Subscribe by EmailAccused music pirate turns the tables on the RIAA
April 28, 2008 by Mark O'Neill |By Mark O’Neill
I think I have just found my new hero. A 45 year-old single mother accused of stealing music on the internet (subsequently sued by the RIAA and vindicated) has now decided to turn the tables against her former accusers—by suing THEM for $5 million, citing conspiracy and illegal investigative practices.
Tanya Andersen alleges the way the RIAA goes pursuing people is illegal, that the way they pressurize and threaten people to pay huge out-of-court settlements without first having to prove any wrongdoing is also illegal and investigative companies hired by record companies routinely violate people’s privacy by snooping through computers and private files without legal permission. Andersen herself alleges that she was threatened with “financial ruin” unless she immediately paid $5000.
The RIAA (of course) says that Andersen’s claims are false, that all they are doing is aggressively taking steps to protect their intellectual property. So who cares if a few innocent victims get caught in the crossfire, right? They’ve got all those billions of dollars to protect.
[Via BusinessWeek]
- RIAA Gobbles settlement fines, kills infants
- Back up your music CD’s with CDex
- RIAA to Hunt CD Rippers Next?
- Apple Discovers Buying > Renting
heheh oh yeah superman as a super hero ? Nevermind that! I love that women ! lol hahahahaha sweeet !
ABOUT TIME !!!
[...] Accused music pirate turns the tables on the RIAA You go, girl! (tags: ip riaa) [...]
With the amount of piracy out there, what is the RIAA doing going after some lady that may have downloaded 2-3 ABBA songs? Looks like they have no idea who to go after so they throw all their money behind attacking defenseless people.
No, they don’t go after defenseless people because they don’t know who to target - they go after them because they’ll capitulate and provide the momentum of another civil-suit victory to the RIAA’s inquisition.
Comment by Koka Sexton
“after some lady that may have downloaded 2-3 ABBA songs?”
You show your ignorance sir, by presuming the lady doesn’t know anything about music because she is 45 years old. I think your nappy is needing changed.
[...] victims get caught in the crossfire, right? Theyve got all those billions of dollars to protect. Accused music pirate turns the tables on the RIAAWhile I support the RIAA in protecting copyright, the actual actions are often well beyond rational [...]
Has anyone ever looked into who gets that money once they do “aggressively protect their property”. The artists certainly don’t. Of course the news outlets never report this…Why? Because they are owned by the record labels.
I’ll tell you what, if Mick Jagger ever shows up at my door in order to aggressively protect his property he is getting his arse beat.
Major thumbs up to this lady!!! I hope that she gets her 5 million!!!
Online piracy had generated the most self-deluding, byzantine reasons to try to rationalize taking something everyone knows perfectly well is intended properly for sale. You don’t help an artist by stealing their stuff, either. The way you put any industry “in it’s place” is to stop buying their stuff, but to ransack a 50 year artists catalog and take it all just because you can is far worse than anything the labels have ever done. Pirates have no courage and do this under cloak of the network. At least the labels show the balls to take it publicly to the courts. The labels have gotten a handful of lawsuits wrong of the tens of thousand they’ve filed, but their choice was to watch their IP being stolen or to try to stop it. There is ample opportunity to DL legally now at a myriad of sites, but piracy continues because the so-called “fans’ have even less ethics than the industry. I’m no fan of the labels, but people who illegally download are just rubbish, and get what they deserve. I’m a digital artist, and I’m on the side of the industry until pirates show some morals.
I can fully understand where you are coming from Sam, however, most of the sites you mention are rediculously expensive, especially for what I am getting. That iTunes, 70p (about$0.99) for a single track is extortionate to say that very little of this money actually goes to the artist. I would be quite willing to play a smaller amount of money directly to the band or singer. Not to mention the lack of artists such services provide — but maybe I have strange tastes — or the lack of album art or physical CD.
Maybe we are in the wrong but we are the majority and we are anonymous. We like our Blue Man Group Discograhpies and we like them affordable.
