Share Your Story
Are you one of the tens of thousands of individuals who has been hunted by the RIAA? Are you one of the students across the country defending someone like Joel?
Share your story. Leave a comment or a link to a YouTube video!
Are you one of the tens of thousands of individuals who has been hunted by the RIAA? Are you one of the students across the country defending someone like Joel?
Share your story. Leave a comment or a link to a YouTube video!
Here’s an email we received just this week:
–
Mr.Nesson
First, let me applaud you on your stance against the riaa. My daughter is a student at college. She as also received a letter demanding $4100. before Jan. 19 or face legal action. Since the school did not fight the request and handed over the students i.p addresses. They have referred her to an attorney. When she contacted him he wanted $5000 for a retainer. 21 students received the letters, that’s over $100,000. I can scrape together the $4100 to keep her out of court, Do you feel I will have any recourse to recover anything once you win your case and declare this witch-hunt unconstitutional?
Good luck and stick it to those greedy !@$#@!
Another email:
-
Dear Mr. Prof. Nesson!
I wish you all the best for the Joeal case, I would be very proud if my Prof. would assist me as much as you do for him (if such a case would hit me).
But as they mentioned on the website: “It is our story as well!” ..yes it is!
I have just donated some money for the (hopefully not) long term dispute.
Best wishes from Rhede, western Germany.
In the immortal words of the 1948 presidential campaign:
“Give ‘em hell, [Joel]!”
*My apologies to Truman fans out there*
Damn, if the RIAA is suing you for all that $$ over just a few songs, just imagine how much they’d sue me for all that I have shared for 10 years and counting! You must be rich. That’s the only reason I can see the RIAA going after you for that much. Let them sue me! Hell would freeze over before they could get a single cent from my wallet.
I strongly agree with the basis of your disagreement with the RIAA. $1M for 7 songs is ridiculous. How could they have gotten away with this looting for so long? I truly hope & pray that you all are successful in this case and that the court proceedings are live so that the RIAA can be exposed for the Shylocks that they and their lawyers/advisers are.
You’re on Digg now.
http://digg.com/tech_news/Show_your_support_for_Joel_and_Harvard_vs_the_RIAA
Stories submitted here don’t always take off, but might I suggest submitting future content pertaining to this case to digg. They have a huge user base vehemently against everything the RIAA stands for. And good luck!
Easy defense… run a wireless network. It’s not your fault if it gets hacked and someone on the street uses it to access the internet and share files.
I’m the guy making the timeline you linked to recently. It is now at a separate URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JesseW/Joel_case_timeline (if you can change the tinyurl?) I noticed that documents J-01 and J-02 give 404 errors? Is this an oversight? And, haven’t there been documents since December 2nd? Can I be of any help in getting them up?
Nice to see ’someone’ is finally fighting the RIAA Mafia. I’ve watched this evil scenario gather force years back, thinking: “surely someone out there realizes the enormous injustice and inequality the industry is perpetrating”; Single mothers; grandparents who don’t even own a computer being threatened. Finally I see light at the end of the tunnel, thanks to all of “you”!! Keep up the good work folks. You have many friends.
My Daughter’s story is on p2pnet.net. Her name is Brittany and she is a student at NMU.
people like you are the reason i still believe in a free world. thank you for fighting on the behalf of joel, myself and anybody else who has been oppressed by large institutions with massive budgets.
the RIAA are the equivalent of the bullies in school ganging up on the little kids. let them try their shit on me, spoofed-ip-and-mac-address-fu
What’s been downloaded or distributed does not infringe the Copyright laws. The Copyright laws does not force anyone to sign up for Rhapsody or goto the music store and buy it to avoid lawsuits, nor does it limits distribution by the RIAA only. I can sign up and pay for it if I want to, but if I download it from individuals, then there’s no need for me to goto the store or sign up and buy it. Nothing wrong with that. Individual users does not need a permission to download or upload them if they’re for non-commercial purposes. I don’t see how or whether the Congress passed the DMCA to make something unathorized, nor does it limits distribution. I’m confident that file sharers, like Joel, will win in the Federal Court, or the Supreme Court one day.
