The bill says if you share a single tune with your pals online—as millions do every day—you are a felon. Penalty: up to five years in jail. Aug. 4 issue — Last month I attended a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee with an intriguing title: “The dark side of a bright idea: Could personal and national-security risks compromise the potential of peer-to-peer file-sharing networks?” I CERTAINLY WAS AWARE that some members of Congress wanted to snuff out the grass-roots phenomena of people’s swapping copyrighted songs on the Net. But I assumed that the crime of file-sharing, joyfully committed by an estimated 60 million pirates, was mainly a problem of lost revenues for the music industry. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, giving the opening testimony, argued otherwise, calling file-sharing networks a grave security risk to this nation. In reality, the hearing was nothing but one of several signs of a new hardball offensive against file-sharing for the same old reasons: protecting the business model of the record labels. MSNBC article here
I smell some of the companies behind RIAA bankrolling some of the members of the Congress. Bringing up stupid excuses like clumsy users might put national security at risk. Sensitive info shouldn't be accessed by clumsy users.
They still can't throw 60 million people in jail. Even if half of the file swappers take their bate and stop sharing, they still have 30 million people to throw in jail. That thought cracks me up! This also cracks me up: SO THE TRUTH COMES OUT! **** the artists, they don't care about the artists, they want people to have to use their new systems! That's all that matters! for RIAA! I'm in a jolly mood this morning, else I'd probably be screaming right about now
Quick thought, do you think there's a way someone could sue or try to push legislation that says the RIAA has to put something on each track that says the song is owned by the RIAA so that someone couldn't accidentally download or listen to a song by an RIAA artist? I don't think I have any songs by RIAA artists, and the RIAA doesn't have a consise listing on their site...
It seems logical enough to me. I mean, I sure don't want to be listening to RIAA crap anymore. I say screw all RIAA artists. And I say it knowing that to stand next to my statement, I won't be listening to anything but the earliest of albums by some of my favourite bands. But let's face it, all the new RIAA-induced crap is the same. And if the RIAA is going to try to put me through hell for it, they can go **** themselves, I don't want to listen to it. At the very least, I wonder if anyone has pled ignorance in a case. "I didn't know I had any RIAA labels on my hard drive... the RIAA never told me what was theirs."
There seems to be a distinct lack of talent with the current chart toppers. And they seem concerened about CD sales .... make some ****ing music and not noise. The CDs they turn out now, except maybe a couple of movie soundtracks, they would have to pay me to listen to them, let alone download them.
I totally agree. 99% of the stuff that's being released today is garbage. The last CD I bought was when Rush releaved Vapor Trails back in the spring of '02.
Is there any way to contact the RIAA? I went rummaging the site and found nothing but a series of articles that pissed me of... (as shown in the "Cost of a CD (RIAA bash)" thread Also, looking at their sales records, I think we're showing a growing urge for people to specifically not purchase from RIAA artists... linkage Nice how their CD sales increased by 25-50% every year until they killed napster... Who would a chap go to to try and get the RIAA to clearly label their music? State rep?
This is so typical pig headed stupidness that we have all come to expect from the RIAA. I was going to bash and rant about that statement but it's not even worth it.
While they cannot throw everyone in jail, fines will be sought. I do believe morals in this day and age are all gone.
