RIAA wants to seed P2P networks with viruses

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-05-06 12:14am

I suppose the RIAA would argue in that case that they'd be flooding the internet with high quality MP3s that would end up circulating on the P2P networks. But Christ, they're ALREADY flooding the market with high quality music files in the form of CDs. And a lot of people would pay $10 knowing they'd have unlimited access to a high-quality recording of any song they want (the RIAA inventory would include practically any song anyone's ever heard of recorded in the last 25 years), especially if they'd done this before they pissed so many people off that nobody cares that music piracy is, technically, stealing.

EmperorMing · Post by **EmperorMing** » 2003-05-06 12:18am

Alyeska wrote:I swear, the RIAA is fucking stupid. I am watching a program on CNBC right now and OMG they are saying the DUMBEST things ever.

The CEO of Gorkster (who was sued by the RIAA for pirating even though they did no such thing) stated that Napster at its height had 80 million users. If just half of them were willing to pay 10 dollars a month for unlimited access to the entire music collection from the combined RIAA inventories, that would be 400 MILLION dollars a month. Thats 4.8 billion dollars a year. When asked about this and the possibility of people paying 10 dollars a month for unlimited access to a massive collection, the RIAA's reply was "We don't reward pirating. That system just wouldn't work".

HELLO!!! FOUR POINT EIGHT BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR!!! That is REWARDING people who download? Shit, CD sales would hardly drop, they might even climb. This would give really freaking massive profits to the RIAA, and they fucking call it supporting pirating. OMFG the RIAA is stupid.

I agree 200% with this. The thing I see with the RIAA however, is the power trip they get for controlling all the music since most of it has been *signed* over to them by artists through the fucked up contracts they have to sign.

And not to mention the money they have been pulling in over the years...

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-05-06 12:38am

RedImperator wrote:I suppose the RIAA would argue in that case that they'd be flooding the internet with high quality MP3s that would end up circulating on the P2P networks. But Christ, they're ALREADY flooding the market with high quality music files in the form of CDs. And a lot of people would pay $10 knowing they'd have unlimited access to a high-quality recording of any song they want (the RIAA inventory would include practically any song anyone's ever heard of recorded in the last 25 years), especially if they'd done this before they pissed so many people off that nobody cares that music piracy is, technically, stealing.

I would gladly pay 120 dollars a year for unlimted access to all sorts of music. That is what I do not like about Kazaa is you can't always find what you want. Such a system by the RIAA would be so fucking cool. Right now they are lucky to get 20 dollars a year from me.

Johonebesus · Post by **Johonebesus** » 2003-05-06 03:02am

RedImperator wrote:You know what all this shit reminds me of? It reminds me of blacksmiths, buggy whip manufacturers, and stable operators banding together to pass laws requiring car drivers to send up rockets to warn oncoming traffic of their approach and forcing them to pull completely off the road and hide their cars when horses approached. They're fighting to save an industry that's getting pulverized by new technology. In my opinion, it's a hopeless fight--they're only waging a scorched-earth campaign against their own customers trying to slow down the inevitable collapse. Wait until the big media conglomerates start spinning off their music divisions to leave the record companies to live or die on their own. Buy a tub of popcorn and a subscription to the Wall Street Journal when that happens and watch these bastards get thrown out on their greedy, worthless asses.

It reminds me of when they sued to prevent the marketing of VCR's and audio cassette recorders. If I am not mistaken, some studios also tried to prevent T.V. from being developed, and I think RCA was sued, or at least harassed, by some early record labels.

The scary thing is this time they might win.

Post by **Edi** » 2003-05-06 03:14am

Darth Wong wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:Wont work in NZ to be extradited I would have to have broken US law in the US. In short, they can kiss my hairy white ass.
Don't be so sure. That's also true of Finland, and it didn't stop them there. You'd be surprised how easily a foreign government will buckle to US State Department pressure and sabre-rattling.

I seem to have missed this one... Could you elaborate on that, Mike? Because I can easily look up facts if I know what case we're talking about and what it involves.

Edi

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-05-06 03:15am

Johonebesus wrote:It reminds me of when they sued to prevent the marketing of VCR's and audio cassette recorders. If I am not mistaken, some studios also tried to prevent T.V. from being developed, and I think RCA was sued, or at least harassed, by some early record labels.

The scary thing is this time they might win.

The problem all the record labels face right now is that time is against them. The technology is advancing faster than they can handle, they can't outthink millions of people using P2P, and their industry is going to be in very bad trouble soon. I used to think it was just their turning out bad product that was doing it, but the numbers are pretty compelling--file sharing is hurting their sales at a time when they need every nickel they can get. The fact of the matter is, though, they've been skewered by technology, and the industry is going to eventually have to cease to exist as we've known it for the last century. Music is easy to produce, easy to record, easy to copy, and easy to transfer. When you needed to press records and distribute them across the country, a big industry with factories and executives and whatnot made sense. Now it doesn't, and frankly they can scream to Congress all they want--they can't save their industry. You'll still have to pay for music--pay to see a concert, and at least one person will have to pay to download a file off an artist's site or a commercial database of music files, but the billion dollar days are numbered. You can also say goodbye to instant millionaire overnight stars--without a huge industry to finance a promotion machine, word of mouth is what's going to get an artist radio play and sell concert tickets. You might never see something like Elvis or the Beatles again without the ability to mass market new artists, but you sure as fuck won't see overproduced, overhyped, undertalented shit like Britney Spears either.

All this isn't so bad. The problem is, as Darth Wong said, is that the industry can hurt a lot of people on its way down, and as I pointed out, its whining sets a bad precedent for the next time emerging technology threatens an established industry.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-05-06 05:36am

Darth Wong wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:Wont work in NZ to be extradited I would have to have broken US law in the US. In short, they can kiss my hairy white ass.
Don't be so sure. That's also true of Finland, and it didn't stop them there. You'd be surprised how easily a foreign government will buckle to US State Department pressure and sabre-rattling.

Over this kind of issue the NZ govt would tell he US to boil its head. In NZ NZ law is soverign.

Post by **Edi** » 2003-05-06 05:47am

Mike I would also add that you might be remembering a case of computer crime where the specific offense was intrusion into protected systems housed in the US, at least I think there was one of those a while back, and I don't remember anyone being extradited to the US. Prosecuted here, yes, but extradited, no. There are quite specific laws about extraditon here, and the grounds for extradition have some strict requirements. Over copyright issues like that, the US would get a big "fuck you" from us. Are you sure you aren't thinking of Norway and the DeCSS thing?

Edi

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-05-06 06:22am

Edi wrote:Mike I would also add that you might be remembering a case of computer crime where the specific offense was intrusion into protected systems housed in the US, at least I think there was one of those a while back, and I don't remember anyone being extradited to the US. Prosecuted here, yes, but extradited, no. There are quite specific laws about extraditon here, and the grounds for extradition have some strict requirements. Over copyright issues like that, the US would get a big "fuck you" from us. Are you sure you aren't thinking of Norway and the DeCSS thing?

Edi

Same in NZ, more or less. It would be the same in Aussie I should think. Here, if you commit a crime in NZ you must be tried, in NZ, under NZ law . No exceptions.