RIAA fights neutral hard drive examiners - bit-tech.net Forums

Garside · 4th Sep 2006, 10:59

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/09...ive_examiners/

DarkReaper · 4th Sep 2006, 11:33

No judge with an ounce of common sense could think that the RIAA are far enough away from the case to be independant - bring in someone else.

Paradigm Shifter · 4th Sep 2006, 11:36

Yeesh.

Yeah, I can see the RIAA being objective if they test that drive. Like bloody hell I can.

A Third Party should always be used.

DougEdey · 4th Sep 2006, 11:39

Are Sony related to the RIAA?

Seems as though they both seem to be shooting themselves in the foot.

specofdust · 4th Sep 2006, 11:39

Don't like the story? Don't buy the RIAA music.

Rich_13 · 4th Sep 2006, 11:39

i'd happily counter sue if they tried this. what about all your personal data. etc, whos to stop them looking at that.

I certainly wouldn't let anyone one touch them unless I was also there to observe and I think a judge would be crazy to give them this.

TheEclypse · 4th Sep 2006, 12:04

The RIAA are definatly biased, so are the defendants, obvious answer is to get the courts to employ an independent party.

atanum141 · 4th Sep 2006, 12:42

Jeez......I expect nothing less from the RIAA.

DXR_13KE · 4th Sep 2006, 14:46

RIAA are not human. they are not logical. it is impossible that they still exist.

quack · 4th Sep 2006, 15:40

A neutral body should definitely be involved. The RIAA only stands to lose if there's nothing found... probably what they're most scared of. I really hope the judge has some common sense.

matt88hezzy · 4th Sep 2006, 18:20

As If.... i can agree with them wanting to examine the hard drives, but without a 3rd party being involved IS NOT right, for all anyone knows is that they could PLANT the supposedly downloaded material back onto the computer. i think the RIAA should be sued for viewing and/or mirroring the persons hard drive without a court order!

thats not only a breach of privacy, but what if you work for a company such as Microsoft, just at home, and your working on projects while downloading 'illegal' material, would'nt the company sue for breaching the security of the project? (as well as firing you).

to bring up one more thing, how would the RIAA react if you personally, viewed and mirrored they're hard drives?? i would love for someone to do that and post it all on the internet, just to see they're reaction!!

draxar · 4th Sep 2006, 19:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by DXR_13KE

RIAA are not human. they are not logical. it is impossible that they still exist.

They're human. They're the money and stock owners behind music. Thus they're after making as much of a profit as possible. They're also likely mostly relatively older, and thus somewhat stuck in their ways. From their perspective the music market has worked in a particularl way for the last 30-40 years, it should stay like that, cause that's how they make their money.

They're the big money behind music. The ones who fund stuff, and who controlled what music we listen to. And they're seeing the system slip out of their control. It's that loss of control as much as the supposed loss of earnings that they're worried about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by matt88hezzy

I think the RIAA should be sued for viewing and/or mirroring the persons hard drive without a court order!

thats not only a breach of privacy, but what if you work for a company such as Microsoft, just at home, and your working on projects while downloading 'illegal' material, would'nt the company sue for breaching the security of the project? (as well as firing you).

to bring up one more thing, how would the RIAA react if you personally, viewed and mirrored they're hard drives?? i would love for someone to do that and post it all on the internet, just to see they're reaction!!

I thhink you may be getting the two stories referenced mixed up - there's the main story - that the RIAA wants to go through this person's computer and that person wants an independant group to go through it instead. There's a reference to a previous story - that someone else got told by a different court "Your hard drive is evidence, don't wipe it", and that person ignored that order and wiped their computer (rather strongly suggesting there was something that shouldn't have been there), and in that second story, the RIAA mirrored their hard drive to show that the offending material was there. Even if the RIAA hadn't done that the person would likely have lost the case and/or been brought up on some sort of contempt of court charges, cause when a court tells you not to do something, that's what you have to do.

Cthippo · 4th Sep 2006, 20:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by matt88hezzy

thats not only a breach of privacy, but what if you work for a company such as Microsoft, just at home, and your working on projects while downloading 'illegal' material, would'nt the company sue for breaching the security of the project? (as well as firing you).

No, because they would then have to go into court and say what that secret was and then it's no longer a secret. As far as I know, even if they were willing to try that, the only thing they could sue for was breach of contract unless they could prove malicious intent.

JaredC01 · 4th Sep 2006, 21:21

Will the RIAA give it a RUCKING FEST??? (Invert the two first letters of the last 2 words if you don't get what I'm saying here). We need to pull up some kind of huge contraversal case against the RIAA and sue them for all that they've got, therefore doing to them, what they are doing to people without computers...

Havok154 · 4th Sep 2006, 22:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by DougEdey

Are Sony related to the RIAA?

