the riaa have sued Jammie Thomas-Rasset of minnesota for $2,000,000 for illegally downloading music.

How much of a penalty would she have to pay if she chose to not break the law? Oh yeah...none. punishing people for listening to music is exactly the wrong way to protect the music business. maybe the record companies have adopted the 'it's better to be feared than respected' approach to dealing with music fans. i don't know, but 'it's better to be feared than respected' doesn't seem like such a sustainable business model.

---------------
sliding door rollers, sliding glass doors, stainless steel balustrade, standoffs signs

Greetings,
I think I first came across your blog via a link on Twitter.. Fancy the content I have seen so far and will definitely return to read more later.Interior Design

The next thing you know the library has to close on the loan books ...

I bought more music because of friends who share the songs before.

It's good to see an artist on the side of the fans. http://www.newfreemicrosoftpoints.com
http://www.freeworldofwarcraftcards.com
http://www.freemicrosoftpointsnow.com/
http://www.freemicrosoftpointsnow.com/free-xbox-live.html
http://www.freemicrosoftpointsnow.com/free-wii-points.html
http://www.freemicrosoftpointsnow.com/free-psn-cards.html
http://www.freemicrosoftpointsnow.com/proof.html
http://www.freemicrosoftpointsnow.com/gaming-blog.html
http://www.freeclubpenguinmembership.info
http://www.freemicrosoftpointsnow.com/free-runescape-membership.html
http://freefarmvillecash.info
http://freexboxlivenow.info/blog
http://freepsncardscodes.info/blog

They shouldn't be going after one woman, who they are trying to make an example of. They should be going after services like Kazaa, to make it so their service can't transfer music files. Not suing the pants off a housewife as an attempt to frighten everyone into not doing it. All that does it make people mad, and that increases the problem, rather than decreases it.

Find out How To Lose Weight Fast without pills, and get results which are much better and longer lasting. There are more useful tips and information contained in this program. Hopefully, you have found this Fat Burning Furnace Review helpful. Check out the full Fat Loss 4 Idiots Review if you've tried other weight loss programs before and know that they are nearly impossible to follow.

How does solar energy work. I compiled a comprehensive list of solar energy advantages and disadvantages that will enable you to make an educated decision. Gallery of solar energy pictures

PortableSolarPanels-forSale.com sells portable solar panels, solar roof panels, solar powered toys and solar power guides. Also provide article about solar energy facts and solar energy blog.

Maybe you are obsessed with
diverse links of london, but
have you ever considered that the links of london charms in the store
casement are better for ladies with large links of
london charms will be
gentle, allay, and links of
london bracelets?

TD Banknorth Garden Amway Arena Philips Arena Verizon Center New Orleans Arena Arco Arena Staples Center Rose Garden Arena Pepsi Center Wachovia Center Bradley Center Quicken Loans Arena Toyota Center - TX American Airlines Center - TX Energy Solution Arena Madison Square Garden Air Canada Centre United Center Target Center Palace Of Auburn Hills FedEx Forum American Airlines Arena - FL Ford Center-OK US Airways Center Time Warner Cable Arena AT&T Center Conseco Fieldhouse Izod Center Tropicana Field Camden Yards Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Safeco Field Fenway Park Yankee Stadium Target Field Rangers Ballpark in Arlington Nationals Park AT&T Park PETCO Park Comerica Park Kaufman Stadium U.S. Cellular Field Turner Field Busch Stadium Citi Field Citizens Bank Park PNC Park Wrigley Field

links of london jewellery is loved by most fashionable ladies all over the world, they all choose some other sweetie bracelet also with some charm bracelets.

