Riaa Subpoenas Isps

See i am starting so see a diffrent trend here, this may be weak but think about it. Ok so verizon is the one getting all the supena's right. Who is Time warner's only compitition? So if you are gonna choose an ISP which one is the avearge person gonna choose, the one where people are not getting supenas. AOL, Road Runner or Earthlink. So time warner (who is unquestionably the main part of of RIAA) creates itself a real good monopoly, by dominating the market. (that is legal).

And what from there, well AOL alreaddy blocks Kazaa right? Road Runner and Earthlink do not use proxy's so they don't, but don't you think that is a possibility? I know it sounds kinda thin, but... It does make a little bit of sense.

I hate Time warner.

Its reidiculous ok then I'm a musiciasion ok so what??? who cares about money??? its about the music its jsut plain ridiculous. aretist is the only ones that matter and they only get 2 bucks out of that 30 bucks I used to pay for a CD.

Say If I ahd a CD and lent it to a friend he lsitened to it ok??? isn't that classified as sharing??? whats the f*king difference??? Or you downlaod something on the net becaseu your not sure if its good you say ohh I like tah I wanna buy the real thig.

RIAA just care about money and that it they don't give a f** about the musicians

all I can say is RIAA can go f*ck themselves

when the riaa talk about scanning programs, how strong r they? r they able to break through zonealarm firewall and the rules i put in for blocking all the bad ips?
if they're not able to, i'm cool with dat. tere's nothin to wory bout... eh? B)

btw: THE RIAA AND THAT MPAA THING CAN SUCK MY DOGS FAT COCK!!!!! :P :P :lol: :lol:

I laugh at the RIAA. :lol:

The real question, however, is when will the RIAA wake up and realize they are producing negative effects for everyone?


:lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jibbler@22 July 2003 - 00:36
The RIAA is just making news, nothing more. Filesharing will continue but it will be encrypted and secure. The artists aren't losing money, the record companies are. They can no longer control the music that you purchase, and their advertising dollars are becoming a waste. I suggest they put out a better product and stop worrying about what we do. ;)

---

Would you buy music if it was a better product? I doubt it.
It seems everyone here is trying so hard to make excuses to why they are stealing and why its not wrong.
Is it wrong to go into a music store and steal a cd?
Is it wrong to go into a book store and steal a book?
how about a video game or a movie?
I would bet that most of you would say it is wrong but what is the diffrence?
So many people try to make this into some kinda holy war or something if you dont like the way things are stop listening to the music stealing just tales the music industry thats its to easy to get something for free and not that there is something wrong with there product either way I highly doubt if they dropped music costs to $8 you would stop downloading them.
Look were all stealing things and its against the law why do you people insist that its not?
Atleast the common thief would admit that what there doing is against the law most of us cant even admit that much and when it comes down to it thats what we all are is thiefs I can admit that I am why cant anyone else?

Quote:

---

admit that I am why cant anyone else?

---

nope its called file SHARING

so all we are doing is sharing data therefore in court it cannot be ilegal hare ones own data is not ilegal. :lol:

If so why not call it File Stealing???

Its only stealing if you sell it.

http://eff.org/

Read up some on copyrights and fair use before you go calling people who share music thieves. Copyrights are not meant to be permanent, niether are they assigned to all form of media simultaneously when they are created. The philosophy is that copyrights are meant to inspire innovation and creativity amongst the people of the US.

Think thats not the case? Then why does the UK prefer to enforce its own form of fair use, outside of the DMCA, as do all the european nations. Why is it you can go to a library and check out music - but you can't on your computer? Read up and get smart. The only people winning here are the idiots who are busy filing frivilous lawsuits against thousands of consumers in the US. If it was steaking, the cops would be at your door- end of story. The cops are not.

And as for the poor artists loosing money because of all the downloading, that is a load of shite. Organizations like EFF have tried to set up a bank of funds payable directly to the artists themselves in exchange for downloading. These attempts were blocked by the RIAA. KNOW who you are dealing with, and you are not 'thieves' so get off it.

I'm jumping in on this thread a little late and kinda off topic, but here goes. On another thread someone said that the RIAA had spent something like $143 million trying to stop filesharers, when I saw that I was like wtf they're going after us for taking money from them when they can waste that kinda bread per year. I only wish I had that much money.

And as to being honest about what I do, yeah I download and upload files, so what. Does that make me evil? I don't think so when you consider all the stuff going on in this world why should I care if a record company or movie congloberate gets the $8.00 or so bucks I choose to spend or not on their product. Esp. when they f**k the artists with their twisted contracts.

I'm not stealing, I'm collecting the evidence. When I have enough, I'll certainly pass it along to the appropriate agency.
Honest ;)

With them suing us... there's no way I'm going to buy music then. NO WAY, I'm going to boycott this, it's ridiculous. The simple phrase: 'two wrongs doesn't make a right' obviously doesn't apply to them. It's unbelievable.

But, my question is, are they able to get us in trouble if we download music videos or TV episodes? I know movie downloading is illegal, but... TV episodes and music videos, those can't be illegal to download, can they?