Kazaa users?

[SouthernHockeyChick]

So are you ditching the site now that users are supposedly being sued? Just curious as my hubbie is a bit addicted to it.

[Stormbringer]

Heck no! Well, not yet anyway...the day I quit using Kazaa is the day I see a number of users significally lower than 3-4 million, and I mean significally lower as in less than a million. Ever since the headline about the users "being sued" a few weeks ago, the number of users has hardly dropped, if at all.

[VandyCane]

My husband is addicted too and I have asked that he transfer things on to disk and not the hard drive. He thinks I'm being silly. I told him that I have no plans to visit him in jail. :beatup:

[Shell]

now that the RIAA won the first battle, and your ISP cannot protect you, they have been issuing subpoenas at a rate of 75 a day, they have issued 871 this month. U.S. copyright laws allow for damages of $750 to $150,000 for each song offered illegally on a person's computer. US lawmakers on July 16 introduced into the House of Representatives the "Authors, Consumer and Computer Owner Protection and Security law" that makes illegal downloading of copyrighted materials a felony offence, punishable with jail time. Personally, it wouldn't be worth it to me. personally it would be absolutely ridiculous to put someone in jail for such a thing. Then again, the state of north carolina is now trying people who have meth labs with 'manufacturing nuclear or chemical weapons' under anti-terrorism bills so nothing surprises me.

It would be nice if more musicians would join the fight. I listen to jam bands, who have a reputation of being totally free with their music. I am a taper and I have full permission to go in and tape the bands I like and the festivals I go to, and copy them for anyone I want. The only rule is that I am not allowed to profit from it (easy rule to follow, it's about the music!!). It is great for bands. Take Phish for example, in 1983 they were in Vermont playing at a small bar. There songs were not radio friendly (most normal people get bored of 20 minutes of music with no lyrics). They became a huge underground culture in no time because they allowed people to tape and share their shows. Say 5 people taped those shows and sent them to some friends around the country, who shared them with their friends. They were a national hit before their first national tour with no studio album and not 1 radio song. Pretty amazing.

So, I record and trade music all of the time.. of many bands. But it is all legal. The bands I like insist on a clause in their contracts that this be allowed to happen. More musicians should go this way. The majority of the tapers and traders I know make a point to buy every studio album the band puts out as a 'thank you' for our privileges.

[Lady J]

This just smacks of big brother, though, you know what I mean? It gives me the creeps.

Read up on the boycott of the RIAA my friends ~ its becoming an amendment issue here rather rapidly.

[Shell]

This just smacks of big brother, though, you know what I mean? It gives me the creeps.

Definitely! Big Brother? How about Sen. Orrin Hatch who keeps insisting that they should "remotely destroy the computers of people who illegally download music from the Internet."

[SouthernHockeyChick]

Well, all I can say is when they come confiscate Mr SHC's computer they beter not take MINE too!!! Or will I perhaps be prosecuted as an accessory? If CDs weren't freakin' price-fixed to begin with maybe this wouldn't be such a freakin' problem??? :mad:

Thnx for all the info Shell!

[folgersnyourcup]

OOOOOO what a smart move by the RIAA!

Their plan to get these people that are downloading songs to buy cd's is to sue them and drive them into bankruptcy so that they can't afford the damn things! :roll:

How absurd.

[hyena]

now that the RIAA won the first battle, and your ISP cannot protect you, they have been issuing subpoenas at a rate of 75 a day, they have issued 871 this month.

i believe it. especially regarding kazaa. i used to use kazaa, but a couple of weeks ago started encountering so many intentionally-corrupted files that i stopped. the 200K connection speeds i was getting should have been a clue that the hosts of these files were not ordinary kazaa users. i hope i didn't wait too long to quit... :crazy:

anyway, i use winMX now and i love it. ;) haven't had a single problem.

i rarely download mp3s, though. i used to trade SHN's of live music over Direct Connect, which is a great program. hmm, maybe i will start doing that again... :D

[Stormbringer]

now that the RIAA won the first battle, and your ISP cannot protect you, they have been issuing subpoenas at a rate of 75 a day, they have issued 871 this month.

i believe it. especially regarding kazaa. i used to use kazaa, but a couple of weeks ago started encountering so many intentionally-corrupted files that i stopped. the 200K connection speeds i was getting should have been a clue that the hosts of these files were not ordinary kazaa users. i hope i didn't wait too long to quit... :crazy:

anyway, i use winMX now and i love it. ;) haven't had a single problem.

