You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on Media, Movies and Music within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. House passes bill that will let the RIAA take away your home for downloading music - Boing Boing
I was just alerted that the House of Reps has passed HR
I was just alerted that the House of Reps has passed HR 4279, with the lovely name, PRO-IP (Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2008). Like the doublespeak PATRIOT Act and Peacekeeper missiles, PRO-IP puts local law enforcement in a position to demand the forfeiture in criminal proceedings of stuff used to violate copyright. Which means that instead of the RIAA simply trying to collect fines, they can also incite local authorities to collect all the computers and related gear that was used to pirate.
As for most laws, there's a very easy solution to make sure no one can not take your computer away.
What.. like.. NOT stealing? Dude, how could you even suggest such a thing? You must be part of the totalitarian american regime that is bent on the destruction of all things free and good in this world.
What.. like.. NOT stealing? Dude, how could you even suggest such a thing? You must be part of the totalitarian american regime that is bent on the destruction of all things free and good in this world.
Yeah . . . my bad.
Seriously . . . something has to be done. We're raising a generation of people who think it's just plain fine to acquire things like movies, music and computer games/software without having to pay for them - almost as if it is a right.
Seriously . . . something has to be done. We're raising a generation of people who think it's just plain fine to acquire things like movies, music and computer games/software without having to pay for them - almost as if it is a right.
I think it's more so the new generation has always had access to it this way, so they don't see anything fallible with it.
As for most laws, there's a very easy solution to make sure no one can not take your computer away.
I do agree with you (I work in film, so there is a little bit of the "hey, that is my work you are stealing"), but the problem is when the RIAA makes a mistake. My 75 year old aunt was charged with stealing NWA, Biggie, Tupac, and the like. She certainly isn't the type to partake in such activities, however like many service providers, her ISP uses dynamic IPs, and the IP she had the day the RIAA did one of their sweeps was used recently to illegally download these artist, yet she was the one who was charged.
My point is, the RIAA is not known for their investigative integrity, they seem to take a shotgun approach in selecting the cases they would like to pursue, and until they have some meaningful standard for bringing these cases to trial, this may cause a lot of headaches for a lot of innocent people.
My point is, the RIAA is not known for their investigative integrity, they seem to take a shotgun approach in selecting the cases they would like to pursue, and until they have some meaningful standard for bringing these cases to trial, this may cause a lot of headaches for a lot of innocent people.
There's nothing there that I don't agree with, and any bad press the RIAA gets from incidents like this is well deserved, and quite frankly, they should be forced financially to compensate. Stealing copyrighted material is a crime, and so should harassing and inconviencing innocent people without due process.
I think it's more so the new generation has always had access to it this way, so they don't see anything fallible with it.
Having access to something illegal doesn't negate the legality of it. Seriously, growing up, if I wanted to buy dugs, I knew the people to go to. The face that I had access doesn't have anything to do with what happens to me if I was busted.
At THIS point, however, I think that most people know that it's illegal to download free tunes and movies. I think the attitude is more of a "who's going to care about little old me" when Jimmy down the road does it on a much larger scale.
Not to mention that - illegal or not - many people with the option to get something for free that normally could potentially cost them hundreds if not thousands of dollars will take that cheaper road and roll the dice that they won't get caught. The ability to steal something from the privacy of your own home means that people are a little braver than they normally would be.
Man, the genie is so out of the bottle for music downloading. My biggest problem as a struggling musician is these established artists like Radiohead (pay what you want) and Trent Reznor (hey, it's free!) who devalue recorded music with these giveaway gimmicks when they can make up the difference easily by touring. It's a very, "I got mine" attitude.
edit: Now, giveaways aren't new, but they are on this type of scale and that's the issue with the stealing as well...scale.
Bands starting out are lucky to break even on gigs in a perfect world but add in extreme gas prices, etc.
It's a hard road but..."Fortune favors the brave".
I've been on the internet for twenty years and never had a problem.
I got my Beatles albums 35 years ago and they still play fine so whats wrong with respecting someones work and paying for it.
I charge for my work too.
I've been on the internet for twenty years and never had a problem.
I got my Beatles albums 35 years ago and they still play fine so whats wrong with respecting someones work and paying for it.
I charge for my work too.
For the record, I still buy albums, movies, etc. I just don't buy them if they suck. If I find out something sucks and I do so without having to pay for it then where is the harm? Look at it this way, I can borrow my friends new Coldplay CD and listen to it..for free....and decide if I want to buy it or not. Now, if I download it, listen to it and decide to buy it then nobody his hurt right? If it sucks and I never listen to it again then were was the harm in downloading it?
Not only that do you have any idea how much music I have discovered this way? Lots of times people in here will say listen to this band....I'll check download it and what do you know...suddenly I'm buying tickets to see a band that I never heard of in concert.
