|
||||||
|
Title: RIAA Hit list Post by Mark C on Jul 25th, 2003, 8:28pm It only takes a court clerks signature for the RIAA to force a subponea (http://www.tba.org/LawBytes/T9_1807.html) on your ISP! NOT a Judge. They don't even need to know your NAME! " April 24, 2003. The U.S. District Court (DC) issued an order [3 pages in PDF] and opinion [58 pages in PDF] in RIAA v. Verizon, holding that the issuance of a subpoena by a Clerk of the District Court pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 512(h) to obtain the identity of an anonymous peer to peer infringer from his ISP does not violate either the First Amendment of the Constitution, or the justiciability requirements of Article III. The District Court also denied Verizon's motion for stay pending appeal, but granted a 14 day stay, to enable Verizon to seek a stay from the Appeals Court." http://www.techlawjournal.com/topstories/2003/20030424.asp Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. U.S. Constitution Bill of Rights (http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html) WTF!? |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by catlind on Jul 25th, 2003, 8:30pm The really sad part is that's only the public stuff. Only the stuff we know about. Some things I know are downright terrifying. Cat |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by FrankF on Jul 25th, 2003, 8:42pm File "sharing" or "trading" or whatever cute euphemisms people want to call it is still STEALING an is illegal. And most people who do it know that, but do it because they think they won't be caught... and rationalize that it is ok because... (fill in the blank reason why it is ok to steal). No sympathy here. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by catlind on Jul 25th, 2003, 8:55pm Speeding is illegal too. Do you ever do that Frank? |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by Mark C on Jul 25th, 2003, 8:58pm I agree Frank.....however eroding the Constitution to placate an industry who cannot compete in todays market......well it sets a terrifing precident. I am more than willing to pay for music I download. If Sony, who owns the rights to millions of songs (as well as making millions of blank cds and computers with burners) would make their music archive avaliable to me I would pay. It is a business model problem on the record industry's side. Besides, P2P is not ever going away. There are estimates that as many as 60 MILLION people use P2P. Remember when it was VCR's that were going to ruin the movie industry? Didn't happen..as a matter of fact Hollywod makes plenty of cash releasing content direct to video now. Question? Is it stealing that I downloaded Dark Side of The Moon because the previous 3 copys of the LP (vinyl) have wore out? Should I be reimbursed for the cost of having to replace the medium the copyrighted material was stored/ sold on because it only lasts a finite number of plays? Did I pay for the vinyl or the rights to listen to the music? Hmmmmmmmm?? Stealing is wrong. Not abiding by the founding fathers ideas is not a good idea either. "Reasonable search and seizure" was not a suggestion. Follow the law...on BOTH sides. Talk amoungst yourselves! Mark |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by Charlie on Jul 25th, 2003, 9:00pm Maybe it's like the case where Judge Holmes, I think, said we have free speech but that doesn't allow one to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by fubar on Jul 25th, 2003, 9:23pm Frank, I don't think anybody is asking for sympathy for the file traders/thieves. The fuss is about something far more important than protecting some industry that has been slow to evolve with technology. Quote:
The point is, no matter what 'good' motivates you to advocate this trespass against our essential liberties, it is wrong at the most fundemental level. Am I the only Republican who can see the difference? -Fu |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by FrankF on Jul 25th, 2003, 9:26pm on 07/25/03 at 20:55:13, catlind wrote:
California law says not to drive faster than what is safe given the the present road conditions, regardless of the speed limit. It also says to "go with the flow". It is illegal to drive so slow as to impede the normal or reasonable flow of traffic. If every other car on the freeway is driving 70mph (5 miles over the limit), then you should also drive 70mph... otherwise you are a traffic hazard. Given these are the laws in California, no I am not speeding. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by FrankF on Jul 25th, 2003, 9:34pm on 07/25/03 at 20:58:23, Mark C wrote:
No, that's different. You paid for the music and the medium that it was recorded on. Actually it's more complicated than that... whether you can legally make a backup copy or replacement copy depends on what the law was at the time you bought it. Dark Side of the Moon was 1973 I believe. For years in California, there was a statute of limitations on how many years a person had to claim that they were sexually molested. Then in 1994, California passed a law that removed the statute of limitations. Molestors were being arrested and convicted for crimes 20,30,40 years old. Then the courts decided that law was unconstitutional. So all of those child molestors are running the streets again. Quote:
No. Not the recording company's fault you played it too many times. Quote:
You paid for both. -------------------- But most people downloading dozens or hundred of songs per week never bought it, and don't ever intend to. They're downloading free music with the knowledge that it is illegal, because (up until now) the chances of getting caught were slim. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by Charlie on Jul 25th, 2003, 9:41pm Forgot that one Frank. Franklin's good enough for me Charlie |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by fubar on Jul 25th, 2003, 10:42pm Frank, In the molestation case, you can point out the evil that was perpetrated on us by the blind adherence to constitutional law, but you can't tell me the judges were wrong to decide it that way. There was no question that law was, while well-intentioned, not allowable under our constitution. I am perplexed by people (like you) that can't understand that *somebody* has to defend our freedoms. What looks like innocent ‘exceptions’ are in fact precedent-setting laws that facilitate the unexpected and intolerable erosions of liberties. I, for one, am glad that people are looking out to defend our liberties, even if it means a few scumbags will get away with shit. Yes, there is a part of me that wants to pass a law for instant execution for child molesters, but I know this would circumvent due process, and due process is there for a reason. That’s what makes this a free country, our diligence. -Fu |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by FrankF on Jul 25th, 2003, 11:09pm Fubar, I completely agree with what you said. Except you misunderstood my post. I just used the molestor law example to point out to Mark that whether it is legal or illegal to make backup copies of music that he bought and paid for, should depend on the law that was in effect at the time that he bought the music... not a law that was passed yesterday, or tomorrow's law. If he bought Dark Side of the Moon in 1973 (as I did) I doubt there was much of any law at the time that dealt with pirating vinyl records. Nobody did it (certainly not on the massive scale that is seen today). Hey Mark. Want to buy a Dark Side of the Moon, Meddle, Uma Guma, or Wish You Were Here vinyl album still in excellent condition? I have boxes of albums that haven't been touched in 20 years. ;D |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by Kirk on Jul 26th, 2003, 12:03am Abrogating the fourth amendment disturbs me more than some file swappers. |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by Kirk on Jul 26th, 2003, 6:38am Now that I'm done with my 4 AM dance with the beast. Heres an article over at Vulture Central on the ongoing technology problems the RIAA has been having with thier web site. http://www.theregister.com/content/6/31983.html Please enjoy your day. TTFN |
||||||
|
Title: Re: RIAA Hit list Post by Mark C on Jul 26th, 2003, 11:21am Thanks Frank, I still have around 600 in pristine condition. Even have several Elvis on the Sun label...UNOPENED! I miss vinyl....played it too much! Impossible! ;D Groving to the tunes! Mark |
||||||
|
Clusterheadaches.com Message Board » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1! YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved. |