Facebook Plunges Again
Tumblr 101: Tips And Tricks To Get Started
Music downloads cost Oregon man $4080
Leslie Maxfield had no idea that downloading music was illegal. He has been called a "music pirate" and a "songlifter" by the RIAA. Of course Leslie and his family meant to steal from the RIAA, just like everyone who has been sued so far. I'm sorry, but this sort of thing really gets under my skin. There really is no way to distinguish legitimate and illegitimate sites, especially for someone who doesn't work in the computer industry. The other issue that I see here, at that our readers have commented on, is the fact that there is no way for people to do the right thing versus the wrong thing because the two aren't so clearly labeled. The RIAA goes after people, not to be sure the artists get their fair share, but to protect only their profits, without providing a way for the music fans to download music legally. Sure we have iTunes today, but the RIAA had nothing to do with the creation of iTunes, or other music stores. It was forward thinking companies like Apple who gave people an option in the first place. Many people think Limewire, Kazaa, and others are just new services that let you download music. There is obviously not an answer to this dilemma that supports fair-use and doesn't let people infringe. Someday we will find a solution to this problem, though I fear it won't be very soon.[Via SeattlePI]
Comments
16
Subscribe to commentsMikeAug 9th 2006 4:53PM
Of course people have an "option in the first place"...buying the albums of the artists they enjoy. I know that buying a whole CD for one song or two may not seem fair, but it's basically the same as buying a DVD when you only like a few scenes in the movie. I feel for the guy because of the sheer amount of the fine...the RIAA is definitely quite extreme in their scare tactics. However, why would anyone think that it's legit to receive music for free when for years and years in the past you've either had to buy the album or listen to the radio?
Bob JonesAug 9th 2006 5:22PM
Actually, in the UK the BPI created a tool that you can download and it searches your harddrive and just warns about any P2P programs which COULD be used for illegal downloading, allowing parents (for example) to remove them.
RIAA could set-up something like 'SiteAdvisor' for buying music online.
emmzeeAug 9th 2006 5:23PM
I agree with Mike ... the RIAA is wrong for using scare tactics, but a) Ignorance is not an excuse, and b) Did the guy really think that suddenly all of the popular musical artists in the world were just giving out their music for free? C'mon ...
Aside: eMusic.com is much cheaper than iTunes and provides high bitrate MP3 files. You won't find many big-name artists there (mostly indie bands, or indie releases of major artists before they hit it big) but it's a great service if you're more into the indie scene. Free trial too.
GraybabyAug 9th 2006 5:40PM
While you claim "There really is no way to distinguish legitimate and illegitimate sites," I have found a fairly simple method to differentiate the two. If at any point immediately prior to or following the download you are required to actually pay for the music, that's a good sign that it's legitimately acquired.
Enjoy.................G
StevenAug 9th 2006 5:55PM
"known as 'songlifting'..."
Songlifting? Can't say I've heard that one before. Stupid RIAA.
Ryan CarterAug 9th 2006 6:10PM
I'm not saying that I am advocating using this line of reasoning to get out of trouble, or that I don't understand how this works. I am saying that a lot of those who only know how to get on email, or their kids do everything for them on the computer, they are the ones that don't get it. It's not that they don't buy albums, but not knowing that it is illegal, someone else installs it for them, and they just download, and don't know all the ins and outs of it. I think in some cases, the parent or adult whose name is on the PC, doesn't know that their kids are downloading this stuff. I know tons of parents who don't apy attention to thier kids. They even have MySpace accounts where they list their home address and school. In this case, it is just like your kid downloading too many pay-per-view movies without you knowing it. As a parent myself, I am going to have to really watch it when my kids are old enough to do this stuff. I am not saying that it is all the RIAA's fault, people are to blame too, but I just think the RIAA's tactics shouldn't be allowed.
christopher SomsookAug 9th 2006 9:21PM
If at any point immediately prior to or following the download you are required to actually pay for the music, that's a good sign that it's legitimately acquired.
...not true cuz there's "limewire" "pro" where one pays but is still illegal
Jonathan LordAug 9th 2006 9:48PM
I know this is a really dated method, but before the days of the internet people would record songs onto tapes from the radio, was that illegal, or even recording a movie from TV onto VHS? How are things different, and why the authoritarian panic now?
