DMusic.com | for indie musicians and fans | Free MP3 music downloads - Forums: Submit News Tips: Man find 4 grand for downloading 5 songs (link below)

Electric guitars, Classical guitars, Guitar amps and more.

zZounds.com offers recording equipment for starting and experienced musicians. Find the best prices on electric guitars, acoustic guitars, classical guitars and more.

Forums > News: Submit News Tips

Man find 4 grand for downloading 5 songs (link below)

sqrlcub	Date: May 14, 2004 @ 11:36 AM http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,9558216%5E15409%5E%5Enbv%5E15306-15322,00.html Sigh... I didn't think it would get stupider than this.
robbydadrummer	Date: May 14, 2004 @ 4:43 PM i thought it was an austrailian getting sued at first because of the link and website. but no, he's a u.s. citizen. this is ridiculous... only 5 songs. totally goes against their going after "major file sharers" comments. lying bastards...
woodhead	Date: May 14, 2004 @ 8:39 PM yea well if you are not goingto go to court, you lose automaticly, they prob could have beat this by simply saying prove I have the damn songs, prove it beyond a shdow of a doubt. Any one keeping up woth this bull crap knows that the RIAA way of getting info is flawed, so simply make them prove it. (P.S. hard to find something you dont have right
Gmonk	Date: May 15, 2004 @ 8:52 AM well at the end of the day he broke the law.. fair and square. All this RIAA hating is a pointless waste of energy, you aren't gonna change it by winging. Its just something we all have to live with. G
woodhead	Date: May 15, 2004 @ 10:45 AM but boycotting I have been for a year and my input is they want there tunes that bad, they can have them. Oh and before you start towingthe RIAA lineGmonk, I think you should realy do so research on the matter. Oh and we will change things, the movements have already started on the internet.
Gmonk	Date: May 15, 2004 @ 12:55 PM "but boycotting I have been for a year and my input is they want there tunes that bad, they can have them" eh? what exactly does that semantically incorrect sentence mean? I'm not towing anyone's line. The RIAA exist and will continue to exist no-matter what internet movement has started. They are just too big. I'm not going to repeat the views that I have stated in a different thread, but in brief... illegaly downloading copyritten work is a bad thing and in legal terms is theft! G
Apertome	Date: May 17, 2004 @ 9:17 PM No, G, downloading copyrighted work is NOT theft! If you download something that you do not have a license for, it is copyright infringement. It may seem like I'm splitting hairs here, but there is a significant difference. Theft is when you take something from someone, and they no longer have it. Copyright infringement is making a copy of something you don't have a right to copy. I am not saying that copyright infringement is legal, or that it should be. But calling it theft is hyperbolic, misleading, and a factual error.
Gmonk	Date: May 18, 2004 @ 4:51 AM yeah yeah semantics... its about the principal... but thx for pointing it out Mux G
woodhead	Date: May 19, 2004 @ 9:59 PM But calling it theft is hyperbolic, misleading, and a factual error. Exactly Mux, and as for the principal, you don't own the tunes any way you only own a license to listen to them, gmonk do you burn copies for your self, or make mixed CD or burn copies for friends? if so this is copy right infringement also. I think you would be surprised by what you can and can not do with a CD, hmmm you only own the license.
Gmonk	Date: May 20, 2004 @ 4:37 AM I know woodhead.. and no I don't go round doenloading stuff and burning cd's for me or others. I'm not pro and anti RIAA, I', for artists rights.. If someone makes a track and releases it they deserve to get paid, just like for anything else in life.. you make something, sell it, get paid, thats how the world works and music is no difrent. With the onslaught of technology it has become easier and faster to download and not pay its morally wrong. you wouldn;t walk ijto a shop and just help yourself to whatever you want and not pay would you? This is exactly the same.. you do not have some god given right to download music that is commercially available not pay for it and then share it around. G
sinai	Date: May 21, 2004 @ 12:12 AM i, however, steal lots of shit over p2p
woodhead	Date: May 21, 2004 @ 12:57 AM however, steal lots of shit over p2p
bl0ck	Date: May 22, 2004 @ 10:31 AM lmao. yeh good one ... if I had the address of the judge I would actually go to his house and bum him.
Intergalacti...	Date: May 25, 2004 @ 1:20 PM This is gettin stupid, this site won't have that problem will it. I mean I can see people who just stream album upon album gettin fined but whats the point for five songs. We should protest!
Svensta	Date: May 26, 2004 @ 12:36 PM how about looking at it from THIS standpoint. The legality of p2p for copyrighted material is moot. This is a civil disobedience, being enacted to force the industry and local government to change the lop-sided, unfair anticompetitive practices ruling in the music industry. Once they make the process intelligent and fair to consumers and creators, I think you will see the p2p industry shift to capitalize on it.
Emoceon	Date: May 26, 2004 @ 6:37 PM i own microsoft
Aibrean	Date: June 2, 2004 @ 9:34 AM don't u mean fined
sqrlcub	Date: June 2, 2004 @ 1:15 PM Yes, don't you mean "you?"
YaBoyDrew	Date: June 15, 2004 @ 1:56 PM daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn
gferr	Date: November 13, 2004 @ 10:43 PM Well I think p2p is a great way to discover new bands. I don't have $15-$30 to spend on CDs so i can "experiment" with new artists. I still buy CDs from the artists I like and support, and going to their shows is the best way to do so. The RIAA should utilize this and let people try new things, and not assume everyone is burning themselves a new Jessica Simpson CD. If they want to sue someone who downloads thousands of tracks, then that is justified. But burning that poor man was shiesty.
peatrap	Date: August 23, 2005 @ 10:34 PM Its just something we all have to live with. Defeetus!
zedsalt	Date: August 24, 2005 @ 12:41 PM Unauthorized reproduction is kind of a hobby of mine. I do it all the time; I just don't do it in a way (over the net, to be specific) that guarantees I can be caught at it. I think the recent trend toward going after the sites that provide unauthorized music "to a group larger than a reasonably-sized circle of family and friends" has already been more effective than going after individual downloaders. After all, they're really not THAT concerned with some guy, say, making VHS tapes of performances from the late night talk shows and PBS, purely for his own enjoyment...are they? Have I said too much?
monkvolcano	Date: August 25, 2005 @ 2:15 AM if it wasn't for getting songs illegally off p2p, there are many artists who would not be getting my money because i would never stumbled on them.. if i really like a band and keep something i downloaded on my HD, I always end up buying there albums, going to there concerts, etc..

Post A Reply
From:	guest	(Icons - Linking)
Post: