Page 1 of 1

RIAA: Anti-Piracy

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:54 am
by owbowagowy
The information below is for everyone but most of all it's for Dean (see below in bold). I hear you talking about bringing Journey down with all this evidence you have. Regardless of what you may think you are in the wrong to post the samples. You do not own the right to upload the music for the public to hear. This is not about what you think that Steve and the band are doing. It's about breaking the law. If Journey was doing what you say they are it's not against the law. You on the other hand are breaking the law. Look it up yourself. It will be you who will lose in the end. All this because you think someone is lip-synching. Ask yourself when you get up in the morning. Is it worth it? Breaking the law to prove a point that isn't even illegal? My advice to you is call it a day. You made your point.

From the RIAA

Anti-Piracy

Old as the Barbary Coast, New as the Internet - No black flags with skull and crossbones, no cutlasses, cannons, or daggers identify today’s pirates. You can’t see them coming; there’s no warning shot across your bow. Yet rest assured the pirates are out there because today there is plenty of gold (and platinum and diamonds) to be had. Today’s pirates operate not on the high seas but on the Internet, in illegal CD factories, distribution centers, and on the street. The pirate’s credo is still the same--why pay for it when it’s so easy to steal? The credo is as wrong as it ever was. Stealing is still illegal, unethical, and all too frequent in today’s digital age. That is why RIAA continues to fight music piracy.

"Piracy" generally refers to the illegal duplication and distribution of sound recordings. There are four specific categories of music piracy:

Pirate recordings are the unauthorized duplication of only the sound of legitimate recordings, as opposed to all the packaging, i.e. the original art, label, title, sequencing, combination of titles etc. This includes mixed tapes and compilation CDs featuring one or more artists.

Counterfeit recordings are unauthorized recordings of the prerecorded sound as well as the unauthorized duplication of original artwork, label, trademark and packaging.

Bootleg recordings (or underground recordings) are the unauthorized recordings of live concerts, or musical broadcasts on radio or television.

Online piracy is the unauthorized uploading of a copyrighted sound recording and making it available to the public, or downloading a sound recording from an Internet site, even if the recording isn't resold. Online piracy may now also include certain uses of "streaming" technologies from the Internet.
Many do not understand the significant negative impact of piracy on the music industry. Though it would appear that record companies are still making their money and that artists are still getting rich, these impressions are mere fallacies. Each sale by a pirate represents a lost legitimate sale, thereby depriving not only the record company of profits, but also the artist, producer, songwriter, publisher, retailer, … and the list goes on. The consumer is the ultimate victim, as pirated product is generally poorly manufactured and does not include the superior sound quality, art work, and insert information included in legitimate product.

Each year, the industry loses about $4.2 billion to piracy worldwide -- "we estimate we lose millions of dollars a day to all forms of piracy."

Music pirates are the first to lose because the recording industry and law enforcement officials are cracking down around the world. Do the crime and you will pay the fine or do the time.

Consumers also lose because the shortcut savings enjoyed by pirates drive up the costs of legitimate product for everyone. Plus, good luck returning a pirated tape or CD when the quality is inferior or the product is defective, as it often is.

Honest retailers (who back up the products they sell) lose because they can’t compete with the prices offered by illegal vendors. Less business means fewer jobs, jobs often filled by young adults.

Record companies lose. Eighty-five percent of recordings released don’t even generate enough revenue to cover their costs. Record companies depend heavily on the profitable fifteen percent of recordings to subsidize the less profitable types of music, to cover the costs of developing new artists, and to keep their businesses operational. The thieves often don’t focus on the eighty-five percent; they go straight to the top and steal the gold.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the creative artists lose. Musicians, singers, songwriters and producers don’t get the royalties and fees they’ve earned. Virtually all artists (95%) depend on these fees to make a living. The artists also depend on their reputations, which are damaged by the inferior quality of pirated copies sold to the public.

Breaking into the music business is no picnic. Piracy makes it tougher to survive and even tougher to break through. As recording artist "Tool" noted, "Basically, it's about music -- if you didn't create it, why should you exploit it? True fans don't rip off their artists."

Source Link: http://www.riaa.com/issues/piracy/default.asp

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:56 am
by Phreedom
Will never hold up in court. Any lawyer with a brain with 1/2 the mass of his cock can get the charge dismissed.

It's called "Fair Use"

Look it up

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:06 am
by WalrusOct9
Yep, the RIAA wants to control what you listen to and the exact ways in which you get to listen to it. You know, instead of letting people do their thing and make real music fans out of people, since Clear Channel radio isn't filling that need anymore.

I understand they need to make money, but even with the decline in CD sales they're still making billions. They're quick to say "we sold less CD's than last year" but very reluctant to point out they're still raking it in.

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:06 am
by RossValoryRocks
Phreedom wrote:Will never hold up in court. Any lawyer with a brain with 1/2 the mass of his cock can get the charge dismissed.

