something.

Maybe if people read the disclaimers on these programs before getting whatever the hell they wanted, they wouldn't get into these messes.

On top of that, it says one lady paid $29.95 for Kazaa. First of all, who pays for it? It's free! She knew enough to pay for the Plus version, but not enough to read disclaimers and know what she is doing isn't exactly legal? Second of all, she thinks that makes everything else okay? People need to be educated about the law, honestly.

While I'm not defending the RIAA, which I hate passionately, I still blame the stupid *** people who use these programs.

Yes, the RIAA sucks. They are insane with these copyright protections; they are fighting a system that could benefit them if they played their cards right; between them and the rest of the industry, many rather successful bands are lucky to get around $5,000 after all the CD sales are added up. They suck horribly... but to me, some of these people are just stupid and deserve what they get.

I also know some random person is going to say that record sales are up despite this. I don't know what you read, but they're down like 30% on average right now. So I hope someone doesn't try that argument yet again.

[Transtic Nerve]

The RIAA has been doing this for years. They think it will accomplish things, and it won't. This is why i don't buy alot of American CDs. If no one buys any CDs, that'll shut them up really quick. Of course that would mean sacraficing any music you may like, but hell, most of you like that crap anyway so it shouldn't be a problem.

Anyway, the RIAA will continue to do this, they will continue to sue and make "threats" on people who trade mp3s. I have almost 6,000 mp3s on my hard drive and I haven't seen the RIAA yet. So they can go screw themselves, lousy, greedy, American bastards. And you all support these people by continuing to give them 90% of the profits from every CD you buy? lol. They are sueing a 12-year old girl... lol What kind of pathetic people are they? What kind of pathetic person supports this?

[TheShinje]

[size=1] Wether you like it or not, the RIAA has the right to protect it's property, the songs they own, and they can do this by any means that they want.

They are screwing up badly though, like Tony pointed out before, it's a resource that can be used to their advantage when they use it properly.

And maybe *gasp* they could drop the [price of their CD's, that would certainly curb some poples desire for downloading if the price was reasonable, they're 30 NZ$ over here. [/size]

[James]

[quote][i]Originally posted by Semjaza Azazel:[/i][b]
I think at some point, these people just need to go outside and buy something.
[/b][/quote]

[color=#707875]Agreed. 1,000 downloaded songs [i]is[/i] getting a bit excessive.

I'm getting very tired of people who keep trying to passionately defend their "right" to [b]steal[/b]. Sometimes it really surprises me. Yes, it's convenient. Yes, you can do it easily. But that doesn't make it legal or right. Forget the RIAA and think about the artist, whom you are stealing from.

In any case, I have been painted as some RIAA supporter in the past for telling people that stealing music is wrong. But I'm just like Semjaza Azazel on this issue. I have little sympathy for the RIAA, but if people are stupid enough to steal that much music and not pay for it...well, they get what's coming to them. And I hope it teaches them a lesson.[/color]

[Transtic Nerve]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Shinji Ikari [/i]
[B][size=1] And maybe *gasp* they could drop the [price of their CD's, that would certainly curb some poples desire for downloading if the price was reasonable, they're 30 NZ$ over here. [/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

One of the record makers is lowering their price now... from like 18 to 13 bucks, American. It doesn't cost but MAYBE $5 to make a CD. Probably significantly less. Yet they charge the consumer anywhere from 12-20 dollars for ONE CD album? The artists gets like 5% of the profits from CD sales, the RIAA gets the rest respectively. Its ridiculous, as this mother pointed out. Like they NEED more money... come on. This must be why this country is so great. They just can't be comtempt like eeryone else? If anyone wanted to due, it should be the artists, not the Recording Indistry. SOme artist LIKE sharing files... Limp Bizkit, Dave Matthews I think was one, several others.... even some purposefully put their stuff online FOR download... Yet all that doesn't matter to the RIAA, lolw hy would it, there's no money in it for them and thats allllll they care about.... ridiculous.... absolutely ridiculous.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B][color=#707875] Forget the RIAA and think about the artist, whom you are stealing from.
[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

Yes think about the artists. Look up their addresses and send them money personally. Go to their concerts. DON'T buy their CDs. You're just giving money to the RIAA, not the artists. At least not enough.

[Semjaza]

This argument would be good if people [i]actually did it[/i].

