Quote

I think the RIAA is on steroids. Coming off some huge victories against P2P and thousands of dastardly downloading teenagers, the RIAA is trying to take the definition of copyright infringement a step farther in a new case. If they win on their terms, then you're probably violating someone's copyright right now.

http://www.lifehacker.com/softwar....336.php

Quote

If the recording industry, the movie industry, the United States Attorney's Office and the Department of Justice have their way, then you could be punished for merely having Shared Folders on your computer. Get used to the name Elektra v. Barker [PDF]. It's probably going to be huge. Although the RIAA has filed thousands of complaints, in this one, it takes its complaint a step farther and alleges that by merely having Shared Folders on your computer, you are "making files available for distribution" thus you are liable for copyright infringement. But get this, you could be found liable even if all the files in your Shared Folder were legally obtained. That is one small step in wording but one gigantic leap in potential liability. Forget intent. Forget notice. Even forget ignorance. If you share copyrighted files, you are a law-breaking copyright infringer... no questions asked.

and

Quote

Question 3: But can't I just destroy my hard drive if I think I'm about to get busted for something? Spoliation of evidence... it's not a good thing, and if the court finds that you willfully destroyed evidence then the court may automatically presume the evidence went against you. This can work out very badly for you in front of a jury. In addition to this, you may be subject to sanctions, separate lawsuits and other penalties just for destroying the evidence, even if all the hard drive contained were pictures of Bea Arthur.

No way they can get away with that.

Quote

Ex-RIAA Chief: Lawsuits No Longer Useful Hilary Rosen: Apple's DRM 'Just bugs me' Posted 2006-06-09 13:25:48 Former RIAA chief Hilary Rosen states that the RIAA lawsuits against broadband file-traders have "outlived most of their usefulness". She pens a piece at the Huffington Post  in which she discusses how the lawsuits didn't begin until after she left, though she was present for the initial planning phases. "But for the record, I do share a concern that the lawsuits have outlived most of their usefulness and that the record companies need to work harder to implemnt a strategy that legitimizes more p2p sites and expands the download and subscription pool by working harder with the tech community to get devices and music services to work better together. That is how their business will expand most quickly. The iPod is still too small a part of the overall potential of the market and its propietary DRM just bugs me." In a recent interview, current RIAA execs said they felt "pretty good" about their ongoing lawsuits.

From dslreports.com

F'ed up, to be sure...but on the last note, courts have never exactly smiled on evidence tampering...

I have not used a "shared music" folder in years,  use torrents and have done for years.

Jeez, glad I don`t live in the US

I know I have posted this a zillion times, but here it goes again:

You can make a difference!

Stop buying their sh*t.

Currently, I already own all the music and games I like.   I intend to be very selective in the future on everything, knowing that every dollar I pump into a certain source ONLY GOES TO ENCOURAGE THOSE PUBLISHERS!!!

Never buy another music/movie CD until those thugs stop their practices.

(As far as games are concerned... well, there are different opinions there.)

Ethics or morals mean nothing to those people.  Only money talks.

Don't give them yours to be used against you.

If you continue to feed them, the 'intellectual property' laws will stretch to strangle almost everything.

.........................................

"I, for one, think it's going to arrive in the form of full-subscription computing. I've said this for years, but it can't be long now before these "rights" you own to your products are merely rights to use a remote copy"

Oh, and refuse to buy any hardware or software leading to DRM.  Do you really need a slightly faster rig to play the cr*ppy pap out there now?

Don't give any of the b*stards a dime.

Quote (SteMot @ June 09 2006, 2:26 pm)

Jeez, glad I don`t live in the US

Huh, and I haven't said anything about the ISPs or BT yet.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/5055744.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/5041684.stm

Quote (dysfunctional @ June 09 2006, 1:42 pm)

I know I have posted this a zillion times, but here it goes again: You can make a difference! Stop buying their sh*t. Currently, I already own all the music and games I like.   I intend to be very selective in the future on everything, knowing that every dollar I pump into a certain source ONLY GOES TO ENCOURAGE THOSE PUBLISHERS!!! Never buy another music/movie CD until those thugs stop their practices. (As far as games are concerned... well, there are different opinions there.) Ethics or morals mean nothing to those people.  Only money talks. Don't give them yours to be used against you. If you continue to feed them, the 'intellectual property' laws will stretch to strangle almost everything. ......................................... "I, for one, think it's going to arrive in the form of full-subscription computing. I've said this for years, but it can't be long now before these "rights" you own to your products are merely rights to use a remote copy" Oh, and refuse to buy any hardware or software leading to DRM.  Do you really need a slightly faster rig to play the cr*ppy pap out there now? Don't give any of the b*stards a dime.

yeah, that will never, ever, work.

This is only on the internet, right?  Not like on my home network... (assuming they ever find out about your home network)

This stuff has got Way out of hand, at this point I wouldn't put anything past  the RIAA. Suing little old ladys who don't own a computer and who never have and don't like computers.....disgusting.