“Maybe we are in the wrong but we are the majority and we are anonymous.”
Precisely, Jimmy. And wrong eventually doesn’t prevail. Anyone who thinks the world’s governments are going to let a group of wrongdoer’s compromise the future of online sale and distribution needs to wake-up. When the network is bogged down with law enforcement, filters, penalties and fines, you’ll have no one to point to but yourselves. My work has been ripped off, reused, traded around and essentially unpaid for years and I’m sick of it. If this were YOUR paycheck you’d likely feel the same but its not so you don’t. By your ethics, Jimmy, a Ferrari costs too much and not enough goes to the designer, so you are entitled to steal it.
Such bullshit, just like all the rest. We’ll see how this turns out. You are likely to nearly ruin this once very-cool, once very-free network. And all because you won’t pay for what you take. A buck a song is nothing, so Thanks, Jimmy. Thanks a lot.
I get your point, Sam. Because the most moral thing to do, if someone objects to the way record companies do business, is to boycott the music industry by not buying or downloading anything. Music, after all, is entertainment and not a necessity, and there are plenty of free radio stations to listen to. There really isn’t much, besides anarchist arguments but most people aren’t anarchists, that can justify stealing music.
However, in your haste to slam the pirates, you’re overlooking the fact that RIAA isn’t exactly playing legal and moral either. If someone steals something from me, you wouldn’t expect that to give me the right to bully, intimidate, and invade the privacy of the thief. And the same holds true of companies, ideally. Though they often bully individuals because they can. They hold more power. This happens very often, unfortunately. Aren’t you horrified at the ease, and the illegality, with which big companies invade privacy and step over people’s lives? What’s moral about that? This woman’s counter lawsuit is perfectly justified, and I hope she wins.
To Sam I am;
Jimmy is wrong, but you are not right. Law Enforcement does care one whit about you. They are only interested in Jimmy having a jacket and RIAA is only interested in their profits.
I do not steal music and I make sure that the music my kids have on their electronics is paid for. Here is my beef - Sam I am, When I get into my Ford/Lincoln/Chevy and start the engine I don’t have to send the company that made it another buck just so that I can drive up the street to get a loaf of bread, and if I want to take my kids along for the ride I don’t have to pay extra because I only bought one instance of the Ford/Lincoln/Chevy.
If I buy a song that copy will go onto every music box I own with a backup copy stashed away for good measure.
I think you ought to be paid for your work and guys like Jimmy should if proved a thief should have to pay up and face charges like any other common thief does. But you or the RIAA are not going to tell me that once I buy a copy of your song that I cannot copy that song and take it along for the ride in my Ford/Lincoln/Chevy.
vaago is right, but doesn’t go far enough. If I buy a car at a dealer and the paint is nice, and the tires are nice but the engine and transmission and air conditioner are junk, I can take that car back and get one where everything is satisfactory. I buy a $12.95 CD for two good songs and eight junk songs - I’m stuck with that CD, can’t trade it in for a CD with 10 good songs, and can’t get a refund for the difference. So, instead of .99 per song, I’m paying $6.44 per song, plus tax, plus gas to and from the store. All because I was lured in by the two good songs that play continuously on the radio.
That analogy doesn’t hold at all. You can return the CD if those eight songs did not play due to some kind of defect, but you can’t return it just because you don’t like the songs, just like you’d probably have a tough time returning a car just because you decided you didn’t like it after all. There’s a difference between not liking something, and that something being broken.
First off, the worlds governments have no choice but to let piracy continue.
“When the network is bogged down with law enforcement, filters, penalties and fines, you’ll have no one to point to but yourselves.”
Do you honestly think that there is no way around filters, and no way past law enforcement? The best pirates in the world do not work in law enforcement, they are on our side. As security gets tougher on this sort of thing, the techniques for bypassing that security evolve. There will never be a way to completely secure media, because doing in doing so you also remove the access to it.
