-
-
Donate Your Piracy Savings to Reduce Poverty
If the MPAA and RIAA are to be believed, rather than buying media, file-sharers around the world are saving billions of dollars by downloading copyrighted material instead. if your one of these people we now have the ultimate solution to solve your ‘guilt’. Donate a week in piracy ’savings’ to reduce poverty among those who need it.
Together with thousands of other blogs, Torrent Freak is participating in the Blog Action Day 2008. This year’s goal is to raise awareness and generate discussion on poverty, so that’s exactly what we’ll do.
Our plan? Encourage people to donate their pirate ’savings’ to projects that help to reduce poverty. Why? Because we believe in sharing.
The Rules:
The idea is to calculate how much you have ’saved’ in the past week by downloading copyrighted content. If you haven’t downloaded anything, just pretend you have, we’re trying to raise money here.
In the interests of grossly inflating the figures and therefore raising as much money for charity as possible, just like the MPAA and RIAA we’re going to assume that one pirated copy equals one lost sale. We decided not to include software, because things can get a little out of hand for those who downloaded Photoshop.
1 music track = $1
1 music album = $10
1 movie = $10
1 TV-show = $5
1 book = $10
Now, calculate your savings based on the example above (you are allowed to show off in the comments) and donate this amount to a project that aims to reduce poverty. You can pick your own charity of course, but we also have a pretty good suggestion.
Where to Donate?
We assume that most of our readers are familiar with the concept of P2P, so we would like you to consider the following. Let’s say you fire up your BitTorrent client because you want to download the latest album from your favorite artist. You use BitTorrent, which means that the more you share with others, the more you will receive back.
The only problem is that you will start with nothing, so initially, you don’t have anything to share at all. Luckily, the BitTorrent protocol has solved this problem, and when the swarm recognizes you as a new entrant, random peers will send you a few bits which you can then start to re-share with others. People might wonder what this has to do with poverty, so we’ll try to explain.
In ‘real life’, people sometimes also need to receive something before they can start building up their business, and generate a steady income. They are just like file-sharers - without the first bits, they can never fully participate in the downloading process. Kiva tries to solve this problem. With Kiva you can lend a few dollars to entrepreneurs in developing countries, who will use it to make a living for themselves.
These people will use your $10 to start their own businesses, so they can provide for themselves and their families - P2P in the real world. The good thing is, once they have a steady income they will repay their loans, give to get, just like BitTorrent.
Final Note
The MPAA, RIAA and other anti-piracy lobbyists want you to believe that thousands of people lose their jobs because of piracy, and that it’s a disaster for the global economy. We know better of course, and would argue the opposite. An illegally downloaded song is not a lost sale, in fact, it tends boost sales. We could even argue that, without piracy, hundreds of thousands of people would lose their jobs. For example, iPod sales would plunge and bandwidth usage would drop by 50%.
Piracy is embedded in our world economy and eliminating it would be devastating. It’s better to work on legal alternatives instead. So dust off your calculator and let’s donate! If the MPAA and RIAA are to be believed, rather than buying media, file-sharers around the world are saving billions of dollars by dow... more -
President Bush signs bill to create cabinet-level intellectual property czar
President Bush signed into law today a bill that will create a centralized position in the executive branch, appointed by the president, to head up the fight against piracy and intellectual property violations. The Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act (PRO-IP) is backed strongly by the usuals—MPAA, RIAA, etc.—and yet faced some pushback from the Justice Department and the Bush administration itself as it made its way through the House and Senate. So what does it all mean?
The cabinet position will give a single point of authority to a job now handled by a scattered handful of different agencies and committees. It also calls for increased strength to prosecute and punish IP offenders. A provision that hoisted the responsibility for civil (in addition to criminal) prosecutions for IP cases on the Justice Dept. had to be thrown out first, as it would have effectively gave the already over-burdened folks at the DoJ the added enjoyment of being the entertainment companies' civil trial lawyers. Also, interestingly, the Bush administration apparently forgot about their earlier weariness to politicize a position (by appointment) so closely related to dealings of the legislative branch and the judiciary—because avoiding that kind of thing has been this administration's hallmark, right?
What it will mean day-to-day for us modern web users remains to be seen, but creating a czar worked so well for the war on drugs, why not try it again? President Bush signed into law today a bill that will create a centralized position in the executive branch, appointed by the presiden... more -
Music stars unite to seek control
UK pop and rock stars are taking action to try to gain ownership and control of their work from record labels.
