Print 60 comment(s) - last by Regs.. on May 5 at 6:46 AM

University IT departments baffled by sudden, inexplicable increase

Observers are reporting a large increase in the number of DMCA copyright notices sent to colleges by the RIAA, and institutions like Indiana University are reporting a “20-fold increase” – sometimes as many as 80 per day.

University administrators note that there has not been a recorded increase in file-sharing activity, and – unlike in the past – many of the RIAA’s notices don’t have any corresponding activity in university traffic logs.

“We are not sure [whether] what we have is an allegation of copyright infringement or an allegation of possible future illegal behavior,” said IU associate vice president of IT Mark Bruhn. “The whole thing is very concerning, to be frank. We don't know why they are doing this and I'm not sure they know what they are doing.”

The Chronicle for Higher Education reports similar increases from George Washington University, which is now seeing over 120 notices per week, up from the usual “five to 10.” Wired’s Threat Level confirmed a surge with the University of Chicago.

The RIAA, when questioned about the increase of letters and Indiana University’s findings regarding their accuracy, said there were no changes in its procedures. “We are always making an effort to more effectively and efficiently detect infringing activity on the Internet, as we are continuously  looking for ways to improve our ability to find and act on incidences of theft online. Having said that, there's been no change,” said RIAA spokeswoman Liz Kennedy. Follow-up inquiries, sent by Wired were not returned.

Some think the RIAA’s actions may be politically motivated: “Public universities are in a unique position since the industry puts pressure on us through state legislatures to try to impose what are widely considered to be draconian content monitoring measures and turn us into tech police forces in support of a specific industry,” said University of California at Berkeley CIO Shel Waggener.

The content industry is pushing initiatives that compel public schools to action after a threshold volume of notices is met, said Luker. Such legislation is currently working its way through a number of states, including Illinois and Tennessee.

“The number of DMCA notices that are sent to a university vary wildly from one day to the next, and no one, including the federal government knows how they send them out or what criteria they use,” said Luker. “It is not reasonable in any way to use those counts as a basis for government actions.”

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

News flash!
By 306maxi on 5/2/2008 2:50:45 PM , Rating: 5
Record labels churn out more generic manufactered crappy music that people see no justification in buying therefore they continue to "steal" music because it's not worth buying.

RE: News flash!
By DEredita on 5/2/2008 3:02:54 PM , Rating: 3
Music has been pretty awful the last few years. I have started listening to BassDrive radio online, and loading the archived shows onto my Ipod. It's the only new stuff that I can find that is independent and enjoyable.

RE: News flash!
By TomCorelis on 5/2/2008 4:11:57 PM , Rating: 3
Big ups to a fellow junglist!

Regular BassDrive listener and aspiring/practicing producer/DJ here :-)

RE: News flash!
By herrdoktor330 on 5/2/2008 5:04:15 PM , Rating: 2
jungle massiv in the house!

Never listened to BassDrive, but long time Breakbeat Science shopper, ragga enthusiast, methbreaks listener, and DJ.

Drum'n'Bass fans love tech. And I'm going to start checking out BassDrive. Thanks guys!

RE: News flash!
By ShadowZERO on 5/3/2008 3:54:18 AM , Rating: 3
Make sure to tune in to Ben XO's weekly mix on Tuesday(3-6pm EST), he's got the best selection of exclusive tunes on Bassdrive IMO. Most of them are on the archive server, so its easy to check them out even if you can't catch them live.

My 2 favorite d'n'b artists right now are Ben Sage ( and Subsonik ( Unfortunatly a lot of their really good stuff hasn't been released, but they keep their myspace page pretty stocked. Occasionally I speak with them on AIM and they give me access to their unreleased stuff, under strict conditions I don't share or give it out.

Be sure to support your Drum & Bass artists and labels! I would highly recommend the new Ben Sage album "How the Days Collide" available now on! Also, be sure to check out and for high-quality wav and mp3 purchases.

Keep an eye on the aforementioned artists and sites for hot new material to be released in the near future. Keep the beats rollin', and remember...