Eternity perfume
Calvin Klein Euphoria
Eternity perfume for women
Eternity perfume for men

Zero Clearance Fireplace
Alcohol fireplace insert

wedding dresses

how they count this $2,000,000??????chanel handbags

this is a big number....
Promdresses1.com is one of the largest website with the largest collection of dresses,prom dresses Pink prom dresses, Plus Size prom Dresses, Short prom Dresses,Prom gowns and more…

Find a great range of Ed Hardy products. Ed Hardy Women's Ellerise Lowrise Sneaker · Ed Hardy Women's
thanks for your post.perhaps you will like cheap ed hardy
We will surprise to find the high quality cheap Ed Hardy in much.
Everyone will focus on ed hardy
ed hardy
Shop Simply Dresses for dresses, 2010 prom dresses, homecoming dresses, formal dresses, and evening wear. Find formal dresses for prom and bridesmaids
evening dresses
cocktail dresses
Evening Dresses and Gowns, Mother of the Bride Dresses, Formal Dresses, in Missy and Plus sizes for immediate delivery.
formal gowns
prom dresses
graduation dresses
Wide Collection of Prom Dresses, Evening Dresses and Gowns, Cocktail Dresses, Wedding Dresses,
Little Black Dresses, beaded dresses, ball gowns and Black

1st, a bit of background is necessary. I am an archaeologist, but I hurt my back doing archaeology in Ireland in 1996 & it has progressively gotten worse. I haven't worked since 2001; got on disability (which is very meagre) in 2002. I've been homeless twice in the past few years paid to upload(even tho I have a Master's degree). Up til this past Jan., I haven't been able to afford enuf food. Things have improved slightly financially, tho, so I can finally afford food & a few splurges like a DVD movie.

Downloading music will always be a massive one, and will continue to be one.

One

Two

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

15

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

45

56

67

22

456

568

785

111

267

889

880

678

512

567

7778

887

987

934

345

334

556

667

668

339

889

tiffany jewelry
Choose, buy and shop for on sale tiffany jewelry including Tiffany & Co Silver Necklace, Pendants, Bangles, Bracelets, Earrings, Rings and Accessories.
tiffany co
tiffany jewelry
Tiffany Jewellery offering bangle Jewellery, bracelet jewelry, eardrop jewelry, necklace jewelry, ring jewelry, finger ring jewelry and earring jewelry
tiffany
tiffany and co
pandora jewelry
Tiffany Style Silver Jewelry: Rings, Earrings, Necklaces, Bracelets and more Tiffany Jewellery at low prices

the record companies give a small cut of the proceeds of each record sold to their artists. unless it's a major artist that has a special contract, or the artist owns his/her own record label with independent distribution.
club penguin cheats

Mobile phone is the symbol of status, but also the symbol of fashion, here, you can find many useful things.

As a whole bunch of you have sent in, the musician Moby has put up a blog post where he suggests the RIAA should be disbanded for its $1.92 million win over Jammie Thomas. While (unfortunately) he gets a few of the facts wrong (they didn't sue her for $2 million, but it's what the jury chose -- though it is accurate that the RIAA has clearly suggested it has no problem with the statutory rates for infringement in the past), his overall point is sound. It's ridiculous that the RIAA thinks this is the proper strategy.easy saver ||

New Year was coming, everyone wants new clothes to disguise themselves, Abercrombie Clothes is a good choice.

I just registered, so Hi Everyone-- Hi Moby!

OK, here's my opinion on this subject.

1st, a bit of background is necessary. I am an archaeologist, but I hurt my back doing archaeology in Ireland in 1996 & it has progressively gotten worse. I haven't worked since 2001; got on disability (which is very meagre) in 2002. I've been homeless twice in the past few years (even tho I have a Master's degree). Up til this past Jan., I haven't been able to afford enuf food. Things have improved slightly financially, tho, so I can finally afford food & a few splurges like a DVD movie.

I've been downloading music since about 2001. Well, I d/l'd stuff to my desktop, but don't use that anymore, so that stuff is basically inaccessible. I d/l'd stuff to my laptop for about 1 1/2 years, but the hard drive crashed & I lost all of that. W/ dial-up, it would take me 45 min. to get one song. W/ cable, which I had briefly, it was considerably less. But my cable co., COMCAST, tried to rip me off bigtime & so I am not going to support it anymore. So, I've been piggybacking onto nearby but very low-level & intermittant insecure wireless signals. So, it's certainly not very easy to get stuff by any means.

