Perfect example of douchebag assholes:

[Monroe]

http://music.yahoo.com/read/news/43610153

Honestly, I cant believe some of the fucken kids who get accepted to college. "Oh noes I was breaking the law, and got caught, but this is so not fair that now I have to pay, wah wah wah". Seriously, I hope the RIAA will destroy them faggot kids to set example for others.

[Grindrolas]

and this is another reason why Canada's laws are light years ahead of yours..(and despite efforts to change this, it won't happen) How do we deal w/ music/movie piracy? Add a small tax to blank media, problem solved. Your government needs to put the RIAA on a leash. There are FAR more important issues than college students stealing music.

BTW, http://blog.wired.com/music/2006/12/warner_music_ce.html, the CEO at Warner Music admitted that his CHILDREN pirated music. Wheres the lawsuit against him? Oh, he told his kids not to, so lets ignore that...

The RIAA is a BULLY corporation. They target those who DON'T have the means to defend themselves against their lawsuits.

A Canadian label HELPING an American who is being sued for downloading music by their artists.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/27/nettwerk_sues_riaa/

[Monroe]

and this is another reason why Canada's laws are light years ahead of yours? How do we deal w/ music/movie piracy? Add a small tax to blank media, problem solved. Your government needs to put the RIAA on a leash. There are FAR more important issues than college students stealing music.

BTW, http://blog.wired.com/music/2006/12/warner_music_ce.html, the CEO at Warner Music admitted that his CHILDREN pirated music. Wheres the lawsuit against him? Oh, he told his kids not to, so lets ignore that...

The RIAA is a BULLY corporation. They target those who DON'T have the means to defend themselves against their lawsuits.

A Canadian label HELPING an American who is being sued for downloading music by their artists.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/01/27/nettwerk_sues_riaa/

How is this light years ahead?

Tax on blank media. That just sounds retarted. What about the people who buy blank media to use it to back up stuff or to put their digital pictures there or for some other completly legal purchase. Why should they pay this tax just because some asshole is stealing music? What about the people who dont use the blank media? I would say a good amount if not the majority of people who pirate the mp3s put them on Ipods or some other mp3 players. An extra tax on Ipods? Again, what if someone buys an Ipod and buys songs legally from the sites, why should he pay a tax just because someone else is stealing.

Your laws are shit because they appease the criminal instead of punishing them. Personally I have nothing but praise for how this whole pirating situation is being handled especially by RIAA. Instead of asking FBI or some other government agency to do the job for them, and find the piraters, RIAA hired their own lawyers and private investigators to track the perps without putting a burden on the government and making tax payers pay for it. When they find the piraters, they once again handle it themselfs through civil suits, instead of burdening prosecutors office with their cases. The guilty are punished, and the innocents (the taxpayers) are bearing the minimal costs since RIAA funds most of the investigation themselfs.


RIAA is a bully corporation going after the people who cant defend themselfs? Lol, thats just some stupid shit that college student said. Nah, RIAA is going after the people WHO BROKE THE LAW. Can't defend themselfs? LOL! Last time I checked there is a law in America that says you cant steal copyrighted music. RIAA has logs and other info to prove that she indeed stolen copyrighted music. So even if she had a lawyer, how exactly would she defend herself when its clear she has broken a law, and there is concrete proof that she did? Hell, she even said it herself, she knew it was illegal, but she did it anyway.

In fact if anything RIAA is not a bully because they generally ask for $3-6k settlements from the people they catch, instead of suing them for full amounts which can be thousands of dollars per song. They ask for settlements which would give someone a sting financially but wouldnt really hurt in the long run and prove a deterrent to never pirate again, instead of suing for hunderds of thousands of dollars (which they can), and that could really ruin someone's life, having to spend 20-30 years to repay a judgement like that.

