oh god, higher quality, I better start buying it up

Better quality shit

is still shit

4/2/2007 5:20:21 PM

http://techdirt.com/articles/20070402/141847.shtml


Is the RIAA the most evil corporation to ever exist? I get sick of fucking hearing about the RIAA and their draconian bullshit. I believe I would be happily hauled off to jail for the chance to spit in the face of every RIAA exec. And I don't mean some sissy spit. I'm talking a nice yellowy thick loogie straight to the eye socket.

4/2/2007 9:11:09 PM

^^ of course, if you believe the music is shit, then yes, paying more is useless; however, the consumer who purchases music for 1.29 rather than 99 is in fact getting more for their money. the fact that you are not one of the consumers of iTunes music doesn't nullify this fact.

4/2/2007 9:49:05 PM

There are two facets of shit here.

1) The majority of pop music is shit. Fortunately, there is a decent amount of stuff out there that isn't, it's just harder to find.

2) The comment 2 posts above yours though, refers to the 128kbps and 256kbps. In my car, with vanilla components on good amps, I can still tell the difference between 256kbps and 1.44mbps, at 320 VBR it starts to get harder and it depends mostly on the track and how it was produced. On my home stuff, with is itself vanilla, I can pick out most 320 stuff versus 1.44.

4/2/2007 10:48:28 PM

^i agree with ya, you can definately tell the differences in kbps with a properly tuned audio system.........but i can't tell a difference between 320kbps and CD's, which is why i dont have a problem dl'ing with this bitrate

this is why i don't think $1 per a 128kbps song is a good deal....the problem is that most people not only cannot tell the difference, they just don't care

Assuming an average of 12 songs per CD, this is actually a crappier deal than just buying the CD (at least you can sell the CD when you're done)

[Edited on April 3, 2007 at 1:08 AM. Reason : ]

4/3/2007 1:04:52 AM

probably mentioned, but [free] and has a decent amount of indie music on it, for those of us that sit at computers for work/play

http://www.pandora.com

4/3/2007 9:28:12 AM

^ i've used that a number of times to discover new artists...gf found corinne bailey rae on there before she was on MTV, radio, etc...i was impressed

from the techdirt article:

Quote :

"In the comments to an earlier post today, a reader pointed us to an article about Trent Reznor's promotional campaign for his latest Nine Inch Nails album. It sounds like he's taken a page from the various alternate reality games that have been popular in promoting movies and video games over the past few years. That is, there appears to be a series of secretive websites that are being leaked out with various clues and there's a big group of fans all trying to track down the details. Also, at some Nine Inch Nails concerts, people have found USB keys in the bathroom with songs from the upcoming album. Not surprisingly, those songs quickly found their way online, all with Reznor's approval. Of course, no one seems to have told the RIAA about this marketing campaign. The RIAA went and demanded that various sites pull down the songs, even though Reznor wanted the songs to spread for promotional purposes. The RIAA always says that if artists want to promote their own songs by giving them away for free they have no problem with it -- but it seems that their mindset is so focused on the idea that no one would ever want to do this that they still have to issue takedowns when artists want the songs given away."

the usb thing is really kind of cool...that'd be awesome...oh, and fuck the RIAA

[Edited on April 3, 2007 at 1:24 PM. Reason : .]

4/3/2007 1:21:37 PM

the question is whether nin actually had any legal right to do that. if they didn't get permission from their label to go around giving out what is (at least in part) the record company's property, then nin is in the wrong. now, do i think that they should punish the people who got these songs? of course not.

4/3/2007 4:06:46 PM

4/5/2007 3:59:28 PM

the RIAA is a monopoly styled company. The government should have been on top of this crap.

4/6/2007 8:37:08 AM

Nice Pic


I also just found a good band off pandora-- "the old ceremony"

out of chapel hill, coincidentally-- I've never heard of them, but they play some pretty good stuff

4/6/2007 9:35:15 AM

are jews in charge of the riaa?