I have a huge record & CD collection, about 1/3 of which I purchased new & 2/3 used. I have been a huge music nut since I was a teenager & used to DJ. A lot of my vinyl records will never be made into CDs, let alone .mp3s. I don't know how to convert vinyl tracks into .mp3s. If someone has already .mp3-ized a record track, why shouldn't I be able to d/l it rather than having to figure out how to do it myself? My position is: I purchased the music at some point: that should entitle me to possess it-- the format of the music shouldn't matter. Have I d/l'd stuff I don't own? Sure. But about 90-95% of what I d/l is stuff I already own on CD or vinyl. Some stuff I d/l just to check out-- new artists I've heard of but don't know their stuff, etc. Some of the stuff I like, some not. When you go to a record store, some of them have 'listening stations' where you can hear stuff before you buy it. I am mostly bed-bound these days & can't easily get out to record stores. When I hear a song, I judge whether I would like it enuf to buy it or not. If I do, I put it on a 'mental checklist' to buy at some point when I can afford it. Like Moby for instance. I was curious about his music, so I d/l'd 'Porcelain'-- might have heard this on the radio a bit, too, actually-- & one other song. Those I considered over the threshold of 'would I buy it or not'. So, at some point, when I can afford it, I will buy the CD(s) that have these songs.

However, most of the CDs I have bought in the past 15 years have been used CDs-- how is the artist getting the money? But if I like an artist, I will go out of my way to purposely buy a new CD so that the artist gets the money.

As I mentioned, I have also DJ'd-- I purposely play/support/promote bands I like w/o getting paid from them for it (nor do I expect to-- I'm happy to do it). I also was involved briefly in the music industry in L.A. & was the editor of an e-zine w/ a readership of 3/4 million. I never got any $ for that either.

Interestingly, it is cuz I've heard those few songs by Moby that I liked that I am going to go to one of his concerts in September. So, you see, he will get the money indirectly after all from my d/l'ing those couple of songs.

Remember, I lost my ability to earn a living by contributing culturally to the world (as musicians do). I have lost probably $300,000 in lost wages cuz of my injury. It happened that that was the only job I could find in 1996, but I didn't even get a salary for it, just room & board. Even tho my work contributed to world culture, I have never gotten any money from the public for it-- nor do I expect to. My point is: this whole issue is a lot grayer than it would at first appear.

I think the whole system should be re-vamped. There should be a 'master' website where all musical artists can register, upload their music in the form of high-quality .mp3s & then have a 'tier' system of payment. Most of the paying d/l'ing sites are $1 a song. That's too much! A track on a CD works out to be about the same cost & if a person is d/l'ing it, they are using their own disk space & labor; there is no packaging or advertising costs involved. It should be much cheaper per track-- like maybe 50 cents. Also, the disabled, elderly, poor, and poor students should only have to pay a percentage-- like 25 cents per track. The 'master' website would take out a % of the proceeds to pay the costs of producing the music as well as towards investing in/supporting new artists.

I should point out that I am a fledgling musician myself (singer/songwriter stuff). But I doubt I'll ever have the $ to develop my own stuff. It would be nice if I could get a grant from a music agency, then learn to be able to produce my own stuff, then I can upload it, & then the 'master' co. would share in the profits & get it's investment back.

Sorry for the length, but it is a complicated issue, after all.

Thx fer readin'!

'SaturnCat'

$2,000,000 for illegally downloading music, that seems like bad music to my ears.

This guy would not be able to pay that kind of money during the entire life span even if he sells his iPod.

Sometimes just having the knowledge of lawsuits and reading lawsuit loan reviews might be a great plus.

http://www.mylegaladvance.com/personal-injury-lawsuit-loan-testimonials-...

I totally agree and think enough is enough. There are ways to get customers to legally pay for the music they want to download and this is the most outrageous, least viable method. The RIAA continues to destroy the business in the name of defending the artists they continue to ignore.

I got here from a link on a column here which is a bit more tongue in cheek and funny (including a total, maybe unwarranted, swipe at Vanilla Ice ???), but does a good job of driving home that this mess is the labels' own fault.

I'm all for the disbanding of the RIAA. Since I've heard so many stories of how artists never actually cash in on these frivolous lawsuits to begin with.

So now it occurs to me, shoplifters if caught generally pay a fine of a few hundred dollars, almost never go to court and sometimes are just let go.

I think if push comes to shove, won't it simply be in our best interest to simply steal from a store risking maybe 30 days in jail or a hundred hours community service rather than a few million for a $20 disc?

What happened to $10 albums? weren't they making far more money as more people were buying?

I don't think the law is made to regulate morality as morality changes with a culture and popular opinion.

I personally don't believe in stealing and yet somehow copying digital information isn't stealing, it's copying.
I can steal physical gold and go to prison, but when I take a number, what have I done wrong?

I suppose, we'll all just have to stop downloading everything and stop using the internet at all the way things are turning what with all this legislation trying to control everything about the internet these days and obviously it's only going to get worse in the future if we all stand by clucking our tongues and saying what a shame...

We in the silent majority are all standing by and letting the minority in power (that would be apartheid) walk all over us and throw some of us in prison.

So it's not so much a disbanding, but a complete destruction and retroactive removal or crimal charges from all people everywhere who have been plagued by our greedy overlords.

We need a Digital Revolution!

To speak out in favor of music fans is great if you want to look noble to them, but the reality is that this lady broke the law. Further, she believed that she broke the law and wouldn't get caught. Then when she did get caught, she became a liar under oath and rejected a plea bargain for much, much less (around $3000). How is this respectful of people who create? It may work out fine for you, having made a good amount of money already, but as you know over 95% of artists don't even make a living at their craft. This type of behavior doesn't help that stat any.

If this lady had spent as much time actually purchasing music through iTunes, as opposed to installing software that is intended to infringe copyrighted material, she would have no legal problems to worry about...but she didn't. She made a choice and went down the path of piracy.

Let's not sugar-coat this. Let's call it like it really is.

Jammie Thomas Rasset has been making headlines as a person who has been made an example of, who really doesn't deserve it. Jammie Thomas Rasset has been sued by the RIAA for illegal downloading from Kazaa, and they want some instant cash to the tune of $1.9 million, for downloading 24 songs – 2 CDs worth. Intellectual property needs to be preserved, but given the history of the music industry, even a casual examination reveals that they only care about the gravy train, rather than the artist's intellectual property, and many recording contracts give almost all licensing to the record companies, which is who is behind the huge need for cash advance loans of epic proportions for Jammie Thomas Rasset. Visit http://personalmoneystore.com/Cash-Advance/cash-Advance-Loans/ for more info.

Firs of all please I’m sorry for my English

You know, Moby, I’m not so popular artist like you. I was release my new album “Free Diving” – Rhythm of Mankind & Nature 12 June 09 and 18 June 09 anyone can download it for free. How can I earn for future release? Could you explain me? It’s not concert music, Atmospheric Style. I spent one year of life for record it.

The RIAA was also a driving force in the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, which is about 116 pages of nonsense that made free internet broadcasting virtually impossible and then they dictated how we could broadcast. It was bad enough that we had to buy the domain name, then pay for the website, then pay $68 a month for each broadcast stream, not to mention paying another couple hundred dollars to parent the streaming managment software and $60 for each dj seat that was using that software for the station. THEN I get a letter that says I need another license to operate my station and my monthly fee can change based on average listeners per hour. Even worse....I have to wait 60 freakin minutes to play songs that are requested, and this is on a station that is driven by requests from the listeners.

For the RIAA to sue this woman for $2M is absolutely obscene. You can "legally" download from several sites with a membership, now chances are that people will purchase conversion software in order to convert those songs to MP3 format, but technically the songs were all downloaded legally. I can go to a legal site right now, download a couple thousand songs, covert them to MP3 Lame and have them available for broadcast by noon.....chances are I would still get sued because I ripped the comments out.

