RIAA keeps the lawyers well fed

When is the RIAA gonna learn that they fighting a war they cannot win. Its like the "War on Drugs" No matter what is done there will still be ways to download music. They should learn to embrace it and offer a service to get the music cheap. To me 99 cents a song is too much. C'mon that is still like $15.00 an album. There is very little overhead on the internet and an MP3 is not 100% CD quality anyway. I would pay $9.99/month for unlimited download and burning capabilities. That seems fair to me. Programs like Itunes and Napster have a good idea, but the price needs to come down.

No kidding bobiroc! MP3 compresses by about 10-1. Lol but people say ya don't lose any music quality. Riiggghhht! Only if your tone deaf! MP3 does sound pretty good though but I am sure not gonna shell .99 cents a song though. I would suggest 10 cents a song for songs with a tenth th' quality. As you pointed out the companies would still be makin a killin with their low overhead!. Oh well I guess rampant greed isn't gonna die easily! Those execs got soooo many hungry Ferrarri's and bimbos and noses to feed, oh my!

Death to them all!!

how come this sort of thing isn't happening in the UK? i think this is just an american greed thing

Bobiroc, you must be some guy living in a cardboard box with a 56k connection if you're going to say "To me 99 cents a song is too much. I also buy Nike shoes for around $180 that don't really fit me but they look good. There's also a perfectly sized $10 shoes but they're black so uh-huh. But then I always wear trousers and they cover my shoes. I'm still going for Nike. But 99 cents a song is too much."

Quote:

---

how come this sort of thing isn't happening in the UK? i think this is just an american greed thing

---

im not talking on behalf of the british, but in australia the same crack down on p2p is going ahead. ARIA(australian recording industry association) if you havent already heard raided kazaa HQ in sydney and now a trial is in the works against kazaa. point is yes the RIAA are the most aggressive in enforceing this law, but that doesnt mean that other governments and record associations dont have other agressive measures to enforce this law, they just go about it in a different way than the the RIAA, which doesnt bring as much attention to themselves as the RIAA does, and why does RIAA bring so much attention to themselves trying to catch p2per's?? because they are the largest record association in the world and have the most to lose(so they think)in the whole p2p piracy thing. bottom line, if any other record association in the world had as much to lose as the riaa(so they think ;))their tactics for stamping out p2p piracy would look a hellava lot similar to the tactics used by the RIAA.

No problem up here in Canada, but that may be just a matter of time. Like I always said, if it was reasonably priced, there would be less need for pirating. If you're going to gouge the consumer, ot's only natural to find a path of least resistance (cost). I would more than gladly buy the CD's and DVD's if they were priced more realistically then what they are. The industry is only interested in getting rich over night, rather than building loyalty and getting even richer over a longer period of time.

Were being fed to the wolves. If we are given programs from the internet we shouldn't be held as criminals for downloading a song.I've downloaded songs and I didn't need to hack anything to get them as well as anyone else that gets them.But people are getting sued and whatever else for this.It crazy.Hell I'll pay a dollar for I song if it comes down to it. I hate bying a cd that just has one good song on it.Most of the file sharing is songs that people had five years ago that they have already purchased.I an artists has more that one good song I'll go buy the cd,But I don't feel it's right what the public has to face when it comes down to p2p websites.People are treated no more than a rat.Give them a peice of cheese and see if they get trapped.The RIAA sucks...

what are they feeding them? alpo? tubesteak? something for them lawyers.Anyhow their well fed thats all that counts them dogs

"There is very little overhead on the internet and an MP3 is not 100% CD quality anyway. I would pay $9.99/month for unlimited download and burning capabilities. That seems fair to me." Yeah nice one. And petrol needs to be cheaper too. I don't care what it takes. Lets kill loads of Iraqis and take THEIR oil, so I can run my SUV. I am ENTITLED to it cos i'm a patriotic american. Lets discourage talented people from creating intellectual property by effectively cutting off their income, just to spite the RIAA. hey, if it exists in digital, i am ENTITLED to it. uhh, wait thats not right at all. I agree with most of what is said, but bobiroc, u can't pull a random number outta your butt and decide that it is a good one. Unlimited downloads? zif. thats ridiculous. i am not against you tho. i'm a total comunist: there is only one way to do away with 'intellectual property' law; abandon the concept of property. to each according to need, not according to value. p2p and such will herald the end of the free-market and meritocracy as we know it. and i for one am glad. Neorocket... mp3s are small, but they are not a reduction in resolution by a factor of ten. that would sound crap. mp3 is based on a different psychoacoustic model of how we interpret sound. WAV is pulse code modulation, ie taking samples of volume at very small intervals, mp3 only codes what can be heard, ie leaves out all but the loudest signal at any one time. mp3 is very competitive with wav in sound quality at high bitrates. just a point of fact. If you can easily spot the difference you should be an audio engineer (like me!)

Personally...I say if it you can get it for free, why the hell not. As far as lawyers getting well fed, well that is just a common thing here in the states, what with all the divorces, criminal cases and such that lawyers are a part of, so it is to no surprise that they are getting a nice little bit of pocket change. My whole stake on this is just about the same as most. If anything, the RIAA would have to make a HUGE one time impact in order to even come close to getting a turn around of the situation...say for instance, like sue a million people. I think that would possibly get everyones attention...but if that would to ever happen, that would be some fight and a long drawn out one at that, and eventually they would either go bankrupt, or just give up. Filesharing is like a disease, it spreads so quickly and ferociously, even I have coerced some of my fellow co-workers and friends to burn everything they can get their hands on and download as well.

Quote:

---

"To me, it's very ridiculous," Sandy Nauman said. "To be honest with you, I was more worried about other things they're getting off the Internet other than songs."

---

Gotta love that comment! Anyways, catch yall later! ;)