RIAA has reached an agreement to stop suing individuals who continue to share music illegally, but will cut your internet connection off instead.The decision was reached with ISP's to send a warning letter to individuals who have been suspected or caught by the RIAA, who will set up P2P listening posts to catch individuals and submit their information to their ISP. After 2 or 3 warnings, your ISP will slow your internet connection, and if a user continues to share music illegally, they will be shut off for good.
RIAA has sued more than 35,000 people since they began operations in 2003, which was very costly to the music industry and time consuming. Only a handful of ISP's have signed deals with the RIAA to help fight piracy, while others remain undecided or not interested.
This change to the RIAA, from the regular subpoena, settle or sue process, will make finding users through their IP address much easier and can bring more users down who continue to illegally download.
yes indeed. I don't know how many times I have moaned that the losers should go after the i.s.p's.
File sharers, music and movie sharers will end up being blacklisted by all i.s.p's, they are like insurance companies, eventually they will hear your name applying for a new i.s.p and they won't take you.
You should be able to track that on google. If you look into the top cases, you'll see that they were all called a mistrial, or settled out of court.
I'm sure it was on neowin when that single mother had to pay over $200,000...
It was reversed.
Judge Declares Mistrial in RIAA-Jammie Thomas Trial
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/09/n...or-publica.html
As long as they take music away from their shared folder it's inevitable.
I was just thinking about this issue. It is "guilty" without due process. I understand that I am being a little dramatic, but for many of us having net access is part of our job. What happens when the RIAA is wrong about the IP address, or the ISP is incorrect about the time frame and I didnt have the IP address when they said I did. A few screw ups and a person is without access.
I'd like to believe that a phone call to the ISP would clear things up, but it won't. They'll believe the RIAA regardless of the facts. I'm glad they stopped sueing... but this is still not the solution. The solution is for record labels to die and for artists to sell music directly. Record Labels = Evil bank loan (IMO)
Peace,
James
Duh...
Yeah, alright
QFT.
Speaking as someone who has an extensive collection of music, hates the RIAA and still hates Metallica (Napster, BAD!), I can say that buying [Edit: DRM free] music online is better in several respects. It's fast. I literally have an entire song in a few seconds. On a file sharing network. . the song can take hours to download if there aren't many sources. Typically for a decent quality file this is the case (Why do people share 128k CBR garbage?). I can't stand anything under 192 CBR. . which leads me to quality. Everything I download from Amazon is VBR averaging at around 256kbps. I love it. The price, while it could be cheaper, it doesn't break the bank for me to purchase a handful of songs for for a few bucks. For the convenience and quality, 89 or 99 cents is worth it to me.
Last edited by Divide Overflow on 20 Dec 2008 - 03:14
The only thing they wanna do is filling their pockets. Ask them how much they pay in due to the artists for their work.
If an artist tryes to start his own musiclabel he is emediatly bought up by the big musiccompanies, so they can fill their pockets, on the musicians b
another stupid move from RIAA.
What may in fact begin happening is that the people that download a LOT, you know, the bandwidth hogs, will probably be targeted if anything.
+1
It is not about "download" but "uploading", like the Canadian Laws
Technically no. They can still pin you in other countries for downloading, but it is illegal to share (upload) in Canada.
KILLPOST!!!No better alternatives about?
We need Free Wifi Network User/P2P-Based "Clouds" as soon as possible to protect freedom in the internet!
Whilst i would love this - Wifi pretty much anywhere at no cost , there will always be some prick who will abuse it and ruin it for others. aka torrenting obscene ammounts of stuff and making the connections unusable for everyone else for one example
(Wrongful claim of downloading anyone? And you know it's happened, and WILL happen)
a) No.
b) Hell no.
c) Go to hell.
d) How much are you going to pay me to do this?
If you answered (d), congratulations. An evil RIAA executive with a bag of cash will be headed your way soon, just as soon as he can figure out a way to make a profit out of giving you money.*
People, stop buying RIAA's crap products already: It's the only way to kill the RIAA.
*NOTE: May involve lawyers. Offer not available in states with sane copyright laws. Your experience may vary. See RIAA for details.
ISP detects users engaging in illegal filesharing
ISP cuts users off, no refunds because users violated EULA
ISP frees up bandwidth to sign more users.
Good users gets more bandwidth.
That's not a bad thing, that's a good thing.
Wait till someone masquerades with your IP and they come a knockin'
Users paid subscription for the month of PHONE SERVICE
PHONE COMPANY detects users engaging in [alleged/suspected/unproven] illegal ANYTHING
PHONE COMPANY cuts users off etc.
That's not a bad thing, that's a good thing.
REALLY? Do you see the distinctions? The similarities? The Internet is just a medium for the transportation of INFORMATION between two parties, just like the MAIL or TELEPHONE service.
In our society, "Illegal" actions are to be dealt with by DULY AUTHORIZED LAW ENFORCEMENT...period. And the medium cannot and should not be held accountable or responsible for the actions (pro or con) if the human beings using the neutral system.
The medium is NOT the message.
Last edited by excalpius on 20 Dec 2008 - 19:02
Read here: http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot....859189661357526
According to a report on Wired.com, the RIAA spokesman claims that the RIAA has not filed any new lawsuits "for months"; according to the Wall Street Journal report the RIAA stopped filing mass lawsuits "early this fall"; and the Associated Press was apparently told that the RIAA had stopped bringing new lawsuits in August.
Being very familiar with the RIAA's penchant for "misspeaking", even when under oath, I investigated the matter a bit, and learned that a large number of suits have been brought by the RIAA quite recently, one as recently as this Monday.
Sell your crap online and at a reasonable price, and just maybe, some people would quit file sharing.
Personally,
I can't remember the last time I bought a cd, but I DO NOT use any file sharing program, P2P or bittorrent. That is just toally unecessary!
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.