Robbie Williams, Radiohead, Kaiser Chiefs and The Verve are among the acts who have signed up to a new pressure group, the Featured Artists' Coalition.
It wants artists to keep the rights to the music they create and to have a greater say in how their songs are sold - and a bigger slice of the takings.
It is a sign of a shift in power in the music industry in the digital age.
In the last 12 months, big names have seen their options multiply after a string of stars shunned traditional record contracts and found new ways of releasing music.
At the same time, many acts have felt they have been ignored when their record labels and music publishers have struck new digital deals.
A spokesperson from the BPI - the body that represents the UK's recorded music business - said it was "looking forward" to working with the coalition.
"The UK music business is a complex community that binds performers, songwriters, promoters, managers, agents, record labels, publishers, distributors, manufactures and retailers.
"No one part of the business can function without the other. This is a business under huge external pressure, and we are stronger united.
"The creators themselves - featured artists, session musicians and songwriters lie right at the heart of this business, and we look forward to working closely with FAC in the future."
The Featured Artists' Coalition's main demands include allowing musicians to keep the copyright to their own music, which could then be leased to record companies.
At the moment, record labels normally own the rights to the music their artists make.
The coalition also wants its members to be consulted more fully on how their music is used, the ways it is sold and who gets the money.
"Record and technology companies are signing agreements to deliver music to fans in new ways," its charter says.
"Artists are not involved in these negotiations and their interests are likely to be overlooked. Artists should receive fair compensation as part of these new deals."
Radiohead famously released their last album, In Rainbows, through their own website, illustrating how established acts could thrive without a record deal.
Talking about the coalition, Radiohead guitarist Ed O'Brien said: "For us, this is a no-brainer of an issue and we believe that all artists and musicians should be signing up to this too."
Other artists, from McFly to Madonna, have left major labels to release their music through newspapers or live music companies.
Pop singer Kate Nash, who signed a major label deal after building up her fanbase online, is among the other artists on board.
"There are going to be people who don't care about your rights and whether you can keep your integrity - they're just going to want to make money out of you," she told BBC News.
"I'm the only one who sees my album as this baby that I need to protect, something that's precious."
Jools Holland, Travis, Bryan Ferry, David Gilmour and Klaxons have also joined the group.
The coalition is also intending to speak up for artists' rights in high-profile issues in the music industry.
It wants changes to copyright law and for the rights of performers to be brought in line with those of songwriters.
When a song is played in a TV advert, on US radio or in a film, its authors are paid but the performers are not, the body said.
for full article http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7652053.stm UK pop and rock stars are taking action to try to gain ownership and control of their work from record labels. ... more -
Wal-Mart Gives Consumers Number 1 Reason Why DRM is Not the Answer
The music industry is struggling to gain a foot-hold in the battle with online piracy. The options available for music lovers to grow their music collection digitally is tremendous and free. So much so that music companies and publishers have struck up agreements with some of biggest names offering digital music: iTunes, Last.FM., Amazon, Myspace, and Wal-Mart.
While the options are appreciated, a certain restriction that comes with the music files is not. To help music labels combat piracy, digital music providers such as iTunes and Yahoo introduced DRM restricted music files to consumers. Today, Wal-Mart has given consumers the number 1 reason as to why DRM was the worst thing ever. The music industry is struggling to gain a foot-hold in the battle with online piracy. The options available for music lovers to grow ... more -
Senate unanimously passes RIAA-backed bill
The U.S. Senate on Friday unanimously passed a bipartisan bill backed by groups like the recording industry and the labor movement that would increase federal protections over intellectual property.
Introduced in July by Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act now moves to the House of Representatives, where it will be taken up either Friday or Saturday, before Congress adjourns.
The bill was stripped of a controversial measure that would have given federal prosecutors the power to file civil lawsuits against peer-to-peer users who violate copyright laws. The Commerce Department and Justice Department voiced their opposition to the provision in a letter this week, saying it would create "unnecessary bureaucracy."
The legislation still provides increased resources for the Justice Department to combat intellectual property theft and provide coordination for federal and state efforts against counterfeiting and piracy. It also increases penalties for intellectual property infringements.
Not all of the Bush administration's objections with the legislation were addressed, however. The bill replaces the body that currently enforces intellectual property law with a White House Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator. The new coordinator will chair an inter-agency committee to combat counterfeiting and piracy. In its letter, the administration said the establishment of a White House IP coordinator was "objectionable on constitutional grounds."
