David and Goliath
June 27, 2007 11:05 AM Subscribe
I'm no pirate! Not that kind of pirate--the kind of pirate the RIAA has been busily harassing, intimidating, and persecuting. This time the defendant fights back with a law suit of her own.
This post was deleted for the following reason: That the RIAA sues people and that people sometimes sue the RIAA has been pretty well established in the previous 137 posts that mention the organization by name, including this one from yesterday. -- cortex
Sorry, should have said (bogus) information.
I thought you WERE a 98 year old woman from Alaska.
posted by The Deej at 11:24 AM on June 27, 2007
I thought you WERE a 98 year old woman from Alaska.
posted by The Deej at 11:24 AM on June 27, 2007
I told them I was a 98-year-old woman from Alaska, and they let me in just fine.
You'll be sorry when they start harassing your fictional 9 year old son.
posted by DU at 11:24 AM on June 27, 2007
You'll be sorry when they start harassing your fictional 9 year old son.
posted by DU at 11:24 AM on June 27, 2007
haha i said i was a 98 year old woman too! only i was from Connecticut. They didn't believe I was a 220 year old man from Rhode Island so I had to scale back.
posted by casconed at 11:26 AM on June 27, 2007
posted by casconed at 11:26 AM on June 27, 2007
It's about time someone defended themselves.
Though, reading the article, I can now see why people haven't been - the RIAA knows that when someone defends themselves, it might torpedo their whole racketeering scheme, and so it's their policy to going to nearly any length to coerce people into settling. Some of those lengths don't sound entirely legal. Hopefully she will nail them.
posted by -harlequin- at 11:34 AM on June 27, 2007
Though, reading the article, I can now see why people haven't been - the RIAA knows that when someone defends themselves, it might torpedo their whole racketeering scheme, and so it's their policy to going to nearly any length to coerce people into settling. Some of those lengths don't sound entirely legal. Hopefully she will nail them.
posted by -harlequin- at 11:34 AM on June 27, 2007
They're thugs. Don't buy new CDs; buy them used, and then support artists directly.
The RIAA, as a matter of course, cheats artists by lying about sales totals. I've actually seen someone claim that this was okay. They argued that because the artists knew the RIAA lies to and steals from them, they knew what they were getting into, and 'the market' will prevail.
Maybe it will in the long run, but here in the real world, there's an excellent chance that buying a CD lines ONLY the RIAA's pockets. They can use your money to go sue more grandmas, while not one thin dime gets to the musician.
I'd rather buy t-shirts or something.
posted by Malor at 11:35 AM on June 27, 2007
The RIAA, as a matter of course, cheats artists by lying about sales totals. I've actually seen someone claim that this was okay. They argued that because the artists knew the RIAA lies to and steals from them, they knew what they were getting into, and 'the market' will prevail.
Maybe it will in the long run, but here in the real world, there's an excellent chance that buying a CD lines ONLY the RIAA's pockets. They can use your money to go sue more grandmas, while not one thin dime gets to the musician.
I'd rather buy t-shirts or something.
posted by Malor at 11:35 AM on June 27, 2007
OK, let me re-rail:
A friend of mine HAD to have been one of the top downloaders during the Napster era. He had a high speed work connection and kept his download list running day and night, and even weekends. At one point, he told me he had downloaded every conceivable piece of music that interested him, and had started on downloading more esoteric fare. This went on for months. He never got contacted, probably because he kept his share folder empty. This was during the time when many people felt that it was technically legal to download like this. I'm not sure if he stopped, but soon after is when the first charges were announced. It would have been no surprise if he has been named as a defendant.
Meanwhile, people like the lady in the article, and grandparents whose kids downloaded a few songs, have been made into examples. I am no fan of copyright-infringement. Besides about 50 songs during the Napster heyday, I have purchased all of my music either as CDs or from iTunes. But the RIAA deserves to have their heads handed to them for their stupidity and their tactics. This is not "justice" by any stretch, nor does it deter high-volume downloaders who happen to be smart enough to cover their tracks.
posted by The Deej at 11:40 AM on June 27, 2007
A friend of mine HAD to have been one of the top downloaders during the Napster era. He had a high speed work connection and kept his download list running day and night, and even weekends. At one point, he told me he had downloaded every conceivable piece of music that interested him, and had started on downloading more esoteric fare. This went on for months. He never got contacted, probably because he kept his share folder empty. This was during the time when many people felt that it was technically legal to download like this. I'm not sure if he stopped, but soon after is when the first charges were announced. It would have been no surprise if he has been named as a defendant.
Meanwhile, people like the lady in the article, and grandparents whose kids downloaded a few songs, have been made into examples. I am no fan of copyright-infringement. Besides about 50 songs during the Napster heyday, I have purchased all of my music either as CDs or from iTunes. But the RIAA deserves to have their heads handed to them for their stupidity and their tactics. This is not "justice" by any stretch, nor does it deter high-volume downloaders who happen to be smart enough to cover their tracks.
posted by The Deej at 11:40 AM on June 27, 2007
I'm with Malor -- you're part of the racket if you support the industry in its current perverse form.
There are alternative ways to get music, and though they might require a little more investigative effort I find the reward worth it -- it seems sometimes the most interesting acts are the same demographic that either rejects or is rejected by the major labels.
I only buy previously enjoyed CDs and DVDs, when I want something from that market.
Mostly, though, I find it doesn't take much time away from the ocean of mainstream drivel to recognize how vapid and unfilfilling it is.
posted by CheeseburgerBrown at 11:42 AM on June 27, 2007
There are alternative ways to get music, and though they might require a little more investigative effort I find the reward worth it -- it seems sometimes the most interesting acts are the same demographic that either rejects or is rejected by the major labels.
I only buy previously enjoyed CDs and DVDs, when I want something from that market.
Mostly, though, I find it doesn't take much time away from the ocean of mainstream drivel to recognize how vapid and unfilfilling it is.
posted by CheeseburgerBrown at 11:42 AM on June 27, 2007
« Older IN YR BACK YARD QUIETLY EXPANDING MAH GLOBAL... | /UBU Editions Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by The Deej at 11:19 AM on June 27, 2007