4/7/2007 3:33:51 AM

^^ That picture actually came from an anthropology lecture. It was on a slide about state societies.

I asked the teacher about it during class. He had no idea that the picture was a joke or what RIAA is. He said he googled 'riot police' and it came up.

4/7/2007 7:31:33 AM

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-pretext7apr07,1,1936238.story?coll=la-headlines-business&ctrack=2&cset=true

The RIAA is lobbying to get the legal ability to pretext ...

4/8/2007 10:06:39 PM

RIAA supports terrorism

4/8/2007 10:08:27 PM

^^ registration required... have another link?

4/9/2007 10:47:03 AM

Quote :

"Recording, movie industries lobby for permission to deceive Hollywood wants to be exempt from a bill that would ban the use of 'pretexting' to get data. By Dawn C. Chmielewski and Marc Lifsher, Times Staff Writers April 7, 2007 SACRAMENTO — The music and movie industries are lobbying state legislators for permission to deceive when pursuing suspected pirates. The California Senate is considering a bill that would strengthen state privacy laws by banning the use of false statements and other misleading practices to get personal information. The tactic, known as pretexting, created a firestorm of criticism when detectives hired by Hewlett-Packard Co. used it last year to obtain phone records of board members, journalists and critics. But the Recording Industry Assn. of America and the Motion Picture Assn. of America say they sometimes need to use subterfuge as they pursue bootleggers in flea markets and on the Internet. In recent letters to state Sen. Ellen Corbett (D-San Leandro), the trade groups said the proposed legislation was written too broadly and could undermine anti-piracy efforts. They said investigators sometimes pose as someone else to obtain bootlegged CDs or movies and to break into online piracy rings. "Basically, we want criminals to feel comfortable that who they're dealing with is probably some other criminal and let us in on what's going on," said Brad Buckles, the RIAA's executive vice president for anti-piracy. "We're not talking about trying to go in and get customer information. In no case have we ever tried to do that." The RIAA proposed changes to the piracy bill that raised alarms among consumer advocates. The trade group asked that any owner of a copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret be able to use "pretexting or other investigative techniques to obtain personal information about a customer or employee" when seeking to enforce intellectual property rights. "I don't see why the recording industry shouldn't have to follow the same laws that everyone else follows," said Fred von Lohmann, senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group in San Francisco. "It appears they want to make the loophole so big that nobody else has to follow the law, either." Hollywood succeeded in killing a similar bill last year. Other opponents of the bill included the California Chamber of Commerce and the Direct Marketing Assn. While applauding the bill's intentions, the movie and music industries said the measure would limit their methods for gathering evidence to share with law enforcement. "This legislation could be construed to prevent MPAA's anti-piracy department and contract investigators, who gather evidence to bring legal actions against criminals who counterfeit and steal motion pictures and other works, from employing certain long-employed techniques to obtain information," the movie association wrote in a letter obtained by The Times. The association also said those techniques "could include posing or portraying an individual personality as part of an ongoing investigation." Buckles said the recording association had never, nor would it ever, assume someone's identity to access that person's phone or bank records. Rather, he said, the group was seeking assurances that its investigators would not run afoul of state privacy laws when they hide their industry connection from traffickers of pirated or counterfeit music. The industry's proposed amendment is unlikely to get anywhere when it comes up for an initial hearing in the California Senate's Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. Sen. Corbett, the bill's author, chairs the committee and is unlikely to accept what's known in legislative parlance as a "hostile amendment." An attorney and consumer protection advocate, Corbett should receive solid backing from the two other Democratic attorneys on the five-member Judiciary Committee: Sen. Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica) and Sen. Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento). Kuehl, a former child actor who played Zelda in the popular 1960s sitcom "The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis," said she shared concerns over piracy. But she said she wasn't sure that the amendment was the best way to deal with the problem. "I think it's going to be a very hard go for the RIAA on this because the underlying principal is so visceral to everybody," she said. "I don't want people calling up and pretending to be me to get my personal information. They'll have a hard time convincing people that piracy is so different that they ought to be allowed to engage in these otherwise illegal acts." Chris Hoofnagle, a privacy attorney at UC Berkeley's Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic, said there was no rational reason to exempt one industry from pretexting laws, especially when information can be legally obtained through subpoenas and other means. "The whole point of these pretexting bills is to rein in private law enforcement that is not accountable to the public or to normal rules," Hoofnagle said. "There isn't much sense in allowing an entire industry to play with a different rule book.""