Ryan CarterAug 9th 2006 10:34PM
The whole debate over fair use rights is the kicker for me, meaning what you said Jonathan, was it illegal to copy that 1980's cassette? The RIAA is only after people now because it is trackable. If it wasn't trackable for people to "share music" they would have nothing to go on, and they still don't have any hard evidence in many cases.
AaronAug 10th 2006 12:28AM
Is this a joke?
How can you tell if its legal or not? If its free, its not legal, its stealing. Not that difficult. Despite how bad the RIAA might be, downloading music is the same as walking out of a store with a CD. There is no excuse for this man to claim "i just woke up and my computer had somehow downloaded mp3s"
The RIAA is dumb for wasting everyones time with lawsuits, this post was dumb to claim downloading music legally is confusing.
Stupid post.
Oh, and ignorance of the law is never an excuse.
alex danteAug 10th 2006 12:48AM
"How can you tell if its legal or not? If its free, its not legal, its stealing."
I hope to god you're not providing legal advice. There _are_ PLENTY of websites that promote FREE music from artists.
But sure, shoot off at the mouth about other people's "stupidity" some more. And remember: ignorance _isn't_ an excuse, as you said...
Claudiu SpulberAug 10th 2006 4:45AM
RIAA's methods are despicable. I mean they should go after the programs and websites that allow sharing illegal stuff. Think of it as smoking. It's a bad thing that people smoke, but if they cannot stop people from doing this they obligate the companies selling them to put in large letters how deadly this habit is.
Should be the same for such programs, in large letters "Sharing copyrighted material is illegal and you could end up in jail" sort of stuff.
JoshuaAug 10th 2006 9:20AM
Of course most applications such as kazaa and limewire have notices that say something or other about downloading copyrighted material is illegal, etc. And to some extent I see the point that it could be confusing, but ignorance of the law does not justify innocence.
Bryan BartowAug 10th 2006 4:58PM
Ryan, you can't possibly be serious with your empathy for this guy, are you? Nothing is free and everyone knows that. There is no excuse good enough to steal. Answer this for me: If this man was walking in to Wal-Mart and stealing the CDs would you still feel sorry for him?
Ryan CarterAug 10th 2006 5:39PM
No, I am serious. I don't know all the circumstances here, but many times people come up and ask me how they can know if it is legal or not. They have seen some places with indie stuff that is free, and seems legal, then they see Kazaa, and it looks the same. Many people truly don't understand the difference. I think of my parents. They really don't know if it is legal one way or the other. Even my younger brother, who is somewhat well read on the web, doesn't quite know for sure. I think a lot of people stay away from downloading music because they don't know if it is okay, not because they know it is illegal. I know and you know, but there are many consumers out there that don't get it. They wouldn't know what the RIAA is if you told them. There are many people who DO NOT download, just because they don't know. If they DO download, without knowing what they are doing, should it be held against them? Stealing from a Wal-Mart is a different issue. You are taking something from the store, by picking up a CD and walking out, having to circumvent any theft-protection. Online, there is no theft protection, there is no notice that these music downloads are not like every other download on the net. Just a small download of the client, and you sign on and search for downloads. Way too simple, nothing says "copyrighted" on it. Most downloads are free for all kinds of media, programs, movie clips, some songs, screensavers. People get used to this "cool-I-can-download-stufff" mentality, and don't even have a lcue about licenses. They find out when something tells them their time is up, and they must buy the app. I guess my point is this: How does the average joe know what the difference is?
KeevesAug 13th 2006 1:28PM
Although in general now, for fear of getting sued, most company's which offer the facility to download pirate music warn you, this hasn't always been the case. If i remember correct, Kazza use to emphasis that using it was completely legal, and only hide the fact that downloading illegal copies was banned in the small print. They even filled their home page up with all links of stuff to download - if you didn't know better how could you tell that you were breaking the law?
Also, there's a large Rushan website (which i cant remember the name of, except it's one of the top few "legal" download sites) that charges you only a couple of pence/cents per download. Of course this looks fine, however it is being taken to court (by the British music accositation - i think) because they allegedly don't actually pay the copyright holder the rolayalties. How is someone meant to know that even tho they are paying, they are still breaking copyright laws??
PS - just in case sum1 reading this is concerned - i don't use any p2p program or similar, partly because i don't want to be taken to court and also because of the security holes / spyware that they put on...