Discouraging Maths Behind RIAA Legal Crusade

Phantasm66 · Jul 29, 2003

As we all know, the RIAA's promise to sue every last P2P user who deals in mp3s (pretty much every P2P trader on the net) or other copyrighted media is complete and utter bunkum... But now, an avid reader of The Inquirer has done their sums, and realised that it will in fact take over two thousands years for the RIAA to carry out its threat.

"I pulled out my calculator to see just how long it would take the RIAA to sue all 60 million P2P music file traders at a rate of 75 a day. 60,000,000/75 = 800,000 days to subpoena each person or 800,000 days/365 days in a year = 2191.78 years to subpoena each person".

However, judging from the completely ridiculous things that the RIAA have been coming out with (in this reporter's opinion), they may still give it a good shot, even if it is a battle that will take longer to run its course than the time that has elapsed since the birth of Christ.

Of course, that's not to say that you won't be one of the very unlucky ones who will get picked on, just so an example can be made of you.... Anyone dealing in illegal media swapping should at least be aware that they are breaking the law, and that they COULD be caught and sued.... But will everyone be sued in the end? Maths seems to cast doubts as to the likelihood of this happening effectively....

"When might this actually start affecting us? When 1 out of every 10 is affected? That would mean they'd have to sue six million people. That would take,...(6,000,000/75 = 80,000)... 80,000 days.. or 219 years! They'd have to sue our great grand children!"

Read the article here.

Phantasm66 · Jul 29, 2003

They'd have to sue our great grand children!

That will probably be the next silly thing that they will be suggesting....

RustyZip · Jul 29, 2003

Do/will all these threats from the RIAA etc affect us in dear ol' blighty ???

Or does this only affect America???

Phantasm66 · Jul 29, 2003

I was thinking about this just last night. I do not know.

But I would imagine that, if anyone is gonna get sued, its gonna be an American....

Mictlantecuhtli · Jul 29, 2003

I haven't heard we live in the United States of the World. Neither US senators making these copyright acts nor Recording Industry Association of America have jurisdiction here as far as I know.

Phantasm66 · Jul 29, 2003

Yeah, I would imagine that the issues are mainly for Americans, however this does not stop me from being disgusted by the whole thing, and wanting to draw people's attention to how lame it is.

MoRulez · Jul 29, 2003

From what I know, the RIAA's evil hand mainly encompasses the U.S., and to a lesser extent, Mexico and Canada.

Be sure to understand the REAL reason all this rucus is happening by reading 'The Music Lover's Manifesto', which you should be able to find on file-sharing clients in PDF format or check the HTML version here :

http://www.p2pnet.net/may03/mus.html

Phantasm66 · Jul 29, 2003

I am not even finished reading your article, MoRulez, and I already think its a fascinating read.

http://www.p2pnet.net/may03/mus.html

Its already making me think of all of the great tunes and artists that I didn't know existed until I started downloading from the internet...

Who knows... Maybe some day artists will covet increased downloading of their songs, in the same way that they currently want increased air time on the radio.

Phantasm66 · Jul 29, 2003

The simple fact that it was peer to peer meant that it was virtually impossible to download a complete album of any consistent quality. Every track was recorded from a different source, different bit rate, different audio levels, etc., making downloading a complete album that resembled the quality of a purchased one extremely difficult.

So, given that Napster improved album sales and could have been a great marketing tool, why were the corporate labels so eager to shut it down? The answer is simple: they saw it as a threat to their control over the musicians.

Recall that Prince changed his name to an unpronounceable symbol precisely because Warner Bros. owned his name.

This is the relationship of the artist to the major label. By being able to work away from his owner, the servant feels almost like a free man, and the artist enjoys the same false sense of freedom. The artist is able to do many things that makes him feel free, but these are just allowances provided by the master label. The artist can do drugs, swear, get arrested, etc., and the label says nothing—in fact, these things are encouraged because they provide free marketing. But until the artist completes his contract with the label he is still merely a servant.

