Music industry starts legal fight

[Ironduke]

Music industry starts legal fight

The US music industry has started legal action against hundreds of people accused of sharing music files without permission online.
The lawsuits, filed in federal courts across the United States, had been widely expected.

The legal action is controversial, with many observers accusing the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) of being heavy-handed.

Those found guilty face fines of up to $150,000 (£100,000) per song swapped.

Exactly 261 people received lawsuits on Monday on behalf of Universal Music Group, BMG, EMI, Sony Music and Warner Music, following the RIAA's announcement in June that individual file-sharers would be targeted.

RIAA president Carey Sherman said he hoped the legal action would prompt parents to pay more attention to potentially illegal activities by their children.

"We expect people to say 'It isn't me, it was my kid,' but someone has to take responsibility," Sherman said.

More lawsuits are expected to follow after Monday's initial set.

The actions resulted from subpoenas sent to internet service providers and others seeking to identify roughly 1,600 people the RIAA believes engage in illegal music sharing.


Despite the $150,000-per-song possible fine, the RIAA has said it would be ready to come to an agreement on each case.

The recording industry is also expected to announce an amnesty for people who admit they illegally share music online.

They must, among other things, promise to delete any illegally downloaded music and not swap files illegally again.

But those people targeted by Monday's lawsuits would be ineligible.

The music industry says file-sharing is a violation of copyright laws and blames the practice for a drop in CD sales worldwide.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3091526.stm

[Lunatock]

This only goes for those who share files?

Downloaded quite a few things. Burned some CD's and gave them out. Free of charge. But never swapped files with anyone.

[bigross86]

Simple. I download whatever I want, burn it to CD's, and delete from my comp. I also don't share on Kazaa, I just take, so they can't detect me.

[bigross86]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,96796,00.html

Tuesday , September 09, 2003

WASHINGTON — The targets of the first lawsuits against music fans who share songs on the Internet include an elderly man in Texas who rarely uses his computer, a Yale University professor and an unemployed woman in New York who says she didn't know she was breaking the law.

Each faces potentially devastating civil penalties or settlements that could cost them tens of thousands of dollars.

The Recording Industry Association of America launched the next stage of its aggressive anti-piracy campaign Monday, filing 261 federal lawsuits across the country. The action was aimed at what the RIAA described as "major offenders" illegally distributing on average more than 1,000 copyrighted music files each, but lawyers warned they may ultimately file thousands of similar cases.

Durwood Pickle, 71, of Richardson, Texas, said his teenage grandchildren downloaded music onto his computer during their visits to his home. He said his grown son had explained the situation in an earlier e-mail to the recording industry association.

"I didn't do it, and I don't feel like I'm responsible," Pickle said in an interview. "It's been stopped now, I guarantee you that."

Pickle, who was unaware he was being sued until contacted by The Associated Press, said he rarely uses the computer in his home.

"I'm not a computer-type person," Pickle said. "They come in and get on the computer. How do I get out of this?"

Yale University professor Timothy Davis said he will stop sharing music files immediately. He downloaded about 500 songs from others on the Internet before his Internet provider notified him about the music industry's interest in his activities.

"I've been pretending it was going to go away," said Davis, who teaches photography.

Another defendant, Lisa Schamis of New York, said her Internet provider warned her two months ago that record industry lawyers had asked for her name and address, but she said she had no idea she might be sued. She acknowledged downloading "lots" of music over file-sharing networks.

"This is ridiculous," said Schamis, 26. "I didn't understand it was illegal."

She said the music industry shouldn't have the right to sue.

"It's wrong on their part," she said.

An estimated 60 million Americans participate in file-sharing networks, using software that makes it simple for computer users to locate and retrieve for free virtually any song by any artist within moments. Internet users broadly acknowledge music-trading is illegal, but the practice has flourished in recent years since copyright statutes are among the most popularly flouted laws online.

"Nobody likes playing the heavy," said RIAA President Cary Sherman, who compared illegal music downloads to shoplifting. "There comes a time when you have to stand up and take appropriate action."

Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., has already promised congressional hearings into how the music industry has identified and tracked the Internet users it's suing.

"They have a legitimate interest that needs to be protected, but are they protecting it in a way that's too broad and overreaching?" Coleman said. "I don't want to make criminals out of 60 million kids, even though kids and grandkids are doing things they shouldn't be doing."

The RIAA did not identify for reporters which Internet users it was suing or where they live. Lawsuits were filed in federal courthouses in New York City, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, Dallas and elsewhere.

"Get a lawyer," advised Fred von Lohmann, an attorney for the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation. "There's no simpler advice than that, whether you intend to fight this or not. You'll need someone to advise you."

With estimates that half of file-sharers are teenagers, all sides braced for the inevitable legal debate surrounding the financial damage to parents or grandparents. The RIAA named as the defendant in each lawsuit the person who paid for the household Internet account.

"That question will come up immediately, whether a minor can have the requisite knowledge to be the right defendant," said Susan Crawford, who teaches law at Yeshiva University's Cardozo law school in New York City. "A very young child who didn't know what they were doing would be a bad defendant for the industry."

The RIAA also announced an amnesty program for people who admit they illegally share music, promising not to sue them in exchange for their admission and pledge to delete the songs off their computers. The offer does not apply to people who already are targets of legal action.

