HAHA! The RIAA wants to sue me!

SkyHog said:
Grumble grumble....mafioso style bastards.....grumble grumble.
Click to expand...

9250$ for a single song. So basically, at about .75 cents per song to legally license a song... She'd be paying to license that song 12,333 times. Wow.
 
FYI Nick

:D:D:D:D

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • propaganda_in_the_internet_age.thumbnail.jpg
    propaganda_in_the_internet_age.thumbnail.jpg
    45.8 KB · Views: 432
Wow, resurrected. I never did hear back from these giant sissies.

The RIAA is no company to fear. Mafia tactics and all, they know when they're licked.
 
mikea said:
You know that the RIAA and MPAA are buying a law to make the justice department spend...wait for it.. taxpayer money, to prosecute the cases as criminal?

It time to email or FAX your Senator. Unfortunately one is of mine is running for President.
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/09/copyright-enforcement-bill-being-pushed-fast-track
Click to expand...

kevin47881 said:
On this we can agree. :D:p
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
Save your tax dollars and your rights!
FILL THIS OUT
NOW!
http://www.publicknowledge.org/alertfax/1744

​
 
Is this still about to happen immediately?

I'll call every one of them if I can.
 
SkyHog said:
Is this still about to happen immediately?

I'll call every one of them if I can.
Click to expand...

They're trying to fast track it.

The next trick will be to attach it to another bill.

You KNOW they want to get this through before GW is done. I wonder why they haven't claimed it's for national security.
 
I called each of them, but 3 of the voicemail boxes were full....guess who 2 of them were.

Wondeful, eh?
 
That's pretty pathetic legislation. Without reading the actual bill, I'm betting it's an unfunded mandate on the Justice Department.
 
KennyFlys said:
That's pretty pathetic legislation. Without reading the actual bill, I'm betting it's an unfunded mandate on the Justice Department.
Click to expand...

Arrrrr! IDEA! We need to find a bill da scallywags be fast-trackin' to pass in a week and slip tings like dis under the covers unto it where's dey won' be noticed....

and such speed always get us good quality well-thought out swag like the da Patriot Act. :no::no::mad:
 
mikea said:

Save your tax dollars and your rights!
FILL THIS OUT
NOW!
http://www.publicknowledge.org/alertfax/1744

​
Click to expand...

KennyFlys said:
That's pretty pathetic legislation. Without reading the actual bill, I'm betting it's an unfunded mandate on the Justice Department.
Click to expand...

The Justice Department said no way but I just heard the IP bill passed the Senate anyway with the Justice Department as free RIAA lawyers part removed. The taxpayers get to pay for an "IP czar."

It's was supposed to pass the House today.

I suppose that congress decided that as long as they were ignoring what the citizens wanted....
 
SkyHog said:
I'm so happy. My biggest dream is coming true. I get to battle the RIAA. I received a notice (via email, believe it or not), that the RIAA is going to sue me. The text of the letter is as follows:



Well, this can't be true. I never, ever downloaded anything from BitTorrentUS (I don't even know what the hell BitTorrentUS is). So I was immediately thinking that this is a scam. The headers on the email are from NPG Cable, legitimately. The p2plawsuits.com is actually owned by the RIAA. The Case # gives me a settlement option of $3000. Holy crap, I think this might be real!

But wait, I'm still innocent, and by the way, even if I was guilty, the RIAA can go straight to hell.

Then I found this: http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/02/72834

Yep, its real, I'm being sued. So - since I hate the RIAA so much, I figured I'd pen a response to the e-mail address . I don't want to wait more than 40 days, right?



Harsh, yes. And if the moderators want me to edit out some of the language, I will, but I wanted to be fair and post the full contents of my response.

I hate the RIAA so very very much.
Click to expand...

http://portal.wowway.net/news/read....news.ap.org>&ps=1016&_LT=HOME_LARSDCCL2_UNEWS
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
http://portal.wowway.net/news/read....news.ap.org>&ps=1016&_LT=HOME_LARSDCCL2_UNEWS
Click to expand...

Pants on fire.
According to a report on Wired.com, the RIAA spokesman claims that the RIAA has not filed any new lawsuits "for months"; according to the Wall Street Journal report the RIAA stopped filing mass lawsuits "early this fall"; and the Associated Press was apparently told that the RIAA had stopped bringing new lawsuits in August.

Being very familiar with the RIAA's penchant for "misspeaking", even when under oath, I investigated the matter a bit, and learned that a large number of suits have been brought by the RIAA quite recently, one as recently as this Monday.
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008_12_01_archive.html#1104859189661357526
Click to expand...

They have those 2 left that are still buying CDs.
 
Watch the video, no collection or payment is planned by either party...and an appeal or 'other options' are also ongoing.
He said he will simply file for bankruptcy....and they will feel they have gotten their message across.
 
This is a guy who admits to what he was sued for, but the judgment of $22,500 per song is over the top!
 
I wonder how many folks are willing or able to spend any money defending these suits. The filer gets a default judgment that purportedly sends a message. But, the message may be very different if a capable party is sued.

Best,

Dave
 
JeffDG said:
Statutory Damages are kinda rough...especially since the jury found willful infringement...the LEAST they could have assessed is $750 per infringing work.

Bottom line...don't infringe copyrights. Be they music or software or books.
Click to expand...
But if all your friends are doing it then it is ok. At least that is what this numnuts used as his argument. I swear part of that judgment is a fine against him for being stupid.
 
Dave Siciliano said:
I wonder how many folks are willing or able to spend any money defending these suits. The filer gets a default judgment that purportedly sends a message. But, the message may be very different if a capable party is sued.

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...

The defendants that got the recent outrageous judgements had representation by specialized lawyers and groups that are fighting back.

Ray Beckerman has a few cases and I think he's doing some pro-bono or with group sponsorship. He's been skewering the RIAA and tracking what happens in other cases.

He says BTW that the huge judgments will lead to the RIAA's death knell.

http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2005/10/oregon-riaa-victim-fights-back-sues.html
 
Dave Siciliano said:
I wonder how many folks are willing or able to spend any money defending these suits. The filer gets a default judgment that purportedly sends a message. But, the message may be very different if a capable party is sued.

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...

That's the trouble with not showing up in court; the plaintiff gets a default judgment. That's what happened to one of the children in one of the suits mentioned earlier in the thread, and it was 20 or 30 thousand dollars as I recall.
 
I wonder if this is true in the US too?

People who illegally download music from the internet also spend more money on music than anyone else, according to a new study. The survey, published today, found that those who admit illegally downloading music spent an average of £77 a year on music – £33 more than those who claim that they never download music dishonestly.
The findings suggest that plans by the Secretary of State for Business, Peter Mandelson, to crack down on illegal downloaders by threatening to cut their internet connections with a "three strikes and you're out" rule could harm the music industry by punishing its core customers.
Click to expand...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...pend-the-most-on-music-says-poll-1812776.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top