Who the hell does? Many people download random songs from random bands. Many also download entire CDs or even entire discographies online. Now, you expect me to believe that they're willing to go buy $20 shirts or pay for concert tickets for every single one of those groups/musicians instead?

Maybe for every CD someone downloaded, someone bought merchandise or went to a show... we'd be fine. These people don't exist in that large of a number. I don't see anyone downloading tons of [insert band name here]'s stuff running to shows to negate their downloading amounts.

To me this proves absolutely nothing. Do people honestly think that the label will even support these bands without record sales? Guess what? They don't.

Two good examples...

Example One:

NIN - NIN is largely successful for their type of band. Everyone knows them in some form. However, The Fragile didn't sell as well as Interscope had expected. It was a 2 CD album, and did something around platinum in sales. Still wasn't enough.

So what did Interscope do? They pulled most of their funding from the tour. Luckily Trent had enough to cover most of the costs out of his own damn pocket. That was for Fragility 1.0 in the US... Fragility 2.0 in the rest of the world was still upcoming, but he took care of that as well.

Example 2:

Curve - Curve isn't as successful. They are doing fairly well for themselves though. They also had the record sales problem. Unfortunately, unlike Trent and NIN, they didn't have the money to take care of any funding their label couldn't. So then what? That's right, no tour.

This goes for a lot of smaller bands as well. Tickets to these shows seem to go between $4 and $15. They still have to pay a bunch of middle men and the club and whatever else, just like with the industry. They don't exactly get tons out of that either, but at least there is merchandise, which helps.

To me, that argument is a bunch of crap. I really don't think most people go through with it. They get what they get because it's free. Not because they really care about it.

There are obviously better ways to go about this. The industry in general screws everyone over. It's not just the RIAA. The Smashing Pumpkins put their last release online for example, which I thought was a good idea. Many bands put up samples, but it's not really the end of the world for the recording industry.

The RIAA would be smart to embrace what is obviously the future. Instead, they are morons who want to stick to archaic, unfair business models that bring them in as much money as possible.

On the other hand, I don't like the idea that people who don't "support" the RIAA think they are some modern Robin Hood. You're not. This doesn't hurt the RIAA as much as you'd like to think. It hurts the little guys that need that tiny bit of money to stay alive.

Also, for all the stuff people have downloaded... has the RIAA gotten more sympathetic? No. They've gotten worse and worse and just keep coming down harder and harder.

I do dislike the RIAA, I hope this is obvious. At the same time, I do what I have to do. This means putting up with **** I don't agree with and voicing my complaints by other means rather than stealing the songs and helping no one.

If I shop around, I rarely spend more than $12 for a CD anyway. Most of the time I spend under $10. Why people shop at these yuppie CD stores and pay nearly $20 a disc, I have no clue.

Also, open up a CD booklet. There are far more people involved than just the artist and the suits. In addition to those people, you also have to add in the stores, deliveries, package artists and everything else. There is far more to it than just that.

The RIAA is whithered old hag that should just be brutally put out of its misery. However, I don't really think what people are currently doing is the most beneficial route... nor do I think the RIAA threatening their consumer base is the best idea either. They really need to get with the times.


Edit - I really think the best course of action would be for these bands to take these things into their own hands.

Curve, Rasputina and many other bands have already released entire albums strictly online. You pay them and you download it, bypassing most of the moneygrubbers. At this point, I think that's the best course of action for everyone involved.

Although I doubt they sold as many copies doing that, they most likely got more actual returns on it. If larger bands embraced this idea it would probably work. There is probably an entire system they could set up just to make it work.

I guess we'll see.

[Drix D'Zanth]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B][color=#707875]Agreed. 1,000 downloaded songs [i]is[/i] getting a bit excessive.

I'm getting very tired of people who keep trying to passionately defend their "right" to [b]steal[/b]. Sometimes it really surprises me. Yes, it's convenient. Yes, you can do it easily. But that doesn't make it legal or right. Forget the RIAA and think about the artist, whom you are stealing from.