The Commerce Department said it is still reviewing the legislation as it was passed.
The Recording Industry of America gave resounding praise for the bill.
"At a critical economic juncture, this bipartisan legislation provides enhanced protection for an important asset that helps lead our global competitiveness," RIAA Chairman and CEO Mitch Bainwol said. "Additional tools for intellectual-property enforcement are not just good for the copyright community but for consumers who will enjoy a wider array of legitimate offerings."
Rick Cotton, executive vice president and general counsel of NBC Universal, said concerns that the bill goes too far are unfounded.
"Over the last 20 years, the flood of physical counterfeit projects and the scale of digital theft (have) gone off the chart," he said. "What drives (the U.S. economy are) precisely technical invention, innovation, and creativity--if we don't protect that, we dramatically undermine our economic future."
Along with the recording industry, the bill is backed by the Chamber of Commerce, and labor groups like the AFL-CIO and Change to Win. The U.S. Senate on Friday unanimously passed a bipartisan bill backed by groups like the recording industry and the labor movement tha... more -
Mis-trial declared in RIAA Kazaa case - downloaders rejoice
A judge has declared a mistrial in the Jammie Thomas Kazaa case, and reconsidering the validity of the 'making available' prosecution line of attack.
One to watch.
d A judge has declared a mistrial in the Jammie Thomas Kazaa case, and reconsidering the validity of the 'making available' pr... more -
RIAA hates you still but...
Judge Declares Mistrial in RIAA-Jammie Thomas Trial
Remember that woman that lost a case with the RIAA for sharing music online.
The RIAA tries to sue the single mom for a few 100 thousand.
Well, a judge has declared that the RIAA needs to stop being such dicks and actually have proof next time.
So as far as I know, the RIAA has never ever won a case. Judge Declares Mistrial in RIAA-Jammie Thomas Trial Remember that woman that lost a case with the RIAA for sharing music online. ... more -
ACTION ALERT: Tell the Senate to Hold Up the IP Enforcement Bill | Public Knowledg...
Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee gave the green light to S. 3325, the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Act of 2008. We need you to show them the red light, NOW! This intellectual property enforcement bill lets the DOJ enforce civil copyright claims and lets the government do the MPAA and RIAA’s intellectual property rights enforcement work for them—at tax payers’ expense.
By allowing the federal government to sue infringers in civil court, the DOJ would be asking a court for monetary damages on behalf of content owners. In a civil suit brought by the government, the defendant loses many of the protections he possesses in a criminal action—including his right to free legal representation. What’s more, the government’s legal burden of proof is lower: the government only needs to prove infringement with a “preponderance of the evidence,” meaning that it’s more likely than not that infringement occurred, as opposed to the usual criminal standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Does the content industry need this help from the Department of Justice? Absolutely not! In the last five years, the RIAA filed or threatened more than 30,000 suits against alleged infringers. If the Enforcement bill passes, not only will the number of such suits increase—they’ll also be paid for with your tax dollars.
Now, the bill’s backers are pushing to have it pass the Senate as early as today via a streamlined procedure, without the full Senate voting on the measure. Tell members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that you don’t want your tax dollars spent on DOJ’s civil enforcement of copyright, and to put a hold on the bill. Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee gave the green light to S. 3325, the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Act of 2008. We ne... more -
Muxtape in Trouble
The user-friendly mixtape Web site, Muxtape, might be forced to shut down for good - and here's why.
-
Biden: Let's monitor P2P for illegal files
A prominent Senate Democrat on Wednesday said federal and local police should use custom software to monitor peer-to-peer networks for illegal activity, and he wants to spend $1 billion in tax dollars to help make that happen.
At an afternoon Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing about child exploitation on the Internet, Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) said he was under the impression it's "pretty easy to pick out the person engaged in either transmitting or downloading violent scenes of rape, molestation" simply by looking at file names. He urged use of those techniques by investigators to help nab the most egregious offenders.
The software, dubbed "Operation Fairplay," was developed two years ago by Special Agent Flint Waters in the Wyoming Attorney General's Office, who, by Biden's description, is considered an expert in the field. The application is currently being used by all of the regional Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) task forces nationwide and internationally, Waters told the panel.