I was just wondering, what exactly does the RIAA team have as evidence that Joel downloaded or uploaded music? And is Joel even required to submit his computer to the court for inspection or something? I’m just trying to understand how one can know someone is sharing music without participating in the sharing themselves. I just got a letter from those crooks, and I didn’t even open it. I’m planning on just going to court by myself (I have no choice–I can’t pay!), and I’m just fishing for as much info as I can.
This is such a wonderful thing you guys are doing! Keep it up! Keep us posted!!!
Its not the size of the dog in the fight, its the size of the fight in the dog.
Joel Fighters, et al. winner TKO.
I am really into older music but I have to say I find your post intersting thanks very much.
I have a PhD in computer science with a major in networking. Unless they have had physical custody of your computer hard drive, and were allowed to examine your network card, they have no solid evidence whatsoever that you have copied any files. Its totally repudiatable. I told the RIAA to go to hell 4 years ago and I haven’t heard from them since.
This definitely sounds like a clear case of the RIAA being mad that nobody is buying music much anymore, and they’re losing money, so let’s just go after this one guy and make HIM pay for the fact that millions of other people are also downloading. First off, how can they demand that much money from him for downloading seven songs??? My god, a drug dealer wouldn’t get punished that badly. That amount of money is absolutely ridiculous. Secondly, shouldn’t the RIAA be going after the other millions and millions of people who download and sue them for millions of dollars as well? This whole case is absurd.
Anyhow, Joe…keep fighting!!
4 months prior to my graduation at B.U. I was contacted to sign for a letter at my dorm mail room. When I went to sign for it, it was one among a stack of identical envelopes. The RIAA singled me out for $3,000 to settle on p2p sharing. (Worst of all it was all automated through a website payment by case ID!) How was I supposed to fight back through all the legal fees? I was so terrified of notifying my parents that my brother and I had initially thought to empty our two savings accounts to keep the situation under wraps. I finally broke down and told the story to my parents who advised me to settle because the $3K wasn’t worth legal fees. RIAA has honestly stolen lunch money from so many randomly chosen college students- who they assume can afford to pay off these settlement fees. Also, colleges should be doing a better job of protecting student names and IP addresses! THANKS FOR FIGHTING BACK! Please keep me posted, I’ll be following your progress.
In 2002, Directv first mastered these type litigation letters and lawsuits. They mailed some 175,000 letters for which millions in settlement money was mailed and confidential settlements signed. For those resisting the letters, 30,000 were sued in Federal court. Sued for the mere possession of a lawfully owned smart card programmer.Understand, there is no law prohibiting the ownership of a smart card programmer. The theory was that a smart card programmer might have been used to reprogram a directv access card and then might have been used to view television with out having paid. People can claim, “well you cannot sue on a maybe.” or “they will never win in any trial over that.” What most do not realize is that of the 30,000 sued, directv never intended for someone to have a trial. No trial, there is nothing which has to to be proved so the plaintiff can say anything, true or not. There is no trial because the plaintiff will increase litigation to the extent that it drive the defendant broke long before any trial van occur. In the Directv cases, many simply filed Bankruptcy when they could litigate no more.
In my own case, I am not ashamed to say that I bought an access card to receive the programming I paid directv to receive. That’s right, I paid for the service! As a paid subscriber I have to buy an access card to see what I paid for and I do not have to become a victim of crime should the copyright holder decide to steal. April 10, 1997, Directv in what was later known as class action Luaces V. Directv, Miami, used digital manipulation, took programming away from PAID subscribers and refused to return the programming unless they paid more. In as much as Directv paid 11 million in settlement for that indiscretion, directv later turned and sued the class action members stating that it was now the members who stole the programming because they bought an access card to stop the theft of there programming on April 10, 1997. In many of these settlements when the defendant cannot afford to litigate, the settlement requires the signing away of constitution rights and liberties and seals the settlement as confidential. In my case, the perpetrator ran me out of money then had me sin a confidential agreement. Not only that but commencing litigation in a second federal court after the issue was settled in a previous federal court causes any settlements to be re-written. Now which federal court settlement do you wish to follow? There is something far more at stake here where an attorney can make up a story to a court and use that made up story to force payment out of the target. I say made uo as in my case they knew the truth and chose not to tell the court. Then comes the confidential settlement where all is sealed. It is well a matter of against public policy, but first someone has got to care if confidential settlements are made to conceal the taking of constitutional rights. Far be it the defendant to disclose his constitutional rights taken in confidential settlement. He would then open the matter allowing Goliath to sue again for breech.
