RIAAHitList
July 23, 2003 6:05 PM   Subscribe

The RIAA hit list. Are you sued or not? I would have thought defaultuser@kazaa would get targeted.
posted by srboisvert (44 comments total)
 
The first against the wall when the revolution came...
posted by FormlessOne at 6:09 PM on July 23, 2003


...was TMONEYNDHIZOUSE@kazaa
posted by samuelad at 6:40 PM on July 23, 2003


joanjett@Kazaa

Ms. Jett, can you tell the court why you downloaded so much music?

I love rock 'n roll...
posted by mathowie at 6:44 PM on July 23, 2003


I read an article in the Wall Street Journal that said the RIAA was targeting uploaders/sharers more than downloaders. Does this mean it is still safe to download as long as I have sharing turned off?

- Ghettobootybabe7@kazaa (not GBB8!)

Nice joke, Matt!
posted by Frank Grimes at 6:49 PM on July 23, 2003


The following users should be very afraid of prison time: sweetthang1421@Kazaa, Ghettobootybabe8@Kazaa, hottdude0587@Kazaa, Playgirlmama@Kazaa, munkeyspanker21@Kazaa
posted by 10sball at 6:54 PM on July 23, 2003


"any individual computer user who continues to offer music illegally to millions of others will run the very real risk of facing legal action in the form of civil lawsuits"

Is there any method to their selection? Or is it purely on a random basis? Does anyone know how international law applies to this news?

Unbelievably I'm actually innocent of these hateful crimes against big business [because they send me their goodies for free in the job that I do] - I'm just curious not scared.
posted by meech at 6:57 PM on July 23, 2003


I have a rather unique situation here:
I'm young (sort of), unattached, educated and highly mobile.

What country would I move to if my only selection criteria was a desire to continue my fileswapping unhindered?
posted by spazzm at 7:07 PM on July 23, 2003


something just seems juvenile about listing the usernames. its like, "look, look, we're really going to do it and see, see, we have real people to sue. be afraid, be very afraid."

thats just how the RIAA sound to me, *shrug*. it will be interesting to see what developes from this.
posted by erisfree at 7:09 PM on July 23, 2003


Cayman Islands.
posted by Hildago at 7:09 PM on July 23, 2003


What country would I move to if my only selection criteria was a desire to continue my fileswapping unhindered?

my choice? Vanuatu.
posted by mrgrimm at 7:15 PM on July 23, 2003


>What country would I move to if my only selection criteria was a desire to continue my fileswapping unhindered?

Screw fileswapping. If they're going to turn it into painful ligitation process that will drain you of your life savings and garnish your wages for the rest of your days, just buy REAL pirated CDs. Many, err, gray businesses in Hong Kong will happily sell you the newest RIAA CDs for 1/3rd the price which includes CD media, with packaging/inserts, and shipping.

If the RIAA wants to encourage huge domestic pirating operations like those common in Asian then they're on the right track.

Instead of Johnny Downloader listening to some track he'll never buy we're going to have hundreds of Johnny Burners who will buy the source CD and sell a burned CD for a tidy profit to a scared and cheap public.

Here's to real bootlegging that will actually hurt sales.

That is if the RIAA suits aren't countered by a class action on the basis of barratry.
posted by skallas at 7:33 PM on July 23, 2003


I'm safe, the stuff I download and sometimes share isn't on the Really Irritating Artists of America's radar. Really, all of the RIAA shit can be found a million different ways in newsgroups, IRC, FTP, etc. But the stuff you don't hear on the radio, that's where the file sharing programs become really useful.

I hope the Bush twins are out there downloading and sharing every Britney and Justin song there is. And I hope they are among the Kazaa users being singled out. Hee hee.
posted by bargle at 7:50 PM on July 23, 2003


Ummm... I've shared music, I've also downloaded music. Sue me, and you can get my bills. Please, I make $9 an hour and you're going to tell me I have to pay some ridiculous amount per song? Whatever.
posted by JakeEXTREME at 7:51 PM on July 23, 2003


I read an article in the Wall Street Journal that said the RIAA was targeting uploaders/sharers more than downloaders. Does this mean it is still safe to download as long as I have sharing turned off?