Waters describes the system as a "comprehensive computer infrastructure," housed in Wyoming, that grants law enforcement officers a "big picture" of what sort of child pornography file transfers are going on across the country. It's able to help investigators conduct undercover operations involving peer-to-peer file-sharing applications, chat rooms, Web sites, and mobile telephones, Waters said.
No one's trying to demonize those technologies, Waters said. "Blaming this problem on peer-to-peer innovation is like blaming the interstate highway system when someone uses it to transport drugs," he said.
But in 2008 alone, investigators using Fairplay have "seen" more than 1,400 IP addresses tied to swapping child pornography files on at least 100 different occasions, Waters said. He didn't say how he identified what he viewed as child pornography, which can include photographs of fully-clothed teenagers taken with their parents' consent. In addition, as critiques of a 1995 law review article pointed out, trying to guess the contents of a file based on its name can be a problematic process.
Based on Waters' statements to the committee, the system appears to work like this: Investigators log onto peer-to-peer file-sharing networks as any other person would and search for files containing certain keywords that are likely to indicate child pornography is involved. Then they download the files--frequently videos, sometimes as long as 20 to 30 minutes, with names like "children kiddy underage illegal.mpg" and much more obscene--to their own machines. They're able to use the Fairplay software to obtain the IP address of the file's sender and, in some cases, display its geographic location in map form.
Once armed with an IP address and date and time of the download, investigators can subpoena the Internet service provider for more information, such as name and address of the subscriber who was assigned it at that moment. "It's not necessarily the suspect but it tells us the physical location to start," Waters said. (He didn't say whether any wiretaps were conducted to monitor ongoing file swapping.)
Investigators use the IP addresses to keep track of offenders on a "daily" basis, Waters told CNET News.com during a break at the hearing. But in about half its cases, for purposes of longer-term tracking, the software captures "unique serial numbers" from the person's computer and keeps a tally of how many allegedly illicit files that particular user is trading.
Waters provided the committee with a chart that said, for example, law enforcement had "seen" one user in Pennsylvania exchanging those files 2,792 times, one New Jersey user swapping them 1,182 times, and so on. It wasn't clear whether the so-called serial number corresponded to IP address, P2P username, or something else, and Waters wouldn't elaborate.
More to read at the link.... A prominent Senate Democrat on Wednesday said federal and local police should use custom software to monitor peer-to-peer networks for... more -
Joe Biden's pro-RIAA, pro-FBI tech voting record
If you care about what you do online, then take a read, so why did Obama pick this guy? Obama believes in "free Internet" neutral, but this guy want's to destroy it and without mercy...
Start of article: Please be aware due to a 4,000 max words, you need to clink the link to finish it.
By choosing Joe Biden as their vice presidential candidate, the Democrats have selected a politician with a mixed record on technology who has spent most of his Senate career allied with the FBI and copyright holders, who ranks toward the bottom of CNET's Technology Voters' Guide, and whose anti-privacy legislation was actually responsible for the creation of PGP.
That's probably okay with Barack Obama: Biden likely got the nod because of his foreign policy knowledge. The Delaware politician is the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations committee who voted for the war in Iraq, and is reasonably well-known nationally after his presidential campaigns in 1988 and 2008.
Copyright
But back to the Delaware senator's tech record. After taking over the Foreign Relations committee, Biden became a staunch ally of Hollywood and the recording industry in their efforts to expand copyright law. He sponsored a bill in 2002 that would have make it a federal felony to trick certain types of devices into playing unauthorized music or executing unapproved computer programs. Biden's bill was backed by content companies including News Corp. but eventually died after Verizon, Microsoft, Apple, eBay, and Yahoo lobbied against it.
A few months later, Biden signed a letter that urged the Justice Department "to prosecute individuals who intentionally allow mass copying from their computer over peer-to-peer networks." Critics of this approach said that the Motion Picture Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of America, and not taxpayers, should pay for their own lawsuits.
Last year, Biden sponsored an RIAA-backed bill called the Perform Act aimed at restricting Americans' ability to record and play back individual songs from satellite and Internet radio services. (The RIAA sued XM Satellite Radio over precisely this point.)
All of which meant that nobody in Washington was surprised when Biden was one of only four U.S. senators invited to a champagne reception in celebration of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act hosted by the MPAA's Jack Valenti, the RIAA, and the Business Software Alliance. (Photos are here.)
Now, it's true that few Americans will cast their votes in November based on what the vice presidential candidate thinks of copyright law. But these pro-copyright views don't exactly jibe with what Obama has promised; he's pledged to "update and reform our copyright and patent systems to promote civic discourse, innovation and investment while ensuring that intellectual property owners are fairly treated." These are code words for taking a more pro-EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) than pro-MPAA approach.
Unfortunately, Biden has steadfastly refused to answer questions on the topic. We asked him 10 tech-related questions, including whether he'd support rewriting the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, as part of our 2008 Technology Voters' guide. Biden would not answer (we did hear back from Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, and Ron Paul).
In our 2006 Technology Voters' Guide, which ranked Senate votes from July 1998 through May 2005, Biden received a mere 37.5 percent score because of his support for Internet filters in schools and libraries and occasional support for Internet taxes. If you care about what you do online, then take a read, so why did Obama pick this guy? Obama believes in "free Internet" n... more -
RIAA Comic Tries to Scare Kids, Says they Face Years in Jail
"The Case for Internet Piracy" meant to educate young file-sharers, but wrongly says they face criminal action (JAIL TIME) and not civil action (FINES) since nearly every illegal music downloading case has been initiated by the RIAA and not by authorities.
Established in March of 1971, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), is a "non-profit organization charged with improving judicial administration in the United States and around the world." To accomplish this goal, the NCSC provides a variety of services to the courts including: research studies, consulting, and educational programs.
It recently decided to produce a service of "illustrated novels" called the Justice Case Files in order "to educate the public about how the courts work, how judges make decisions, and how courts are accountable to the law."
Issue number 1 is titled "The Case for Internet Piracy," and it's startling to consider that the publication is intended for educational purposes since it's so blatantly biased, and pardon the pun, downright "comical
From the site description:
"The Case for Internet Piracy," tells the story of Megan, a college freshman charged with theft for downloading music,and her grandmother, Ellen, who has received notice that the city plans to take her house through eminent domain.
What makes it so patently one-sided is that from the get go it calls file-sharing "theft," not copyright infringement, but THEFT. So you know from the outset how things will turn out.
"You shouldn't be downloading pirated music files, Henry," says Megan, our to our apparent antagonist.
"I won't get busted, Megan," Henry replies."The cyber police aren't looking for us poor college students. We don't have deep pockets."
Too funny for words right? The RIAA LOVES people with less than deep pockets. It makes their job that much easier because they know you're more likely to settle since you can't afford attorney's fees and fear the risk of increased financial exposure.
For an organization that supposedly prides itself as being an "advocate for judicial and legislative reform, and a center of education in the field of judicial administration" this obviously RIAA-hijacked Justice Case File makes it look like anything but an impartial source of good legal advice. By trying to scare readers with skewed facts and figures it makes you question other "educational" efforts by the NCSC.
Moreover, the real theft here wasn't committed by the fictional Megan character at all, but rather by the NCSC for promoting file-sharing hysteria and trying to charge people $1.50 for this RIAA-fueled scare tactic..
More at the link. "The Case for Internet Piracy" meant to educate young file-sharers, but wrongly says they face criminal action (JAIL TIME) a... more -
RIAA Shuts Down Muxtape Site
Less than six months after becoming the hipster time-wasting destination of choice, popular music-sharing site Muxtape was suddenly offline on Monday. Fans of the site — which allowed users to assemble mixtape-like playlists online that were available for others to stream — were greeted by the message, "Muxtape will be unavailable for a brief period while we sort out a problem with the RIAA."
The site did not offer further elaboration of its troubles with the Recording Industry Association of America — the trade group that lobbies on behalf of the recording industry, and the force behind thousands of lawsuits against individuals for illegally uploading music. A post on the Muxtape Tumblr site explained, "No artists or labels have complained. The site is not closed indefinitely. Stay tuned." MTV was unable to reach a Muxtape spokesperson at press time. RIAA spokesperson Jonathan Lamy declined to comment.
PitchforkMedia.com speculated that the takedown could be the result of anything from a publicity stunt to a technical glitch. Then again, maybe the RIAA took issue with the fact that the site hosted thousands of free, streaming songs and that many users flouted the rules, which included a warning not to upload multiple songs from the same album or artist, or songs that the user didn't have permission to upload.
A report on CNET.com suggested that perhaps the RIAA noticed the increasing popularity of the site and predicted it would tip into the same realm as some of the streaming radio services that have recently been ordered to pay hefty licensing fees in order to continue operating.