:eek2:

Uh huh...thanks for ze warnings Amanda and Shell, they were enough to make me finally take Kazaa off my PC. :crazy: I've heard about WinMX and used to have it over a year ago. Has it improved? When I had it, it didn't work well for me... :sad:

[hyena]

:eek2:

Uh huh...thanks for ze warnings Amanda and Shell, they were enough to make me finally take Kazaa off my PC. :crazy: I've heard about WinMX and used to have it over a year ago. Has it improved? When I had it, it didn't work well for me... :sad:

i thought the same thing -- i tried winMX a long time ago and hated it. i never got good connections. the newest version works great for me, though. even behind a firewall.

[Guyute]

Read up on the boycott of the RIAA my friends ~ its becoming an amendment issue here rather rapidly.

ding ding ding!!! take heed people!!!

[Lady J]

:eek2:

Uh huh...thanks for ze warnings Amanda and Shell, they were enough to make me finally take Kazaa off my PC. :crazy: I've heard about WinMX and used to have it over a year ago. Has it improved? When I had it, it didn't work well for me... :sad:

i thought the same thing -- i tried winMX a long time ago and hated it. i never got good connections. the newest version works great for me, though. even behind a firewall.

So you can still use winMX ? That's what Rio and I had been using , but we were told by a pirate radio friend to stop immediately because they could track your ISP number through them as well.

[Guyute]

I wouldn't say that using ANY software to download music is safe.

only exception I possibly see is d/l'ing from PRIVATE FTP sites, where you need a password. but even then it's risky. RIAA is obviously talking about spying on your drive to see if you've d/l'ed anything.

if it's still worth the risk to you...
I'd work on getting some people setting up FTP hosts so you can all do P2P sharing, and don't worry about some 3rd party software co dealing your info away.

[Shell]

The N&O actually had an article on tapers today, which is far more knowledgable than I expected it would be. If anyone is interested, check it out here: http://www.newsobserver.com/front/story/2717358p-2519504c.html I love being a taper and listening to a concert we go to again and again. They also mention stealthing for taping bands that don't allow taping.

[Shell]

I'll also say that live365.com is a wonderul legal site!!

I have about 20 stations preset from 80's New Wave, Acoustic Campfire Jam, 80's Hairband, Bluegrass, 60's and 70's, Halfbaked Hippies, Floydian Slip, Share the groove (jam bands jazz), The Dead Zone (tonights choice, Live good dead 8/22/68 followed by 10/12/68), and anything else anyone could ever want!

[Turbulence]

(...it's about the music!!)

Yea, it is. It's a strage issue...that I have to shell out $20 for the right to hear somebody play a guitar. It's lunacy...

...that said, there is always going to be some way to get pirated songs off of the internet. Napster went down, and we all got Kazaa and WinMX. They go down and somebody else will create another free program. I'm not concerned...

I have removed all of my songs from my Kazaa folder and put them in a different place, so the evil RIAA won't be able to trace them to my computer. (At least I think...) I rarely download anyway, and when I do I tend to download old stuff, and new obscure stuff, music I think is less likely to be bugged by the RIAA.

I refuse to pay $20 for 11 songs on a CD. I'll go without if I have to. It isn't like Brittney Spears and the Backstreet Boys are having to beg for food on the streets of Hollywood because people burn CDs...they (or, rather, their labels) are greedy. I wish music was still about music...not this commercialized crap that is influencing the ability for the common man to hear music at all...

I'll take radio over what the RIAA wants me to pay, thank you.

[SouthernHockeyChick]

Turby, that's pretty much how my husband feels. The only thing he ever downloaded was songs by artists that a) had plenty successful careers already and b) he only wanted 1 or 2 of their songs and not a whole album. Anyone that is struggling, we buy the CD. If there are more than 3 songs we are interested in, we buy the CD. But I don't see buying a whole CD to get the one Ozzy Osborne song we like.

My hubbie stopped with Kaaza and erased everything he had from his hard drive. He'd only been doing it a couple weeks. Knowing our luck we'll probably still get sued. When they sue me for everything I have do they get my school loans too? :p

[Turbulence]

Did he save the mp3s to a CD before he erased them all? You can fit something like 200 mp3s on a CD...that's what I plan to do if it becomes apparent that Kazaa is really 'biting' people...

Maybe we should go back to the days of recording songs off of the radio to a cassette... :beatup:
This is what Steven Page of the Barenaked Ladies has to say about the whole issue...
"Ladies and gentlemen, there is a debate over those-those - what do you call them - mp3s. Should you be downloading stuff and burning your own cds? Well, here's the answer folks: As long as you don't believe in the internet, like Barenaked Ladies - we refuse to believe that the internet exists - there is no problem with mp3s in the music business. You cannot steal something if there is nothing to steal. What is the sound of one band talking? There is nothing to steal if there is no internet. If there is no internet, there is no need for a moniter on your computer. Just type and touch your privates. I didn't even buy a monitor. It's all in my imagination. It's all in my imagination."

He sounds a bit kooky...but he's right...What is the sound of one band talking?

[SouthernHockeyChick]

He only had 50 songs that he hadn't burned to a CD already. He was gonna burn them before he deleted them but, silly boy that he is, he forgot and deleted them all already. :roll: He's goofy like that sometimes. ;)

[Shell]

Music Group Won't Sue Small Downloaders
Tue Aug 19,10:27 AM ET
By FREDERIC J. FROMMER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The Recording Industry Association of America (news - web sites) says it will not go after small violators when it sues people who illegally share songs on the Internet.

The assurance came in a written response to questions by Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman, chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs' Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Coleman plans to hold hearings on the RIAA's campaign, which he has labeled "excessive."

"RIAA is in no way targeting 'de minimis' users," wrote Cary Sherman, the group's president, in a letter the subcommittee released Monday. "RIAA is gathering evidence and preparing lawsuits only against individual computer users who are illegally distributing a substantial amount of copyrighted music."

Sherman added that his group "does not condone any illegal copying and does not want anyone to think that even a little illegal activity is acceptable."

Sherman did not specify how much illegal distribution constituted "a substantial amount," and an RIAA spokesman declined to quantify the phrase.

Coleman, a Minnesota Republican and former '60s rock roadie, says he fears that legal penalties for downloading songs don't fit the crime. Copyright laws allow for damages of $750 to $150,000 for each song. The RIAA announced plans in June to file several hundred lawsuits against people suspected of illegally sharing songs on the Internet.

The RIAA said that while it has not yet filed lawsuits in its current campaign, "we assure you that we will approach these suits in a fair and equitable manner."

Sherman said that in cases it brought last year against college students who were illegally distributing tens of thousands of songs, the RIAA settled cases for $12,500 to $17,000 each.

In a telephone interview Monday, Coleman said the RIAA has been cooperative but that he remains concerned the industry is "overreaching."

Coleman is a former prosecutor who has used the Web site Napster (news - web sites) to download music.

[Turbulence]

Good...
Me and my 35 songs can go back to Kazaa, then...
I'm glad they aren't going for us little folk.

[Guyute]

I'm glad they aren't going for us little folk.

Ammended:

"I'm glad they aren't going for us little folk. For Now."

RIAA are donkeys, and nothing they try to pull shall surprise me. They'll be trying to piggyback lots of bills through w/out anyone noticing. keep both eyes on 'em.

[mr. chubby]

I love being a taper and listening to a concert we go to again and again. They also mention stealthing for taping bands that don't allow taping.

hey Shell, as a trader i just want to say THANK YOU for taping shows and spreading the music to the community.

and I took Kazaa off my desktop as soon as i found out about the lawsuits. i have all the music i can handle anyway...

[Shell]

Girl, 12, Settles Piracy Suit for $2,000
56 minutes ago Add Technology
By TED BRIDIS, AP Technology Writer

WASHINGTON - A 12-year-old girl in New York who was among the first to be sued by the record industry for sharing music over the Internet is off the hook after her mother agreed Tuesday to pay $2,000 to settle the lawsuit, apologizing and admitting that her daughter's actions violated U.S. copyright laws.

In a new lawsuit Tuesday, a California attorney sued the recording industry, claiming its offer of amnesty for file-swappers in that state was misleading.