What the RIAA seems to be missing is the fact that music has become digital and labels have lost control of the flow of music. As someone said earlier, the artists seem to be making their money by touring, not by record sales in stores. Which brings me to my next question....Is anyone monitoring how many albums are downloaded from sites like Amazon?

I don't know about you, but the way the RIAA is trying to put a chokehold the flow of music is disturbing and greedy. They need to catch up with the digital age and then figure what can be done.

well when it comes to illegal downloading they always forget that in countries like Serbia, there is NO SHIPPING so how the hell could we ever get music here? Even worse for those who listen to rare artist. I would not mind paying for the music if Serbia was on the list of countries from where you can order...

anyway i am not against downloading, but it would be better if they encouraged having genuine hard copies than mp3s.

But how much do artist get from the recording companies anyway, like the quarter of the whole price?

MOBY FOR PRESIDENT of RIAA

...it's attacking them.

What kind of people continuously tell us that Bill Gates shouldn't be allowed to keep his billions; that products and services should be given for free; that money is the root of all evil? Actors, musicians, and Academics, mainly.

When you accept the idea that it is proper to steal from others, you must accept that sooner or later, you will be an "other".

Artists, musicians, and Academics, and other miscellaneous collectivists: you created the monster that is now destroying the last free country on Earth, and now you will be consumed by it, right along with the object of your envy: the hated rich. You've been warned by history a dozen times over but still you do not learn.

Stop crying that the product of your work is being stolen by your fans - you told them to do it.

Does anybody want to guess how much of the money the RIAA has recovered for file sharing has actually gone to artists? Anybody? Would you believe ZERO?

BTW, I'm still trying to figure out why recording costs are recouped from the BAND'S royalties, not split in the same percentage as profits from the record. See also http://www.negativland.com/albini.html . And we're supposed to feel sorry for these companies when people listen to music without paying for it?

The next thing you know the library will have to shut down for lending out books...

I've purchased MORE music because of friends sharing songs than before.

Good to see an artist on the side of the fans.

This, yet another desperate reaction, from the industry fossil.

The fossil:
An RIAA that stood by, as clear channel destroyed free trade and competition in music, and funneled their monies into the far right's religious attack on Gays, people of color, and inner city youth, while supporting the war in Iraq, the bush regime, and ultraconservative causes.

An RIAA, that has shamelessly awarded homophobic, racist, sexist, and violent music, numerous times,and at the same time reward the very worst, prefab, phony, propped up "artists" of the Disney Machine, and destroyed it's own credibility in doing so.

An RIAA that stood by, willingly blind to payola, while billions were made for for mobsters, criminals,and conglomerates while bands and artists suffered.

An RIAA that refused to embrace the MP3, file sharing, creative commons licenses, and that shamelessly pandered to the very worst American corporate excesses, that in essence, were the undoing of the music industry.

The RIAA has shown itself once again, drastically out-of-touch, not interested in the concerns of the common person's desire to have affordable music in their lives, and Little more than a shill, and running dog of the Major corporate Powers, that have infiltrated and destroyed the music industry.

Good thing for local regional, and national music and the people who carry on, regardless of if they have a "major label" contract or not.

MUSIC BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE.

Piero Amadeo Infante.
Berkeley CA, 2009.

papamalo@gmail.com
http://www.papamalo.com

well it's about time an artist, a successful one, takes a stance like this. My feelings about music file sharing are quite passionately in defense of the sharers. It is a shame we're being punished for listening to music. The reputation of RIAA is beyond repair to me. I think the artists who benefit by downloading far outweigh any damage done to others.(I can't think of what damage this might be). Does file sharing actually promote artists? of course. Does file sharing stop fans from going to concerts to pay top dollar for front line artists??? of course not. The bottom line is, it's for the greater good we share files. And for the record, I still purchase music online. (but I WON'T pay full price to the real thieves, Sony & EMI etc.)

...for the long rant. It just felt like there was too much important information for anything to be left out of my post.

