LimeWire sued by the RIAA

[Faux]

This reminds me of that FAITH+1 South Park episode where the cop explains what pirating does to the artists. It was pretty funny.

[zzxxccvv]

8-) *gos to C:Documents and settings,,Shared,Cuts everything,Pastes in my music,uninstalls limewire* 8-)

[FrankyBrown]

This reminds me of that FAITH+1 South Park episode where the cop explains what pirating does to the artists. It was pretty funny.

 

 

 

I was going to mention that but I forgot when I posted before :lol:

[assassin_696]

insane, i have a couple of articles here and here that you might find interesting. I'm not saying they solve everything but they show a different side to it.

 

 

 

My views: I download music, but I know that morally it's wrong, I know that artists are being cut out of cd sales by file sharing, but frankly, the day that individual artists start sueing users for file sharing, then i'll stop.

 

 

 

I get the feeling the RIAA isn't doing all this suing left right and centre for the music, but for the money. They're just milking this current cash cow with as little (actually less) moral thought for the young kids they give hefty payments than as the P2P users gave for music sharing. I don't see why I should support or back down to the RIAA, when they are just a bunch of greedy bullies, who say that they are "doing it for the music industry". That's rubbish, the music isn't going to the artists, it's going to fund more lawsuits, and they admitted this, so where does it end?

 

 

 

The fact is, file sharers like music, they like the music that the artists produce, that's why they download the music. I personally love music, and will always support new artists, or buy the latest cd's that a band brings out, or even buy old ones, but I only spend so much of my time in a record store, I spend much more online so for me downloading is a more viable, and effective way to discover new music. I would not have spent nearly as much money on cd's as I would if i'd never downloaded.

 

 

 

The RIAA is missing out on a golden opportunity here. Personally if the file sharing applications offered a "license" to download and file share, be it for the whole network or a license for each artist, then i'd be interested. I want to support the artists, but I want to discover new music easily and cheaply as well.

 

 

 

Basically, the RIAA need to look at file sharing and realise that it is the future, and they need to find a way to tap into this future, not by suing music lovers, but by using the networks as a whole to their advantage.

 

 

 

I want to get sued about as much as anyone, but if I do then I will hold my head up high, accept the consequences of my actions, and will honestly be able to say "I did it for the music", which is more than the RIAA can.

[How2PK]

Hehe. Everybody is doing something that they KNEW wasn't alowed. And now that some action is taken for it they're all crying about the RIAA doing stuff wrong and not being fair. You guys are cute. :)

[slushee]

there's other ways then torrenting to

 

you can just rip from a cd and upload to the net

[Anesthesia]

I was merely pointing out that I enjoyed the fact that the end result is that recording artists are being stood up for, however indirect it may be.

 

 

 

As far as I know there's no evidence that the RIAA are giving any of this money to artists.

 

 

 

Can you back this up with a shred of real evidence?

 

This is a paper written by a professor at a University in Dallas - inside the paper there are a few graphs, all that show a large decrease in album sales first starting in 1999; the first year that P2P became extremely popular.

 

 

 

London, 14 April, 2000 - Global music sales in 1999 grew by 1.5% in constant dollar value to US$38.5 billion, helped by sustained strength of demand in the USA and by healthy advances in South East Asia, Scandinavia, parts of Eastern Europe and Australasia.

 

 

 

In the United States , the world's largest and most dynamic music market, CD sales were up by more than 10%, taking total music sales dollar growth to 19% over the past two years. At the same time there were strong indications of rapid growth in sales of internet-delivered music in 1999. The number of consumers who used the internet to buy music rose to 2.4%, up from 1.1% the previous year, according to USA consumer research.

 

 

 

^^ And that's from a recording industry source.

 

 

 

NEW YORK, July 6 (UPI) -- Downloaded music sales are skyrocketing with 281 million individual tracks sold online in the first 26 weeks of 2006, said Nielsen SoundScan in New York.

 

 

 

Online sales of individual songs were up 77 percent over last year, Nielsen reported.