Seems as though they both seem to be shooting themselves in the foot.

Actually, yes. They are a part of the RIAA.

Aankhen · 5th Sep 2006, 01:01

The RIAA is completely object and unbiased. I fully support their requBWAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA

I tried, but I couldn't.

Tyinsar · 5th Sep 2006, 03:55

Mr. Wolf says: "why yes Mrs Sheep, you can trust me with that tasty little - erm - I mean - you can certainly trust ME with your kid :->

AWACS · 6th Sep 2006, 08:51

doh... I thought it was common practise to bring in third party examiners... I wonder what would happen if we'd stop buying AND downloading music... that way riaa would have absolutely no other way of accusing anyone else except themselves for the loss of income... I'd say stop buying and downloading... listen to the radio instead... that would hurt them the most... cus if they can't sue anyone to cover their losses then they are bound to make more REALLY BAD moves and some court would have to bash them big time... and yes... innosent artists would suffer from this blockade... however if they'd put some heavy words against riaa then there might be hope after all...

Flibblebot · 6th Sep 2006, 09:48

but the RIAA (and the BPI in the UK and other industry associations around the world) still get money even if we just listen to the radio.
In fact, they probably get more money from radio stations than from consumers. This is because the radio stations pay a royalty to the record company each time a record is played plus (in the UK at least) they have to pay an annual fee to the BPI to allow them to broadcast the music.

So if we want to hurt these associations and their members, the only way is to give up music completely - and that will include watching any TV programmes that use artists' music (as opposed to music recorded specifically for the programme).

Sorry, ain't gonna happen.

The only way these associations are going to get their powers curtailed is if a government decides to step in and stop the lawsuits.

Don't hold your breath.

AWACS · 6th Sep 2006, 14:18

yes I know they pay to be allowed to play the music... but it would still cut the record industry income to a fraction of the normal... (those greedy *******s)... though convincing 5 billion ppl or more to stop buying and downloading the music would be near impossible... but if they would even consider that possibility then they migh stop and think things over before running over their customers like some sort or mafia or totalitary state power...

4th Sep 2006, 10:59	#1
Garside Supermodder Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: London Posts: 395	RIAA fights neutral hard drive examiners http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/09...ive_examiners/

4th Sep 2006, 11:36	#3
Paradigm Shifter Lethargic Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 1,213	Yeesh. Yeah, I can see the RIAA being objective if they test that drive. Like bloody hell I can. A Third Party should always be used. __________________ Core i7 920 D0 @ 3.8GHz \| 6GB Corsair 1600MHz \| Gigabyte EX58-UD5 \| XFX 4870X2 2GB \| 4TB \| WUXGA

4th Sep 2006, 11:39	#4
DougEdey I pwn all your storage Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Southampton Posts: 13,933	Are Sony related to the RIAA? Seems as though they both seem to be shooting themselves in the foot. __________________ Burnout: Paradise Stats!XBL: DougEdey Bindi PSN ID: DougEdey Twitter

4th Sep 2006, 11:39	#5
specofdust Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Aberdeen, UK, EU Posts: 7,615	Don't like the story? Don't buy the RIAA music. __________________ Like marmite, only no-one hates it Mmm bop!

4th Sep 2006, 11:39	#6
Rich_13 Hypermodder Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: London /Essex Uni Posts: 716	i'd happily counter sue if they tried this. what about all your personal data. etc, whos to stop them looking at that. I certainly wouldn't let anyone one touch them unless I was also there to observe and I think a judge would be crazy to give them this. __________________ [Gaming laptop:][Intel Cour Duo2 T7200 ] [Nvidia7900GS GO] [1920x1200 display] [2GB DDR][Creative 6.1's ] My blog

4th Sep 2006, 11:33	#2
DarkReaper Alignment: Sarcastic Good Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Belfast, NI Posts: 1,750	No judge with an ounce of common sense could think that the RIAA are far enough away from the case to be independant - bring in someone else.

4th Sep 2006, 12:04	#7
TheEclypse Supermodder Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: England Posts: 407	The RIAA are definatly biased, so are the defendants, obvious answer is to get the courts to employ an independent party. __________________ Current Rig: Shuttle ST20G5 \| AMD Athlon64 4000+ San Diego \| X1950Pro \| 200Gb Samsung SpinPoint P120S SATA \| 1GB OCZ Performance \| NEC ND3540A \| 7-in-1 Floppy

4th Sep 2006, 12:42	#8
atanum141 I fapped to your post! Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: London Posts: 7,538	Jeez......I expect nothing less from the RIAA. __________________ Welcome to Thunderdome, B*tch XBL: atanum141

4th Sep 2006, 14:46	#9
DXR_13KE Madeira's banana is the best!!! Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Madeira ; Portugal Posts: 6,473	RIAA are not human. they are not logical. it is impossible that they still exist. __________________ *Renegade X - 0.40 Release!* <---- CLICK!