Quote :

" "We're not talking about trying to go in and get customer information. In no case have we ever tried to do that.""

Sony, anyone?

[Edited on April 9, 2007 at 11:00 AM. Reason : ]

4/9/2007 10:58:04 AM

http://www.bugmenot.com/view/latimes.com

4/9/2007 10:58:08 AM

I wonder how long it will be before somone files a class action suit against the RIAA and MPAA for gross privacy violations and malicious prosecution.

4/9/2007 11:17:05 AM

from Technician

Quote :

"RIAA files 23 lawsuits against NCSU Pre-litigation settlements were followed by lawsuits this week for the University's illegal downloaders Josh Harrell Issue date: 4/13/07 Section: News After the Recording Industry Association of America sent pre-litigation settlements to N.C. State illegal downloaders last month, the company stepped up its game this week. The RIAA filed 23 music theft lawsuits against anonymous NCSU network users after they refused to take the settlement. The lawsuits are in the form of "John Doe lawsuits," meaning that the RIAA does not know the names of the people it has filed against. The users have been identified by their IP addresses, according to an RIAA spokesperson who declined to give her name or be directly quoted. The same spokesperson said the company will have to wait on a judge to grant the RIAA permission to begin the name-discovery process. But Pam Gerace, the director of Student Legal Services at the University, is fighting the lawsuits for her student clients. She advises that the students should remain anonymous. "The RIAA actually said they might have use for the names in the future," Gerace said, She added that this could prove dangerous for the students, as the RIAA could pursue other legal actions or give the names to record companies. The letter sent to NCSU had nothing about a timeline for other settlements to be made or what the lawsuit will entail, Gerace said. "There's no timeline, and that's driving my clients up the wall," she said. "But [the students] can take their time -- the RIAA didn't say anything about that. " After the RIAA sent its first settlement last month, Gerace said only one student came to Legal Services to take the settlement. According to the RIAA spokesperson, of the 400 students who the RIAA sent settlement letters to nationally, 198 of them agreed to it. The RIAA accompanied the initial settlements along with a sample listing of songs the students downloaded. "[The number of songs] ranged from 10 to 2,000," Gerace said. "They said it could be $750 per song. The letter said, though, that they could just pay $3,000, which would not be based on the number of songs." Now the RIAA will go through with the subpoenas, according to Gerace. "They'll go to the University Council, then [Information Technology Division] and the students will be notified," Gerace said. The students who are being subpoenaed do have options though through Legal Services. One of those options, Gerace said, is making a motion to quash. "If someone is subpoenaed and they say they don't want to comply, the subpoenaed party says they can't come for a certain reason," Gerace said. "Then it goes to the federal court who could take a year to make a decision." It is also possible that the subpoenas are invalid, she added. In this case they don't have to respond. "But if they do nothing and it is valid, then the University would have to give out their names and addresses," Gerace said. She said she still expects another round of settlements to come through, but this time the stakes will be raised. "When they do the subpoenas, there will be another round of settlements -- those will obviously be more than the last one," Gerace said. "It will probably be closer to $5,000." Gerace added that any students who are still receiving these letters should contact Student Legal Services."

4/14/2007 4:37:39 PM

i wish the riaa would go to china or something...all they do there is pirate our shit

4/14/2007 4:42:47 PM

NCSU makes it to slashdot!

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/16/033220

4/16/2007 9:16:58 AM

hellz yeah...I saw that too!