 

 

 

There was a slump in the period between then and 2004 which has ended:

 

 

 

Music sales in the US rose by more than 9% in the first three months of 2004 compared with the same period last year - signalling an end to a four-year dip.

 

 

 

Here[/url]":249cqz3i]Total music unit sales in the U.S. increased 19.5 percent to 817 million units in 2004.

 

 

 

None of this shows that piracy is okay, however it does show that this isn't the death of the recording industry as the RIAA would like you to think.

[insane]

Thanks for the articles all! I just wanted to see people actually showing proof instead of making possibly false blanket statements.

 

 

 

I will hold my head up high, accept the consequences of my actions, and will honestly be able to say "I did it for the music", which is more than the RIAA can.

 

 

 

This is an interesting statement, and I almost agreed with it. Until I realized that if you really were "doing it for the music", you would have financially supported the artists. Music doesn't exist without the people that make it.

 

 

 

 

 

As far as I know there's no evidence that the RIAA are giving any of this money to artists.

 

 

 

Yea, that's why I said it was indirect. Even if they aren't getting money, people that are stealing from the artists are being made example of. Like I said, it's really indirect. Possibly something only I take pleasure in.

[Anesthesia]

Whilst it is true that this may act as a deterrent, it is kind of stupid/wrong for the RIAA to be suing people in the name of the artists they represent but keeping the money for themselves, not passing it on to the people they are suing in the name of. I'll bet the money just goes towards funding more lawsuits.

[Nenga]

People that use limewire get the music fron somewhere. It's a filesharing network not a filegiving network ppl still buy the cds just not as many as the RIAA would like cuz it's less money for them.

[imaleber]

Anyone know the policies here in Australia? I just deleted all my dled songs etc. Am i right now or do i need to remove LimeWire from comp as well?

 

 

 

thanks

[How2PK]

I think it would be best to destroy your computer. So that all traces are erased. You might face a couple of years when they find out you removed those tracks and the program to avoid jail. And your Runescape account will get banned of course.

[Oy_the_Great]

I think it would be best to destroy your computer. So that all traces are erased. You might face a couple of years when they find out you removed those tracks and the program to avoid jail. And your Runescape account will get banned of course.

 

 

 

Actually it's not that funny. A friend of mine got feed 20,000ÃÆââââ¬Ã¡Ãâì for copying music and selling the CDs he burned. But he was known as the Don of downloading and copying music, games and software throughout our region. I myself still have a bunch of CDs of his.

 

 

 

Oh, the result: his father is a high ranked cop, so no harm done eventually :-$

[imaleber]

Anyone know the policies here in Australia? I just deleted all my dled songs etc. Am i right now or do i need to remove LimeWire from comp as well?

 

 

 

thanks

 

 

 

im actually being serious..

[____]

Actually it's not that funny. A friend of mine got feed 20,000ÃÆââââ¬Ã¡Ãâì for copying music and selling the CDs he burned. But he was known as the Don of downloading and copying music, games and software throughout our region. I myself still have a bunch of CDs of his.

 

 

 

Oh, the result: his father is a high ranked cop, so no harm done eventually :-$

I actually find that funny.

 

 

 

One of my mates got caught running a network with other 180TB of pirated music and movies. And that was on one of the smallest servers they used. He ended up with a pathetically small fine and 3 years probation.

 

 

 

Reason: Bloody good lawyer and him knowing more than the police's computer crimes division.

[Anesthesia]

A friend of mine got feed 20,000ÃÆââââ¬Ã¡Ãâì for copying music and selling the CDs he burned.

 

 

 

That is a different thing altogether. What your friend was doing was profiting off the work of another, selling copyrighted material is a crime just about everywhere. This distinguishes it from downloading/sharing songs for free because they are not turning a profit.

[How2PK]

Actually it's not that funny. A friend of mine got feed 20,000ÃÆââââ¬Ã¡Ãâì for copying music and selling the CDs he burned. But he was known as the Don of downloading and copying music, games and software throughout our region. I myself still have a bunch of CDs of his.