Also, as for the whole paycheck thing. If you were any good at what you do, you would be working for a label who paid you regardless of who was stealing your productions off some server.
Furthermore, you say that $0.99 per song is nothing. Would you mind sending me a mil so I can rightfully pay for the terabyte of media I have? How about sending me a hundred mil so I can rightfully pay for all the media my friends and I own? I didn’t think so. the fact of the matter is, $1 a song is rediculous, and no one in their right mind would be willing to pay that for anything over a few songs. When you want a library collection with over 100k songs, you simply can’t afford to pay for it all.
Also this makes me question the argument of what actually constitutes piracy. If I were to hear a song on the radio and record it onto a cassette, am I pirating that song? Furthermore, the methods used by RIAA for finding those who have illegally downloaded media are questionable at best. You promote the legal system (which in itself is a complete mockery of justice), and at the same time are promoting the violation of our right to privacy.
My suggestion would be to either get good at what you do so that you may work without fear of hunger, or to find a different career.
If I did this, and won… I would personally mail the settlement amounts back to every person the RIAA fucked over.
Imagine the “Ha Ha Fuckers” message that would send
[...] Tanya! Go, Tanya! From here: Accused music pirate turns the tables on the RIAA I think I have just found my new hero. A 45 year-old single mother accused of stealing music on the [...]
“And wrong eventually doesn’t prevail.”
What planet do you live on? I’d love to move there.
“My work has been ripped off, reused, traded around and essentially unpaid for years and I’m sick of it. ”
Boo Hoo. Get a real job. I give my work away because art is about self expression. Making a dime from doing what you love is a privilege not a right. Accept donations and quit your whining.
You can’t own data, you didn’t invent a shred of your work. At best all art is a remix of prior art.
You’ll deserve cash when you invent something of value like a functional synthetic heart or a way to turn plutonium into wheat.
Until then, grow some perspective. 30,000 people died of malnutrition today you spoiled western child.
“Making a dime from doing what you love is a privilege not a right.”
… and the Darwin Award goes too …
To Brandon Sergent; I wonder, could you step down off of your lofty steed so the rest of us could get a look at you shining countenance?
I am truly sorry for the evil in this world but please, point your gun at Monsanto, I believe if you could find an honest magistrate you could get a conviction for the hunger in the world; besides, in western do you mean Occidental versus oriental? I’ll wager you didn’t go to bed hungry.
It takes as much practice and effort to be a truly good artist as it does any other endeavor. You need to believe in yourself and put that same effort that is required to invent an artificial heart into your art and you too will one day say “This is my property, please do not steal it.”
Music may be a remix of the same notes in different ways but there are voices that when time finally robs us of them… its all a question of balance my friend.
well 30,000 people died of malnutrition. Where is this, where have they not learned if they can’t take care of their children that they shouldn’t reproduce. That if they can’t feed themselves learn to, there are plenty of wild animals in the world even for homeless people of major cities. Learn to build traps, learn to hunt, if you die from not having anything to eat then you are being eliminated due to natural selection, or your parents should have known better then to reproduce.
So stop supporting the ignorant masses, and unlike you I don’t make any assumptions of your origins, I only assume you are not as intelligent as you try to sound, that you do not look at a situation from all sides.
Maybe people should learn to take care of themselves and not rely on others.
There are proto-fascists everywhere, arent’ there? What a moron! You are proof of the randomness of the survival of one sperm out of billions. Too bad yer pa didn’t use a condom, eh?
He is advocating social Darwinism, which is basically survival of the fittest applied to society. And ideally, that’s how society should work, why the fuck should I, a well standing citizen, have to pay for food for some poor bastard who can’t keep a job and spends all the money he has on booze? If you can’t support yourself you should not expect anyone else to support you after you grow up. If you do you are nothing but a leech on society and completely worthless.
And there’s no need to stoop to personal attacks. And I’d say he’s a prime example of how society should be, everyone looking out for themselves and others second.