RE: News flash!
By TomCorelis on 5/3/2008 3:18:15 PM , Rating: 3
I spend way more money than I should on vinyl...

RE: News flash!
By ShadowZERO on 5/3/2008 4:39:42 PM , Rating: 2
Vinyl? ewwwww. Many DJs(and i'm not one, btw) feel that since thats how it started, there is no replacement for the original format for the music. However, some DJs are going all digital with Final Scratch.
From the wikipedia:
Final Scratch is a DJ tool created by the Dutch company N2IT with input from Richie Hawtin (aka Plastikman) and John Acquaviva that allows manipulation and playback of digital audio sources using traditional vinyl and turntables. It seeks to cross the divide between the versatility of digital audio and the tactile control of vinyl turntablism.

Not sure how it works exactly, but you can play wav and mp3 files from your comp using special timecoded vinyl, and never have to keep music on records again.

RE: News flash!
By TomCorelis on 5/4/2008 5:59:09 AM , Rating: 2
Drum&bass has a somewhat special history with vinyl, and a lot of the producers and DJs in that scene are more purists than some of the other electronic scenes. In any case, I've been enamored with the iconic "two turntables and a mixer" look for years now, and it's all been my dream to master that. I feel like I am disrespecting the genre, and the music, if I get my start on digital.

Don't get me wrong, I really want a Serato (digital standard in D&B scene, it's like Final Scratch) setup, but right now I am holding off on that for now. I want to learn things the correct way first... have you ever been to a party where the DJ looks like he's checking his email instead of rocking out to the tunes? It's hard to be showy when you're hunched over your laptop.

Beyond all that, there's a certain special something with vinyl. I felt it the first time I went to the local record shop and tried out their listening station, and I feel it every time I grab a record out of my crate and drop it on the plates. It's a certain closeness... a oneness, of sorts ... with your music. I don't get that feeling when I download the tunes off of Beatport, and I don't get that feeling when I pop a CD in my CD player.

RE: News flash!
By ShadowZERO on 5/4/2008 1:19:44 PM , Rating: 2
I keep in touch with some DJs from the London UK drum'n'bass scene(Ben XO, for example), where d'n'b first evolved from the "breakbeat hardcore" genre in the early 90s. Some of the DJs and producers living there are against the globalization of the genre, even having the arrogant attitude that since d'n'b started there, it remains "their" music.

This attitude also parallels the transition from vinyl to digital in some cases. The nice thing about Final Scratch, is that you are still using "two turntables and a mixer", and still dropping vinyl on your decks. The main difference is instead of digging through a record crate, you are pulling the tunes off your laptop.

Still, I understand where you are coming from. There is a unique experience to going to a record store, browsing the collection, and being able to meet and talk to others who are there for the same purpose. Also, thumbing through a vinyl crate, looking for that familiar sleeve with cool graphics on it, and dropping the needle on the exact spot you want to start from is totally different than loading files off your laptop.

RE: News flash!
By TomCorelis on 5/3/2008 3:19:03 PM , Rating: 2
Also, don't miss Method One's Vinyl and Circuity on Fridays. Australian Atmosphere on Mondays is also an excellent program.

RE: News flash!
By sporr on 5/4/2008 7:08:48 PM , Rating: 3
ez boys :)

Regular bassdrive listener too. check out aswell. in fact, if you use winamp, goto your media library and click on Shoutcast Radio. From there I always enter "bass" into the search panel. just over a hundred dnb stations. about 20 or so are decent.

For mixes check (massive amount!)

Thankfully, it appears most drum n bass producers are signed to independant labels, far from the stranglehold of the likes of the RIAA and so on.

I hope it stays that way.

RE: News flash!
By kamel5547 on 5/2/2008 3:44:48 PM , Rating: 1
Uh yeah. This doesn't reallys tand up when you look at the wide range of things being pirated (pretty much every musical artist, movie, and video game). While I do not like the RIAA and think they got themselves into this mess(at least partially), I also don't think there ismuch excuse for blatant theft. Justifying theft doesn't change what it is, and unfortunately few people seem to understand that.

