******* File Sharing = No Internet Service

member979979

Closed Account
Ok this is complete bullshit, now the RIAA is trying to get your ISP to shut off your service for stealing music. :rofl:

Premium Link Upgrade

At last, the music industry admits what we've known for years: That filing music-swapping lawsuits against teenagers, little old ladies, and corpses is a fool's errand (not to mention an expensive headache for the defendants). But don't worry—the RIAA has something new up its sleeves.
The new strategy (as reported by the Wall Street Journal): If the music industry finds out that you're swapping music files online, it'll send an e-mail to your ISP (agreements have already hashed out agreements with "some" unnamed service providers, apparently), which will in turn forward the message to you—probably with a little "P.S." asking you to stop. [Update: CNET has a copy of the RIAA's form letter to ISPs.]

If you don't stop, well ... your service provider probably won't sue you, but it might slow down your broadband connection, or cut off your service altogether.

So, why has the RIAA changed the play? Well, maybe it's been looking at reports like this one from the NPD Group, which shows that U.S. CD sales continue to slide, while the number of tunes shared via P2P sites continues to increase, despite all the litigation.

And then there's the disastrous headlines, as the RIAA relentlessly tracked down and sued tens of thousands of alleged music pirates. Among them: ****, octogenarians, and a few dead people.

Reaction to the news? Mixed. Engadget's headline reads (in part): "RIAA finds its soul," with the story noting that while the RIAA reserves the right to go after "heavy uploaders or repeat offenders ... it appears that single ******* are in the clear."

All Things Digital has a darker outlook, speculating that ISPs—which "care about the cost of moving lots of data around … [and] want to make money by selling, renting, or just offering up Hollywood's movies and TV shows to subscribers"—might be more than content to "cut off file-sharers … [or] simply [charge] heavy file-sharers a lot of money."

And here's another possibility, courtesy of yours truly: Say your ISP catches you sharing tunes via P2P. No problem—download away! But when you get your next cable bill, you'll find the itemized songs added to your monthly charge, kind of like an iTunes bill.

Call it the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" strategy.

P.S. Make no mistake—just because the RIAA has stopped filing new music-swapping lawsuits doesn't mean that it's dropped the existing ones, according to the Journal. Quite the contrary.
 
they are never going to win. instead of fighting against people fire sharing, they should use it to their advantage. riaa is sad.
 
What if it's old music? I haven't used any file sharing in a long time.

I'm tired of their tactics and lies. Also, people are file sharing because most of the so-called music is terrible and now with even less money to buy things people will continue to share anything they wish.
 
What I don't get is why they can go after the downloaders, but not the download companies (Kazaa, Ares, LimeWire) and shut them down. I admit, I use Ares to download stuff because it is available.

Why buy the milk when you can get the cow for free.
 
I bought Sgt. Pepper's on vinyl when it first was published in 1967. When I got my first 8 track player, I bought it again. Then when cassettes were all the rage, I bought it once again. When CDs became the norm, I bought it yet once again. Today, if I want to download A Day in the Life from some p2p file sharing service, I think I have that privilege. After all, I've already bought it 4 times.
 
I bought Sgt. Pepper's on vinyl when it first was published in the 1967. When I got my first 8 track player, I bought it again. Then when cassettes were all the rage, I bought it once again. When CDs became the norm, I bought it yet once again. Today, if I want to download A Day in the Life from some p2p file sharing service, I think I have that privilege. After all, I've already bought it 4 times.

truth

I have a cd/vinyl collection well over 10,000. If anybody gives me **** for downloading music...they can my d.
 
I bought Sgt. Pepper's on vinyl when it first was published in the 1967. When I got my first 8 track player, I bought it again. Then when cassettes were all the rage, I bought it once again. When CDs became the norm, I bought it yet once again. Today, if I want to download A Day in the Life from some p2p file sharing service, I think I have that privilege. After all, I've already bought it 4 times.

I understand the logic, but do you have all the receipts? lol

But in regards to free downlaods of things especially new content at some point if what people produce doesn't earn them anything (nobody pays) it will just mean they stop producing it.
Gotta be some reasonable way to resolve it where both the public and the people generating the product feel satisfied they are not getting a bad deal.
 
Big fat dick in the mouth of that greedy motherfuckers. That's what I think!

I was using, use, and will use ******* file sharing.
P2P forever. Pirates forever!
All my music collection is downloaded from the internet. And I will never pay for it, all their shitty obstacles will be eliminated.
 
I bought Sgt. Pepper's on vinyl when it first was published in 1967. When I got my first 8 track player, I bought it again. Then when cassettes were all the rage, I bought it once again. When CDs became the norm, I bought it yet once again. Today, if I want to download A Day in the Life from some p2p file sharing service, I think I have that privilege. After all, I've already bought it 4 times.