So, just because children of executive did it, all of a sudden it makes it right? Executive himself admitted that it was wrong, and they broke the law, and he made them stop. As far as them not getting sued? Whats your point? A lot of people who pirate dont get sued. There is tons of people on this forums who pirate, I dont think any of them got sued yet. But if any of them get pinched, I will clap and cheer!

[Zelandra]

Any music that you can find on your school's network is bad, and you should be arrested just for downloading it.

[Tengil]

I like the word crack.

[Grindrolas]

How is this light years ahead?

Tax on blank media. That just sounds retarted. What about the people who buy blank media to use it to back up stuff or to put their digital pictures there or for some other completly legal purchase. Why should they pay this tax just because some asshole is stealing music? What about the people who dont use the blank media? I would say a good amount if not the majority of people who pirate the mp3s put them on Ipods or some other mp3 players. An extra tax on Ipods? Again, what if someone buys an Ipod and buys songs legally from the sites, why should he pay a tax just because someone else is stealing.
A percentage of every Microsoft Zune sold goes to record labels. A couple extra cents on a spindle of cd's, or dvd's isn't much, especially comparing the cost of blank media to retail music cd's...

Your laws are shit because they appease the criminal instead of punishing them. Personally I have nothing but praise for how this whole pirating situation is being handled especially by RIAA. Instead of asking FBI or some other government agency to do the job for them, and find the piraters, RIAA hired their own lawyers and private investigators to track the perps without putting a burden on the government and making tax payers pay for it. When they find the piraters, they once again handle it themselfs through civil suits, instead of burdening prosecutors office with their cases. The guilty are punished, and the innocents (the taxpayers) are bearing the minimal costs since RIAA funds most of the investigation themselfs.
They protect the PEOPLE from money grubbing corporations who claim to protect the artist, but don't at all. Our laws in no way appease the criminal. If someone up here started to SELL copies by the million, they'd be be charged and thrown in jail.


RIAA is a bully corporation going after the people who cant defend themselfs? Lol, thats just some stupid shit that college student said. Nah, RIAA is going after the people WHO BROKE THE LAW. Can't defend themselfs? LOL! Last time I checked there is a law in America that says you cant steal copyrighted music. RIAA has logs and other info to prove that she indeed stolen copyrighted music. So even if she had a lawyer, how exactly would she defend herself when its clear she has broken a law, and there is concrete proof that she did? Hell, she even said it herself, she knew it was illegal, but she did it anyway.
Find me a lawsuit brought against someone who is well off. Are you trying to tell me that people who have money don't pirate? RIAA has no LOGS, they have an IP ADDRESS. Do you know how IP addresses are given out monroe? Every time you connect, you're given a new one RANDOMLY. An IP address != a person (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060727/1131227.shtml)

In fact if anything RIAA is not a bully because they generally ask for $3-6k settlements from the people they catch, instead of suing them for full amounts which can be thousands of dollars per song. They ask for settlements which would give someone a sting financially but wouldnt really hurt in the long run and prove a deterrent to never pirate again, instead of suing for hunderds of thousands of dollars (which they can), and that could really ruin someone's life, having to spend 20-30 years to repay a judgement like that.
Stating that each song is over $100 is absolutely ridiculous, and one of the many "out of my ass" claims that the RIAA likes to regularly make.

So, just because children of executive did it, all of a sudden it makes it right? Executive himself admitted that it was wrong, and they broke the law, and he made them stop. As far as them not getting sued? Whats your point? A lot of people who pirate dont get sued. There is tons of people on this forums who pirate, I dont think any of them got sued yet. But if any of them get pinched, I will clap and cheer!
Nowhere did I say it made it right. Fact is, they didn't get sued. Why do his children get a slap on the wrist, and everyone elses get sued. Hypocrisy at its finest.

I'd like to point out that NOWHERE did I claim piracy was ok. I completely understand that every game, movie, and cd that I may or may not download is illegal. I live in a country where piracy isn't more important than CHILD MOLESTORS or CHILD PORNOGRAPHERS though, and my government has decided that that is an issue that is much more important than a bunch of rich people, who don't even have the interests of the people who made the product being stolen, wanting to fill their pockets even more.