Yes, the nearly 2M fine is outrageous, but if that alone hasn't had you frothing at the mouth, here's something that probably will push you over that edge.

First off, I'm going to start by addressing the "notice" fine that she got in the mail. Media Sentry, the "company" that was investigating for the RIAA to track down file sharers was NEVER LICENSED TO DO INVESTIGATIVE WORK IN ANY STATE IN THIS COUNTRY. What's worse is that they did it across state lines. That's criminal behaviour. There was no accountability, no checks or precautions. No peer review. Nothing but their word. (Considering they engaged in illegal behaviour, that already puts their word into doubt.)

They just looked at a user, wrote down whatever IP address they were using, what tracks they saw in a share folder. Then the RIAA files a motion in court to discover who these John Does are... meanwhile, the John Does can't be contacted to defend themselves until -after- personal information had been released on them. Conveniently, the RIAA had already had their day in court without opposition before they sent the notices out demanding a settlement from the people that were ASSUMED to be file sharing. This amount, according to the letters, is to be paid under the threat that they will be taken to court and could stand to lose much more.

You know what that's called? Extortion. Pay us now... cause it would be a shame if you lost everything you had whether or not you were actually the right person to be accused of filesharing. (Remember the dead grandmother or the person who never owned a computer or had any internet connections?)

Now for what really needs to be looked at, the penalty or so-called 'damages'.

Let's assume each of the 24 songs in question in Jammie's case is available on iTunes with a price of 99 cents. Let's also assume that statutory damages were actually limited to the revenue lost by the company (which they obviously aren't)... And finally that the 24 songs were each 5MB and the cable modem had an upload speed of 256kbps. (Given that this happened in 2004, 256k or 384k upspeed is most likely)

For the 24 songs in question to incur $80,000 in damages each... they would have had to be downloaded a total of 1,939,394 times, for 9,696,970 MB (9.6GB) of downloads. This would, at 256kbps, take 3,507 days (about 9 and a half years). Kazaa had only existed for about three years at the point of infringement. Also... that ignores the remaining 1,678 songs.

Going the other direction, if all 1,702 songs were saturating the upload speed of the modem for the history of Kazaa (call it 3 years even to make things easier) you'd have been able to upload 1,009,152MB, or about 201,830 songs, divided evenly over all 1,702 songs... that's about 118 times each. At 99 cents each, that's $2,803.68 in statutory damages.

$2,803.68 total, not each song, and only that much given that her connection was *absolutely saturated for the entire three years.*

Another way to put $80,000 per song in perspective, look at the RIAA's 2001 marketing stats ( http://www.azoz.com/music/features/0008.html ) (the latest year I could find figures for new releases). On average each new CD title brought in about $500,000 in revenue. If you figure conservatively 8 songs per CD, that works out to $62,500 per song. (The difference between an ep/single and an album, or an album with longer tracks, etc... 8 seems like a fair number.)

In other words, the jury awarded more averaged damages per song than if she'd prevented all copies of the song from ever being sold.

You angry now?

I've been a lurker on here for a very, very long time and felt the need to say something now. I'm exceptionally pleased that you have decided to speak out against this, Moby... but I don't see how any reasonable person shouldn't. It crossed a line so far, so low that I cannot fathom what the jury was thinking... that they couldn't even be of our own society.

I was disheartened when Mute Records was acquired by EMI. This made Mute, and its releases, funding sources for the RIAA. I have much respect for Daniel Miller and what he did with Mute (Mute was one of the two labels I would blindly purchase releases from. WaxTrax was the other. It was how I discovered Moby... I saw a copy of the Move EP and bought it on account of it being a Mute release.)... It put me at ends with my desire to explore new music on account of a label's reputation. If it wasn't for the extreme abuses being perpetuated by the RIAA when it comes to how they view filesharing... I wouldn't be so selective and shy as I am now about buying RIAA affiliated acts.

Filesharing is killing music? No. The RIAA is.

that is so dog of them to charge her 2 million smakers it's all about money these days but money can't buy your soul back