CNET reported in April that the Electronic Frontier Foundation's senior intellectual-property lawyer said that Muxtape would probably be able to fly under the radar only if it didn't reach critical mass, and if it had good lawyers who could argue for why it shouldn't pay those licensing fees.
Speaking of those fees, one of the most popular online music discovery sites, Pandora.com, is on the verge of going under because of the high cost of licensing fees for Internet radio stations. The fees, which do not apply to terrestrial radio, have caused a number of popular online radio stations to shut down or consider going out of business. Less than six months after becoming the hipster time-wasting destination of choice, popular music-sharing site Muxtape was suddenly of... more -
R.I.P. Muxtape™
Muxtape Presses Pause To "Sort Out A Problem With The RIAA"
Muxtape launched, then the next day *everybody* had one, then the next day we made some for each other, and then the next day we all sorta stopped using it and waited for the RIAA to get pissed.
According to Muxtape: "Muxtape will be unavailable for a brief period while we sort out a problem with the RIAA."
In the meantime, you could always make a REAL mixtape / cd.. . Muxtape Presses Pause To "Sort Out A Problem With The RIAA" ... more -
RIAA Pays $107,951 to Alleged Filesharer
It has been something of a David and Goliath battle, but the first skirmishes in the war on file sharing are over. While the RIAA jubilantly claimed success last year, it is another case that has has now silenced the RIAA, as it avoids drawing attention to the case it never had.
riaaIf you read a mainstream media news report about file sharing or talk to a reporter about (illicit) filesharing, you would think that the only case involving the RIAA was Capitol V Thomas, a case that made news nationwide for the size of the fines. However, there are a number of cases going on around the country, cases where the RIAA did not win.
One of the most under-reported is Atlantic V Anderson, which has taken over 3 years from start to finish. The RIAA eventually dropped it with prejudice, meaning they accept the fault was theirs in this case. A similar thing happened in the case against another alleged filesharer, Foster, but both cases were relatively under-reported in mainstream media.
Copyright law, like most other aspects of civil law, allows for the prevailing party to recoup legal fees and costs incurred in the case. This is exactly what Foster and Anderson did, with success. The Foster case was awarded over $68,000 in attorney fees and costs. Likewise, the Anderson case was awarded fees and costs but of a substantially greater amount; $107,834 to be precise, in an order dated July 28th 2008.
It is encouraging to finally hear that last night, the RIAA and the member companies that were involved in the case finally paid the fees (they refused first), putting an end to this protracted legal wrangling. The amount paid was not, however, $107,834 but a figure of $107,951 – a figure which takes into account interest accrued due to delay.
It should be noted that while this is the end of Atlantic V Anderson, it is not the end of Anderson V Atlantic, the case where Ms Anderson is taking her former accusers to task over their practices in this field. It is a heartening victory, and one that is spurring the tide.
So, with Thomas looking to head to a mistrial, making the $222,000 judgment null and void, the two largest decisions in the RIAA’s ‘war on downloading’ have been against them. In both cases the RIAA admitted it was wrong, and ordered to pay the fees.
Thanks to Recording Industry Vs People It has been something of a David and Goliath battle, but the first skirmishes in the war on file sharing are over. While the RIAA jubi... more -
RIAA argues against Jammie Thomas retrial
Major record companies made their written case today (download the .pdf here) against a new trial for Jammie Thomas, the single mom ordered by a Minnesota jury to pay $222,000 for infringing the copyrights on 24 songs through Kazaa. Major record companies made their written case today (download the .pdf here) against a new trial for Jammie Thomas, the single mom or... more
-
Bono Apologizes for Paul McGuinness
I wanted to set the record straight on behalf of the members of U2 on comments made to the BBC by our much-loved and valued manager, Paul McGuinness, regarding Radiohead’s decision to make the music of ‘In Rainbows’ available as a download, using the ‘honesty box’ idea for payment.
We agree with our manager that this is a head-scratching and worrisome time for many musicians who, unlike ourselves, are depending on royalty or publishing cheques to pay the rent (particularly songwriters). We also agree that it is disturbing to see internet service providers and technology companies profit from the so-called ‘disintermediation’ of the music business when so many music lovers are losing their jobs. And while there is no doubt that it’s extremely difficult for a new artist to get the kind of investment on which U2 depended in the first few wobbly years of recording, we disagree with Paul’s assessment of Radiohead’s release as “having backfired to a certain extent.” We think they were courageous and imaginative in trying to figure out some new relationship with their audience. Such imagination and courage are in short supply right now…they’re a sacred talent and we feel blessed to be around at the same time.