Now, this deal seems pretty bad: the artist has signed away all the rights to his music, the ownership of his name, and, indeed, his freedom—in exchange for a loan and a few cents from each CD sold. Why would an artist agree to this? The answer is simple: choosing not to sign to the major label is in essence choosing not to be heard.

Fraternity brothers who studied together at business school—not people who actually care about music—are now in charge of what gets played on the radio.

If Napster was good for CD sales and helped get musicians heard, why would so many artists speak out against it? For the same reason that a servant would try to protect his master when his master was in danger: their livelihood is caught up in the slave system.

-recall Metallica talking about the evils of P2P piracy....

This last point is interesting....

Consider this: if we download an album or copy it from a friend, and then mail the musician five dollars, that would be as much as 50 times what that musician would make if we spent $18 for the CD! It’s up to us. We have the power to stop tyranny and all we have to do is stop buying CDs. -In the interest of freedom, this document may be freely distributed, published, sold, quoted, posted, e-mailed, performed, etc.

SNGX1275 · Jul 29, 2003

You non us members may become my mp3 laundering service , nah j/k I can get my stuff without using the p2p networks.

Phantasm66 · Jul 29, 2003

Originally posted by SNGX1275
You non us members may become my mp3 laundering service , nah j/k I can get my stuff without using the p2p networks.

You know what....? Even although there is nothing wrong with that sentence at all, as I read it, I can't help but imagine that you are completely drunk right now? Am I right? Save a beer for me, Davie.

Phantasm66 · Jul 29, 2003

Originally posted by Phantasm66 However, judging from the completely ridiculous things that the RIAA have been coming out with (in this reporter's opinion), they may still give it a good shot, even if it is a battle that will take longer to run its course than the time that has elapsed since the birth of Christ.

I take it back. The RIAA are God and they can indeed do things like that.

You know how they were talking about doing some kind of attack over the internet to kill the machines of P2P users? ??

Well, I was thinking that maybe the way they are going to do this is by concentrating pure evil and firing that flaming fireball of dark energy across the internet to destroy someone for downloading an mp3.....

Oh man, the world has gone insane. Best to just stay indoors, put a paper bag over your head and listen to the radio....

XtR-X · Jul 30, 2003

Most likely, they will have it easier going sueing Americans. They will target Americans first, then hop out of the country to the second most popular place of doing it. I think this is a bit extreme and costly, they would need to turn down the P2P servers.

---agissi--- · Jul 30, 2003

Re: Re: Discouraging Maths Behind RIAA Legal Crusade

Originally posted by Phantasm66
Best to just stay indoors, put a paper bag over your head and listen to the radio....

Are you sure that'll be legal? if you havnt bought even song that they play(on the radio), it'll be illegial to listen to it

MoRulez · Jul 30, 2003

P L E A S E spread the word of the 'Music Lover's Manifesto' as much as any of you possibly can.

The Truth Will Set You Free !

---agissi--- · Jul 30, 2003

Umm, ehh, LOL! Sounds like a Tree-Hugger to me (no offence,ack, that was a lil harsh)

SNGX1275 · Jul 31, 2003

Originally posted by Phantasm66
You know what....? Even although there is nothing wrong with that sentence at all, as I read it, I can't help but imagine that you are completely drunk right now? Am I right? Save a beer for me, Davie.

It was only 7:55 pm, I had probably had a few, but wasn't drunk then, its when you see my posts after 3am Central time (-6:00 GMT) that they are drunk posts.

TechSpot

Discouraging Maths Behind RIAA Legal Crusade

Phantasm66 Newcomer, in training

Phantasm66 Newcomer, in training

RustyZip TechSpot Paladin

Phantasm66 Newcomer, in training

Mictlantecuhtli TS Special Forces

Phantasm66 Newcomer, in training

MoRulez Newcomer, in training

Phantasm66 Newcomer, in training

Phantasm66 Newcomer, in training

SNGX1275 TechSpot Special Forces

Phantasm66 Newcomer, in training

Phantasm66 Newcomer, in training

XtR-X Newcomer, in training

---agissi--- TechSpot Paladin

MoRulez Newcomer, in training

---agissi--- TechSpot Paladin

SNGX1275 TechSpot Special Forces