That woman deserves a medal! She is a total hero and we all ought to support her efforts by contributing to a legal fund for her. This is a case the ACLU ought to take on (a bit more important than defending skinheads’ right to paint swastikas on synagogues, don’t you think?
Here’s my breakdown…
Music is created by an artist, usually with the aim to have people listen, and enjoy their art (the music). Making money from your art, should not be your top priority, then you are not really an artist anymore, you are just a greedy bastard!
Art is meant to be appreciated, and in the recording industry, is the music itself not considered art? It’s the same principal, as a gallery telling people “you can’t look at these pieces, because you haven’t paid enough to see them” that would be ludicrous!
I do not mean to flame anyone, nor start an argument, however, I believe this woman is truly justified in her argument, and hopefully will win her case. It’s time the true artists begin to speak out, and let the world know, that they want their art to be appreciated, no matter what it is.
Those are my 2 cents
Oh, and as for the person who was unable to find where 30,000 people died from malnutrition, take a look all around here, United States, Canada, England, China, Russia, everywhere, there is malnutrition all over the world, it’s happening everywhere!
Also, one final thing, if you believe that people who are malnourished should learn to hunt, and should stop reproducing, then you are truly blinded by popular media. You need to do some research, and understand the global situation around you. With global warming on the rise (there’s an argument waiting to happen) and many other factors coming into play (politics, war, etc) there is simply not the same opportunity to hunt, or grow crops. Take a trip one day in your life to somewhere such a Malawi or Somalia, where the GDP Per Captia is only $600!
Anyway, back to the issue at hand… You Go Girl! Teach the RIAA a lesson they need to learn!
The birds don’t get paid when they sing, evertone that hears it gets too for free. Just because someone wants to sing or play in a band, or even a sporting event WHY SHOULD WE HAVE TO PAY TO WATCH THEM. IF THEY DON’T LIKE IT QUIT AND GET A REAL JOB WHERE YOU EARN YOUR MONEY.
Get a real job? Only is America… Can’t even get affordable healthcare there so why should you care about piracy?
So the same goes for books and paintings and movies? These can all be considered artistic expression, but you did not create that. As such, you have no right to tell the artist what they can do with it. Without the artist’s valuable input, these creations never would have come into being. So, ultimately, the responsibility of these is in the artist’s hands or they passed ownership to.
The only solid difference between something like a movie or album, and a physical item such as a CPU or MP3 Player is that one is easily reproducable and the other is not. I’m sure people would pirate CPU’s and MP3 Players if they really could. You might argue it’s not the same, but really how is that? All of these people are trying to create a product to be sold for a living. Even though these items are so easily replicated it does not mean it’s right to distribute them without the author’s permission. The author didn’t tell you you could. This is what we call “intellectual property”. It’s something immaterial and easily reproducable, yet it still represents the product of one’s skill, accrued knowledge, and man hours. Therefore it is still their PROPERTY. You don’t know how to make it, you don’t have the skills to make it, you didn’t put in the man hours to make it, and more importantly YOU DID NOT PRODUCE THE WORK. So you have no right to that property, other than what the artist/copyright holder has given you.
Taking that without payment or permission is stealing. Stealing is wrong. At least most pirates admit that by saying “If you enjoy this CD/movie/game, please purchase it to support the artist/developer.”
Invasion of people’s privacy to exercise their right to this intellectual property is also wrong by the RIAA. Bullying and threats on the street goes the same for a corporation or association. Just because they have more muscle does not mean they have the right to bully and threaten their consumers. And also offering tiny amounts of money to the people responsible for this artwork is shameful. Artists deserve full credit and royalties for their work. Without the artists there would be no record companies, and there would be no music. And not the other way around. The industry is too big for its boots. It needs to adapt to the artist’s needs and consumer’s needs.
I know a few artists personally who upload their music on Bit Torrent, with a text file giving contact information for downloaders to send them a cheque if they like their music. It’s really showing who we’re not happy with in this equation.
possession is 9/10 of the law.