In any case, I have been painted as some RIAA supporter in the past for telling people that stealing music is wrong. But I'm just like Semjaza Azazel on this issue. I have little sympathy for the RIAA, but if people are stupid enough to steal that much music and not pay for it...well, they get what's coming to them. And I hope it teaches them a lesson.[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

I can't agree with this. If I buy a CD and let my friend borrow it and listen to it, there is no chance in hell that I should go down for a lawsuit. Yes people are taking advantage of the system. But the fact is, they aren't COPYING anything, they are sharing their music with other people. No exchange of money, and frankly I have little sympathy over RIAA. We aren't stealing anything, I think it's just sharing :D. The only issue is that people have taken granted of what they have. That sounds familiar, people taking advantage of some industry... wait... that sounds like the industry itself when it claimed as CD's FIRST came out "The CD will be easier to use, easier to play, and much cheaper." Which SHOULD be true. Nope, CD's came out initially costing well over the price of casettes. Record companies haven't even bothered thinking of the consumer, merely the fattening wallets and the wallets of their stars. No sympathy here.

I know some of you will argue: But it is stealing, you get a cd and put in on Kazaa , people just take the music from you, they don't share it like anyone else, and you OWN that music! Wait wait, there IS a feature on kazaa where you can stop uploads.

Oh, superl337chix0r let me borrow her song "The Prodigy"? Thanks! :) way to share, benefits society. Uh oh, Mr.debax0tr wants to borrow my newly shared song, well I don't think superl337chix0r would want me to share the song she so generously shared with me, so sorry debax0r, no downloading for you :(

[Dagger]

I dislike the RIAA as much as anyone else. However, I've got to admit that their lawsuit strategy is working pretty well. They're trying to strike fear into the hearts of downloaders, and for all I know, it may be working.

Look on the bright side. Kazaa may not be the best of options anymore, what with viruses and subponeas, but the music industry is hemorrhaging money, and this has only partly to do P2P programs. Lawsuits aren't going to put them back in the black.

Some music companies are starting to cut CD prices as low as $12. I've always been able to find discount CDs for around that much, but it's cool that the regular prices are finally going to drop. It used to really infuriate me that I could buy an anime DVD, along with extras, from a big retailer like Amazon.com--for less money than a 14-track CD from the music store at the nearest mall.

So although I think that the RIAA is being invading our privacy with this whole suing business, they're also making steps in the right direction, and music lovers should be happy about that.

~Dagger~

[Semjaza]

I must wonder how many people that use Kazaa and these other mindless programs actually know how to rip MP3s. I've not many people that do. Most use something stupid like Musicmatch anyway.

Personally, I don't think the problem is really the people who share lots of random stuff. The problems seem to be those warez groups that get most of these CDs out online weeks ahead of time, or these FTPs that seriously have around 1,000 complete albums on them. If you look around, they're not hard to find. The RIAA also goes after these people to an extent, but I'm not getting the picture that they are going after them as much as they should. They are the problem.

I guess they want to hurt the little people to convey this message to normal people. I don't really know. Seems weird to just right out attack the hand that feeds you, the general consumer.

The sharing argument might work if you weren't giving millions of people access to all of it. It's hardly comparable to you lending something out to a few people you know.

[Mitch]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Semjaza Azazel [/i]
[B]This argument would be good if people [i]actually did it[/i].

Who the hell does? Many people download random songs from random bands. Many also download entire CDs or even entire discographies online. Now, you expect me to believe that they're willing to go buy $20 shirts or pay for concert tickets for every single one of those groups/musicians instead?

Maybe for every CD someone downloaded, someone bought merchandise or went to a show... we'd be fine. These people don't exist in that large of a number. I don't see anyone downloading tons of [insert band name here]'s stuff running to shows to negate their downloading amounts.

To me this proves absolutely nothing. Do people honestly think that the label will even support these bands without record sales? Guess what? They don't.

Two good examples...

Example One:

NIN - NIN is largely successful for their type of band. Everyone knows them in some form. However, The Fragile didn't sell as well as Interscope had expected. It was a 2 CD album, and did something around platinum in sales. Still wasn't enough.

So what did Interscope do? They pulled most of their funding from the tour. Luckily Trent had enough to cover most of the costs out of his own damn pocket. That was for Fragility 1.0 in the US... Fragility 2.0 in the rest of the world was still upcoming, but he took care of that as well.

Example 2:

Curve - Curve isn't as successful. They are doing fairly well for themselves though. They also had the record sales problem. Unfortunately, unlike Trent and NIN, they didn't have the money to take care of any funding their label couldn't. So then what? That's right, no tour.