That is what the RIAA would like you to believe (which doesn't necessarily mean it's not true). This whole thing is about deterrence. If they can get all the kids to stop uploading, the p2p networks become useless.
posted by jpoulos at 8:07 PM on July 23, 2003


The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has now issued more than 911 subpoenas

Like what, 912 or 913? Does anyone else find this sentence a bit strange?
posted by lasm at 8:37 PM on July 23, 2003


If they're going to turn it into painful ligitation process that will drain you of your life savings and garnish your wages for the rest of your days, just buy REAL pirated CDs.

Or, hell, just shoplift from the goddamn Sam Goody. Lighter penalty involved in that....
posted by mr_roboto at 8:42 PM on July 23, 2003


The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has now issued more than 911 subpoenas

Like what, 912 or 913? Does anyone else find this sentence a bit strange?


just wait for the public service announcements about how p2p networks really support terrorism.
posted by erisfree at 8:48 PM on July 23, 2003


That is if the RIAA suits aren't countered by a class action on the basis of barratry.

Based on whats happened in the DirecTV case, I unfortunately doubt that the counter-suit would win.
posted by jmd82 at 8:57 PM on July 23, 2003


jpoulos is absolutely right. This is a deterrent. Just a smoke screen. Smoke and mirrors. The RIAA is trying to scare people into submission. Not that I mean to compare the RIAA to terrorist activity, because terrorists scare people into submission with guns and bombs. The RIAA scares people into submission with lawyers and questionable political hornswaggling. So it's a whole different kind of terrorism altogether. Cuz [sarcasm]of course everyone knows file swapping is a treasonous act to America and everything it stands for. [/sarcasm] Truthfully they can't possibly nab every single downloader of an mp3. So this "justice" they seek is going to be inadequate, inconsistent, and blind. Sometimes you'll get caught. Sometimes you won't. Kinda like speeding.
posted by ZachsMind at 9:00 PM on July 23, 2003


In the meantime I thought that there was finally a way for us poor non-Mac users to download songs at reasonable prices. But then I saw this. What is wrong with these people?
posted by dg at 9:59 PM on July 23, 2003


OK, I'm confused. First user names are easy to change, second, I don't see any username@k-lite.com, which is what the latest version of k-lite uses, (obtainable at k-lite.tk) and finally, k-lite blocks know riaa IPs, and hides the files you are sharing, making it impossible to do the old "get more from same user" routine, while still allowing you to share. And oh yeah, it keeps your participation level at 1000. So, I'm confused, why does any one use Kazaa anymore? What with all that nasty spyware, and the complete lack of protection from big brother.
posted by Grod at 10:12 PM on July 23, 2003


A shame that www.k_lite.tk_Kazaa_Lite@Kazaa (the last on the list) is the default name for anyone using Kazaa Lite...if they can't figure that out, I don't see this going that far..
posted by Orange Goblin at 12:22 AM on July 24, 2003


Did anyone else just casually peruse that list just to make sure they weren't on it?

Only me, huh?
posted by salmacis at 1:24 AM on July 24, 2003



Heh. Deterrence in action.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:28 AM on July 24, 2003


One burning question. Since when did RIAA get the power to issue a subpoena to ANYONE ? Maybe they could file suit against people, but subpoena them?
posted by maggie at 1:39 AM on July 24, 2003


Did anyone else just casually peruse that list just to make sure they weren't on it?


Of course not, no one else downloads anything, whatsoever...

I wasn't on it, right?
posted by drezdn at 1:45 AM on July 24, 2003


ktgurl13@Grokster
Sweet3114@Kazaa
nikki@Kazaa
freckles72587@Kazaa
emmi4@Kazaa

OK, I completely revise my opinion that you'd be safe if you changed your username to "flowergurrrl_12@kazaa" because the RIAA would have to be morons to incur the negative publicity by prosecuting sweet little photogenic girls.

I mean... ktgurl13@Grokster!!?? These people are frikkin evil.<
posted by Blue Stone at 2:25 AM on July 24, 2003


Bush323@Kazaa

Um, Mr. Bush, we've received a . . . um, well, it's a subpoena from RIAA, sir.
posted by Outlawyr at 3:32 AM on July 24, 2003


" Bush323@Kazaa

Um, Mr. Bush, we've received a . . . um, well, it's a subpoena from RIAA, sir."


Shit. They don't want to do that. He'll likely misread RIAA as one of those middle-eastern countries, and start bombing the crap out of them.

On second thoughts...
posted by Blue Stone at 4:40 AM on July 24, 2003


Dvorak thinks the RIAA actions will actually help terrorists.
posted by madman at 4:48 AM on July 24, 2003


www.k_lite.tk_Kazaa_Lite@Kazaa

Hehe. Okay everyone, change your Kazaa e-mails to that one up there. If the RIAA can't figure out that it is the default for Kazaa Lite, everyone should be able to stand under it as an umbrella. Perhaps they don't know that Kazaa Lite exists -- the newest version blocks known RIAA-related IPs.
posted by VulcanMike at 5:46 AM on July 24, 2003


I must be missing how they're connecting these email addresses to real identities. What's the link?
posted by scarabic at 10:34 AM on July 24, 2003


definitely_ditzy@Kazaa

Like, OMG LOL!
posted by clevershark at 10:37 AM on July 24, 2003


I must be missing how they're connecting these email addresses to real identities. What's the link?
I had assumed that they were tracking IP addresses in use by those users and following them back to the ISPs, hence the "issued more than 911 subpoenas to Internet service providers across the United States" part. Someone more tech-savvy may be able to enlighten us as to whether they can monitor IPs in some way over P2P networks?
posted by dg at 3:44 PM on July 24, 2003


So, everybody change their usernames (which are totally arbitrary on the Fasttrack Network) to one of these usernames, and switch every day.

Voila!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:44 PM on July 24, 2003


No! They got TMONEYNDHIZOUSE?! Now it's personal.
posted by squirrel at 5:03 PM on July 24, 2003


You know, it's actually rather fucked up that 1000 individual people are going to have to hand over ten grand to one of the biggest conglomerates in the country.

How can the RIAA hope to prove that level of damage? Someone is going to have to ride this one to court with a team of good lawyers. Luckily, there must be thousands of pot-smokin' green-votin' grey wolf baby boomer lawyers who've been waiting all their lives for a moment like this.

I look forward to their performance in defense of victims of corporate thuggery. We should get some good stuff from them, don't you think?
posted by squirrel at 5:14 PM on July 24, 2003


scarabic, the same packet that carries the username also carries an IP and a timecode. They publish only the username, but they have the number and the time. With that, they can get the account info from the ISPs. I imagine there must be a lot of WiFi hosts who are shutting down their hot-zone networks--just about the most exciting thing happening in network technology, and it's being researched and funded mostly by private individuals. Anyone on your network is logging as your IP. A great distributed network model, which copyright activists, as such, are trying with all their might and dollars and political influence to crush. Way to pave the way for the future, RIAA. And thanks for jumping on the wagon with a big cheesy grin Apple and Microsoft. Sieg Walt.

Okay, rant over.
posted by squirrel at 5:22 PM on July 24, 2003


Are you sure, about that timecode/ISP thing, squirrel?

I know that such a thing is possible, of course, but don't they need a court order or anything of the sort?
posted by scarabic at 5:26 PM on July 24, 2003


thousands of pot-smokin' green-votin' grey wolf baby boomer lawyers who've been waiting all their lives for a moment like this.

like, man, have you ever, like, really *looked* at the back of a CD, man? whoa! killer!
posted by quonsar at 5:35 PM on July 24, 2003


scarabic, yes certainly. In the same way your browser has to give a net server your IP address in order for them to route you the html, all current gnutella server/clients dish out their IP to every search that comes through. That's how their client knows how to connect.
posted by squirrel at 5:53 PM on July 24, 2003


don't they need a court order or anything of the sort?
hence the "issued more than 911 subpoenas to Internet service providers across the United States" part.
posted by dg at 5:54 PM on July 24, 2003


Yeah, dg's right. The part where the IP gets matched to your personal account is where the subpoenas come in. And, as we know, that process recently got a > a whole lot easier for the RIAA.
posted by squirrel at 8:15 PM on July 24, 2003


www.k_lite.tk_Kazaa_Lite@Kazaa

Oh no! I'm busted!
posted by hawkman at 8:43 AM on July 26, 2003


« Older Tyler wins Stage 16!   |   The Vagina Monoliths? Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments