5

7/4/2007 12:26:23 AM

+1 post

7/4/2007 12:47:26 AM

Quote :

"But Pam Gerace, the director of Student Legal Services at the University, is fighting the lawsuits for her student clients."

HOLY FUCK

Did ncsu just actually stand up for their customers students??

7/4/2007 3:35:55 PM

^ As I understand it, they're (ncsu) not doing shit.

7/4/2007 4:31:07 PM

http://www.floridatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070708/NEWS01/707080343/1006

New low? It is hard to keep track.

[Edited on July 8, 2007 at 10:40 PM. Reason : ]

7/8/2007 10:22:59 PM

^Just read about that on /.

Pretty fucked up stuff.

7/8/2007 11:03:44 PM

*sigh it's so easy to avoid all of this by NOT FUCKING UPLOADING

7/8/2007 11:07:31 PM

Quote :

"Andrus said a friend of his who owned a restaurant that did not feature music was contacted by a company looking to charge him because it owned the rights to a Hank Williams Jr. song, "Are You Ready for Some Football?" The song preceded every "Monday Night Football" telecast, which the restaurant carried on its televisions. He said his friend simply chose to turn the volume down when the song came on."

that doesnt even make sense...youre paying to get television, the network is paying for the rights of that song..i dont understand. might as well have to pay royalties just for listening to public radio ...

7/8/2007 11:44:49 PM

^ Yes, but you don't have a right to share the broadcast publicly.

7/8/2007 11:45:54 PM

sigh.

7/8/2007 11:48:07 PM

Quote :

"http://www.floridatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070708/NEWS01/707080343/1006 New low? It is hard to keep track."

If you were a cover band/artist, couldnt you just write to the artists you cover asking for permission?

I mean, I would think MOST artists would give permission to small time local acts like this without any problem at all.

7/9/2007 1:10:27 AM

^It doesn't even matter if the artists give permission. The record companies can still sue.

Hell, Nine Inch Nails intentionally leaked songs on USB keys hidden in bathrooms to promote their new album. These were intentionally free given out songs. When the people who found the USB keys posted the songs on a website to share what they'd found (remember, the FREE song) the RIAA threatened lawsuits.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Won-039-t-RIAA-Ever-Smart-Up-51375.shtml

7/9/2007 2:54:22 AM

Quote :

"*sigh it's so easy to avoid all of this by NOT FUCKING UPLOADING"

At this point we are discussing lawsuits that go beyond peer-to-peer filesharing.

7/10/2007 8:56:22 AM

Quote :

"sigh it's so easy to avoid all of this by NOT FUCKING UPLOADING"

Right, becuase the RIAA hasn't ever sued anyone who hasn't owned a computer.

7/10/2007 12:43:40 PM

Quote :

"The latest target of an RIAA suit is NASA, for playing copyrighted music over space shuttle air-to-ground communications, which are public frequencies. NASA traditionally plays wake-up songs to astronauts each morning."

7/10/2007 12:59:21 PM

^..............................wtf

7/10/2007 1:25:19 PM

^^ link or it didn't happen

7/10/2007 1:29:45 PM

^^seriously...i mean W-T-F

7/10/2007 1:31:21 PM

yeah I can bullshit on that one.

7/10/2007 2:46:36 PM

http://www.gullible.info/

7/10/2007 5:38:52 PM

i mean really...wtf!!?!?!?

7/10/2007 5:43:30 PM

RIAA got bitchslapped!

http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/07/virginia-judge-denies-riaa-ex-parte.html

In Interscope v. Does 1-7, an ex parte proceeding in the Eastern District of Virginia, in Newport News, Virginia, in a 5-page decision by Judge Walter D. Kelley, Jr., the Court denied the RIAA's ex parte motion for an order granting discovery into the identities of students at the College of William & Mary.

This is the second such ex parte motion of which we are aware that has been denied recently, the first being Capitol v. Does 1-16, in which the RIAA sought information about University of New Mexico students.

7/14/2007 6:12:09 PM

http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/07/judge-awards-68000-in-attorneys-fees.html

Quote :

"In Capitol v. Foster, in Oklahoma, the Court has order the RIAA to pay the defendant Debbie Foster $68,685.23 in attorneys rees and costs. This is the first attorneys fee award, of which we are aware, against the RIAA."

7/17/2007 8:53:02 AM

Has this thread covered the fact that guitar tab and youtube guitar lessons have been pulled from the internet?

Fucking fascists.

7/17/2007 9:24:41 AM

yea its ridiculous how they have attacked the guitar tablature sites for some time now

7/17/2007 9:37:51 AM

http://www.engadget.com/2007/07/21/riaa-wants-drm-on-all-digital-radio/

7/21/2007 8:25:37 PM

Quote :

"The Recording Industry Association of America’s massive lawsuit campaign to crack down on music pirates has generated a lot of bad PR, while any good that has come out of it remains controversial at best. In a recent conversation with TG Daily, the RIAA acknowledged that suing potential customers “was not the answer,” while adding that the lawsuits were “a necessary part of a larger equation.”"

Full article:

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/33022/118/

7/24/2007 11:06:26 AM

Quote :

"yea its ridiculous how they have attacked the guitar tablature sites for some time now"

7/24/2007 11:11:30 AM

yet there is no way anymore in this country to fight against a bullshit corporation like this

we just all bend over, and bitch about how we're having to take it

7/24/2007 12:36:01 PM

this is amazing. I mean the great part is people are fighting back and winning, the RIAA is basically a joke organization and the whole industry is getting left in the digital dust anyway

7/26/2007 3:53:17 AM

well what sucks is that they are still suing people and getting 3k per case probably

[Edited on July 26, 2007 at 3:57 AM. Reason : and college people that cant afford it]

7/26/2007 3:56:24 AM

Two new stories:

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/31/1628226

and

[link]http://http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/07/31/1233244.shtml[/link]

7/31/2007 4:25:11 PM

http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/08/judge-allows-riaa-to-serve-subpoena-on.html

8/4/2007 10:51:01 PM

damn I wish it was possible to sue RIAA out of existence.

if I ever got sued, I'd subpeona every artist that I had a song for; asking them if I was financially hurting them.


RIAA claims to represent the artists; but I wonder how much money the artists get when RIAA wins a case. my bet is none.


fuck RIAA. they're the reason why i support mp3 piracy.

8/5/2007 5:39:02 AM

8/5/2007 7:04:36 AM

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/14/2027231

Interesting ...

8/14/2007 9:18:58 PM

You mean spending thousands of dollars to stop tens of dollars worth or piracy and to damage your own business isn't cost effective?

8/14/2007 9:49:30 PM

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/08/17/riaa_anderson_class_action_lawsuit/

8/17/2007 8:19:29 PM

Looks like an NCSU student has stepped up and it trying to fight this bullshit. I wish them the best of luck.

http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/09/wolfpack-student-named-as-john-doe.html

9/21/2007 8:45:47 AM

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070924-victorious-riaa-defendant-gets-attorneys-fees-turns-to-class-action-plans.html

9/24/2007 4:35:52 PM

The RIAA's lawyers are officially incompetent. They're asking the lawyers of the people they're suing to help them draft motions that won't be dismissed.
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/10/in-response-to-dismissal-motion-in.html

10/2/2007 1:02:31 AM

Quote :

"You mean spending thousands of dollars to stop tens of dollars worth or piracy and to damage your own business isn't cost effective? "

You'd be surprised at how many people are paranoid about the RIAA WRT downloading music these days... their campaign is working.

10/2/2007 2:32:21 AM

BOHICA

10/2/2007 2:52:41 AM

employees of the RIAA deserve to rot in hell along with other scum of society along with tow truck drivers, parking nazi's, and ALE officers.

10/2/2007 10:17:31 AM

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/10/riaa-rips-defen.html

Quote :

