More Riaa Bs?
09-09-2003, 03:41 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cincinnati, Oh hi hoe!
Posts: 2,286
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,96797,00.html
12 years old and WAS signed up for a service.. still being sued?
12 years old and WAS signed up for a service.. still being sued?
09-09-2003, 04:20 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 1,784
Naw over people getting screwed cuz someoen else got music under their name. One particular case some old man that knows nothing about computers who's grandchildren download music yet its under his name. They're entire plan is flawed. You only get in trouble mainly for sharing it, not downloading it because its legal to get songs as long as you have the cd or so i've heard. Their entire plan is flawed though just off those guidelines. Cuz if the people downloading are legit then the sharers are doing nothing wrong as well.
09-09-2003, 04:23 PM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Houston Texas
Posts: 1,142
I think the whole system is messed up...
At first the record companies were selling Cd's for almost $20. So like all humans we tried to defend ourselves by creating napster. A small attempt to fight the system. Well in my eyes we won. Now the record company is mad because we are no longer in a monopoly type situation and can simply click a link and BAM! Music is on our harddrive.
I can honestly say I never stopped buying Cd's.During the Peak of the Napster days I think the record labels only saw a 10% loss. Now that they are being little babies about everything they are seeing almost a 30-40% loss. And the funny part is...the dumb asses think it is because people would rather download music then buy it. When the actual truth is...People are doing the same thing that I am doing and that is to not buy cd's altogether.
In my eyes the record industry did it to itself. But I am not really that angry. The more people they sue....the less Cd's that are going to sell. Its a lose, lose situation either way. So I am not worried in the least bit
At first the record companies were selling Cd's for almost $20. So like all humans we tried to defend ourselves by creating napster. A small attempt to fight the system. Well in my eyes we won. Now the record company is mad because we are no longer in a monopoly type situation and can simply click a link and BAM! Music is on our harddrive.
I can honestly say I never stopped buying Cd's.During the Peak of the Napster days I think the record labels only saw a 10% loss. Now that they are being little babies about everything they are seeing almost a 30-40% loss. And the funny part is...the dumb asses think it is because people would rather download music then buy it. When the actual truth is...People are doing the same thing that I am doing and that is to not buy cd's altogether.
In my eyes the record industry did it to itself. But I am not really that angry. The more people they sue....the less Cd's that are going to sell. Its a lose, lose situation either way. So I am not worried in the least bit
09-09-2003, 05:18 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Fayetteville, Georgia
Posts: 2,483
I wrote a letter to the editor about an article for the NY Times on this subject.
How can an industry survive by suing its main customer base?
Young people buy the most CDs.
The industry is outdated.
How can an industry survive by suing its main customer base?
Young people buy the most CDs.
The industry is outdated.
09-09-2003, 07:34 PM
#9
Super Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Amityville, New York
Posts: 12,288
Originally Posted by Leetheslacker' date='Sep 9 2003, 08:31 PM
Thing is, people who are paying for services to download music, like this 12 year old are downloading legally and sharing legally so why is she and her family being sued?