It's called "Fair Use"

Look it up


Fair use allows for cuts, usually not much longer than 1 minute, not whole songs or concerts.

But I agree that Dean probably won't be going to court over this.

So while he did violate the letter of the law, the chance of prosecution is slim.

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:18 am
by owbowagowy
RossValoryRocks wrote:
Phreedom wrote:Will never hold up in court. Any lawyer with a brain with 1/2 the mass of his cock can get the charge dismissed.

It's called "Fair Use"

Look it up


Fair use allows for cuts, usually not much longer than 1 minute, not whole songs or concerts.

But I agree that Dean probably won't be going to court over this.

So while he did violate the letter of the law, the chance of prosecution is slim.


I agree.

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:33 am
by RossValoryRocks
All you ever wanted to know about Copyright and Fair Use issues!

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_a ... index.html

I feel like Fox News...We report, you decide!

So read it and say what you think in regards to Dean and Fair use.

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:52 am
by WalrusOct9
RossValoryRocks wrote:I feel like Fox News...We report, you decide!




If you're watching Faux News, it's hard to decide when they're only reporting what the Republicans want them to. :roll:

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 9:27 am
by Rockindeano
What Journey is doing is allowed by law?

Hmm, Let me pound a few beers and come back with a thought that will blow you away. If I really wanted to, I could sue Journey tomorrow and win a hands down slam dunk.

If any band members or management are reading this, they HAVE to know to what I am referring to.

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 9:30 am
by NealIsGod
Rockn'deano wrote:What Journey is doing is allowed by law?

Hmm, Let me pound a few beers and come back with a thought that will blow you away. If I really wanted to, I could sue Journey tomorrow and win a hands down slam dunk.

If any band members or management are reading this, they HAVE to know to what I am referring to.


What's stopping you? And maybe you should tell us while you're sober.

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 11:08 am
by Liam
Rockn'deano wrote:
Hmm, Let me pound a few beers and come back with a thought that will blow you away.


Yes sir. You're lucky I enjoy boozin' otherwise I would've said No.

Oh wait...you meant YOU....oh well. lol.

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 12:42 pm
by LAWoman
Rockn'deano wrote:What Journey is doing is allowed by law?

Hmm, Let me pound a few beers and come back with a thought that will blow you away. If I really wanted to, I could sue Journey tomorrow and win a hands down slam dunk.

If any band members or management are reading this, they HAVE to know to what I am referring to.



On what possible theory could you sue Journey?

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 1:37 pm
by Phreedom
WalrusOct9 wrote:If you're watching Faux News, it's hard to decide when they're only reporting what the Republicans want them to. :roll:


On the other side of the coin, you can watch the Communist News Network and see 9 socialist democrat women consume Larry Lap Dog's hour long show as an infomercial for the democratic party.

Speaking of Lag Dog Larry, he's going to get a Journalism award this weekend from the LA press club LOL. That's about as ridiculous as giving Arafat the Noble Peace Prize!

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 11:37 am
by acceber
LAWoman wrote: On what possible theory could you sue Journey?


Good question....I want to know too

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 12:00 pm
by wildone
acceber wrote:
LAWoman wrote: On what possible theory could you sue Journey?


Good question....I want to know too
No kidding isn't a live show supposed to be live???Thats like false advertising...

PostPosted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 4:58 am
by yak
Phreedom wrote:On the other side of the coin, you can watch the Communist News Network and see 9 socialist democrat women consume Larry Lap Dog's hour long show as an infomercial for the democratic party.

Speaking of Lag Dog Larry, he's going to get a Journalism award this weekend from the LA press club LOL. That's about as ridiculous as giving Arafat the Noble Peace Prize!



Right on the money with that one.......But then, they (posters) only see the side they want to see. It only works one way for them...their way. :lol:

PostPosted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 5:07 am
by whocares
Much like the arrogance of the U.S. Government huh?

The RIAA at one time was a good thing for the musicians, now it's not. They're much like unions in the U.S. outdated and un-needed. In fact many will tell you they actually hurt the U.S. people. Especially the ones they are meant to help.

Do you seriously think that IF the RIAA ever collects fines, that they will give them to the musicians? hell no they won't, they work for the record companies.

PostPosted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 5:15 am
by yak
Anybody wonder why the perrymaniacs aren't screaming about illegal bootlegs this time around? Anybody remember way back when they were beside themselves because there were bootlegs of Journey? Now, of course, they seem to have changed their ways, and are salivating over a bunch of bootlegs...because it suits their purpose.



http://forums.melodicrock.com/phpBB/vie ... php?t=9440



UPDATE: I have now taken the links down. Email me if you want to hear them. Some over zealous Perrypeople have seemingly taken offense at my attempts of spreading free concert recordings to the fans.
Before she reports the links or in someway gets me or the server in trouble, I am taking them down.