The hurried settlement involving Brianna LaHara, an honors student, was the first announced one day after the Recording Industry Association of America (news - web sites) filed 261 such lawsuits across the country. Lawyers for the RIAA said Brianna's mother, Sylvia Torres, contacted them early Tuesday to negotiate.

"We understand now that file-sharing the music was illegal," Torres said in a statement distributed by the recording industry. "You can be sure Brianna won't be doing it anymore."

Brianna added: "I am sorry for what I have done. I love music and don't want to hurt the artists I love."

The case against Brianna was a potential minefield for the music industry from a public relations standpoint. The family lives in a city housing project on New York's Upper West Side, and they said they mistakenly believed they were entitled to download music over the Internet because they had paid $29.99 for software that gives them access to online file-sharing services.

The RIAA said this week it already had negotiated $3,000 settlements with fewer than 10 Internet users who learned they might be sued after the RIAA sent copyright subpoenas to their Internet providers. But lawyers negotiated those settlements before the latest round of lawsuits, and the RIAA had said any further settlements would cost defendants more than $3,000.

Even in the hours before the settlement was announced, Brianna was emerging as an example of what critics said was overzealous enforcement by the powerful music industry.

The top lawyer for Verizon Communications Inc., William Barr, charged earlier Tuesday during a Senate hearing that music lawyers had resorted to a "campaign against 12-year-old girls" rather than trying to help consumers turn to legal sources for songs online. Verizon's Internet subsidiary is engaged in a protracted legal fight against the RIAA over copyright subpoenas sent Verizon customers.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., also alluded to Brianna's case.

"Are you headed to junior high schools to round up the usual suspects?" Durbin asked RIAA President Cary Sherman during a Senate Judiciary hearing.

Durbin said he appreciated the piracy threat to the recording industry, but added, "I think you have a tough public relations campaign to go after the offenders without appearing heavy-handed in the process."

Sherman responded that most people don't shoplift because they fear they'll be arrested.

"We're trying to let people know they may get caught, therefore they should not engage in this behavior," Sherman said. "Yes, there are going to be some kids caught in this, but you'd be surprised at how many adults are engaged in this activity."

It was unclear how Brianna's name — rather than her mother's — came to be listed as a defendant in this case. The recording industry said it named as the defendant in each lawsuit the person who paid for the household Internet account, but children typically aren't listed as account holders.

The RIAA said it did not investigate each individual's background before filing its lawsuits.

In the suit against the RIAA, attorney Ira P. Rothken of San Rafael, Calif., accuses the music trade group of "unfair, misleading and fraudulent business practices" for promoting an amnesty program aimed at music file-shares. The RIAA's "Clean Slate" program would allow file-sharers who step forward and pledge not to download files illegally to avoid being sued. Rothken did not immediately return a call for comment late Tuesday.

[Guyute]

there's a very interesting question in there, for sure.

there's no doubt that Brianna (a 12 year old) was Not the account holder of the ISP. Probably not the "online file-sharing service" account holder's name either... for that was a fee too.

So, how did the RIAA come about charging HER instead of her mother?
There's a lot of shady business going on here... and I don't mean by people downloading music.

But good for you RIAA... congrats on charing pre-teens who live in the projects several thousand dollars per pop. I hope you people rot.

[moonstomper]

there's a very interesting question in there, for sure.

there's no doubt that Brianna (a 12 year old) was Not the account holder of the ISP. Probably not the "online file-sharing service" account holder's name either... for that was a fee too.

So, how did the RIAA come about charging HER instead of her mother?
There's a lot of shady business going on here... and I don't mean by people downloading music.

But good for you RIAA... congrats on charing pre-teens who live in the projects several thousand dollars per pop. I hope you people rot.

well said Guy...good points

[SouthernHockeyChick]

Agreed, Guy. So kid living in the projects gets fined another couple thousand so that Britney Spears can reach her next million a little more quickly.

Why, in all this, has it barely been mentioned that there is price fixing going on with CDs? How about the legality of that?

In the suit against the RIAA, attorney Ira P. Rothken of San Rafael, Calif., accuses the music trade group of "unfair, misleading and fraudulent business practices" for promoting an amnesty program aimed at music file-shares. The RIAA's "Clean Slate" program would allow file-sharers who step forward and pledge not to download files illegally to avoid being sued. Rothken did not immediately return a call for comment late Tuesday.

