GnomeToys 300 Posted June 10, 2009 http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/lawyers-plan-class-action-to-reclaim-100m-riaa-stole.ars The RIAA lawsuits against fileswappers managed to piss off some people from Harvard recently, and now they're trying to take down not only the current cases they're handling but file a class action and reclaim every penny the RIAA has made in its lawsuits and settlements over the past years since the Napster shit. These aren't bullshit lawyers either, Charles Nesson is a professor of law at Harvard who is having his students help work on the case as well, and Kiwi Camara was one of his students. I predict full scale rape of the recording industry and the legalization of file sharing, but only time will tell... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
YouMad.GIF 277 Posted June 10, 2009 you think a harvard law professor be a handfull of students are going to "rape" one of the most powerfull teams of industry lawyers ever assembled?!? The RIAA is not only a corporate law dream team, it also is a powerfull civil and criminal prosecutional force, as well as one of the more powerfull lobbying groups. I don't think you really understand the political sway they hold! Harvard law doesn't stand a chance - perhaps if they sided with all the other top universities they could equal the legal power the RIAA holds, even then it's a long shot Do you know the RIAA probably has 10 lawyers from harvard law with 10 times more trial experience, not to mention lawyers from every top law school in the world Yale, harvard, camebridge, swarthmore, you name it they have an army Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
autoteller 292 Posted June 10, 2009 harvard owns boston. if there was any legal team that could do it, it more than likely is harvard. you have no idea of their say in things. they LITERALLY OWN BOSTON. i'd like to see how this will go. simply put, harvard law is probably one of the most respected law schools in the country. i'm pretty sure a professor would know a stupid idea in court a hell of a lot more than most. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
autoteller 292 Posted June 10, 2009 Why the RIAA may be afraid of targeting Harvard students The RIAA has targeted over 4,000 students at 160 colleges and universities with its prelitigation settlement letters. None of them attend Harvard. What gives? http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2007/11/why-the-riaa-may-be-afraid-of-targeting-harvard-students.ars harvard could pay the 100 mil that they've sucked out of the veins of every filesharing user, and then still have enough money to build a rocketship to fly into their headquarters. harvard = death star. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fist 666 1,221 Posted June 11, 2009 this is win, but i'm w/ kimjung, its not going to be rape, but it is certainly going to be a good read. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GnomeToys 300 Posted June 11, 2009 Yeah, rape was strong on that. It is still two giants clashing and ought to be interesting as it progresses. The harvard professor was originally trying to get his trial broadcast on live webcam so the public could see what the RIAA does in court, but it got thrown out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mauler5150 110 Posted June 11, 2009 I'm not against filesharing but i will tell you now, if something is worth my money I will buy it, whether it comes down to music, movies, whatever. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Organic Therapy 56 Posted June 11, 2009 Torrents ftw! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
!@#$% 624 Posted June 11, 2009 i too will support an artist and buy a CD. occasionally. but i know that attending their shows puts a lot more money directly into their pockets. good for harvard. i hope it dismantles the entire industry, but it seems that is hoping for a lot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
YouMad.GIF 277 Posted June 11, 2009 who cares if harvard owns Boston RIAA owns DC, NY, and LA... As well as any other city with a large entertainment base. Sorry but harvard law isn't the death star, and this is coming from someones whose step-grand parents are tenured grad professors there - they are the grand daddy standard for legal studies, but I would put my money way more on a team of diverse corporate lawyers who have not only equivalent education, but specific legal and political pull... RIAA is more like the death star, they just pick on lower teir universities and state schools who don't have a reputable law department full of professors and eager law students chomping at the bit to get their legal feet wet. The RIAA hasnt gone after Yale, swarthmore, camebridge, orvany of the Ivy leaguers, nor have they attacked any top 30 university with a law department because there are plenty of weaker prey. That's just good legal sense - take the weaker opponents out first Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Manute Bol 414 Posted June 11, 2009 Yeah, watch the students get killed one by one and the professors head end up on Harvard's front steps. That much money is no joke. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shai 707 Posted June 11, 2009 At this point anyone who uses the internet has heard plenty of horror stories about the RIAA/MPAA. However, people still blindly support an incredibly outdated and greedy industry/racket by buying the crap they put out. I have a few simple questions- 1. Have they fully investigated the potential behind DRM-free distribution of media online in lossless formats as a profitable and environmentally friendly alternative? 