" DULUTH, Minnesota -- Is 30-year-old Jammie Thomas of Minnesota also a Kazaa user named Tereastarr, who allegedly downloaded and shared copyrighted music? The Recording Industry Association of America says she is, making her liable for perhaps millions of dollars in damages in the first RIAA copyright case to go to trial. The recording industry lobbying arm first adopted its zero-tolerance piracy policy and began suing thousands on infringement allegations four years ago. The bulk of the cases have settled, been dismissed or are pending. According to testimony here Tuesday, Tereastarr is the username that Thomas uses on Match.com, on her e-mail addresses, and on web site logins . The RIAA put on compelling evidence that the Tereastarr on the Kazaa filesharing network, who allegedly shared 1,700 digital music tracks, is also Thomas, a Native American single mother of two who works as an administrator at a nearby tribe here. The RIAA's witnesses testified that the internet protocol address assigned to Thomas by her ISP the night of Feb. 21, 2005 was the source of the shared songs on the Kazaa network. The RIAA also put on evidence that the cable modem used that night was registered to her. Also, the username of Tereastarr was logged into Kazaa using that IP address and modem that evening, according to testimony. And the RIAA points out that Thomas had her computer hard drive replaced some time before turning it over in evidence. "She gave that to us so our experts could inspect it," RIAA attorney Richard Gabriel told jurors. But will nine of 12 federal jurors, all that is needed, vote to find Thomas liable for copyright infringement and as much as nearly $4 million in fines? Regardless of all the expert testimony and the forensics, the industry cannot demonstrate that Thomas was physically at the computer that evening in question. "Did you people actually observe defendant infringing?" defense attorney Toder asked Jennifer Pariser, Sony BMG's anti-piracy chief, who took the stand for about 90 minutes. Pariser did not directly answer. "It's very clear to us ...that she infringed our sound recordings," she testified. Tracks by Janet Jackson, Green Day, Guns 'N Roses, Journey, Destiny's Child, and others are at issue in the case. The industry is basing its lawsuit on 25 shared files, although Tereastarr allegedly distributed as many as 1,700 songs. Jurors often convict perverts for downloading child porn based on the same type of forensic evidence being produced in the Thomas case here. This case might answer whether civil jurors hearing that type of evidence will find an internet user liable for copyright violations. During jury selection, panelists did not appear computer savvy. Five of them said they have a digital music player. Only three knew where they got the music for it -- from iTunes. One juror, a construction foreman, said he had never been on the internet. A potential juror was excused from the pool when she said she had used a peer-to-peer site to download copyrighted music. Here in Duluth, the weather began cloudy and balmy and turned into a light drizzle as the day wore on. The federal court gallery had about two dozen people, many students, journalists and attorneys huddling in a cement-block courtroom. Those in the gallery, in the church-style wooden seats got a glimpse into the policing mechanism of the RIAA, which contracts with internet forensics group Safenet. Weaver, its director of operations, testified that Safenet investigators actively pursue people on file sharing sites. The company downloads unauthorized music, makes screen shots of the downloaded files and notes the source internet protocol address. The company also looks at what else the user is sharing. "We find a user, we look at songs in the share folder," Weaver testified. The third RIAA witness was David Edgar, manager of the internet security department of Charter Communications, Thomas' internet service provider. Edgar testified that the IP address identified by Safenet was assigned to Thomas at the time. He said the company received a subpoena by the RIAA concerning the IP address and turned over her information. "The name of the Charter subscriber account was Jammie Thomas," Edgar testified. On cross examination, Thomas' attorney, Toder, suggested that perhaps Thomas owned a wireless router, which a third party might have hijacked from "right outside her window." "A neighbor could do it too, right?" he asked Edgar. "Yes," Edgar replied. But testimony from another RIAA witness sought to counter that defense. Iowa State University computer forensics specialist Doug Jacobson claimed that speculation over a wireless internet connection used by roving marauders was unfounded. "There was no wireless router used in this case," he testified. The Charter IP address identified the night of the downloading was 24.179.199.117, according to testimony from Edgar and Weaver. Had a wireless router been used, the internal private IP address assigned by the router would also have been detected by investigators, he claimed -- likely beginning with 192.168. Jacobson is expected to resume the witness stand here Wednesday morning and be followed by music industry insiders and Cary Sherman, the former RIAA chief. Thomas is also likely to take the stand in her own defense on Wednesday. Those suing Thomas, who are RIAA members, include: Capitol Records, Sony BMG, Arista Records, Interscope Records, Warner Bros. Records and UMG Recordings."

looks like the first jury trial isn't going well. I'd keep a close eye on this case, see what happens, could be a major victory for those fighting against RIAA, or a major defeat.

10/3/2007 3:42:25 AM

Looks like a major defeat to me in the works.

10/3/2007 8:41:26 AM

^^

Quote :

"Had a wireless router been used, the internal private IP address assigned by the router would also have been detected by investigators, he claimed -- likely beginning with 192.168."

That's a damned lie.

10/3/2007 8:51:29 AM

from the evidence they have, it's pretty obvious that they were sharing, and the jury consists of a bunch of computer-illiterate people.

and speaking of illiterate,

Quote :

"The Charter IP address identified the night of the downloading was 24.179.199.117, according to testimony from Edgar and Weaver. Had a wireless router been used, the internal private IP address assigned by the router would also have been detected by investigators, he claimed -- likely beginning with 192.168."

Is it possible for them to determine if you're behind a router? I thought all out-bound packets from the router stripped off any traces of internal addresses. Also, are MAC addresses encoded into packets? Could they get the MAC address of her computer (or router) from the packets they collected on the file sharing site?

10/3/2007 8:53:17 AM

Quote :

"Is it possible for them to determine if you're behind a router? I thought all out-bound packets from the router stripped off any traces of internal addresses. Also, are MAC addresses encoded into packets? Could they get the MAC address of her computer (or router) from the packets they collected on the file sharing site?"

Your typical home router uses NAT. This site explains it very well without me having to type a description:

http://www.grc.com/nat/nat.htm

But in short no ... from "the Internet" you can't tell how many computers are behind a router using NAT and you also can't tell which one(s) originated a request.

10/3/2007 9:08:48 AM

Yea I have a wireless router and my original ISP would not allow more than one IP address and connection on the network. But they never knew that I had a half dozen computers and video game systems running through it; it all looked like one IP address to them.

And basically as long as you have a wireless router with an open WiFi that has an SSID broadcasting, you should easily be able to give enough doubt about you being the guilty party to get off in a trial. If I understand it you should:

1) Have a wireless system that is open
2) Use a generic login name on systems like KaZaa, Ares, etc.
3) Once they file with you, clear your machine of any trace of any filesharing from your computer. Format the computer and put a clean install on, or if your more computer savy, go into the registry and annhiliate all traces of said filesharing and all mp3 files. To make the first method less suspicious, buy a new OS or something that makes you have a good excuse for nuking your system. The second method is going to really fuck with them but I imagine you have to be very thorough. In fact they could probably undelete files, so you would probably need to use another HD to copy your system files to, so that forensics guys couldn't resurrect the files.
4) Destroy all burned CDs in your posession that could be gathered as evidence.

What other ways could they come at you?

10/3/2007 1:33:41 PM