As for people that download the stuff and never buy it that's a shame. I think everyone should buy something sooner or later. However, the RIAA claiming that every download is equal to a lost sale is a ****ing joke. They just make those claims to sensationalize the numbers that they report so that they can influence lawmakers into seeing things their way. If anyone is taking money out of the hands of starving artists it's the ****ing recording industry for not embracing a new technology that could be used to increase sales. If they hadn't been fighting the inevitable all this time then maybe they would not have missed the boat and maybe they would not be bitching about iTunes all the damn time.
They made their bed and have to lie it in now and they don't like it. The mere fact that they, for nearly 20 years, got away with a price point in the $18.99 neighborhood for something that cost about .25 cents to make is why people are so pissed at them.
My music budget hasn't changed a bit. I still buy upwards of 30-50 CDs a year. The only thing that my downloading habits have done is change which 30-50 CDs I actually end up buying. After all what differences does it make if I have a bands full album on my hard drive when I can go sample it just the same at their MySpace page?
I respect musicians tremendously. I just want to use this tool to my advantage and disperse the $500-700 a year that I spend on music to artists that truly deserve it for making truly good music. No way will I ever be tricked into buying some assclown's one hit wonder CD just because it was available for a mere $9.99 on it's day of release. For the record, I have 4 of the Coldplay songs from their new album that releases next month. Three of those 4 songs are out of this world amazing and I will be buying their CD they day that it comes out.
For the record, I still buy albums, movies, etc. I just don't buy them if they suck. If I find out something sucks and I do so without having to pay for it then where is the harm? Look at it this way, I can borrow my friends new Coldplay CD and listen to it..for free....and decide if I want to buy it or not. Now, if I download it, listen to it and decide to buy it then nobody his hurt right? If it sucks and I never listen to it again then were was the harm in downloading it?
Not only that do you have any idea how much music I have discovered this way? Lots of times people in here will say listen to this band....I'll check download it and what do you know...suddenly I'm buying tickets to see a band that I never heard of in concert.
As for people that download the stuff and never buy it that's a shame. I think everyone should buy something sooner or later. However, the RIAA claiming that every download is equal to a lost sale is a ****ing joke. They just make those claims to sensationalize the numbers that they report so that they can influence lawmakers into seeing things their way. If anyone is taking money out of the hands of starving artists it's the ****ing recording industry for not embracing a new technology that could be used to increase sales. If they hadn't been fighting the inevitable all this time then maybe they would not have missed the boat and maybe they would not be bitching about iTunes all the damn time.
They made their bed and have to lie it in now and they don't like it. The mere fact that they, for nearly 20 years, got away with a price point in the $18.99 neighborhood for something that cost about .25 cents to make is why people are so pissed at them.
My music budget hasn't changed a bit. I still buy upwards of 30-50 CDs a year. The only thing that my downloading habits have done is change which 30-50 CDs I actually end up buying. After all what differences does it make if I have a bands full album on my hard drive when I can go sample it just the same at their MySpace page?
I respect musicians tremendously. I just want to use this tool to my advantage and disperse the $500-700 a year that I spend on music to artists that truly deserve it for making truly good music. No way will I ever be tricked into buying some assclown's one hit wonder CD just because it was available for a mere $9.99 on it's day of release. For the record, I have 4 of the Coldplay songs from their new album that releases next month. Three of those 4 songs are out of this world amazing and I will be buying their CD they day that it comes out.
QFT
without downloading, most bands i listen to i would have never disocovered OR discovered much later. I download, and buy the ones i like. Most of my entertainment money goes towards music anyway. Not everyone ONLY downloads. I for one, love the feel of buying a new cd and listening to it while looking at the art work and reading the lyrics. There is something really special with that.
without downloading, most bands i listen to i would have never disocovered OR discovered much later. I download, and buy the ones i like. Most of my entertainment money goes towards music anyway. Not everyone ONLY downloads. I for one, love the feel of buying a new cd and listening to it while looking at the art work and reading the lyrics. There is something really special with that.
I also like that but if I see another artist go with that cheap cardboard case I think I'll kick a best buy working in the testicles. I hate that ****ing cheap crap and I'm talking to you Thom Yorke, Jack Johnson, The Shins, etc... Considering how much money these guys are losing I think it's best that they put in extra attention to liner notes, and fold outs and such.
The one thing that amazes me about people that buy on iTunes is that they are actually paying more money for "soft files" than they would if they would just buy the CD themselves. For example, I downloaded (torrent) Red Hot Chilli Peppers "Stadium Arcadium." Even though I wasn't thrilled with that album I bought it anyway since I had almost every other RHCP album. It was $9.99 at Circuit City. How much was it at iTunes? $22.77. Yeah, .99 cents EACH SONG. It just amazes me that people not only pay more for soft files but they do so for DRM protected, low quality 128kbps iTunes garbage.
If people would do some simple research on MP3 quality and learned how to rip CDs properly the would at the very least never buy from iTunes ever again. You're simply better off buying the physical copy, ripping it and storing the CD then you are in buying the soft files on iTunes.
Last edited by OrangePuck; May 15th, 2008 at 01:53 PM.
House passes bill that will let the RIAA take away your computerfor downloading music 
Mouth of Empty Praise!!! 
ValleyFan
Go Kings