You can read the cases here: http://www.digitalrightownertheft.com/
http://www.digitalrightownertheft.com/
Forgot in the above post to put my google video:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7190539995214850542
For some reason, I have such a hard time with these darn captcha codes. So glad this place doesnt’ use it! You can hardly read them!
JMG–
Thanks for that bit of info! I’m definitely not paying them anything after knowing that!
This is a great wp theme - did you do it yourself? If not, could you let me know who did? I’d be interested. Perhaps you would be interested in making me one for my blog?
I got a similar threat from the RIAA demanding money for copyright infringement. I Called their number and told them to sod off, and that if they even thought about sending anyone to my house the individual would be detained and tortured… I have since stopped receiving threats from them
This seems more like the RIAA manipulating the legal system for a quick buck than them actually wanting to stop pirating. It’s like music is simply the bait for their actual profit-making machine. I wouldn’t be surprised if they leaked their own music on to the internet.
While he really shouldn’t have downloaded the music, the thing the jury must see here is how affected the “victim” is and assign punishment accordingly.
If it’s seven songs, toss them $7 dollars. That would be justice. Not this exorbitant sum.
Joel
Hate to say it but you’re going down.
I’ve been a professional songwriter (not an artist or an RIAA member) for decades and have seen the music biz gutted by the likes of you and your defenders. I have as much sympathy for you as you have for those of us who have devoted our lives to creating music — only to have the fruits of our labor stolen a click at a time.
P.S. If the RIAA is the force of evil in the world,why are the top 50 most downloaded songs from their member labels or those distributed by them?
I’ll sign off now and you can start attacking me.
@ Bob
Why did you say “hate to say it but you’re going down”. I could feel your glee from here.
And you are wrong by the way. The music industry has not been “gutted” by the likes of Joel and his defenders, it has been gutted by it’s own greed and ineptitude. Original Napster was amazing and the music industry blindly hunted it down instead of embracing it and trying to mold it into something usable. By the time they did try to embrace it it was too late and the copy cats (Kazaa et al) were out.
Just becuase the RIAA has some of the biggest artists does not make them angels numbnuts.
Let me ask you this Bob, if I purchase a downloadable song from say Itunes, I do not have to buy it again because I own a copy of that song. Correct.
Then why is it that if I have a huge vinyl record collection and in order to play them on my newly aquired mp3 player I have to purchase them all again. Doesn’t seem right does it. I know your answer will probably be “yes you should purchase again” and would typical of the corporate greedy world we live in but I think that is wrong. Right or wrong I would download through torrent by the way.
PS I thought you all did for the love of it, not the money.
@ Joel
You have an uphill struggle my friend that looks very steep indeed, to be fighting against such a behemoth and with the judge so obviously clinging to that behemoths shirt tails. You have not only my sympathy but you also have my respect. Win or lose you will be triumphant.
To Jake;
Your harping on “greed and ineptitude” is laughable and naive. Show me an industry and a business model that can compete with it’s product being given away free in every household in the developed world— with the click of a mouse. You vilify the victims of theft and celebrate the thieves.
If you are remotely interested in the truth, spend a week in LA, Nashville, or New York and talk to the ones who actually make the music that is downloaded by millions. I’m not talking about a band that posts a video and hopes. It takes huge resources, time, $ and talent to create anything that millions desire, the content you thinks should be valued at $0.
PS. Because I do it for love—about 12 to 14 hrs a day– doesn’t mean I shouldn’t be compensated or that my kids should go hungry. Someone’s making $, just not me. Pirate Bay just sold for millions. They sell ad space and T-shirts on their site. Apple sells 160 gig Ipods that hold 40,000 songs to high school kids, ISP’s advertise ever faster downloads to snag customers, all businesses that thrive on peoples love of content, music and movies. Should the one s who spent their lifetime making the product that draws people to those sites, services and products share in that $?
Oh yeah I forgot, I’m greedy.
Go read the constitution, Article 1, Section 8. “copyright” means just that. The author, not you or Joel, has the exclusive right to copy his works.
Maybe what you perceive as “glee”has something to do seeing some justice after seeing countless friends and co-workers, all of whom got into this for the right reasons, driven out of business by the Joels of the world.