“Was she going out looting, or accessing information that is readily available in her house?”
Neither. She was noticed, tracked, evidenced and accused “with cause” of looting copyrighted material that is readily available in her house. You can do lot’s of things “in your house” and it’s still a crime, people. For Christ’s sake, grow up. Take all you want. Pay the price they ask for all you take, or pass on it, that’s your choice.
You get the same deal at YOUR job. You get paid for what YOU do for a living, right? These so-called arguments that “support” illegal downloading and copyright infringement are getting old.
it’s not just music movies and bookz. games are moving from the pc to the proprietary consoles becuase so many of the game developers are being royally shafted by the very gamers who call themsleves Fans. P2P is destroying the gaming industry. What Pirates are doing is disgusting. PAY FOR THE GAMES OR SOON THERE BE LESS GAMES BEING MADE.
The intellectual property of all people is free game.
If you are are not savvy enough to secure it before releasing it to the entire populace of the world, then you must endure pirates who are savvy to intercept and procure it for their own use. If it is popular artistic content then the artist will benefit in many ways because of POPULARITY!
Like when a catch phrase comes into vogue.
Example: “Where’s the beef?” That’s not much of an intellectual property although Wendy’s might argue otherwise.
Next Example: “a most popular song or written story”
Gnarls Barkley or Led Zeppelin or Doctor Who.
If it is truly worthy of reckoning, then it will propagate and make much income for it’s authors and players.
Even dead popular artists are still making money: Elvis, Curt Cobain, Tupac Shakur.
If your product is popular you will make money according to it’s popularity, that’s how it always has been and always will be as long as people adapt to new art and technology.
GET GNU-LINUX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!!!
To Vaago:
“But you or the RIAA are not going to tell me that once I buy a copy of your song that I cannot copy that song and take it along for the ride in my Ford/Lincoln/Chevy.”
In fact, Vaago, you are entitled to multiple copies according to the drm agreement in your purchase document, (as from iTUNES, for instance) but only for you. You cannot give them away, you cannot sell them, you cannot perform them, you cannot distribute them in any way. That remains MY right as the creator and the artist, and you don’t purchase the music itself, you purchase the right to listen to it. Period. Maybe read up on your copyright law before you post.
Besides, the industry and the artists couldn’t give a damn is you make a copy here and there. That’s small change and fair publicity. But what they can and will stop with the courts assistance is one properly purchased copy uploaded to P2P and then 40 fucking million copies taken for free in the first weekend. THAT bullshit will end. Anybody who thinks they can’t filter THAT out is dreaming, but the courts take time and they should. You can speed on the highways, too, but eventually you are going to be fined and then lose your license. This is just getting started and technology is out ahead of the courts and law enforcement, but only for the moment. Every court case narrows down the angles. Taking without paying is inevitably going to be discredited. To those of us being stolen from for years, it’s been bullshit all along.
Robert said:
“The intellectual property of all people is free game.
If you are are not savvy enough to secure it before releasing it to the entire populace of the world, then you must endure pirate”
Robert, buddy, you sound like a moron, tonight. That’s like saying if your car or your house is burgled and all your stuff you’ve worked hard for is lost to burglary, it’s your fault.
It’s no wonder the courts are maginalizing doofs like you, y’know?
SAM I AM,
Get a new job.
If my house is burgled tonight, I will most likely kill the intruder.
Everything I have worked hard for is secure, including my intellectual property.
If I find something new on my PC and my www tonight you may be out of a job.
I am a native American.
And I know in my heart that land can not be owned unless it is bullied away from the surrounding inhabitants, and “INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY” is only as good as it’s popularity!
robbie, you “opine” about ownership of land, and your “knowledge” about intellectual property is blatantly incorrect. you should do more knowing with your _mind_ and less with other body parts
OK. Here is the deal… if you produce something for sale… art, music, a product, food, etc. Then it is for sale… The argument that a painting hangs so that everyone can see it is ludicrous. Just because a painting hangs in a gallery where you can see it, doesn’t mean that you can grab it and take it home. It belongs to someone, and to own it, you have to buy it.