Do you remember mp3.com? Remember the big lawsuit involving the RIAA? Remember the 158 MILLION dollar settlement? The artists haven't seen a cent.

The record labels in the US need to follow in the steps of the labels in Canada...
On April 14 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_14), 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006), six record companies left the CRIA after a dispute over new artists and radio content. The six companies that left are: Anthem Records (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthem_Records), Aquarius Records (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquarius_Records), Linus Entertainment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Entertainment), Nettwerk Records (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nettwerk_Records), The Children's Group (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Children%27s_Group&action=edit), and True North Records (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_North_Records).[1] (http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1144965013518&call_pageid=968867495754&col=969483191630) The loss of these members makes it difficult to state that the CRIA represents Canadian artists or recording companies.

[Monroe]

A percentage of every Microsoft Zune sold goes to record labels. A couple extra cents on a spindle of cd's, or dvd's isn't much, especially comparing the cost of blank media to retail music cd's...

So fucken what? I dont give a fuck if its even a single penny, when I buy my DVD's I dont want to pay a tax because some douchebag is too cool to pay for his songs. Nor should I.


They protect the PEOPLE from money grubbing corporations who claim to protect the artist, but don't at all. Our laws in no way appease the criminal. If someone up here started to SELL copies by the million, they'd be be charged and thrown in jail.


What the fuck does the artists have to do with it. Just because the artist recorded something, doesnt meant he actually owns the song, you stupid fuck. The one who holds a copyright to that song owns the song and the royalties from it.
And whats the difference between selling copies, and just downloading for yourself? Both are stealing just one is on lesser scale than the other.

Money grabbing? Lol, thats that communism talking. I mean god forbid a company wants to get paid for the use of something it owns. Oh the travesty!!!

Find me a lawsuit brought against someone who is well off. Are you trying to tell me that people who have money don't pirate? RIAA has no LOGS, they have an IP ADDRESS. Do you know how IP addresses are given out monroe? Every time you connect, you're given a new one RANDOMLY. Your ISP has little to no record of what IP you had when. An IP address != a person (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060727/1131227.shtml)


Majority of people who pirate use cable or some other forms of fast internet, dynamic IP was on dial up and i doubt anyone is waiting for 30min to load a song anymore. Just because someone found some legal loophole to continue to steal, doesnt mean shit imo.

As far as your "well off" comment... I dont follow every single case, I comment on the issue in general. The kids in the article were ceranly from fairly "well off" families. They were in college, they had computers, and their parents paid their judgements for them. Yes, the majority of people whom they sue are young, because its mostly younger people who pirate shit, I mean this whole issue is maybe 5-7years old, tops. Maybe they didnt "fight back", because their parent had more sence than their kids, and realized they were caught stealing and the right thing to do was to pay. In fact in 99% of the cases the reason the people who get sued are mad is not because they believe they are unjustly acused but because they were caught and all of a sudden they have to pay a fair amount of money, when they thought they were being smart and getting songs for free illegally instead of paying for legal ones.


Stating that each song is over $100 is absolutely ridiculous, and one of the many "out of my ass" claims that the RIAA likes to regularly make.

Thats the maximum alowable limit they can sue for or somthing. In realities depending on whom, they charge much more for the right to use songs. Radio stations pay thousands for each song they play. Movies, tv shows, hunderds of thousands. Thats why for example several of MTV shows, like Daria for example, have never been released on DVD in full. To secure copyright on music used in some episodes would make DVDs cost prohibitive.


Nowhere did I say it made it right. Fact is, they didn't get sued. Why do his children get a slap on the wrist, and everyone elses get sued. Hypocrisy at its finest.


So, what? Lots of other people who are unaffiliated with RIAA in anyway, didnt get sued yet ether. Doesnt make them anything special.