The music industry has robbed musicians and people who buy music for years and now they have the disgusting audaity to take people to court for file sharing. I have spent over £50,000 on music over the past 10 years, most of which I buy second hand as I can’t stand to put any more money into the hands of the pilfering thiebing record companies. Long live the internet file sharing revolution. If somethings worth paying for people will pay for it. Let the real musicians rise to the top, stop the corporate manipulation of creative industries and then we will have a music industry we can be proud of again…
Its about time the fight was taken to these bastards! I have great sympathy for the artists, the song writers but the most profit goes to the record execs, the lawyers and accountants in the industry.
If I could ask just one question of the RIAA it would be this. Just how many times do I have to buy the same music before I can call the recorded sounds mine?
Its like this. In the early 70s I had an infatuation with a Rock group called Nazareth. I had to have their album 33rpm Hair of the Dog so I bought it. It got destroyed during a party frenzy with a nice big scratch across the face of one side and that side just happened to be the side with the perhaps the reason I had the album. Craaaap!
Then out came 8 track players, the end to scratched and un usable records so I bouth Hair of the dog again. Man that was great, I could play it non stop if I wanted until the damn machine ate the tape…..double Craaaap!
Finally out came cassette players, still a tape machine but the industry was moving to the latest and greatest and held promise for a better solution to 8 tracks so again…. I bought Hair of the Dog. By now my love for the group is waning but hey the music promoted some really good memories sooo again I bought the cassette, and all was right with my world. Trouble was tape is tape and again the machine gobbled up the music….. no more I was not going to buy the next technology which at the time was looking like a duel between Digital audio tape and the Compact Disc.
By now there was maybe two songs on the original; album that were worth listening to…
Along comes the internet… I have downloaded the songs I wanted and I do not feel bad for it. I paid for that damn album 3 times I think at some point that collection of sounds should have been mine.
There needs to be a statute of limitations on music and film. At what point in time does it get to be over..
L
BOB,
Sir you are the one who is laughably naive. You sit there moaning about how bad you’re musical life is and how hungry you’re kids are because of the “Joels” of this world, while the very companies you work for are paying you a pittance from the HUGE profits they make. The last thing ANYONE wants is for the end of music.
I say again the industry was too late and too greedy and now all they can do is bully their customers instead of trying to find a workable solution. And why should I have to purchase all my music over and over again every time the industry release a new format. Face it, the business model is broken.
Mind you, Spotify is a start, is it not Bob.
Jake
Like I said at the end of my first post, you can start attacking me now. Numbnuts?!?! Good response. Where does all your anger come from? What is it that scares you so much about hearing from someone who actually makes a living doing this? Yeah the labels and publishers try to make a profit. Duh. Any corporation plays hardball with it’s contract labor. Artists aren’t naive innocents raped by the man. They make deals. The ones who create something desired by the public then re-write their deal points and they make a killing. How do things work in whatever corporation employs you, assuming you’re actually living in the real world? Do you create something of value for which you are paid? Congratulations.
My life in music has been wonderful and fulfilling and my kids had a happy meal today, thanks for asking. I hate it for the ones coming up now–the give it away and pray bands.
You have made this about your hatred of the RIAA (and now apparently of me and all professional writers, producers, singers, studio musicians, engineers etc.). If you don’t like copyright law, start a movement for an amendment to strip if from the constitution.
I’ll sign off now and wait for the guilty verdict.
Just pay for the music. And you won’t have the legal problems. Is it really worth it ?? You are
the owner of those songs. In fact… When you buy a CD or download. It is a license that you
purchased.
Nothing more.
A license is not an ownership. It is a right granted.
CORRECTION
Just pay for the music. And you won’t have the legal problems. Is it really worth it ?? You are NOT
the owner of those songs. In fact… When you buy a CD or download. It is a license that you
purchased.
Nothing more.
A license is not an ownership. It is a right granted.
Dear Sir,
During the early 2000’s I worked for Sony Music Entertainment in its European Office in Aylesbury, Bucks, UK. I was the responsible for the Europe wide network we were installing then which was outsourced to AT&T. We were also charged with looking at new technologies and as such I was instructed to investigate Napster. With the full permission and encouragement of my superiors, I must have download 200-300 tracks, on the Sony network, using Sony equipment and stored on their servers.
Now I know this was in the UK, but surly my actions shine new light on Sony’s behaviour
If you’d like to hear more, please contact me on the attached email and I’ll happily help the fight.