This goes for a lot of smaller bands as well. Tickets to these shows seem to go between $4 and $15. They still have to pay a bunch of middle men and the club and whatever else, just like with the industry. They don't exactly get tons out of that either, but at least there is merchandise, which helps.

To me, that argument is a bunch of crap. I really don't think most people go through with it. They get what they get because it's free. Not because they really care about it.

There are obviously better ways to go about this. The industry in general screws everyone over. It's not just the RIAA. The Smashing Pumpkins put their last release online for example, which I thought was a good idea. Many bands put up samples, but it's not really the end of the world for the recording industry.

The RIAA would be smart to embrace what is obviously the future. Instead, they are morons who want to stick to archaic, unfair business models that bring them in as much money as possible.

On the other hand, I don't like the idea that people who don't "support" the RIAA think they are some modern Robin Hood. You're not. This doesn't hurt the RIAA as much as you'd like to think. It hurts the little guys that need that tiny bit of money to stay alive.

Also, for all the stuff people have downloaded... has the RIAA gotten more sympathetic? No. They've gotten worse and worse and just keep coming down harder and harder.

I do dislike the RIAA, I hope this is obvious. At the same time, I do what I have to do. This means putting up with **** I don't agree with and voicing my complaints by other means rather than stealing the songs and helping no one.

If I shop around, I rarely spend more than $12 for a CD anyway. Most of the time I spend under $10. Why people shop at these yuppie CD stores and pay nearly $20 a disc, I have no clue.

Also, open up a CD booklet. There are far more people involved than just the artist and the suits. In addition to those people, you also have to add in the stores, deliveries, package artists and everything else. There is far more to it than just that.

The RIAA is whithered old hag that should just be brutally put out of its misery. However, I don't really think what people are currently doing is the most beneficial route... nor do I think the RIAA threatening their consumer base is the best idea either. They really need to get with the times.


Edit - I really think the best course of action would be for these bands to take these things into their own hands.

Curve, Rasputina and many other bands have already released entire albums strictly online. You pay them and you download it, bypassing most of the moneygrubbers. At this point, I think that's the best course of action for everyone involved.

Although I doubt they sold as many copies doing that, they most likely got more actual returns on it. If larger bands embraced this idea it would probably work. There is probably an entire system they could set up just to make it work.

I guess we'll see. [/B][/QUOTE]

[size=1] Read this post again if you haven't read it enough. Tony is right in everything he says.

I personally don't download anything anymore. Nearly all the music I have is from CDs I've either purchased myself, or my Dad has given me. I have some 100 songs downloaded...and 30 of those or so are Pink Floyd songs, which now I own The Wall, and The Dark Side of the Moon. So I basically have all of those songs.

I only use it as a means to hear a band before I purchase their CDs or whatever.

I'm nearly with Tony on this. I don't hate the RIAA. I'd be doing some of the same things if I were in their shoes...

And that's what you have to do. Put yourself in their position instead of standing by yourself with your own shoes not seeing their side of this.

I certainly don't know the half of this...I haven't really been paying attention. But I don't hate them. They are doing what I would probably do..

With each cause there's an effect. The RIAA might be pretty greedy...nearly never paying bands what they deserve, but hell, I can't do **** about it.

When it comes down to it it's you people. All this is doing is destroying good bands that should have the spotlight and forcing record labels to not try anything new or any newer bands due to lack of money and such. So just look at the bands you love, ask yourself if they'd still be here if it wasn't for their record sales, and their getting a spotilight in a sense.

Look there. Would they be here still, those that are, such as Metallica? I don't think so. Before the Black Album, Metallica wasn't known as widely as that at all. The record was what kept them alive.

So when it comes down to it I'm as pissed at people that download music like cheapskates as I am with the RIAA. But there's nothing I can do..I can only support new bands that sound great, and buy their albums. It won't do much, but at least I can say I'm better than those other people and that I actually care what the hell happens to music.[/size]

[The Original]

I honestly don't know which side to take. While I agreed with Drix D'Zanth (there's something new) about his veiw that it isn't stealing, its "sharing", most of the points made by Semjaza Azazel make a lot of sense as well. I personally think that this is a disgusting mess that is not being helped by either the RIAA or downloaders. To me, this is just an example of humanity's overwhelming greed.


[URL=http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view.php?id=115382]Taco-Man Hates the RIAA[/URL]
This movie may not convert you (it didn't for me), but it does lighten up the situation a little. Lol.