I'd like to point out that NOWHERE did I claim piracy was ok. I completely understand that every game, movie, and cd that I may or may not download is illegal. I live in a country where piracy isn't more important than CHILD MOLESTORS or CHILD PORNOGRAPHERS though, and my government has decided that that is an issue that is much more important than a bunch of rich people, who don't even have the interests of the people who made the product being stolen, wanting to fill their pockets even more.


Are you trying to say that USA doesnt put effort into catching child molestors and pornographers? Are you fucken retarted, our sex offender laws are way tougher than the ones in canada.

Like I said before, RIAA mostly finances their own investigation, so the burden on government is actually very small. Read what I said before, douchebag.

And if you are saying that piracy is wrong, then what kind of punishment are you proposing for the pirates? Or you just saying its not ok to pirate in principle, but people are free to do it, and there is no negative consequences for them.



Do you remember mp3.com? Remember the big lawsuit involving the RIAA? Remember the 158 MILLION dollar settlement? The artists haven't seen a cent.


Probably because the artists werent the ones who owned the songs.



The record labels in the US need to follow in the steps of the labels in Canada...

I dont even know of any labels that are in canada, probably because they are non-factor independant labels.

[Grog]

hey look, attention

[Grindrolas]

What the fuck does the artists have to do with it. Just because the artist recorded something, doesnt meant he actually owns the song, you stupid fuck. The one who holds a copyright to that song owns the song and the royalties from it.
And whats the difference between selling copies, and just downloading for yourself? Both are stealing just one is on lesser scale than the other.
The whole argument is that the labels have lost money on cd sales. Each cd sale the artist gets paid a percentage. Do you follow?

Money grabbing? Lol, thats that communism talking. I mean god forbid a company wants to get paid for the use of something it owns. Oh the travesty!!!I'm all for it when the product is GOOD, and the company isn't OVER CHARGING. $17 for a music cd? I only buy those I really love. Even then, I'd much rather directly support the artist via live shows.

Majority of people who pirate use cable or some other forms of fast internet, dynamic IP was on dial up and i doubt anyone is waiting for 30min to load a song anymore. Just because someone found some legal loophole to continue to steal, doesnt mean shit imo.
This shows how little you truly know about the internet, or technology. Cable and/or DSL both use something called Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol. DHCP dynamically assigns IP addresses on connection. Most ISP's charge extra now if you want a static, unless you're a business, otherwise its dynamic.

Thats the maximum alowable limit they can sue for or somthing. In realities depending on whom, they charge much more for the right to use songs. Radio stations pay thousands for each song they play. Movies, tv shows, hunderds of thousands. Thats why for example several of MTV shows, like Daria for example, have never been released on DVD in full. To secure copyright on music used in some episodes would make DVDs cost prohibitive.
And you think thats all ok? I'm sorry, but if I had gone in the direction of musician, and was currently watching someone else make millions while they pay me very little, I wouldn't be ok with that (and possibly, if you were a musician you'd understand). I'm not, and I'm still not ok with that. I'm ok with people being paid for something THEY have created. These people are making money off of other hard work. I have zero respect for that.

So, what? Lots of other people who are unaffiliated with RIAA in anyway, didnt get sued yet ether. Doesnt make them anything special.
And luckily, no one up here will.

Are you trying to say that USA doesnt put effort into catching child molestors and pornographers? Are you fucken retarted, our sex offender laws are way tougher than the ones in canada.
Nope, I didn't suggest that at all. I suggested that your countries priorities when it comes to the two topics are fucked up. Your government shouldn't allow a body, like the RIAA, to sue people based on an IP address.

Like I said before, RIAA mostly finances their own investigation, so the burden on government is actually very small. Read what I said before, douchebag.

And if you are saying that piracy is wrong, then what kind of punishment are you proposing for the pirates? Or you just saying its not ok to pirate in principle, but people are free to do it, and there is no negative consequences for them.
The current system doesn't work, and the RIAA protecting it with these random lawsuits, which people get out of easily by stating they're charging an ip address, and not a person, is useless. This girl, and her parents, who paid the $3000 either sought the wrong legal counsel, or no legal counsel at all.