Many Thanks
Chris Tucker
Bob - you’re not acknowledging the fact that artists don’t make anything off CD’s anyway. They’ve ALWAYS made their money in tours/merch/etc…
Think of this way (just random numbers plugged in): You have to buy a CD, maybe 100,000 people buy your CD, and half go to your show (50k). If it gets downloaded, 300,000 people hear it, and half go to the show that’s 150k people. For the artists, it’s much better to have a p2p scene, but bad for the studios. Like someone else said, had the companies worked with p2p, we wouldn’t even be here. But they tried to fight what was obviously going to be the prevailing technology, and now they’re crying about it.
And yes, i’m in a band, but could care less if anyone download our stuff. If people d/l the music, or listen to it for free on myspace, what’s the difference?
When people want to see a Picasso painting, they can google it, see it, print it, and own it for free. Where’s the musical equivalent?
“My life in music has been wonderful and fulfilling and my kids had a happy meal today”
-So if life is so good, and you’re kids are fed, what are you complaining about? Sounds like you don’t need the money too bad…
Fuck the Pigs that think they rule the world
To BodomAfterMidnight
Re artists not “making anything” off CD’s. That’s true now that Cd sales are in the crapper. Not the case pre-p2p. I’m not a defender of the RIAA but there was and is no way to compete with free. Read Joel’s testimony. He could’ve given a rat’s a– if there were legal alternatives. He did it because he could. Multiply him by tens of millions, then come up with a competitive business model.
If you want to give your stuff away, great that’s your right and the model works. Since I don’t tour, when something is p2p’d, I get zip. Neither do many other talented dedicated people in the food chain.
Yeah I’ve clawed my way to the middle. Is that any reason I should throw up my hands and say, “sure, steal it all?” Read my post #28 about all the $ being made from commercial music that doesn’t find it’s way to the creator. There are many forces working against creators. Keep focusing all your attention on the RIAA. The p2p sites who don’t share revenue, electronics manufacturers, ISPs, you tube etc etc like it that way.
Good luck with your band. If 10 years and 2 kids down the road like me, you want to not spend every night in a van, maybe you can try your hand at writing for others.
We’ll talk again then.
Nice posts Bob. These kids will understand one day.
I don’t understand how stealing what does not belong to you does not present’s a moral or ethical issue…unless your a sociopath.
Why are other people crying on this site that they have daughters/sons where the same thing has happened…where they raised as feral dogs and cats?!
Stealing is bad… mm kay! RIAA over states damages… Pay for your music, don’t steal it.
To Bob, and others: a different look on p2p file sharing:
Simple fact: without p2p filesharing, a lot of “underground” genres, such as metal, electro and the likes would never have become as popular as it is now. Why? Because the record labels are most of the time too small to offer global distribution of their albums. Granted, you can use iTunes or Rhapsody, but the music I like is not on there, meaning that I have to go to a specialized store and buy the album -which usually costs me between €13.50 and €17. That’s quite a lot of money for a student.
Now, a lot of metal bands put their whole album on myspace nowadays, so everyone can listen to it. Any person with sound recording software on their computer can just “steal” the songs that way. What does this mean? Quite simple: that the metal industry has finally realized that they shouldn’t expect a huge profit margin out of album or MP3 sales anymore. They have moved on and now focus on merchandising (t-shirts, hats, underwear, etc.) and touring. They have realized that illegal downloading can be used to expose a lot more people to their music, meaning that more people will come to shows -after all, it’s called file *sharing*. Metal festivals have been booming over the last few years, with lots of young people showing up. Young people who can impossibly pay for hundreds of albums, yet they know a lot of artists. They downloaded songs and albums of those artists, bought tickets for the festival and probably a t-shirt of said artists. Merchandising is where it is at, nowadays.
Sadly, money hungry corporations as Sony BMG, EMI, etc. still do not realize that you can not stop the internet and still hold on to outdated business models. Why sue people who can not, and will not, pay the demanded fine? That is knowingly destroying someone’s life, and is in itself a criminal act, and highly immoral.
I have read a way more interesting idea of an internet provider in Great Britain and Virgin in a newspaper a few weeks ago: if you are caught downloading music illegally, your internet subscription will be cancelled after a few warnings, but on the other hand, they will also offer a subscription to a music downloading service, where you can download as much music as you want for a monthly fee.