[eleanor]

[size=1][QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Drix D'Zanth [/i]
[B]I can't agree with this. If I buy a CD and let my friend borrow it and listen to it, there is no chance in hell that I should go down for a lawsuit. Yes people are taking advantage of the system. But the fact is, they aren't COPYING anything, they are sharing their music with other people. No exchange of money, and frankly I have little sympathy over RIAA. We aren't stealing anything, I think it's just sharing :D. The only issue is that people have taken granted of what they have. That sounds familiar, people taking advantage of some industry... wait... that sounds like the industry itself when it claimed as CD's FIRST came out "The CD will be easier to use, easier to play, and much cheaper." Which SHOULD be true. Nope, CD's came out initially costing well over the price of casettes. Record companies haven't even bothered thinking of the consumer, merely the fattening wallets and the wallets of their stars. No sympathy here.

I know some of you will argue: But it is stealing, you get a cd and put in on Kazaa , people just take the music from you, they don't share it like anyone else, and you OWN that music! Wait wait, there IS a feature on kazaa where you can stop uploads.

[/B][/QUOTE]

You are a new artist, trying to make money, and about 10,000 brats decide to rip you off and not buy your stuff. Instead, they feed off of some obscure man who actually bought your CD and is now sharing it on Kazaa. This makes you feel very good. Smile.[/size]

[Dagger]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by maladjusted [/i]
[B][size=1]

You are a new artist, trying to make money, and about 10,000 brats decide to rip you off and not buy your stuff. Instead, they feed off of some obscure man who actually bought your CD and is now sharing it on Kazaa. This makes you feel very good. Smile.[/size] [/B][/QUOTE]

That was well phrased, my friend. ^_^

Anyway, it's my opinion that think that both the RIAA and file-sharers are being rather greedy. You bring up an excellent point. However, bear in mind that some new artists (such as Kittie) originally became famous because their songs were popular online. I don't advocate stealing--I just wanted to say that everything has its pros and cons. When it comes to file-sharing, a responsible person will probably decide that the bad outweighs the good.

~Dagger~

[wrist cutter]

If it weren't for online music sharing/stealing, I wouldn't have the 50 or so CDs I have now. And I wouldn't have gotten other people into this music either, who also purchased large quantities of CDs.

There's no easy answer to this situation.

[noodleboy]

though i am sad that i'm not supporting my fav. artists... i do nothing. i will continue to download so be it i under stand what will happen...

instead of whining about it do something [url]http://www.boycott-riaa.com/[/url]

[Transtic Nerve]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by wrist cutter [/i]
[B]If it weren't for online music sharing/stealing, I wouldn't have the 50 or so CDs I have now. And I wouldn't have gotten other people into this music either, who also purchased large quantities of CDs.

There's no easy answer to this situation. [/B][/QUOTE]

Exactly... I'm one of those people who got into music more BECAUSE of file sharing. In fact, I can think of ONE case where I got into an artist because I just randomly bought his CD... and then I bought all of his CDs after that. But the rest of what I'm into and artists I support I've gotten into because of file sharring... If the RIAA wants, I will be more than happy to ask for my money back and pretend I never got into their artists, ofcourse that would be silly.

The majority of my 6,000 mp3s have either been personally ripped, which I've done with almost ALL of my CDs. I have well over 50 CDs, both Japanese and American, some European. The rest I have downloaded has been mostly Japanese or European music, not anything the RIAA can get me for anyway.

What I don't understand is that they are going after people who do not download much, or all the time. They are going after 12 year old girls... a grandfather who's grandkids downloaded some songs... a university professor..... I mean come on. If you wanna make a point go after people who have thousands of mp3s, who download on a regular basis, people who SELL burned copies of CDs. Not innocent people. That prooves nothing but the heartlessness of the RIAA and how greedy they really are.

I personally still do not understand the reasong behind this. We've been making copies of music since the recorder was introduced with tape decks. There's nothing wrong with that. We've been making copies of VHS tapes for ages. There's nothing wrong with that.... the reason? Because we don't make money off of it. SHouldn't it work the same with file sharing?... I'm not making any money off of it. I don't even share my files, I just download them. I essentially borrow music from other people to listen to. It's as if i went and borrowed a movie from my friend and watched it. I'm not making money off of it, I'm just watching it. Why is that so wrong?

