Charges being filed...

People getting fined and prosecuted for downloading illegal music has been going on for years now. What is special about yesterday ?

Originally posted by the_wang
Cause the government is doing it?

Right...and who do you think was doing it before :rolleyes: ?

Originally posted by the_wang
RIAA?

The RIAA has to take the offender to court.(controlled by the government)

Mina, I'm confused (having paid little attention to study of the English system in law school). Isn't the Queen's power to appoint the Crown Court an exercise of governing power?

Finally pirating kiddies are getting their come-uppins!

Avast ye scurvy pirates! Ye best be ware!!

Originally posted by baggss
So now all you Canadian pirates can come to the US, where it is still relatively safe
Since I'm already here, I might as well pack up and move to Russia. ;)

Originally posted by punxking
You aren't referring to the RIAA going after the Internet2 users are you?
Does it matter? Isn't Internet2 the same as the ol' fashioned Internet, but a lot faster.

The RIAA could still get a person's information either way.

Well, no actually it's not exactly the same. The whole point is that the people (students) that were sharing music on the I2 thought they were immune because they didn't think anyone was watching and/or it would be harder to catch them (being a seperate/non-public network, etc.) The RIAA has said that part of the reason that they filed those 1000 suits was to make a point about this very thing.

In regard to the basic act and the principles of not sharing music though, you are right it is the same thing. I was just trying to clarify if this particular instance is what the original poster was referring to...

Yeah, I am still puzzled aswell to where he was referring too...

What i dont understand is, if someone is caught by the RIAA downloading say 1000 songs illegally and are sent a letter describing the fine, couldn't that person then go out and buy all the music if its cheaper than the fine? And by doing so, would not be breaching copyright. The RIAA can't prove you didnt buy the music before you downlaoded it. This theory is resting on the fact that its not illegal to download music you already hold copyright of, so correct me if i'm wrong.

And if it is illegal, then why is it not illegal for someone to download the music off the disc to their computer once they have the disc? Therefore creating two copies which you would have if you owned the diesc but downloaded the music. Either way theres a loop hole in all of this crap.

Mina.

Originally posted by Mina
What i dont understand is, if someone is caught by the RIAA downloading say 1000 songs illegally and are sent a letter describing the fine, couldn't that person then go out and buy all the music if its cheaper than the fine? And by doing so, would not be breaching copyright. The RIAA can't prove you didnt buy the music before you downlaoded it. This theory is resting on the fact that its not illegal to download music you already hold copyright of, so correct me if i'm wrong.

And if it is illegal, then why is it not illegal for someone to download the music off the disc to their computer once they have the disc? Therefore creating two copies which you would have if you owned the diesc but downloaded the music. Either way theres a loop hole in all of this crap.

Mina.

The biggest method the RIAA uses is to flood P2P sites with music themselves and then trace the music back to those making song available for downloading. They do this via the songs checksum and another similar number that is generated when the song is initially ripped (I don't remember what it is called, but someone here will know). The number between the original song and the one you rip yourself will not match and they can supposedly tell the difference. Thus buying and ripping your own would not matter if the illegally downloaded file can be retrieved from your computer.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the RIAA is not going after down-loaders in the US, they are going after up-loaders. As it stands right now, at least in the US, they can not force an ISP to give them your name, so unless your ISP chooses to drop a dime on you (almost none will, bad for business) all they can do is sue an IP address. The ISP should then inform the user of the IP that a suit has been brought but that's about it, the RIAA can't get you and can't make you pay anything. Doesn't really prove anything except let the general public know they are watching. They can not collect any fines on these lawsuits

One of the local colleges here, RIT, is being forced to release names of 25 students that have been taking advantage of "The Internet 2" to swap songs. They have untill the 29th of the month to comply.

This internet2 business sounds hot. Apparently it would take 512k users 24 hours to download 'The Matrix' compared to 30 seconds for internet2 users. No prizes for guessing what internet connection the Feds use.

Mina.