I tell you what… next time you are at work and you have an idea that a co-worker steals, remember this thread… too bad for you! You make too much money already! Think of the starving people in other countries! Be glad you have a job!… etc. The point is, if it doesn’t belong to you, then you have to compensate someone for receiving it.
Believe me, I think that the recording industry makes too much money and at the same time admire what they built… I think that if you don’t, then you are simply jealous. Is it greedy? Yes. I have learned that most people that fight against greed are simply members of the “Have Not” crowd. I was there once too and felt the same way.
Get a job.
Get a life.
Pay for what you did not make and was not gifted to you.
Wake up.
Feel free to email me directly for a debate hedgieb@yahoo.com.
[...] Single mom flips the script and sues RIAA… Accused music pirate turns the tables on the RIAA–Geeks Are [...]
No matter how you put it, pirating music is wrong. It is stealing and there is no excuse for it. One of the comments listed above stated this same thing, but then states that one or two copies to friends is okay but 40 million is wrong. Please don’t contradict yourself - is is always wrong and is theft.
On the other hand, I do agree that $1 charged by Itunes is ridiculous. If I pay for that song, I should be able to put it on every device in my house. The problem is that I cannot. In our house we have a Sansa MP3 player, a Memorex MP3 Player, an IPod, and a Zune. If I pay for the song through ITunes, I cannot load it on any of my other player. If I pay for the song through Zune I can’t load on any other player.
I also don’t have a MP3 player in my car and I want to download a song and burn to a CD to listen in my car, but cannot because of “rights”.
The problem here is on both sides of the table, pirates who are freely distributing millions of copies of music without paying and the music industry raping its customers by making it impossible to utilize the music they have paid for legitimately. The music industry is perpetuating their own problem.
I say this woman is a hero for finally bringing to light that the pirates are not the only criminals.
Concubahr,
I agree with you 100%. It does frustrate me that I have paid for an item and cannot then use it on my iPod, or burn a CD… Even to the point that if I have bought a movie or even rented a movie, I should be able to watch it on whatever device I like. The problem is, dishonest folks (Pirates) have prevented us from having that latitude… one bad apple…
I blogged on this about a month ago. My conclusion:
The claim about illegal entry into hard drives won’t hold water. If dumbass P2P users share out their hard drives to the world, then the RIAA has just as much right to inventory your shared directory as anonymous users.
But if Anderson’s attorneys stick to the part about threats through the mail, they have a good chance to set a precedent. The RIAA has every right to pursue legal action against users that violate the copyright laws. But you are not allowed to intimidate and threaten anyone.
Has begun.
What the hell are you guys talking about. Who gives a fuck about internet piracy. Its fucking music. Its ment to be listened to. Quite being a bunch of captain America pussies and lighten up. Oh yeah music pirateers are real “evildoers”. You sound like George Bush. Go eat shit.
Love the shirt.
Jesus
the RIAA remind me the combine from hl2
their intentions seems to be great but the means are any thing but that
It doesn’t matter who this woman sues. The RIAA has paid enough money in campaign contributions and graft to get the government in its pocket, so she can never win her lawsuit. The government will make sure of that.
I have noticed something in almost all of the above comments. Many of you are copying statements made by other people, and using them to either support their own ideas or detract from the views of others.
I ask you all, Is it wrong for people to do this? By following the logic of some of the afore said statements isn’t this the same as stealing intelectual property and redistributing it without permission and without payment? Should we all start suing each other for stealing our intelectual property?
This is begining to head into an area that borders on infringement of basic freedoms that everyone should enjoy without it being taken away for lack of payment.
I agree that it is wrong to steal any type of media, that goes without question.
But to say that when you purchase music, that you are only purchasing the right to listen to it is a scarey idea.