4th Sep 2006, 15:40	#10
quack \o/ Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: England Posts: 5,221	A neutral body should definitely be involved. The RIAA only stands to lose if there's nothing found... probably what they're most scared of. I really hope the judge has some common sense. __________________ Denying Rights to Music lovers. Denying Rights to Movie lovers.

4th Sep 2006, 18:20	#11
matt88hezzy What's a Dremel? Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1	As If.... i can agree with them wanting to examine the hard drives, but without a 3rd party being involved IS NOT right, for all anyone knows is that they could PLANT the supposedly downloaded material back onto the computer. i think the RIAA should be sued for viewing and/or mirroring the persons hard drive without a court order! thats not only a breach of privacy, but what if you work for a company such as Microsoft, just at home, and your working on projects while downloading 'illegal' material, would'nt the company sue for breaching the security of the project? (as well as firing you). to bring up one more thing, how would the RIAA react if you personally, viewed and mirrored they're hard drives?? i would love for someone to do that and post it all on the internet, just to see they're reaction!!

4th Sep 2006, 21:21	#14
JaredC01 Hardware Nut Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Alaska, USA Posts: 794	Will the RIAA give it a RUCKING FEST??? (Invert the two first letters of the last 2 words if you don't get what I'm saying here). We need to pull up some kind of huge contraversal case against the RIAA and sue them for all that they've got, therefore doing to them, what they are doing to people without computers... __________________ \|i7 920\|\|EVGA Classified E760\|\|6GB Ballistix Tracer 1600\|\|3x XFX 4890CF\|\|X-Fi Fatality\|\|4x WD Black 1TB RAID 10\|\|Revolution 1050w\|\|Corsair Obsidian 800D\| \|E8400 @ 4.00 w/ NH-U12P\|\|GA-EP45-UD3P\|\|8GB G.Skill @ 445MHz 5-4-4-12\|\|4870 512MB\|\|X-Fi XM\|\|WD Green 1TB\|\|Tagan BZ 700w\|\|Antec P182 Gunmetal\| In Progress\|\|Current Rig -- If I helped you, please give me rep!

5th Sep 2006, 01:01	#16
Aankhen Supermodder Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: India Posts: 406	The RIAA is completely object and unbiased. I fully support their requBWAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA I tried, but I couldn't. __________________ It sure took me a long time to realize I hadn't changed my forum settings since returning from Canadia-land.

5th Sep 2006, 03:55	#17
Tyinsar 6 screens / 1 card Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: AB.CA Posts: 2,005	Mr. Wolf says: "why yes Mrs Sheep, you can trust me with that tasty little - erm - I mean - you can certainly trust ME with your kid :-> __________________ It's not about how life treats you, it's about how you treat life.

6th Sep 2006, 08:51	#18
AWACS Supermodder Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Finland Posts: 371	doh... I thought it was common practise to bring in third party examiners... I wonder what would happen if we'd stop buying AND downloading music... that way riaa would have absolutely no other way of accusing anyone else except themselves for the loss of income... I'd say stop buying and downloading... listen to the radio instead... that would hurt them the most... cus if they can't sue anyone to cover their losses then they are bound to make more REALLY BAD moves and some court would have to bash them big time... and yes... innosent artists would suffer from this blockade... however if they'd put some heavy words against riaa then there might be hope after all...

6th Sep 2006, 09:48	#19
Flibblebot Free from artificial flavourings Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Right here, right now Posts: 2,232	but the RIAA (and the BPI in the UK and other industry associations around the world) still get money even if we just listen to the radio. In fact, they probably get more money from radio stations than from consumers. This is because the radio stations pay a royalty to the record company each time a record is played plus (in the UK at least) they have to pay an annual fee to the BPI to allow them to broadcast the music. So if we want to hurt these associations and their members, the only way is to give up music completely - and that will include watching any TV programmes that use artists' music (as opposed to music recorded specifically for the programme). Sorry, ain't gonna happen. The only way these associations are going to get their powers curtailed is if a government decides to step in and stop the lawsuits. Don't hold your breath. __________________ My uber-system: 66Mhz 486DX2, 8Mb RAM, 20Mb hard drive, 256 colour VGA adaptor (goes all the way up to 800x600!), keyboard AND serial mouse

6th Sep 2006, 14:18	#20
AWACS Supermodder Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Finland Posts: 371	yes I know they pay to be allowed to play the music... but it would still cut the record industry income to a fraction of the normal... (those greedy *******s)... though convincing 5 billion ppl or more to stop buying and downloading the music would be near impossible... but if they would even consider that possibility then they migh stop and think things over before running over their customers like some sort or mafia or totalitary state power...