4/16/2007 9:23:30 AM

Goodbye Internet radio ...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18384667/site/newsweek/

Quote :

"As you read these words on your monitor, there is a decent chance that you’re also streaming a little online radio. After all, with an estimated listenership of approximately 50 million Americans per month, Internet radio has become a go-to destination for a fuller spectrum of music, an alternative to FM’s mind-numbing monotony. And if you are one of those listeners, mark May 15 on your calendar: it might well be the day that the music dies."

[Edited on May 1, 2007 at 1:08 PM. Reason : oops]

5/1/2007 1:08:03 PM

that is some BULLSHIT

5/1/2007 1:17:02 PM

5/7/2007 11:28:48 AM

haha, so good

5/7/2007 12:07:14 PM

ehe. i think the RIAA has just convinced me to steal some music for the first time in years >.<

I'LL LET YOU ALL KNOW HOW IT GOES

5/13/2007 4:23:09 PM

http://www.wired.com/gadgets/miscellaneous/news/2007/05/digiwax

At least it's only US that's the problem. Everyone else isn't retarded.

5/14/2007 4:58:13 PM

^merge records has been doing that since last year

5/14/2007 5:11:32 PM

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/business/la-fi-radio21may21,1,1028211.story?coll=la-headlines-business-enter&ctrack=1&cset=true

And now they go after ... FM RADIO!

5/22/2007 9:19:53 AM

Quote :

"Artists and labels seek royalties from radio By Jim Puzzanghera, Times Staff Writer May 21, 2007 WASHINGTON — With CD sales tumbling, record companies and musicians are looking at a new potential pot of money: royalties from broadcast radio stations. For years, stations have paid royalties to composers and publishers when they played their songs. But they enjoy a federal exemption when paying the performers and record labels because, they argue, the airplay sells music. Now, the Recording Industry Assn. of America and several artists' groups are getting ready to push Congress to repeal the exemption, a move that could generate hundreds of millions of dollars annually in new royalties. Mary Wilson, who with Diana Ross and Florence Ballard formed the original Supremes, said the exemption was unfair and forced older musicians to continue touring to pay their bills. "After so many years of not being compensated, it would be nice now at this late date to at least start," the 63-year-old Las Vegas resident said in Milwaukee, where she was performing at the Potawatomi Bingo Casino. "They've gotten 50-some years of free play. Now maybe it's time to pay up." The decision to take on the volatile performance royalty issue again highlights the rough times the music industry is facing as listeners abandon compact discs for digital downloads, often listening to music shared with friends or obtained from file-sharing sites. "The creation of music is suffering because of declining sales," said RIAA Chief Executive Mitch Bainwol. "We clearly have a more difficult time tolerating gaps in revenues that should be there." It's not the first attempt to kill the exemption. In the past, politically powerful broadcasters beat back those efforts. But with satellite and Internet radio forced to pay "public performance royalties" and Web broadcasters up in arms about a recent federal decision to boost their performance royalty rate, the record companies and musicians have a strong hand. Broadcasters are already girding for the fight, expected to last more than a year. In a letter to lawmakers this month, the National Assn. of Broadcasters dubbed the royalties a "performance tax" that would upend the 70-year "mutually beneficial relationship" between radio stations and the recording industry. "The existing system actually provides the epitome of fairness for all parties: free music for free promotion," wrote NAB President David Rehr. Performance royalties are collected from traditional radio stations in nearly all major industrialized countries, but U.S. musicians and record companies can't because there is no similar royalty on the books here. "The time comes that we really have to do this," said John Simson, executive director of SoundExchange, a group created by the recording industry to collect and distribute Internet and satellite music royalties. For record labels and musicians, addressing the issue now is crucial because digital radio, now being rolled out, allows broadcasters to split a signal into several digital channels and play even more music exempt from performance royalties. Groups preparing to push Congress to change the law include the RIAA, the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences, the American Federation of Musicians and other organizations. The U.S. Copyright Office has long supported removing the exemption. The groups have a major ally in Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Valley Village), who now chairs the House subcommittee dealing with intellectual property law. Berman is "actively contemplating" leading a legislative push to end the exemption. "Given the many different ways to promote music now that didn't exist as effectively when this original exemption was made," he said, "the logic of that I think is more dubious." Congress granted composers and publishers of music copyright protection in 1909. But the recording and radio industries were in their infancy, and the actual musical recordings were not covered. Congress extended limited copyright protection to musical performances in the 1970s to guard against an earlier form of piracy: the copying of records and tapes. But by then, broadcasters were influential enough to snuff out any talk of making them pay musicians and recording companies for playing their music. "The old saying is the reason broadcasters don't pay a performance royalty is there's a radio station in every congressional district and a record company in three," said Chris Castle, a music industry lawyer. Broadcasters even successfully fought a group of singers and musicians led by Frank Sinatra in the late 1980s who tried to pressure Congress into changing the law. Broadcasters also prevailed in 1995, when Congress exempted them from new fees for digital recordings that everyone else had to pay. "Congress has always recognized that broadcasters generate enormous sums of revenue to record companies and artists in terms of airplay," said NAB Executive Vice President Dennis Wharton. Radio stations also have public-interest obligations that satellite and Internet broadcasters don't have to worry about, he said. Satellite radio, Internet broadcasters and cable television companies offering digital music channels now pay performance royalties. The recording industry and musician groups say it's time for traditional radio stations to pony up. "Most of the artists in the world are kind of middle-class cats, trying to piece together a living," said Jonatha Brooke, a singer-songwriter who is part of the Recording Artists Coalition advocacy group. "It's important to be recognized and paid for our work.""