Sherman called the amnesty offer "our version of an olive branch."

Some defense lawyers have objected to the amnesty provisions, warning that song publishers and other organizations not represented by the RIAA won't be constrained by the group's promise not to sue.

U.S. copyright laws allow for damages of $750 to $150,000 for each song offered illegally on a person's computer.

[Praxus]

The music is private property of the record company if you don't buy the CD in essence the lisence you have no right to download that song. They should sue anyone that downloads it without first buying the CD.

and an unemployed woman in New York who says she didn't know she was breaking the law.

So you steel private property and then you say you don't know your breaking the law?

Steeling a song off the internet is like going into the store and steeling a Single off their shelfs and walking out.

No wonder she is unemployed, she is a dumb ass.

[bigross86]

The question once came up before a panel of Rabbi's, and after much debate and discussion they came to the following conclusion: One is allowed to download if he doesnt share it with others. He can download songs if they are for his personal use and enjoyment. Once he starts sharing them with others (Enabling sharing, making CD's for friends, etc...) he is stealing according to Torah Law. They came to this decree because so many people were doing it so the rabbis created a loophole that keeps people "honest".

[Praxus]

What he is saying is that it is immoral to steel but it is moral for you to take it from the person who steels it?????

[Ironduke]

I download music and haven't purchased a CD for 4 years or so. And I feel no qualms about doing so. The music industry has been fixing prices for years (illegally according to some experts) and the availability of singles has dwindled.

I'm not going to buy a CD for $15-20 just so I can hear 1 song I liked on the radio. The music industry sure wants that though.

[Praxus]

You like steeling things, have fun.

You don't have a right to whatever you want just what others with volunteerily(sp?) offer you in a free market. You have no right to that music.

But that's just my opinion.

[Ironduke]

Originally posted by Praxus
You like steeling things, have fun.

You don't have a right to whatever you want just what others with volunteerily(sp?) offer you in a free market. You have no right to that music.

But that's just my opinion.

Like I said, I believe the music industry has been price-fixing in addition to making singles unavailable in an effort to make us buy the $15-20 CD. I've been ripped off enough on CD's.

http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/n...ttlement_x.htm

States settle CD price-fixing case
By David Lieberman, USA TODAY

NEW YORK — The five largest music companies and three of the USA's largest music retailers agreed Monday to pay $67.4 million and distribute $75.7 million in CDs to public and non-profit groups to settle a lawsuit led by New York and Florida over alleged price-fixing in the late 1990s.

Attorneys general in the two states, who were joined in the lawsuit by 39 other states, said that the industry kept consumer CD prices artificially high between 1995 and 2000 with a practice known as "minimum-advertised pricing" (MAP).

The settlement will go to all 50 states, based on population. Consumers may be able to seek compensation.

Under MAP, the record companies subsidized ads by retailers in return for agreement by the stores to sell CDs at or above a certain price.

"This is a landmark settlement to address years of illegal price-fixing," New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said in a statement. "Our agreement will provide consumers with substantial refunds and result in the distribution of a wide variety of recordings for use in our schools and communities."

The companies, including Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, Bertelsmann's BMG Music and EMI Group, plus retailers Musicland Stores, Trans World Entertainment and Tower Records, admitted no wrongdoing.

The companies have not practiced the pricing agreement since 2000. At that time, they agreed in settling a complaint by the Federal Trade Commission that they would refrain from MAP pricing for seven years.

Former FTC chairman Robert Pitofsky said at the time that consumers had been overcharged by $480 million since 1997 and that CD prices would soon drop by as much as $5 a CD as a result.

In settling the lawsuit, Universal BMG and Warner said they simply wanted to avoid court costs and defended the practice.

"We believe our policies were pro-competitive and geared toward keeping more retailers, large and small, in business," Universal said in a statement.

Previously, the companies said that MAP was needed to protect independent music retailers from rising competition from discount chains such as Wal-Mart, Circuit City and Best Buy. They had slashed CD prices, below cost in some cases, in the hope that once consumers were in their stores they would buy other, more expensive products.

The music companies said that MAP did not directly help them because it didn't affect wholesale prices. Retailers added that they needed support to keep prices up because their rents, particularly for stores in malls, were higher than the discount chains.

Lately, several record companies have cut prices on some CDs, particularly for new acts, to counter the continuing industry slump. Album sales are off nearly 11% this year compared with the same period in 2001, according to Nielsen SoundScan.



The music industry has been found guilty of illegal price-fixing in civil courts. I'll take my compensation in the form of free downloads.

[bigross86]

What he is saying is that it is immoral to steel but it is moral for you to take it from the person who steels it?????

In a manner of speaking. According to the Mishnah and the Talmud, one who steals from a thief is considered innocent and liable for ppunishment. This decree actually places some blame on the downloaders.

[Ironduke]

Originally posted by bigross86
In a manner of speaking. According to the Mishnah and the Talmud, one who steals from a thief is considered innocent and liable for ppunishment. This decree actually places some blame on the downloaders.

One who steals from a thief is considered innocent, yet liable for punishment?

If they're innocent, why the punishment?

[bigross86]

My mistake, I meant to write not liable for punishment...