It doesn't matter though. I don't support many american artists, I don't download from many american artists. If I do download, I usually end up buying their albums to. I own every single BT album made. I own all Metallica's albums, except for their last two and I don't have one mp3 from either of those albums...

Support the artists you like in whatever way you want, but if you think buying CDs is supporting your artist, you're wrong. You're supporting the RIAA and giving a measly 5 cents to the artists. Mail thema nickle yourself and go download the album if you want to support them. Go to their concerts. Buy their merchandise.

This is not about the artists like the RIAA is making it out to be. It's about them and not getting a humoungous profit from CD sales. It's all about money and money for them, not the artists. It's ridiculous. And just because they do stuf like this is the sole reason i DON'T buy American CDs... and you shouldn't either. There's only one way to support your artists.... give them your money yourself. Any other way, you're supporting other greedy people like the RIAA.

[PiroMunkie]

[size=1]I download music as much as the next person, and honestly I have no problem with it. The music is downloaded to my computer and it stays there. The only thing I have a problem with is when people take the music off of the computer and use it elsewhere.

The main purpose I download music is to check out a band that I may not have heard of, and see if I like their music enough to actually go out and support them. I would not be into naerly as many bands I am today if it were not for the downloading of their songs. Once I can get up the money I [i]do[/i] actually go out and buy a CD or two. I get a lot of CD's especially when Christmas comes around. My dad said he just goes to BestBuy.com and orders everything from there, and has said that since he started doing theat Best Buy has sent him numerous e-mails asking him to buy more stuff.

I do not currently have a job, which makes it hard to go out and buy music, but when I get the chance, I do. I am currently talking to a person I know who works at a Best Buy store here in Omaha and seeing if he can get me a job there. So not only shall I then have money, but I shall be within the right place to get what I want. Best Buy is probably my favorite entertainment store all around. They seem to have more of a selection of bands and for a rather reasonable price. If they do not have what you are looking for on the shelves, then you can check out their site and see if they have it there. That is how I was able to purchase Apocalypse Hoboken's CD [i]Microstars[/i]; they are not even together anymore.

Come Christmas time it can be expected that I shall be asking for a lot of music I am currently getting into and/or have always been meaning to get (i.e. David Bowie, Tiger Army, Misfits, Mindless Self Indulgence, Marilyn Manson, The Cure, Joy Division, Smashing Pumpkins, etc.). I love the holidays, because I am able to do this. All that I am unable to attain myself I can get other people to do for me.

I only have a few burned CD's only two of which a full albums and the rest are mixes, but none of them do I even really listen to anymore. They are laying around my room somewhere collecting dust, which is [i]not[/i] how I care for the CD's I have that I actually enjoy having. I am probably one of the most anal people when it comes to organzing the music I have. All of my CD's are alphabetized (both the cases and the CD's), and all my files are the same way on the computer. Of course it is that way by default, but I have recently gone through them all and made sure all the titles and names were capitalized properly and written correctly.

For example, the file [i]the Cure - the love Cats.mp3[/i] becomes [i]Cure, The - The Love Cats.mp3[/i]. I have also gone through the playlist in Winamp and checked to make sure that each song within each artist is alphabetized. All I do is pull up my entire playlist and have it set on [i]shuffle[/i] so I get a random artist. Then when I get new music I update the organization and save it again.

I love the music very much and am not going to outright harm those people who make it. I may not be able to get their stuff right away, but it will come around eventually.

I am not one of those people who downloads an artists CD well ahead of time of its release, or even at all before it is released. I know Tony can back me up on that one because he had checked out [i]Sing the Sorrow[/i] (AFI) a little bit ahead of time and asked if I wanted to listen to it and I would not do it. I would only listen to the stuff AFI pre-released to the public.


I really dislike the actions the RIAA are taking as it seems they are targeting the wrong audience. If I ever get caught up in their mess I am going to light up an debate faster than a computer hooked up with T3 can download any song.[/size]

[Semjaza]

The RIAA and that little girl settled. Her family has to pay them $2,000.

[Transtic Nerve]

lol... they made a little girl pay 2,000 dollars... or well her mother.... I wouldn't have given them a cent.... what a bunch of BS....

