RIAA Goes After YouTube Users

After fighting and bypassing laws and court rulings in Sweden against The Pirate Bay, the RIAA takes their fight even further. In the past they fought against mediums that facilitate the tracking and distribution of copyrighted materials, now they take it a step further. They have taken it upon themselves sending Google Video and YouTube users that post video's of themselves dancing, doing stupid or other things to songs, lip syncing to songs, karaoking to songs, using songs to put as the background noise for their CounterStrike or Battlefield movies, cease-and-desist letters. Next up will most likely be kids that play famous tunes on their own musical instruments for fun.





The RIAA has been going "to far" for years now and they are loosing the backing of the musicians they are supposed to represent.
More and more bands are choosing to publish their own music and setting up their own online distribution methods because the big company's they can sign up with and the fascist music/video policing groups like the RIAA refuse to do it.

The case in Sweden against the Pirate bay was a prime example of this.

Bittorent trackers in no way are illegal. They don't store any copyrighted materials, they don't distribute it and none of the traffic that transports these materials ever comes even near the trackers servers.
There are no and should be no laws for something like a BT tracker to advertise and track where you can find copyrighted materials, its in essence free advertising by the trackers. Its not the trackers fault that there are users that download applications and music without following up on the licensing payments and procedures.

Swedish court has ruled that BT trackers do nothing illegal but the RIAA and all its mother and sister organisations found a way to put the court ruling aside and got the Swedish police to confiscate the Pirate Bay servers anyway.

Instead of embracing the internet, developing viable distribution methods online for their products and being happy with the massive profits they already generate, the RIAA and organisations like it choose to terrorise the world like Nazi's and there seems to be no one stopping them.

Related News Links:
news.com.com
news.dmusic.com
www.osnn.net


[edit on 20/6/06 by thematrix]

[edit on 20/6/2006 by Mirthful Me]

I guess I need to be careful how loud my ipod is. If someone hears it, I may be prosecuted, persecuted for the unlawful distribution of music.

MAN!! I hope everyone stops buying their music, it is like the music nazi's are going to get us all.

I bought it, it is mine, I should be able to do what I want with it!!!

Semper

I'm wondering when they start going ofter ICE tuners that can generate 150 dB with their cars.

Before you know it they'll force these people to pay the same fees as dancings and radio stations XD

Introducing the Corruptibles!!!

www.youtube.com...

Check that animation out. Apparently that's what they want to end up doing with us all. They're definately against net neutrality.

Thats exactly how it is Bandit.
They already wormed their way trough US politics so they have the soul power and authority to tell consumers what products they can or can't buy, what they can do with everything they bought and even how they wish to listen to music or watch movies they legaly bought.

If they decide you aren't allowed to watch DVD movies or listen to your music CD's on your computer anymore, then they can force you to stop doing that. And with force I mean really force, with police, court orders and a whole lot of other glitter.

This isn't going to happen, people enjoy the internet way to much to allow it to be controlled.

These guys are asking to get a plate served to them by a mass invasion of viruses. One secretary is going to screw up, open up an Email, and a whol mess of viruses will screw their computer networks up.

Shattered OUT...

Im sorry, but entertainment has taken it too far, no one needs to be paid any more then 1 million bucks for anything! thats retarded even at a million but so many would complain if their music stars dont have a learjet or a bathroom made of gold.

No one owns music, as i see it anyone can come up with twinkle twinkle little star, umm ring around the pony, frickin the works of Mastah P an Kenny G, i mean all this stuff is made either by pencil, instrument, paintbrush, so forth so on an anyone else can create with those objects just the same, isnt it about exposure that makes or breaks an idea or Creation?

Im not saying artists shouldnt be paid or even praised for their works,But so many others out there will never get a chance an sound 10 times better then anything else out there, not to mention movie ideas, other ideas an so on, but just like sports players, singers, actors an actresses, its work that others could do if given the same resources so why pay so much money an make it such a big deal when that money could be put to better use, im sure.

so many people aspire to become singers, actors an really its for the fame an money.