With respect,
Bono I wanted to set the record straight on behalf of the members of U2 on comments made to the BBC by our much-loved and valued manager, P... more -
RIAA Defends Refiling Contested Piracy Case With New Judge
Last week, Threat Level reported some convoluted litigation tactics employed by the Recording Industry Association of America as part of its courthouse war on file sharing -- a campaign of more than 20,000 lawsuits alleging copyright infringement.
Friday's story described a New York family accused of copyright infringement, a case the RIAA voluntarily dismissed last month as a judge was considering a motion to dismiss the case based on the "making available" theory. The RIAA was initially zeroing in on the mother, Joan Cassin, as being the copyright infringer.
Two weeks later, the RIAA subsequently re-filed the identical allegations in a new lawsuit that was sent to another judge because the RIAA did not "relate" the cases. The record companies immediately demanded discovery to find out whose Kazaa file share folder was open for the pilfering of music -- a share folder on the same Verizon internet account used at the Cassin household. The previous judge halted discovery, pending his "making available" ruling.
The new lawsuit was filed as a Doe case, meaning it didn't name a defendant.
The RIAA said Monday it dismissed the original claim against the mother on the word of her attorney, Ray Beckerman, an outspoken critic of the RIAA who runs the blog Recording Industry vs The People. Beckerman, who described the RIAA as "psychos" and suggested the RIAA was shopping for a new judge in the case, had informed the RIAA that the mother was innocent of the allegations.
Why the RIAA did not "relate" the new lawsuit to the old lawsuit?
If it did, the new case likely would stay before the same judge who was expected to rule any day on perhaps the most important question in RIAA litigation defense: Can somebody be liable for copyright violations for having a peer-to-peer share folder open and hence "making available" copyrighted music? The courts are mixed on the question.
On Monday, the RIAA conceded that, after nearly two years of litigation, it was targeting the wrong person. In a letter to U.S. District Judge Charles Brieant, the new New York judge in the case, RIAA attorney Victor Kao noted that it had dismissed the original suit May 27 so "no case related to this one existed at the time this case was filed."
Days ago, Beckerman had urged judge Brieant to dismiss the latest version of the lawsuit, based on the theory of res judicata: that the May 27 dismissal resolved the new case.
Hold on, the RIAA said. "Plaintiffs dismissed the Cassin case based, in part, on her counsel's statement that she was not responsible for the infringement at issue. Unless Ms. Cassin is now changing her story, she is not a Doe defendant in this case and has no basis to assert a res judicata defense."
Beckerman declined comment Tuesday. Last week, Threat Level reported some convoluted litigation tactics employed by the Recording Industry Association of America as part ... more -
RIAA drops and refiles lawsuit it was going to lose
It's no secret the Recording Industry Association of America has sued more than 20,000 people on accusations of unlawfully sharing copyrighted music on peer-to-peer networks.
The lawsuits are generally the same. Investigators for the RIAA usually go onto Kazaa, take screenshots and download some files of music. The RIAA sues.
But then there's the case of a New York family accused of copyright infringement... It's no secret the Recording Industry Association of America has sued more than 20,000 people on accusations of unlawfully sharin... more -
Radiohead to Prince: Unblock 'Creep' cover videos
After word spread that Prince covered Radiohead's "Creep" at Coachella, the tens of thousands who couldn't be there ran to YouTube for a peek. Everyone was quickly denied — even Radiohead.
All videos of Prince's unique rendition of Radiohead's early hit were quickly taken down, leaving only a message that his label, NPG Records, had removed the clips, claiming a copyright violation. But the posted videos were shot by fans and, obviously, the song isn't Prince's.
In a recent interview, Thom Yorke said he heard about Prince's performance from a text message and thought it was "hilarious." Yorke laughed when his bandmate, guitarist Ed O'Brien, said the blocking had prevented him from seeing Prince's version of their song.
"Really? He's blocked it?" asked Yorke, who figured it was their song to block or not. "Surely we should block it. Hang on a moment."
Yorke added: "Well, tell him to unblock it. It's our ... song." After word spread that Prince covered Radiohead's "Creep" at Coachella, the tens of thousands who couldn't be ther... more
-
related topics
RIAA
Contributors (121)
RIAA
