K
Kizzy
Guest
I attended a Pink concert last year, which only happened BECAUSE I downloaded her music off the Internet. I liked 1 song, so when I download that song, I downloaded others and found out I really like her music.
K
Kizzy
Guest
:shrug: Not to me Ken. I'm sure if we sat down and did the math, the concert ticket put more money in the singer’s pocket than the CD would have. Believe me, I attend very few concerts these days, because the tickets are expensive.
K
Kizzy
Guest
The whole copywriting issue is confusing. I download music using Kazaa. How many times do you hear a song on the radio and think you kind of sort of like it? So, you run home and download the song to decide if you do like it or not. Sometimes I buy the CD and sometimes I just don't. Why doesn't RIIA go into the file sharing business? They could offer a site that strictly trades nothing but music, sorry tater no porn on my RIIA site, but they could offer a REASONABLE monthly fee or a per song fee. I would think it would give them more money in the long run, because the legal fees are racking up and point blank, they are ####ing of the consumers. They have advertised by using high profile celebrities to beg not to download music from the Internet but it isn't working. Nobody is feeling the pain of the artist because they will make more in one night doing a concert that nearly anyone here will make in a lifetime. Lets face it, Brittany Spears isn't living on pork and beans and owns more cars at the moment than I will own in a lifetime. Her music isn’t all that. 
Really, it is hurting the record industry not the artist. The artist only gets an average of 35 cents per CD sold, which is less than the cost of a postage stamp. The artist gets the real money by going out on tour.
How can sites like Kazaa still be up and running if sharing music is illegal? This is where I’m confused, they say all long as it isn’t protected by copyright laws, but isn’t just about everything you download from Kazaa covered under copyright laws?
I read the copyright laws and I feel like a monkey doing a math problem. (sound familiar)
Really, it is hurting the record industry not the artist. The artist only gets an average of 35 cents per CD sold, which is less than the cost of a postage stamp. The artist gets the real money by going out on tour.
How can sites like Kazaa still be up and running if sharing music is illegal? This is where I’m confused, they say all long as it isn’t protected by copyright laws, but isn’t just about everything you download from Kazaa covered under copyright laws?
I read the copyright laws and I feel like a monkey doing a math problem. (sound familiar)
They settled with the 12 year old for $2000 and an apology. Let's think about this: A multi-bazillion dollar organization taking $2000 from a kid.
I'm curious how they caught her in the first place.
I'm curious how they caught her in the first place.
willie
Well-Known Member
What are the details about the 12 year old? All I've read is the fact that the kid was 12 and the big Corporation was going to squash the poor child but what exactly did the child do? Just download a few or distribute thousands? If my Grandson just downloaded a few songs to my computer there is no way I'd apologize and cough up $2k. Where elso are you going to find Waylon Jennings "Get Nekkid With Me" except on Kazaa?
A story in the Post this morning indicated that the "perps" 
were caught because they shared, not because they downloaded. The RIAA guys got online, did a search and busted whoever they found offering the file.
Willie, I wouldn't have coughed up the money, either. When I originally purchased "Gimme Dat Ding", it had a Side B. The 45 is long gone but I did, in fact, purchase it at some point. So they owe me another song.
were caught because they shared, not because they downloaded. The RIAA guys got online, did a search and busted whoever they found offering the file.Willie, I wouldn't have coughed up the money, either. When I originally purchased "Gimme Dat Ding"
, it had a Side B. The 45 is long gone but I did, in fact, purchase it at some point. So they owe me another song.
Wonder who the other 2 people were that bought that 45.
crabcake
But wait, there's more...
geez, she was just a kid
but she settled for paying a $2K fine!
wonder if the little "britney's" of the world will take up her cause and boycott the RIAA.
but she settled for paying a $2K fine!
wonder if the little "britney's" of the world will take up her cause and boycott the RIAA.
tipsy mcgee
Always thirsty
The targets seem to be just that, the ones who are sharing all the stuff. I have downloaded a lot in the past, a lot, but when it clearly became illegal, I went into the properties section of Kazaa and changed my folder so no one could access my "real" music library and only have 40-some songs in the one other users can access. Then I changed the amount of uploads available to zero instead of the default three or four. You have to change it to zero each time you use it, though, or it will default to three or four.
B
Bruzilla
Guest
Ken, the Fair Use provision is used by radio and TV stations, usually their news departments, for running clips of movies, songs, etc., for the purposes of comment/criticism without the need to obtain permission. I've often heard, but cannot confirm, that Fair Use is limited to 15 seconds maximum.
I'm all for a boycott against the RIAA. I will not buy another CD, nor give my kids money to buy CDs, until these lawsuits stop. We had to go through this crap when VCRs came out and these groups were suing to prevent people from copying TV signals. We had to go through it with the videotapes when they came out. I'm really tired of these companies being able to gouge the consumer without any options for the consumer. Well... the RIAA can't sue people for not buying their product. If they want to see what lower profits really look like, we should show them.
I just hope that book publishers don't decide to start suing libraries!
I'm all for a boycott against the RIAA. I will not buy another CD, nor give my kids money to buy CDs, until these lawsuits stop. We had to go through this crap when VCRs came out and these groups were suing to prevent people from copying TV signals. We had to go through it with the videotapes when they came out. I'm really tired of these companies being able to gouge the consumer without any options for the consumer. Well... the RIAA can't sue people for not buying their product. If they want to see what lower profits really look like, we should show them.
I just hope that book publishers don't decide to start suing libraries!
Bru,Originally posted by Bruzilla
Ken, the Fair Use provision is used by radio and TV stations, usually their news departments, for running clips of movies, songs, etc., for the purposes of comment/criticism without the need to obtain permission. I've often heard, but cannot confirm, that Fair Use is limited to 15 seconds maximum.
I'm all for a boycott against the RIAA. I will not buy another CD, nor give my kids money to buy CDs, until these lawsuits stop. We had to go through this crap when VCRs came out and these groups were suing to prevent people from copying TV signals. We had to go through it with the videotapes when they came out. I'm really tired of these companies being able to gouge the consumer without any options for the consumer. Well... the RIAA can't sue people for not buying their product. If they want to see what lower profits really look like, we should show them.
I just hope that book publishers don't decide to start suing libraries!
Nothing in the law says that individuals are precluded from the fair use exceptions. Also, if there was a time restriction (15 seconds) you think it would be listed in the law, it isn't. I think the RIIA is totally worng and the courts have failed to address the other provisions of the law for the duplication via digital methods that are already contained within Title 17 of the code.
B
Bruzilla
Guest
The price of CDs isn't really falling. The only thing that has dropped is the Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price (MSRP), which I think most of us know is a bogus amount to begin with since no retailers ever sell stuff for MSRP. You may see CDs selling cheaper in a few stores, but they'll be the same prices in most places.
CD prices should come way down as CDs are much cheaper to produce than cassettes, yet the price of cassettes used to be about $12.00. A CD should only cost about $7.00 tops, but the record companies feel that people will pay more so they charge more. Unless consumers force companies to adjust their prices, they never will. We saw that with videos. What rental stores and used tape sales were to videos, MP3s are to audio. Unfortunately, the courts are siding with the RIAA instead of the consumers this go around.
CD prices should come way down as CDs are much cheaper to produce than cassettes, yet the price of cassettes used to be about $12.00. A CD should only cost about $7.00 tops, but the record companies feel that people will pay more so they charge more. Unless consumers force companies to adjust their prices, they never will. We saw that with videos. What rental stores and used tape sales were to videos, MP3s are to audio. Unfortunately, the courts are siding with the RIAA instead of the consumers this go around.