2. Have the artists and executives ever considered redistributing some of the obscene amounts of money they make into other areas of the industry instead of maintaining lavish lifestyles for the executives and paying for lawyers, investigators, and lobbyists while bemoaning the dire financial straits they're in? 3. Can they accurately account for what percentage of their gross goes towards lobbying for getting laws passed that are favorable to preserving their profits and restrictive towards filesharing/piracy, and does this account for the steady increase in the average price of a CD/DVD/movie ticket since around the end of the 90s (when the DMCA passed)? I still buy CDs when I go to shows. Everything else I download, and I don't feel like I'm ripping anyone off because I usually end up deleting about half of what I acquire and I don't upload stuff unless people ask for it. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spaceman Spiff 104 Posted June 11, 2009 The comments on the first link are worth a look. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
YouMad.GIF 277 Posted June 11, 2009 I know a lot of people just think of the RIAA as a regular team of lawyers, but I also do t think many people have experience with how they will come to your city and just seize millions of dollars of property if they find someone selling mixtapes (which are usually LEGAL promotional tools) They have their own enforcement agents and they operate more like a branch of law enforcement, and they are given permission to operate as such by the FTC and state department. Suing then for class action damages is like suing the federal government. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the_gooch 436 Posted June 11, 2009 I'm not against filesharing but i will tell you now, if something is worth my money I will buy it, whether it comes down to music, movies, whatever. ditto. but fuck the RIAA in general. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the_gooch 436 Posted June 11, 2009 "This is the home of Lars Ulrich, the drummer for Metallica. There's Lars now, sitting by his pool. This month he was hoping to have a gold-plated shark tank bar installed right next to the pool, but thanks to people downloading his music for free, he must now wait a few months before he can afford it. [a close-up of Lars sobbing] Come. There's more. [leads them away. Next seen is a small airport at night] Here's Britney Spears' private jet. Notice anything? [a shot of Britney boarding a plane, then stopping to look at it before entering] Britney used to have a Gulfstream IV. Now she's had to sell it and get a Gulfstream III because people like you chose to download her music for free. [britney gives a heavy sigh and goes inside.] The Gulfstream III doesn't even have a remote control for its surround-sound DVD system. Still think downloading music for free is no big deal? " 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wags 27 Posted June 11, 2009 what kind of name is kiwi. bootleg Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IOU 646 Posted June 11, 2009 At this point anyone who uses the internet has heard plenty of horror stories about the RIAA/MPAA. However, people still blindly support an incredibly outdated and greedy industry/racket by buying the crap they put out. I have a few simple questions- 1. Have they fully investigated the potential behind DRM-free distribution of media online in lossless formats as a profitable and environmentally friendly alternative? 2. Have the artists and executives ever considered redistributing some of the obscene amounts of money they make into other areas of the industry instead of maintaining lavish lifestyles for the executives and paying for lawyers, investigators, and lobbyists while bemoaning the dire financial straits they're in? 3. Can they accurately account for what percentage of their gross goes towards lobbying for getting laws passed that are favorable to preserving their profits and restrictive towards filesharing/piracy, and does this account for the steady increase in the average price of a CD/DVD/movie ticket since around the end of the 90s (when the DMCA passed)? I still buy CDs when I go to shows. Everything else I download, and I don't feel like I'm ripping anyone off because I usually end up deleting about half of what I acquire and I don't upload stuff unless people ask for it. I wanna quote this and especially number 2. Why the fuck should I really support your lifestyle of excess? Manage your money better like the rest of us are supposed to do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
R@ndomH3ro 463 Posted June 11, 2009 It only takes one brick to collapse a poorly supported tower Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TommyPillfingers 21 Posted June 12, 2009 Buying CDs is fucking stupid, im glad everytime i see a Tower Records or Virgin go out of business. fuck the RIAA. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GZOO 84 Posted June 12, 2009 It only takes one brick to collapse a poorly supported tower like jenga! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
metronome 226 Posted June 12, 2009 i too will support an artist and buy a CD. occasionally. but i know that attending their shows puts a lot more money directly into their pockets. yes and no. buying a big name label CD isn't going to do shit for the artist you're right. but 95% of the music I listen to is distributed by little distro's and every CD purchase helps the artists make new music. 95% of the CD's I buy only cost $10 as well. so for those little guys out there ... they appreciate it Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vanfullofretards 312 Posted June 12, 2009 like jenga! JENGAAA!!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
YouMad.GIF 277 Posted June 12, 2009 Pretty much any artist I fuck with has an independant distro deal through a label like kotch or select-o-hits, so if I DO buy it's going about 80% in their pocket Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