Just my two cents.
Kind regards,
Maarten
Joel I think you should claim a right to music the same as the right to health care and then we can all demand that the filthy rich musicians and record companies have to supply it to us . I think that a public option would also be needed. good luck Mike
The RIAA is full of shit. Total shit. But seriously man, you go to Boston University and use Limewire? Miserable. Try a better undetectable source, like rapidshare.
What a joke of a democracy the US is becoming. You can work there for years without paying taxes and live a good life as a illegal immigrant and take part of the social system without any punishment, but this guy who downloads 30 songs gets a fine that is worth 300.000 times the actual crime. Lets publish the names of the judges and their families…
Greetings from Sweden Joel - keep up the good spirit!
I currently share almost 6,000 files on Soulseek, and I’m a pride supporter of public access to free music and creative expression. I’m very sorry you had to take the fall for our beliefs, but I’m so proud of you for standing up for what you believe in. I have never gotten a letter regarding my shared files, but am not afraid to stand up to the RIAA for what I believe is a power-hungry struggle for financial monopoly of the music industry. To the artists out there - don’t fall for the label hype. Release your music yourself and have complete control over your careers. Give your music away for free, let as many listeners get their hands on your work as you can, and you’ll see the payoff.
Notice how the word “fine” is thrown about? Compensation for a loss seems to be viewed as a fine and a fine levied by private enterprise. Just one thing of many wrong with this. The award levied against you was far out of line. Shoplifting would normally be $125.00 if this would be viewed as a “fine.” The company that got me made a false complaint stating I viewed there television programming while I was a paid subscriber. They called it a fine as well. Even though there court complaint was a fraud and not true, no one really cared and I did not have the money to pay for litigation for a trial. In fact falsified documentary evidence was submitted and no one blinked an eye. Cases where fraud is permitted or compensation is way out of line will catch up with our justice system in that each time it happen, that system looses credibility as you can read in the posts above this one. When fraudulent court complaints are allowed and awards are so out of line it is sure our system is no longer fair and equitable.
I have a case open with the Cincinnati FBI White Collar Crimes Division tracing the global crime rings of music and the entertainment industry and more. They are stealing and embezzling money, some are guilty of charges like arsen and attempted manslaughter, and they willingly and deliberately set out to rip everyone off, including artists, to pocket the money themselves. We’ve been investigating this for a little while and have hordes of evidence against them. We’re still collecting evidence right now, but I guarantee you they will be exposed for their crimes, including this. I try to keep updates on my youtube channel comments-as-notebook; it’s my only outside link for this case. We should have it done before your appeal. I’ve gone so far as to contact the BBC to prepare them for a global entertainment industry collapse, so many will be under arrest. This is where internet bands shine!
Ok what about this… A radio clause? What did you guys do whenever a song played on the radio back in the day when you had a cassette tape? You recorded the song, and then passed the tape along to your buddies by copying the music to another tape. That was never illegal nor brought to light? Just because its now easier to swap and trade songs so to speak, that is now illegal? So I deem that if they songs have ever been played on the radio, you cant sue for someone owning the song on an ipod/computer. Whenever you heard the song on the radio you didnt have to pay to play it. It’s like DVR’s you dont have to pay to record your show, you want to because you want to watch it (or in case of the songs listen) to it whenever you want. And from a DVR you can transfer songs to other DVR’s guess what thats not illegal either! If it starts off free on the radio, it should stay free. Why can’t artists make their money selling to radio stations and doing concerts. You dont have to make 100’s of millions of dollars to put food on the table.
This site is bull! Joel is a thief and knew what he was doing was stealing so the fact that anyone is donating to him is crap. I wish he had gotten the full fine and jail time. Spoiled brat. Did you see his mommy with him? WAAAAAAA!
Soy un compositor Colombiano y estoy contigo JOEL, los de la RIIA son unas ratas igual que los de ACODEM aqui en Colombia. tienes nuestro apoyo. Todos estamos cvontigo
Mary you sound exactly as you type, yes an idiotic.