for those that dont wanna register- i figure its a pretty liberal paper so i might as well register, even though i kinda hate dems and repubs at the moment...

5/22/2007 9:24:34 AM

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2007/05/22/046.html

Quote :

"uesday, May 22, 2007. Issue 3661. Page 6. Brits Arrest Allofmp3 Bagman The Moscow Times British police have arrested a 25-year-old man in east London in connection with an online voucher scheme used by Russian music download web site Allofmp3.com, the London Metropolitan Police said in a statement Monday. The man, who is being questioned as part of a wide-scale investigation into online piracy, has not been identified and was arrested earlier this month under fraud legislation recently passed by the British parliament. He is accused of advertising and selling Allofmp3.com vouchers through the Allofmp3vouchers.co.uk web site and auction sites such as eBay. Vouchers costing ?10 ($19.70) contained access codes allowing buyers to download tracks from Allofmp3.com. The Allofmp3vouchers.co.uk web site was blocked following the nighttime raid and arrest, during which the police seized a computer and paperwork for further investigation. "Allofmp3.com is illegal in Russia, the United States, Britain and everywhere else in the world," John Kennedy, chairman and chief executive of IFPI, said in a statement. "The [arrest] is the latest to highlight Allofmp3.com's long and undistinguished history of stealing music from artists, composers and record producers and selling it at a profit.""

5/22/2007 9:56:58 AM

Quote :

"Mary Wilson, who with Diana Ross and Florence Ballard formed the original Supremes, said the exemption was unfair and forced older musicians to continue touring to pay their bills. "After so many years of not being compensated, it would be nice now at this late date to at least start," the 63-year-old Las Vegas resident said in Milwaukee, where she was performing at the Potawatomi Bingo Casino. "They've gotten 50-some years of free play. Now maybe it's time to pay up.""

so let me get this straight here....the musicians that make way more than the avg. person makes in a lifetime is complaining b/c they didnt manage and budget thier money like the rest of us?

this cunt is telling me that she didnt plan for retirement and now has to work to make it?
welcome to the real world.

my god these people are dumb...

5/22/2007 12:51:02 PM

^You mean you aren't getting paid for work you did decades ago?

