Music industry sues swappers

RIAA says 262 cases pursued for illegal distribution of copyrighted music; amnesty program offered.
September 8, 2003: 1:03 PM EDT

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - The U.S. recording industry launched an attack Monday against the illegal distribution of copyrighted music, announcing the filing of 262 lawsuits as a well as an amnesty program.

The Recording Industry Association of America said the civil suits were filed against individuals who had each distributed more than 1,000 copyrighted files.

RIAA also said it is initiating the amnesty program for those who admit to have illegally downloaded files but who pledge never to do it again.

"For those who want to wipe the slate clean and to avoid a potential lawsuit, this is the way to go," said Mitch Bainwol, RIAA chairman and CEO. "We want to send a strong message that the illegal distribution of copyrighted works has consequences, but if individuals are willing to step forward on their own, we want to go the extra step and extend them this option."

RIAA said that individuals caught distributing copyrighted files on popular file sharing sites Kazaa, Grokster, and Gnutella, as well as Imesh and Blubster, were targeted in the first round of lawsuits.

After months of posturing, the RIAA formally announced in June that it was planning on filing lawsuits against individuals that were found to have illegally downloaded copyrighted music.

A report by research firm NPD Group released last month showed that the number of homes illegally acquiring and swapping music files over the Net has started to slow, in part due to fear of litigation.

...
[This message was edited Mon Sep 8 11:00:29 PDT 2003 by IceNine]

261 music file swappers sued; amnesty program unveiled
By Jeordan Legon
CNN
Monday, September 8, 2003 Posted: 1:47 PM EDT (1747 GMT)


(CNN) -- The recording industry filed 261 lawsuits against individual Internet music file sharers Monday and announced an amnesty program for people who admit they illegally share music files across the Internet.

The federal lawsuits and amnesty program are the lastest moves by the Recording Industry Association of America in its fight against illegal trading of music files on the Internet, which record companies blame for declining sales.

Cary Sherman, president of the RIAA, said the civil lawsuits filed were against "major offenders" who made available an average of 1,000 copyrighted song files.

Sherman also announced the Clean Slate Program that grants amnesty to users who voluntarily identify themselves and promise not to share music on the Internet. The RIAA says it will not sue users who sign and have notarized a Clean Slate Program affidavit.

"We're willing to hold out our version of an olive branch," Sherman said.

"For those who want to wipe the slate clean and to avoid a potential lawsuit, this is the way to go," added Mitch Bainwol, RIAA Chairman and CEO. "We want to send a strong message that the illegal distribution of copyrighted works has consequences, but if individuals are willing to step forward on their own, we want to go the extra step and extend them this option."

The offer of amnesty will not apply to about 1,600 people targeted by copyright subpoenas from the RIAA. More information about RIAA's amnesty program is available at www.musicunited.org.

teller said:

IceNine said:

262. whoop-tee-friggin-do.

teller said:

just cuz it looked the next thing in the sequence

Please elaborate your gayness about this news, Icenine...

They have a case, but this sucks.

Alternatively, Apple's iTunes has now sold 10 MILLION songs since it launched.

http://www.eff.org/

Recording Industry Plans "Amnesty" for Music Sharers
"Stepping into the spotlight to admit your guilt is probably not a sensible course for most people sharing music files online, especially since the RIAA doesn't control many potential sources of lawsuits," says EFF Staff Attorney Wendy Seltzer.

Pacific Bell Sues Recording Industry for Customer Privacy
Electronic Frontier Foundation Supports ISP Resistance

File Sharers: See If the Recording Industry Is After You
Electronic Frontier Foundation Offers Subpoena Database


Just many of the articles you'll fin but this one you'll need if you were a Windows user with no clue...


How Not To Get Sued By The RIAA For File-Sharing
(And Other Ideas to Avoid Being Treated Like a Criminal):

http://eff.org/IP/P2P/how...etsued.php

deMatthijs said:

It makes me happy because they are going after those who believe that stealing is the best way to get music. I wouldn't agree with them if they were targeting those who have only downloaded a few files, as they very well might be "trying" before buying, but those who download thousands of songs are simply stealing and they should be dealt with as criminals.

In other excellent news, K++ released a new list of blocked IP addresses to keep nosy money hungry RIAA employees out of the general publics business...

All I know is that I've purchased quite a few CD's after sampling some songs from download.