That's exactly why this will never happen. The effort that the music industry and these service providers would have to put in just to prove that you DON'T ALREADY OWN the songs you are downloading for free would be a complete waste of time and money. So, no...it will never happen.

By the way, IMO, the best way to stop people from downloading all of their music instead of buying it on a CD is to stop making CDs cost $15-20. I'm not going to pay that much money just so I can have the privelage of listening to 2 good songs, 3 barely tolerable songs and 6 more really bad songs. No, I'm not doing it.
 
Things are changing, and the RIAA doesn't much like it. Right or wrong, though, they're going to have to adapt. Or, better yet, close down and go away.

The internet will soon hopefully do away with the need for the middle man, as artists can simply put their music up on their own sites and have folks pay them directly. I have no problem paying an artist for their music. I do having to pay some fella in the middle who doesn't really have any business getting in between us.

I have to say, though, that one of the best arguments I've heard for pirating is that most of the time the artists don't even own their own songs anymore.

On a related note, I wonder what the RIAA thinks about libraries and such. Where I live, you can get just about any CD or DVD from the library - popular music CDs that were just released. Nothing's stopped me from simply getting all the music I've ever wanted from the library, taking it home, copying it and sending it back.
 
They will never be able to stop it. Ever.

The days of the huge record deals and exclusive music industry are way numbered. Artists are going to have to earn a lot more money from (eek! Gasp!) performing on tour than CD sales. CD's, as a commercial product- suck balls. They're expensive, and it's a crap shoot as far as quality.

Do I understand and respect intellectual property rights? Hell yeah- I'm a writer and movie maker. I sure as hell don't want to do the **** for free, but you've got to find a way to make people interested enough to support you, and a nice easy way for them to do that. Acting like a bunch of spoiled, snobby assclowns is not the way to do that.

H
 
Fuck the RIAA and MPAA, bunch of hairy dildo's. Con merchant whores they are.

Their losses due to downloading isn't as bad as made out to be. They are just trying to make things seem worse that it is, because they can't stop it in the manner that they want to. It angers these cunts in the RIAA and MPAA, as it is denying the record exec's and movie producers that little bit extra cash for their new yacht or jacuzzi that they would buy with the profits from the heafty price tags they put on their CD's and DVD's [UK prices I refer to]. I mean the mansion and model wife and fancy cars isn't enough from profit.

Stupid he-bitches.
 
They are the old way of thinking which means they are trying to protect their income sources. The artist that they represent only gets a minimal cost of the CD, while the music companies, RIAA gets a bigger portion.

There are bands/performers who are embracing the internet and releasing stuff using the internet and offering limited physical releases. That way, they get the majority of the profits and don't need to put up with other companies wanting a piece of the pie.
 
Someone should organize a protest in front of the RIAA building and all the music companies buildings.

I'm not saying that it should turn into a riot but....

I would understand if it did. ;) :hatsoff:

There are bands/performers who are embracing the internet and releasing stuff using the internet and offering limited physical releases. That way, they get the majority of the profits and don't need to put up with other companies wanting a piece of the pie.

More people should do that.

No one really needs a label behind them.

Look at all the independent book and comic book publishers.

Start your own labels, you can work for yourself. :thumbsup:
 
the way this happened for me was i was dling movies for a while and they caught me. my isp shut off my internet and i called about it to find out what was up. they told me the story and said the first time is a slap on the wrist, the second time they will b like dude seriously??? and the third time the fbi is allowed to prosecute and i am blacklisted from that isp for life. or so the story goes with cox cable.....
 
This is nearly impossible to do, they have to monitor every bit of data that is going through their network. The information have to be saved, which will be a huge. Just scanning the header of a package wont do. Beside that its that infraction of our privacy.

Question that pops up is "When are you downloading ******* content?"

But when you get your next cable bill, you'll find the itemized songs added to your monthly charge, kind of like an iTunes bill.

Yeah i see that happening :thefinger. You browsing on the web downloading nasty **** and guess what some guy thought it would be funny infect you with a virus/trojan w/e that downloads songs over and over.

The thing with those people is they have no clue what they are talking about they are desperate and are trying to solve their problem by making it someone else his problem.
 
Ok this is complete bullshit, now the RIAA is trying to get your ISP to shut off your service for stealing music. :rofl:

Premium Link Upgrade

they give you warnings. it's all right. how many people you know get caught. look on wikipedia for the list of bad isps in your country. i think it's comcast only for US. as long as you dont do anything insanely stupid like register a software while connected to the internet, theres no logical reason for them being able to detect that you have pirated data, unless of course their means are *******.
 
Back
Top