5/22/2007 12:58:50 PM

Quote :

"Allofmp3.com is illegal in Russia, the United States, Britain and everywhere else in the world," John Kennedy, chairman and chief executive of IFPI, said in a statement. "The [arrest] is the latest to highlight Allofmp3.com's long and undistinguished history of stealing music from artists, composers and record producers and selling it at a profit."

glad to see they have found someone who is an expert in national and local laws for EVERY SQUARE MILE OF THE EARTH.

5/22/2007 1:27:04 PM

Studies: music industry overstating threat of P2P piracy
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070531-studies-music-industry-overstating-threat-of-p2p-piracy.html

6/1/2007 11:16:39 AM

Quote :

"so let me get this straight here....the musicians that make way more than the avg. person makes in a lifetime is complaining b/c they didnt manage and budget thier money like the rest of us? this cunt is telling me that she didnt plan for retirement and now has to work to make it? welcome to the real world."

GG.

Fuck stupid greedy ass musicians who complain about money.

6/1/2007 1:04:31 PM

RIAA's Ex Parte motion denied!!!!!

http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/06/riaa-ex-parte-discovery-application.html

A judge finally made a ruling that make sense. There's finally a judge that isn't allowing the RIAA to abuse the legal system and violate the rules of procedure to violate the legal rights of individuals.

6/20/2007 11:29:15 AM

bttt This ruling is huge!

6/20/2007 4:44:23 PM

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/20/2241222

Reported on /.

6/20/2007 9:59:36 PM

Washington Woman Sues RIAA for Attorneys Fees ...

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/23/1338203

6/23/2007 2:06:02 PM

RIAA, Safenet Sued For Malicious Prosecution

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/25/2310205

w00t!

6/25/2007 10:03:29 PM

yay...score one for the good guys

6/25/2007 10:04:42 PM

We will have to see who wins this, but it is progress at least.

6/26/2007 8:55:07 AM

And a setback ...

http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/story/96215.html

Quote :

"The University of Washington announced Monday a new policy about illegal music file-sharing on campus: Not only will the school not shield students from lawsuits from the recording industry, it will track them down and serve them the legal papers."

6/26/2007 10:18:43 PM

score one for the bad guys

[Edited on June 26, 2007 at 10:28 PM. Reason : woah i just noticed ur response to my earlier response...dont know how i missed it...]

6/26/2007 10:28:16 PM

use bittorrent + ssl

6/26/2007 10:37:26 PM

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/UN_BROADCASTING_RIGHTS?SITE=WIRE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Quote :

"GENEVA (AP) -- Talks on an international treaty updating broadcast rights to accommodate the Internet failed Friday because countries were unable to agree how much legal and technological protection to afford broadcasters, a U.S. official said. "It became clear that there was no agreement on any of the fundamental issues of the treaty," Paul Salmon, head of the U.S. delegation, told The Associated Press. The treaty fell victim to disagreements over issues such as whether protection against piracy should cover only traditional broadcasting methods - meaning cable, antenna and satellite signals - or whether it should include retransmission over the Internet, he said. European countries wanted to give broadcasters rights over any content they transmit - even if they did not originally produce the content. That type of rights-based treaty is opposed by electronics and telecommunication companies like Intel Corp. and Verizon Communications Inc., as well as librarian groups and consumer advocates. They say it would stifle technological innovation and could prevent people from playing legal music or films over their home networks. The groups have lobbied for a narrow treaty protecting only the signal itself from piracy. The talks, which were held under the auspices of the United Nation's World Intellectual Property Organization, were meant to pave the way for an intergovernmental meeting in November to approve a treaty. It would have been the first major regulation of broadcast rights on an international level since the 1961 Rome Convention, which many countries, including the United States, are not a party to. Salmon said delegations would discuss how to proceed on Friday. "There was no question that countries were negotiating in good faith," he said. "It's just that despite our efforts we are nowhere near agreement." "

6/29/2007 10:54:13 AM

AllOfMP3.com is shut down ...

AllofMP3.com renamed to MP3Sparks.com ...

Still evading the RIAA ...

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070703-allofmp3-com-breathes-its-final-breath.html

7/4/2007 12:21:43 AM