However, in this case, where she admits to it, thats on her. She deserves what she got. With that said, the RIAA has made COUNTLESS claims that have been baseless. They've had little to no evidence except an IP address, which now that you know what DHCP is, you should understand that its hard to tie an IP address to any one person, unless its static. Even then, in a household filled with people, they don't know who to accuse. Accusing the person with their name on the account is all good, in theory, but because of wireless, households having multiple pc's etc. charging the person whos name is on the contract for that connection, also isn't concrete.

If pirates get caught red handed, they should have to pay a fine, even some jail time, but having a body blanketing Universities with e-mails to random people is not ok. What happened to innocent until proven guilty monroe? Isn't that one of your rights, just like its your right to carry a gun? So, you should be able to carry a gun, but these people who may, or may not have (and I don't just mean this girl) downloaded music should just pay, regardless of the lack of evidence against them?

Probably because the artists werent the ones who owned the songs.Doesn't matter, it was part of the settlement agreement, part of the labels contract w/ the artists. They're getting reparations on CD SALES, which the artists would have got a cut from, although minimal.

I dont even know of any labels that are in canada, probably because they are non-factor independant labels.
And your ignorance shows through. If you don't look into Canadian artists, then you're yet another American missing out on some great music.

[Victis]

Yea Canada produces no artists.. or actors... and 70% of nhl players don't come from ontario

[Monroe]

The whole argument is that the labels have lost money on cd sales. Each cd sale the artist gets paid a percentage. Do you follow?

I'm all for it when the product is GOOD, and the company isn't OVER CHARGING. $17 for a music cd? I only buy those I really love. Even then, I'd much rather directly support the artist via live shows.


You dont have to buy a CD. I think when you buy a cd you also pay for that booklet that comes with it, etc etc. Me, personally, I havent bought a CD in 7-8years. Majority of my music comes from my satelite radio subscription, since I generally only listen to music when I drive. But if there is some song that I heard or I when I needed songs for fraps, I bought mp3s from a legit site, allofmp3.com. I paid like 20cents a song. Thats not expensive at all.


This shows how little you truly know about the internet, or technology. Cable and/or DSL both use something called Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol. DHCP dynamically assigns IP addresses on connection. Most ISP's charge extra now if you want a static, unless you're a business, otherwise its dynamic.


What the fuck are you talking about. I have had cable internet for over 6years, and the whole time I have had the same IP.


And you think thats all ok? I'm sorry, but if I had gone in the direction of musician, and was currently watching someone else make millions while they pay me very little, I wouldn't be ok with that (and possibly, if you were a musician you'd understand). I'm not, and I'm still not ok with that. I'm ok with people being paid for something THEY have created. These people are making money off of other hard work. I have zero respect for that.

Off others hard work? You are fucken clueless. Who do you think promotes the musicial spends tons and tons of $$$ advertizing new acts to make them famous, pays for their recording, and its all a gamble, because majority of acts never make it. Maybe thats why noone heard of those "great canadian artists" that we are all missing out on, because they are represented by some piece of shit hippie labels who have no idea how to promote them. WHile american artists are followed around the world.


Nope, I didn't suggest that at all. I suggested that your countries priorities when it comes to the two topics are fucked up. Your government shouldn't allow a body, like the RIAA, to sue people based on an IP address.


The current system doesn't work, and the RIAA protecting it with these random lawsuits, which people get out of easily by stating they're charging an ip address, and not a person, is useless. This girl, and her parents, who paid the $3000 either sought the wrong legal counsel, or no legal counsel at all.


I dont even see how those 2 topics are related. You are just spewing out some shit as usual. And for the record, US government is spending a lot more resourses on catching and prosecuting pedofiles, than on assisting RIAA on suing the music piraters.