EvilWhiteMale said:

Good, good... but you don't download thousands of songs, right?

One might argue that they aren't exactly suing their customers, since those people are of course not paying for what they are downloading.

However, in the current music business climate, after these people have been sued, can they afford to lose the 250-1000 future paying customers? Or all of those who will no longer buy music, just out of distaste for what the RIAA is doing, even if they've been acquiring music legally until now?

question: does a person who has people send him/her CDR's of music in the mail have a right to criticize music downloaders?

IceNine said:

That for one depends thoroughly on the content downloaded. One can download 'thousands
of songs', without harming anyone's wallet, even through unregulated file-swapping
services. That is solely a matter of the copyrights involved. And let us not
even start the amateur-recording discussion...

Besides, the RIAA keeps its methods and definitions vague, foremost because of
their legal grounds, which are around 90 years old. For instance, has anyone
spoken about the quality of the questionable downloads? Since when is the industry's
opinion that the CD is a far superior media than compressed computerfiles reviewed?

I have participated in a forum-discussion, a few years ago, in which I made strong
suggestions to learn from the historical mistakes. When casette-tapes were
introduced onto the mass-market, the industry feared en masse bootleggage of LP's.
They at first responded to this with trying to put it to an end in various ways, with
marginal effect. Then they got wise and heavily started investing in CD-technology.
They succeeded in fooling the general public into believing that this truly was a superior
way of experiencing the pleasures of music, and they saved their corporate buns.
More or less the same happened in the movie industry, when videotapes became available
to the public.

The technology has advanced beyond control of any regulation, and since the
corporate world thinks it can bribe the government into a supportive law-enforcing
engine, they have not yet ended their crusade.

I recommended back then to look at ways to enrich the product in such ways
that it can enforce a superior existence aside its digital cousins. The
industry should focus on the listening experience, as it is a fact that common people
are enjoying themselves with far inferior products, qualitywise.

But, and here I want to take a few lines to defend the artists, the sick part
of it, is that the industry has its artists pay for the losses encountered from
the so-called 'piracy'. This is only a way of avoiding the acknowledgement of the shame
that the industry once again chose the wrong path. As a result the artists and
the public pay for this, with less music and andless artists.

Instead of using the internet to its fullest potentials, the industry once again
goes to war with the most important party in every discussion: the customer.

AaronSuperior said:

I think that "trading" mix discs and things is cool and actually is a "try before you buy" type of deal. I have actually sent discs to people and have gotten discs from others as well, but I always buy whatever it is that I like. I think that it is cool to expose other people to music that they might not have heard before, but I don't agree with downloading thousands of songs and never paying for them. This is just my way of looking at things though...

Then there is the issue of out of print titles that cannot be purchased and that the artist will not get any money from if you buy a used copy... that one is sticky.

IceNine said:

and this is exactly how i use downloading. things that are either 1) out of print, 2) things i want to sample first, and 3) things i already own, but want to have a copy for use on my computer.

and under these guidelines alone, i have probably downloaded 1,000 files in the last 5 or so years. under the current plan, i would be likely to be sued, and that is ridiculous.

crazyhorse said:

AMEN! I have very little sympathy for these musicians and artists who bitch and whine they are getting "ripped off".They live in huge mansions and drive fancy cars!! I never see them helping their own FANS by demanding that record companies lower the price of CDs.

Record companies have been ripping off consumers and artists for years. I don't care if they hide behind the veil of doing it "legally", but albums full of filler with only one good song, monopolizing radio stations, price-fixing, etc... I have no sympathy for the RIAA. These people have fat cash in their pockets, so a "33% drop" in sales just means one less Bentley for them.

We now have the ability to preview albums online at places like CDNow. There has been more than one occasion where I'm glad I previewed the album first before buying it because it just sucked.

Not to mention the entire economy of this country has gone to hell. Everyone is suffering right now, not just the RIAA.

It's amusing how they are throwing the entire blame on file sharing.

If file sharing is a thorn in their side, justice is served.

IceNine said:

No, of course not. But hopefully people who download a few tracks here and there won't be attacked by the feds like those who abuse it.

EvilWhiteMale said:

Breaking the law is breaking the law. That's like saying i stole a 20 inch t.v and he stole a 50 inch projection.
They need to stop attacking the consumer and find a way to make the internet work for the industry. All they will do is piss peeps off and another way will be found to get around the system.

Tom said:

AMEn,Tom!