***** ******* ******* stupid ******* ******* ******* mother ***** ********* and you have no ******** clue.
Radio brings up an interesting point. When I think about what it would have been like to grow up in an early time, instead of the late 90’s when downloading music was readily available, it really makes me wonder how I would have possibly learned about even 1/50th of the amazing bands I now love. I still buy more cd’s than most people I would say. If I really like a band I’ll buy their new release (I usually give my money to smaller artists that actually might need it). But if I wasn’t able to download music I’d probably be forced to listen to the wretched radio all the time to find new artists. The problem is, radio seems to play more commercials than music, and the music they do play usually sucks. So thank god I can find new music other ways. I think it’s true that downloading music is probably doing harm to big businesses and what not, but should I care? They should adapt and make money other ways. I don’t feel bad about downloading instead of listening to the crappy radio or buying music from the drivel that so often comes out of major labels. I’m supposed to be sad if they lose a little of their profits? I’ve also heard tour/merch money is where it’s really at for bands. I wish there was some study/research I could look at regarding the actual ability of bands to survive/thrive since downloading music (as well as myspace, youtube, etc) has become increasingly prevalent. I wouldn’t be surprised if the increased exposure has done much more good than harm for bands. Now major labels, maybe not. But again, so what? I care about the bands not the companies.
I doubt this is the place for this, but…
I have a problem with our current copyright laws, and I believe that the way our current system of government uses lobbying is the cause of it.
Our laws do not equally protect everyone, they only protect the interests of a rich few. Is there not some way to change the way things are? What percentage of the population can be mistreated before real change can be pushed to occur? Our laws have been contorted and twisted to benefit a rich minority.
Example:
I’m a land surveyor. My family has worked to perform surveys for people for 40 years. We have always bid very competitively sometimes losing money to get jobs hoping that we would make our profits by having the records so that we would get the work for future surveys as well as being able to do them easily by just updating what info we already had on file. Now this same system of lawmaking that is protecting the RIAA is allowing the title industry and others that have been collecting copies of our surveys to distribute them to people accepting affidavits for closings using our work for their profit and excluding us from making money for our own sweat labor and work. What bothers me most about this is that, one day, there will be a lawsuit on a survey we did decades ago, that was used for a later closing against our will and the courts will side against us for a job we didn’t even get paid for. We’ve written many people in government asking for help in some way only to receive passive template replies or no reply at all.
Romans had it better 2000 years ago. We think we live in a democracy, but I fear it is not even a republic. We vote to put a group of Republicans or Democrats in government, only to have our laws written and reformed to benefit a rich minority, by lobbyists funded by and representing a rich few. This very same government we voted for puts a low priority on the desires of the majority, in the belief that this rich few are more wise or are more deserving than the majority.
I’m afraid our government has become more of an Aristocracy.
I think Joel is a hero. He has become the symbol of a wrong that needs to be righted, standing for something that is good and right, a small boat fighting against “the perfect storm.” The RIAA and the MPAA is using the laws that their lobyists push to reform for their Own monetary gain, and then using those very same laws as propaganda to make it sound like downloading music is not good. Since when did Legal = Moral?
Nina
I have said that So many times… I’ve gone to many a concert, we just went to one two weeks ago that was 2 1/2 hours drive from where I live…
In my opinion the RIAA has taken something good, copyright laws, and has contorted it, reformed it, and exacerbated it through lawsuits to benefit themselves in a corrupt, repulsive way against the majority of people.
We need Change..
Copyright law reformation is needed. I have a high school diploma, college diploma, licenses for my profession, and my work will never be protected in the way an artists is. How is an artist more protected than a professional? I feel that the distribution of music through file sharing is perfectly good, and should be legal. If you are an artist, songwriter, w/e and can’t make enough money try getting a real job out in the hot sun, where actual physical labor is required, and do “what you love” part time like the rest of us. I mean shouldn’t “sweat of the brow” doctrine actually require a little sweat? Another example of aristocratic government If you have enough money you can contort anything to benefit your own pocket, including the Bible.
sorry for the length..
and sorry for my inadequacies in language skills, flame the information if you so desire, not the presentation…
Anyways, ofc I’m in construction and am actually broke (I wish that I was RIAA or Singer broke), but anyway … I’m sending $30. I know it doesn’t help, but at least it’ll make me feel like I did what I could. Sorry I can’t do more.
Professor Godsend,
You Rock.
I’ve downloaded tens of thousands of songs over the years, and haven’t paid a penny.
If I hadn’t been able to download them, would I have bought tens of thousands of songs from HMV?