And because the piraters have found that legal loophole, that all of a sudden makes stealing ok? Is that what you are saying? Because that article that you linked, is pretty much saying "oh hey its ok to steal music, but if you get pinched, here is what you do to get out of trouble".


However, in this case, where she admits to it, thats on her. She deserves what she got. With that said, the RIAA has made COUNTLESS claims that have been baseless. They've had little to no evidence except an IP address, which now that you know what DHCP is, you should understand that its hard to tie an IP address to any one person, unless its static. Even then, in a household filled with people, they don't know who to accuse. Accusing the person with their name on the account is all good, in theory, but because of wireless, households having multiple pc's etc. charging the person whos name is on the contract for that connection, also isn't concrete.


Like I said I have had cable internet for probably longer than you had internet. I have always had the same IP. If its a household, is it so hard to monitor who is using your computer for what? I think that if you allow people to use your computer, you should bear responsibility for what they do on it.


If pirates get caught red handed, they should have to pay a fine, even some jail time, but having a body blanketing Universities with e-mails to random people is not ok. What happened to innocent until proven guilty monroe? Isn't that one of your rights, just like its your right to carry a gun? So, you should be able to carry a gun, but these people who may, or may not have (and I don't just mean this girl) downloaded music should just pay, regardless of the lack of evidence against them?


Actually its not random people. They knew exactly which computers downloaded the illegal music. If you been in college, you would know that colleges in general have limit on how much internet you can use a month. (I think Rutgers allowed like 2gb download/1gb upload a week, to the outside, and it was unlimited over the college internal network.) So, college have really good tracking system, because they track the downloads and uploads of every student who have internet access. If you read the article, you would know that university cooperated with RIAA and gave them the exact info on who was stealing music. It wasnt random people.

As far as "innocent until proven guilty", what the fuck does that have to do with anything? They were given a choice to settle for 3k, because they are innocent until proven guilty. Otherwise, the RIAA was gonna take them to court, prove them to be guilty in court, and then have them pay the full amount, which would be hunders of thousands of $$$$$


Doesn't matter, it was part of the settlement agreement, part of the labels contract w/ the artists. They're getting reparations on CD SALES, which the artists would have got a cut from, although minimal.

If thats the case artists should sue RIAA, they should win if its how you say.

And your ignorance shows through. If you don't look into Canadian artists, then you're yet another American missing out on some great music.
Maybe noone knows them because their companies arent spending $$$$ promoting their shit.

[Monroe]

Yea Canada produces no artists.. or actors... and 70% of nhl players don't come from ontario

what the fuck does nhl have to do with musical artists, are you fucken stupid?

[Victis]

no talent comes out of canada, and all our record labels are non-factors.. lolol

[Monroe]

no talent comes out of canada

I didnt say that. After all you guys have the Star Wars kid

[Zelandra]

no talent comes out of canada, and all our record labels are non-factors.. lolol

Canada did get absolutely smashed in the last olympics (in Hockey) :<

Umm....Canada has.....french people? ;O

[blackmanta]

did you guys/girls ever hear about Andersen?:O

[Talorth]

Canada did get absolutely smashed in the last olympics (in Hockey) :<

Umm....Canada has.....french people? ;O

Didn't the U.S. get creamed to the point of being a nonfactor in hockey?

Umm.... The United States has... rednecks? And poor people!? ;O

[Monroe]

ay least we didnt have a fucken drunk indians shut down our main rail road and then have our trasportation minister beg them to move.

[Victis]

We don't have you in our country.

Nuff said

[Damascus]

hey look, attention

FACT

[Talorth]

ay least we didnt have a fucken drunk indians shut down our main rail road and then have our trasportation minister beg them to move.

Well of course you don't. You'd just end up shooting them :P

[Monroe]

Well of course you don't. You'd just end up shooting them :P

nah man we shot all our indians last century. they already learned not to mess with the paleskins

[MrsDemon]

I tried to come but i farted instead

[Damarus]

RAGE ON MONROE!!!