Would they aspire to become rocket scientists, Particle engineers, or Nanochemists if they were glamourized in the next reality show or music video?

lol wow that would be funny.

but honestly would things be better if entertainment wasnt such a big deal, if it was only our focus when we wanted entertainment?

just really ranting that our attention is focused on things that should really be our Accessory focus.

[edit on 20-6-2006 by Tranceopticalinclined]

Running Backwards With Their Eyes Closed

This sort of publicity is not going to help the RIAA's clients sell more music, and frankly, if I were an RIAA-affiliated label, I would be seriously reconsidering membership right now.

They may be legally justified to pull these stunts, but I don't see a sound business case for alienating customers and waging war against technological innovation.

For a technical standards organization, it is ironic how dedicated to the cause of standing against new entertainment technologies the RIAA seems to be.

I think it would be wise for the RIAA board of directors to consider taking a more adaptive and sensible approach toward modern technology and the reality of the Internet entertainment marketplace.

The Internet can't wait around for them forever.

It simply can't.

The Downside Of Extortion-Based Marketing

By painting themselves as ogres, the RIAA's members generate growing resentment from customers who would otherwise -- given the means to do so conveniently -- happily shower them with money.

Angering customers is not a sustainable business model.

Also, they should seriously consider hiring a new PR firm.

But these are just my opinions, and I recognize the right of the RIAA and its members to make bad decisions.


[edit on 6/20/2006 by Majic]

Thing is, starting musicians don't even need the record company's and stuff like the RIAA anymore if they embrace the internet.

Only thing they need is a recording studio (which is rapidly becoming cheaper and cheaper with the capabilities computers have these days) and a site to distribute their songs on at a fee, sites like this already exist and its fairly cheap to create and host a site like that all by yourself.

And thats exactly what many bands are starting to do, except for the ones that signed with the big record labels, because they generaly lack the talent and the will to stop feeding these monsters.

These bands that go by themselves weren't mainstream enough and didn't have the mass popularity capability to them for the record labels to notice. Problem with that is that a good band doesn't need to be mainstream(and generaly mainstream bands aren't even good to start with, they make jolly tunes that are hollow) or have the potential to be liked by everyone in the world. There's 6 Billion people in the world, if a band can sell records or just single songs to just 0.001% of those, they are making more money then most people.

[edit on 20/6/06 by thematrix]

I don't see what's a big deal about this. These people are using copyrighted music as background for their videos without permission or compensation to the owners of the music. One of the requirements of copyrights is that the owner defends their right of copyright. This has been going on for years, long before the internet. My High School decided to do West Side Story as a school musical in 1982. We had to have a fund raiser to get the $250 to purchase a license from the copyright holder.

This is just too much.Anyone else here taught to share as a kid?I was told its good to share...This is more corporate facsism,and tomorrow there will be more and so on.
I`m not advocating piracy,but this is just opressive.

All I know is, being a musician myself & having dealt with record companies & trying to get a deal, I learned some valueable information.

The Artists themselves don't generally make much money from the album sales, or the residual income from "plays", whether it's on the radio, or in commercials...etc.

The record companies make money, The publisher makes money, & the Artist gets next to nothing. Unless they themselves own the publishing rights, & the writing credits.

Most NEW artists get shafted by the record companies & their lawyers, when the contract is drawn up.

So the RIAA is NOT doing this for the benefit of the ARTISTS! They are doing it for the Record Companies.

Artists actually make most their money TOURING! (Ticket sales, & Merchandise) But the sad thing is, most of the money they make ends up going to pay for the next album & tour, so they can continue the same circle.

IT SUCKS!

MAJOR "Big Name" artists can get better contracts drawn up, & actually make good money, but the majority of bands & performers don't stick around long enough to reach that status, because the record company makes what they can in the first couple years, & then forgets about them to bring in the "NEXT BIG THING".

So the RIAA can kiss THIS musician's Keister!!!!

Oh i really do hate riaa.

This really pisses me off, what will be the next thing? That if you get spotted on the street singin' youll get arrested? If tap a famous song with your fingers youll get fined? If you use a sentence thats also in a song, youll get fined?

This is poo.

Here i denmark we have something like riaa called APG. They do the same poo-y things, and the artists they represent have yet to see any money, APG sez that all earnings this far had to go to themselves to pay salarys and stuff.

Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 20/6/2006 by Mirthful Me]

Originally posted by JIMC5499
I don't see what's a big deal about this. These people are using copyrighted music as background for their videos without permission or compensation to the owners of the music. One of the requirements of copyrights is that the owner defends their right of copyright. This has been going on for years, long before the internet. My High School decided to do West Side Story as a school musical in 1982. We had to have a fund raiser to get the $250 to purchase a license from the copyright holder.

That's precisely whats wrong with it. How can they even think of charging a bunch of high school kids $250 just to put on a musical performance. Besides, the use of their music by your school should have been flattering to them and welcomed because it gave them extra exposure.

In my opinion, this is a clear conspiracy.

The only reason the major record labels release music to us, is to make money.

The success of the digital distribution network (i.e. downloading mp3's / streams etc) came as a shock to the major record labels.

Now along comes a distribution channel, that threatens their position, threatens to cut into their profit margins and even threatens their very existence.

So they gang together (the major labels/copyright organisations etc) and conspire to damage, destroy or take control of this new distribution channel.
Their tactics so far have been heavy handed, aggressive, and bordering on the bounds of legality.
But there is alot at stake for these guys, for years they have been earning millions and millions off the back of artists and music fans with over-inflated prices for their products (I will spare you my full music biz rant here )

There were many different ways that this issue could have been resolved, bringing benefits to all involved, but due to the greed of the people that the RIAA represents, it doesn't look like this will happen.

Please note, I strongly agree that artists need to have a copyright structure in place, to protect their work, and to help them make a living from it, but surely that can be achieved without all this corporate greed and corruption, and harrasment of their own customers!

[edit on 20-6-2006 by melem]

Why in the world are they going againts individual users who are just having fun? Shouldn't this kinda organization be focusing on those who make money and actually steal copyrighted materials? When was the last time you've heard of a pirate _selling_ bad guys caught instead people who just entertain themselves?

So from what is being said here I am to assume that people do not have the right to make a profit from their own skills and talent? Those record companies pay the artists for the rights to their music. Just because you don't think that they pay them enough that gives you the right to take their product without paying for it?

I am currently going through the process of obtaining a patent for a device to aid handicapped people. If I am successful, I'm hoping to sell my patent to a company for a nice chunk of cash. The prototype and patent costs amount to several thousand dollars that comes out of my pocket. If I were to sell my patent to some nice big corporation, to you believe that you have the right to use it without paying that corporation?

I'm glad their doing this, the more stupid they get, the more people will boycott them.

I haven't bought a music cd since 97/98 and dont have a shred of guilt getting them elsewhere. I support my favourite artists by going to concerts where the RIAA dont see a single penny from me.

They have no sympathy from me and I hope as many people as possible pirate as many CDs as possible.

JIMC5499 when someone buys that device you patented, can't they do whatever with it they see fit, rent it out, lend it out, as long as they don't replicate it and sell it to other people?

Will you be pissed at a person if he needs 2 of the devices you sell and just buys one because he has the knowhow and skill to create a 2nd device for his own use?

Will you be pissed if the person uses the device in public and lets friends and family use it if they need it?

Originally posted by thematrix
JIMC5499 when someone buys that device you patented, can't they do whatever with it they see fit, rent it out, lend it out, as long as they don't replicate it and sell it to other people?

Will you be pissed at a person if he needs 2 of the devices you sell and just buys one because he has the knowhow and skill to create a 2nd device for his own use?

Will you be pissed if the person uses the device in public and lets friends and family use it if they need it?

First off I'm planning on selling the patent. What happens from there won't affect me, it will affect the company that I sell it to. What ever someone does with something that they buy is their business. The person who starts making their own devices after reverse engineering mine is another matter in itself. I could see the company I sell the patent to sueing or prosecuting that person. When you buy something the company that made it has been paid for their interest in that item, however the person who starts making them on his own has only paid for one item not several. If he were to keep them for personal use then that wouldn't be worth the effort in taking him to court, but if he started selling them or giving them away that is different. That is the purpose of a patent. It is technically a law granting you the exclusive right to your own idea for a period of time.