 

 

 

Oh, the result: his father is a high ranked cop, so no harm done eventually :-$

 

 

 

He got what he deserved. Too bad he didn't have to pay the fee.

[RaggyTramp1]

static ip FTW!. but i dont use lmewire.

[____]

static ip FTW!. but i dont use lmewire.

More like dynamic IP ftw, specially when using p2p. The only time static is of any real value is when you've got ip-bound access to servers.

 

 

 

it's easier to trace, especially if you haven't taken steps to protect yourself (and this is a case of firewalls mean nothing). If you know how to erase digital footprints, you're golden. Takes someone to dob you in to be caught.

[insane]

Any more flaming and this gets locked.

[MyPurpleCrayon]

Until I realized that if you really were "doing it for the music", you would have financially supported the artists. Music doesn't exist without the people that make it.

 

 

 

I understand what you're saying here, but at the same time I disagree a little bit.

 

 

 

You don't have to have loads of money to make music. I have never seen a Ska band that cares about whether or not you buy their records. Reel Big Fish says numorous times at their concerts, "You can buy our CD and have a genuine copy, or you can just go download it or steal it from your friend!"

 

 

 

Tomas Kalnoky (lead singer for Streetlight Manifesto, ex-lead singer for Catch 22) says in an interview at the end of one of his CD's, "I don't care if a single record is sold, it's just something that we wanted to do."

 

 

 

It's not like you have to buy music to support music. It doesn't work like that. Music isn't about getting people to buy it, it's about making people happy.

[LP]

Kurt cobain/Nirvana didnt care about the money.

 

 

 

They just wanted to get out there and do shows, and spread their music.

[Nenga]

Right thats what i was tring to say earlier, some artists don't mind if you buy the cds or not, it's somthing they wanna do. The RIAA want's more money if every1 downloads the cd no more money for them,

 

 

 

so there just greedy little...i wont go any firther. (don't coment on my spelling i know it sucks)

[assassin_696]

Thanks for the articles all! I just wanted to see people actually showing proof instead of making possibly false blanket statements.

 

 

 

I will hold my head up high, accept the consequences of my actions, and will honestly be able to say "I did it for the music", which is more than the RIAA can.

 

 

 

This is an interesting statement, and I almost agreed with it. Until I realized that if you really were "doing it for the music", you would have financially supported the artists. Music doesn't exist without the people that make it.

 

 

 

 

Believe me I see your point here, but in my case for nearly every artist that I might have downloaded music for, i will have bought a cd from. I would never have bought that cd if i hadn't been able to download and sample their music in the first place.

 

 

 

A lot of my friends look to me as a source for good music. If i've recently "discovered" a new artist via downloading then i'll recommend it to them. Whether or not they then go out and buy the artists cd or download it is up to them of course, but I know some who will buy cd's. Whilst I know that this doesn't justify my actions, it's just an interesting point where it's not all just downloading for free, money has been spent that wouldn't have been spent otherwise.

 

 

 

I'll bet the money just goes towards funding more lawsuits.

 

 

 

They actually admitted to this.

 

 

 

It's not like you have to buy music to support music. It doesn't work like that. Music isn't about getting people to buy it, it's about making people happy.

 

 

 

Which goes back to my point of, if the artists start whining about lost record sales and filing lawsuits, and let's face it, with the money some of them make they can easily do this; then I might think twice about downloading. But as it stands the industry bigwigs who want more money, not the artists. They're out having a good time spreading their music.

[Nenga]

 

It's not like you have to buy music to support music. It doesn't work like that. Music isn't about getting people to buy it, it's about making people happy.

 

 

 

 

 

Which goes back to my point of, if the artists start whining about lost record sales and filing lawsuits, and let's face it, with the money some of them make they can easily do this; then I might think twice about downloading. But as it stands the industry bigwigs who want more money, not the artists. They're out having a good time spreading their music

 

 

 

Right thats just more proof that the artists don't care if you buy there cd or not. If they did you think they would come out by now.