I say this because if that is the true spirit of the law, then what is to stop the government from putting forth a law that says you not only have to purchase the right to listen, but that now you have to purchase the right to speak?
I know this right is guaranteed under the constitution, But aren’t we supposed to be protected from illeagal search and seizure also?.
The Riaa seems to be getting around this somehow. Unless, and I admit I do not know how they go about this, do they indeed go to a judge and are granted a warrant to search the suspected pirates media. Thats a lot of judges being asked to grant warrants to search the millions of suspected illeagal downloaders.
Where does Riaa get it’s info on who is being suspected of illeagal downloading?
Is it by way of the same p2p sites? Doesn’t that mean they are illeagally inspecting peoples media without their permission?
Has the country, meaning the U.S., begun selling away the rights of the people it is sworn to protect.
Is it true that we have the freedom of speech, but not the freedom to listen?
Sounds naive I know, But think about the consequences here.
In essence could you not construe the playing/reproduction of any media,for no matter what use, to be a freedom of expression/speech?
An example would be the playing of the national anthem, or the viewing of the country’s flag. Who owns the rights to these two particular pieces of media? Why are they significantly better than others?
Being a citizen, I know what they stand for and I respect them.
Will the day come when I cannot listen to my country’s national anthem because someone else owns the rights to it? Or is it that way already and I have just not been informed?
Think about the morals of being either pro or con to the problem here. Don’t be so quick to condemn each other over this. If this continues to escalate then one day soon we may no longer have the ability to argue about it, let alone listen to each other.
You can speak out all you want. But if people can’t afford to listen to you, then you are for all intents and purposes, Mute.
They’re artists aren’t they? They’re producing their art for art’s sake, not money correct? What happened to the starving artists? All the members of U2 are worth over $100 million each and still charge $400 for a concert ticket. Paul McCartney can afford a $50 million divorce settlement.
Haha, yeah, like I’m going to “buy” their albums, I’m poor enough and am not going to get any poorer by purchasing their “art”.
Call me Jean Valjean and let them eat cake.
I am an artist. If someone copies and distributes my work, I should thank them for appreciating my piece. The only thing I ask for is recognition, whether I get paid or not . This lady should win the case. It should be a matter of morality not of personal gain and greed. For those who say “How would you like it if someone steals your stuff?”, I reply “I don’t go into the record label HQ or vaults to steal the music in its physical form, so stealing is out of the question.”
I take music for free, I’ll admit. But the arguments that I have heard in support of this crime are really quite stupid. Everyone seems to be stepping around a very crucial point: if you didn’t buy it, it’s not yours. Regardless of the nefarious practices of its sellers, the “rediculous (sic)” cost, etc, it really just comes down to the fact that you don’t want to pay for it. It’s easy to get for free, so you take it.
Oh, and telling working artist who, just as a side note, work 10 times harder than your sorry ass, to get a “real” job shows a sincere lack of clear perspective; get your head out of your ass.
If you are taking music, don’t make lame excuses; just take it. You are a criminal. The fact that the RIAA may be criminal in practice as well does not absolve you. The law is behind them, not you. If you hate the law, work to get it changed. And don’t pretend that’s what you’re doing by anonymously ripping songs off from thousands of hard-working artists like a pansy little wanker; get your cause into the public ear. If you can’t do that, just continue to be a criminal and stop making excuses.
When it comes to downloading songs I feel the only victims are the record stores. Most of them are gone! I’ll miss the stores but won’t miss paying good money for something I may not like. MP3s have allowed me to review these songs before I pay for them. This means, if I like it, I buy it. I’ve always bought the albums I thought were worthy. I’m glad I no longer have to have blind faith in the artists. This promotes artists to make better music and less fillers. MP3s are the best thing to have happen to the recording industry. If the artist’s albums aren’t selling it’s not because people are downloading their music. It’s because they just suck. Yes, Darwinism.
Would you buy stock in a company you have no knowledge about? I think not. Same goes for music.
Cheers mates!