[Harry]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Semjaza Azazel [/i]
[B]
Personally, I don't think the problem is really the people who share lots of random stuff. The problems seem to be those warez groups that get most of these CDs out online weeks ahead of time, or these FTPs that seriously have around 1,000 complete albums on them. If you look around, they're not hard to find. The RIAA also goes after these people to an extent, but I'm not getting the picture that they are going after them as much as they should. They are the problem. [/B][/QUOTE]
You had a good arguement until you said this. Most of the stuff you see on kazaa is not from a warez group, but stuff ripped from people themselves. Most people get their mp3's from kazaa, some get it from mirc, and even less get them from ftp's. The RIAA knows that if people stop using kazaa and that other stuff, music piracy would plummet a lot.

[quote]I also know some random person is going to say that record sales are up despite this. I don't know what you read, but they're down like 30% on average right now.[/quote]
I'm guessing they meant that they're up if you consider that they cut the amount of albums released by 35% or something like this. There was a study that stated it but that was a year ago or so.

I think if they just lowered the prices of their cd's piracy would lower a lot. I find it completely stupid to pay 20 dollars for I don't know a linkin park cd and enjoy the 2 or 3 good songs, the 4-5 decent songs, and the rest crappy songs (if that album even had that many) when I could buy a DVD and watch it for an hour and half, watch the commentary, and watch some extra features. And if it's a good movie I could watch it again and again.

[Semjaza]

If you read that paragraph, you'd see I wasn't even talking about Kazaa. I said they should go after these FTP people more and not concentrate soley on random idiots downloading crap off of peer to peer stuff like Kazaa that just don't know any better. Besides, they aren't just targetting Kazaa, which would be obvious if you read their subpoenas and other things they send out. One of the people they went after in the past was running some sort of server in his dorm room.

Now yes, most people do get their stuff of Kazaa and the like... however, 90% of leaks and such originate on some FTP and wind up on Kazaa very, very quickly. On top of this, on Kazaa you're lucky to find anyone that has a full album of anything. Whereas FTPs generally have entire discographies you can just leech off of there. It's not that small of a market, and it's more of a problem in terms of that then some random kid downloading a couple boy band songs.

If you find an original of a newer CD on Kazaa is ends in something like FNT (which would be the group releasing it) or whatever else and generally has underscores instead of spaces. Many, many people wind up with these and some rename them, some don't. They are obviously a bigger problem than is evident and are surely the source of the newest things that get leaked to Kazaa. They're the reason I've been able to find many CDs weeks and weeks ahead of time on Kazaa in the first place.

So I'm not sure how what you said disproves what I said.

Edit - Added more.

[Harry]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Semjaza Azazel [/i]
[B]If you read that paragraph, you'd see I wasn't even talking about Kazaa. I said they should go after these FTP people more and not concentrate soley on random idiots downloading crap off of peer to peer stuff like Kazaa that just don't know any better. Besides, they aren't just targetting Kazaa, which would be obvious if you read their subpoenas and other things they send out. One of the people they went after in the past was running some sort of server in his dorm room.[/b][/quote]
They're focusing on kazaa a lot more now because the only people that get busted are the ones running the ftp in america (which is assuming the owner knows it's even going on), it is much more fear invoking to go after the people that download the files.

[quote]Now yes, most people do get their stuff of Kazaa and the like... however, 90% of leaks and such originate on some FTP and wind up on Kazaa very, very quickly. On top of this, on Kazaa you're lucky to find anyone that has a full album of anything. Whereas FTPs generally have entire discographies you can just leech off of there. It's not that small of a market, and it's more of a problem in terms of that then some random kid downloading a couple boy band songs.[/quote]
Most leaks do come from the warez groups, but they dont' care about that mainly. They care about people like the ones stated in the article downloading thousands of songs and most likely sharing them. Once again though, it doesn't matter that much with ftp's because not a lot of people know what a ftp is. You might not think you're computer savy but to a good majority of people you are compared to them.

[quote]If you find an original of a newer CD on Kazaa is ends in something like FNT (which would be the group releasing it) or whatever else and generally has underscores instead of spaces.
So I'm not sure how what you said disproves what I said.
[/B][/QUOTE]

I'm well aware what a warez group is, and I'm well aware that most of the mp3's on kazaa are not from groups.

[quote]So I'm not sure how what you said disproves what I said.[/quote]
All I'm saying is that going after individual people to invoke fear in all the kazaa downloaders (assuming it works) is much more affective than taking down the groups that release them.