Thank God someone filed that suit. They can get their amnesty from the RIAA, sure, but if something changes and they start pursuing these cases criminally you've then got a full confession on file. And don't think they won't use it. :roll:

[stewart123]

Well, the major problems with the amnesty program is that it's 1) only for the RIAA, with nothing stopping every record label or production studio from using that list of names to start their own lawsuits against individuals, 2) not a federal or state agreement, which means it would have no validity against a government investigation, and 3) the RIAA themselves can change their mind and use it, if a judge includes them as an interested party in a civil case filed by someone else.

[Adrenaline]

Buncha greedy bast*rds as far as I'm concerned! :mad: I mean cmon thats a fricken 12 year old girl there. Don't they have any brains...none the less mercy on a little girl. Give me a f*ckin break man thats just rediculous. I aint buyin' any cds anymore for a long time after that. That just pisses me off to high heaven! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Shell]

Record Industry May Not Subpoena Providers
Dec 19, 11:13 AM (ET)
By TED BRIDIS

WASHINGTON (AP) - A federal appeals court on Friday rejected efforts by the recording industry to compel the nation's Internet providers to turn over names of subscribers suspected of illegally swapping music online.

The ruling from a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia was a dramatic setback for the industry's controversial anti-piracy campaign. It overturned the trial judge's decision to enforce a type of copyright subpoena from a law that predates the music downloading trend.

The appeals court said the 1998 law doesn't cover the popular file-sharing networks currently used by tens of millions of Americans to download songs.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act "betrays no awareness whatsoever that Internet users might be able directly to exchange files containing copyrighted works," the court wrote.

The appeals judges said they sympathized with the recording industry, noting that "stakes are large." But the judges said it was not the role of courts to rewrite the 1998 copyright law, "no matter how damaging that development has been to the music industry or threatens being to the motion picture and software industries."

The appeals ruling throws into question at least 382 civil lawsuits the recording industry filed since it announced its legal campaign nearly six months ago.

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates had approved use of the subpoenas, forcing Verizon Communications Inc. to turn over names and addresses for at least four Internet subscribers. Since then, Verizon has identified dozens of its other subscribers to music industry lawyers.

The appeals court said one of the arguments by the Recording Industry Association of America "borders upon the silly," rejecting the trade group's claims that Verizon was responsible for downloaded music because such data files traverse its network.

The law, passed years before downloading music over peer-to-peer Internet services became popular, compels Internet providers to turn over the names of suspected pirates upon subpoena from any U.S. District Court clerk's office. A judge's signature is not required. Critics contend judges ought to be more directly involved.

Verizon had argued at its trial that Internet providers should only be compelled to respond to such subpoenas when pirated music is stored on computers that providers directly control, such as a Web site, rather than on a subscriber's personal computer.

In his ruling, the trial judge wrote that Verizon's interpretation "makes little sense from a policy standpoint," and warned that it "would create a huge loophole in Congress' effort to prevent copyright infringement on the Internet."

[raleighcanesfan]

Interesting. I've stopped for now (wife forced me too!), but this is interesting to see. How quick do you think these changes will go through Congress? (-;

Anyone use iMesh?

[chandongirl]

:eek2:

Uh huh...thanks for ze warnings Amanda and Shell, they were enough to make me finally take Kazaa off my PC. :crazy: I've heard about WinMX and used to have it over a year ago. Has it improved? When I had it, it didn't work well for me... :sad:

i thought the same thing -- i tried winMX a long time ago and hated it. i never got good connections. the newest version works great for me, though. even behind a firewall.

So you can still use winMX ? That's what Rio and I had been using , but we were told by a pirate radio friend to stop immediately because they could track your ISP number through them as well.

I've been using winMX for a long time now and love it...I don't share files anymore though.....

[tommy]

winMX works for me... I file swap sometimes.

But MusicMatch jukebox is what I use for most of my music, though... you can pick three bands, and it comes up with a list of bands that are similar to that, and plays commercial-free nonstop radio of those bands. It rocks, and its free. (the basic version is.. other versions have tons of cool options, and its like 3 dollars a month. very nice.)

http://www.mp3mag.net/images/news/anti-riaa2.gif