p2pnet - rss feed: Music cartel nails KU girl
p2pnet.net News:- A Kansas University junior is among the latest to ’settle’ after members of the Big Four record label cartel sicced their RIAA enforcement unit onto her.
“When Charli Johnson opened her mailbox July 2 and found a letter from a California law firm she thought it brought good news,” says LJWorld.com here, going on:
“At first I thought it was a joke, but it’s not a joke,” Johnson said.
The letter told her to accept RIAA’s settlement offer or be sued for $750 per song - or, $444,000.
And like the other 3,999 music cartel victims, she decided to pay up rather than risk financial ruin by trying to take on the multi-billion-dollar music industry and its teams of shoot-to-kill lawyers.
Johnson doubts the lawsuits will stop music file sharing, says the LJWorld.com story, adding:
“I really don’t know anyone who doesn’t download … I don’t think other people will stop. I doubt it. I really do,” she said.
And she’s right.
Individual file sharers stand about as much chance of being sued by the RIAA as they do of being struck by lightning, which ironically is a simile the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) has often used to describe the effects of its onslaughts.
An estimated 61 million Americans use p2p networks and last month alone, some 8,250,000 p2p users were online at any given moment. There would have been more had it not been the holiday season, Big Champagne ceo Eric Garland told p2pnet.
Shared files for the month were close to one-and-a-quarter BILLION.
Against that, the record label cartel boasts of the 4,000 people - many of them seniors and children - it’s managed to ‘persuade’ to settle out of court, always neglecting to mention that none of its victims have ever been convicted of anything.
In the meanwhile, music industry’s PR efforts are telling more and more computer owners who previously had no idea file sharing even existed that there’s a cool way to listen to music.
August 21st, 2004 at 7:13 pm
Quote the snake: “We will continue to pursue all avenues in our power to fight those who illicitly profit from our members’ valuable property,” the MPAA’s Jack Valenti states.
“Profitting?” The only profits i see here are going to be what that poor girl has to pay them for snooping into her computer.
August 21st, 2004 at 7:46 pm
You would think that, if anyone, the daughter of a lawyer would be aware of the potential legal liability of P2P.
And they say parents just don’t talk enough with their children. When their children reach a certain age, every parent needs to sit down with their kids and have a long talk about the Facts of Life (Forget about the ‘birds and the bees’ - they probably already know more than you) and explain … the reality of P2P file sharing … and the importance of hiding your shared files.
Even public schools should touch on this subject. This should be taught in the 6th grade at least - how to use P2P and not get caught. Sure, the same arguments against sex education will be flung around - that even talking about it just promotes it. But same as with file sharing - they’re already doing it anyway, and unprotected as well.
August 21st, 2004 at 7:49 pm
Shame on you! Don’t you mean that the dads and moms should be telling there kids NOT to share? heheheh.
August 21st, 2004 at 9:30 pm
Valuable? Right. Regarding record companies, that would explain why Wilco’s company (article is in many places) declined to release one of their albums on the grounds that the company felt it had no commercial potential (value?), and just shelved it.
Please, people (companies in particular), define a song/track/music file (uh oh). These things on their computers are bits and bytes and 0s and 1s. And please, back up that awkward statement that downloading = stealing (definition alone). Or that downloading = shoplifting (’common’ business sense). English is such a funny language. No wonder it’s considered one of the hardest languages to learn.
August 21st, 2004 at 9:42 pm
Yeah, but as most any parent knows, simply telling kids NOT to do something alluring is going to be taken as an open dare. Just like teaching them safe-sex, children need to be taught safe-P2P.
August 21st, 2004 at 9:54 pm
so what IS 4,000 as a percentage of 61 million or 1.25 billion?
August 21st, 2004 at 9:59 pm
I wonder if the law makes a distinction between sharing a single large archive containing many songs - let’s say a multi-CD “Hits of the ’60’s” collection - and the same songs shared individually? Would the archive count as one infringement or a hundred?
Speaking of collections - a collection of public domain songs can still be copyrighted (but only an album with that particular selection of songs) but what if you collected these songs separately, and then, out of pure coincidence, archived them in the same combination and order as the copyrighted collection? Would you then be breaking the law?
August 22nd, 2004 at 8:07 pm
” O ” but even better if we stick to our guns and win this fight!!!!!! HOW???????? Don’t BUY CD’s from the major labels. Don’t share music from the major labels. Let them have their CD’s rot on the shelfs!!!! Then see how valueable it is!!!!!!!!! Support only Indie artists and there are alot of them!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lets put an END to the major labels crap once and for all!!!! It all starts with YOU !!! One person at a time!!!! Let others know why you will not buy !!!!!
August 24th, 2004 at 4:27 pm
Jass,
Do Not keep bothering my web page,.. I am home sick for somebody else,.. You probally was a set up like Slim SAID A LONG TIME AGO,… AND I FEEL SO GOOD NOW THAT I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE SAID THAT I AM NOT THE ONE FOR YOU,… PLEASE BE SWEET,.. GOOD BYE
GOLDEN