No, I would not. I wouldn’t have bought one, and would have stuck to listening to the radio.
Therefore, the record labels haven’t lost any money. Idiots.
Just wondering if these jokers are digging themselves a grave by accusing Joel of creating that mix tape torrent. I mean if they don’t have any proof that either Joel condone it or actually did it himself, how can they make that statement? Sounds to me like a little bit of whining on their part and possibly they may have opened themselves up to some libel. Wouldn’t want to be in the RIAA’s shoes when/if they get called out on this.
I thought this was sposto be for people who have settled lawsuits with the RIAA. What you guys need is a forum. I was hoping to hear a bunch of sad stores of 10 years old having to pay $2,000,000 to the IRAA, now I’m thinkng that either there really isn’t that many cases or they are all to scared to come forward.
I do have a story about copyright infringement though. My internets got shut off once because I seeded a video game. I called my ISP to ask what gives and they made me promise never to do it again.
I’ve since changed ISPs.
The RIAA is……….an evil empire. Simply because they prey on the weak. Name one respectable American company that spews out lawsuit settlements to ordinary citizens. These parasites are just that. Trolling for cash because they feel they have lost billions of dollars. But in reality they are counting on revenues that are theoretical and projected. Hmmm kind of sounds like Enron sort off. Lets put it on the books and expand. Counting the chickens before they hatch. And they hide behind the noble cause of “were protecting our struggling, hard working Artists”. The truth is they are profiteers and don’t care about the Artist other than the profit off of defending there pimps, the record labels. Itunes is just the hotel rooms allowing this prostitution. No, I’m joking. Itunes is a great place to sell Artist’s music at a reasonable price as other distributors. If the pimps latched onto this new technology sooner, the “damages” would have been minimized. But the RIAA convinced the pimps they were in grave danger of this curious technology. And Napster was born. And nobody cared until RIAA realized how much money they could extort. And the pimps were happy. Not really. They are missing out on this multitrillion dollar potential and claiming huge losses. How does this work. What market strategy were they about to employ to capture this revenue? You see file sharing today is similar to LP and CD sharing in the old days when we recorded our favorite song on tape to listen on the go and protect our investment. The pimps hated this because people were getting music for free. But people already get music for free over radio and when riding with friend playing tapes and so on. You see the problem is the idea the pimps created call future revenues called residuals. A way to screw the Artist out of what the real value of their Art is. Believe me, if the pimps had to pay up front, then they would make sure there investments were protected from the beginning. And no music would be free. Should we be charged every time we enjoy art? Perhaps! Hey lets just tax/levy everything and nobody gets off free. Tax CD’s, Tapes, media players, Radio/TV Transmissions and Internet streaming. Sounds Good!!! NOT!! The bottom line is: PIMPS, USE TECHNOLOGY TO PROTECT YOUR MEDIA. And stop blaming consumers for you “lost revenues”. Most of these “thieves” are average people who have spent plenty of money on your Art. They are not criminals with disregard as you make them out to be. They are your future “realized profits”. Take care of them.
Have you heard of anyone that is wrongly accused of pirating art? My ISP threatened me; even though the evidence he had in no way incriminated me. The IP address he said was mine actually belongs to a school district 35 miles north of me. Since the movie I’m accused of pirating was Harry Potter, that would seem the most logical place to look for the culprit. Not at me…a 54 year old who really doesn’t like Harry Potter so much… Can you help? I depend on my computer for employment, to lose my internet would be a disaster in my life!
Great Article! I really liked it! Thanks
Looking at the list of 31 songs I cant find a single one that isnt available on youtube along with the music video in high quality.
Most are there 100 times over so I guess youtube owe the RIAA all the money in the world!
sometimes the Court keeps a cash bond. If you are bonding someone out of jail and you don’t want to take the chance that all or part of your cash will be used to pay the defendant’s court fines, fees and restitution, you might want to hire a bail bondsman. How much does a surety bond cost? A surety bond will cost you a surety bond fee AND a Sheriff’s fee of $10. You will not get any of the surety bondsman’s fee or the $10 back because it is nonrefundable. The surety bondsman’s fee, set by the insurance company, may cost about 10% of the total bond plus $25 or $35 dollars. This fee can be different from company to company and their amounts should be listed with the Idaho Department of Insurance.