If it is not worth your money, why is it worth the effort of finding and downloading and listening to?

RE: News flash!
By Some1ne on 5/2/2008 4:30:07 PM , Rating: 5
Justifying theft doesn't change what it is, and unfortunately few people seem to understand that.

That's just it though. Downloading something is not theft in the traditional sense. If I go to a car dealership and steal one of their cars, I have deprived them of their ability to sell that car to someone who would actually pay money for it, by removing the physical instance of the car. Similarly, if I walk into a music store and steal a CD, I'm removing a physical instance of something from the store, and depriving its rightful owners of access to it.

However, if I had a magic machine that could produce an infinite number of identical copies of a car, at no cost, and I choose to use that machine to give free cars to anyone who happens to want one, I haven't stolen a damn thing (especially if I legitimately paid for the car that I use as the initial input to the machine). It may, as a consequence, cause fewer people to purchase cars from the dealership, but the dealership has not been deprived of a single physical instance of a car. It might also cause the designers of the original car that was used as input into the machine to feel a little bummed, but at the same time I'm sure enough of the people who now have free cars would be more than willing to buy T-shirts supporting their favorite design teams, or pay to see them give talks about designing automobiles, or hang out with them and give them sexual favors, and so on. Further, the increased availablity and attainability of cars would lead to broader appreciation and recognition of those cars that are truly well-designed enough to stand out from the rest.

So, downloading a copy of a file over the Internet is not theft in the traditional sense, because although I got something for nothing, I didn't deprive anybody of a damn thing in order to do it. That's the thing that it's unfortunate that so few people (or at least, so few company executives, politicians, judges, and lawmakers) seem to understand. In a few more decades, when the generation that grew up with the Internet is old enough to be deciding policy, it will likely be different, however.

If it is not worth your money, why is it worth the effort of finding and downloading and listening to?

I think the problem isn't that people don't think that music is worth their money, it's that they just think that (most) music isn't worth the quantity of their money that the record labels like to demand for it. The ability to copy something infinitely at no cost and with very little effort means that anything that isn't priced very close to its actual value isn't going to be purchased legitimately, and music is still generally overpriced.

RE: News flash!
By michal1980 on 5/2/08, Rating: -1
RE: News flash!
By mindless1 on 5/2/2008 5:38:14 PM , Rating: 4
No, "you" didn't necessarily "take" something. You have not deprived anyone of anything, except your ISP of some bandwidth you paid for, if/when you weren't going to buy it in the first place.

If it's crap, some will download it merely because they're bored, because it was free and their time must not be worth much.

Music companies are no different than anyone else. The consumer on the other hand is out to keep money. You are not depriving anyone of anything by not paying them, nobody can just do what they want for a living then demand and/or forcefully extract money from those who aren't willing to pay.

What will happen if piracy is wiped out 100% tomorrow? Do you think these college kids are suddenly going to start buying the content? Think again, the whole point was that with their limited income they can't afford to buy this stuff nor spend their time doing other things that cost money.

If anything they are more likely to increase value of content by making it seem more popular and thus, perceived more desirable.

The answer is real simple - if anyone thinks they're not getting paid enough they are free to choose another line of work, the same as everybody else, or to rethink their product and business model so they create new revenues.

The one thing that is for certain is that the old business model does not work anymore and no number of lawsuits will change that. Oversimplified ideas about theft, stealing, etc won't change it either. You ignore cause and only look at effect and that never works in the long term.

RE: News flash!
By croc on 5/2/2008 6:15:17 PM , Rating: 2
I won't buy a damned thing before I do some testing / tire kicking. If it isn't played on the radio, and my local CD shops won't let me do a preview, how do I do that???

RE: News flash!
By jconan on 5/2/2008 7:13:50 PM , Rating: 1
in the traditional sense if you're saying that people took something without paying for it, then it's not true because on a 1:1 relationship that other original must disappear before being considered taken. hence that would imply people should not be reading for information that would also be theft because they are taking knowledge saving bits and pieces of information into their cranium without paying for it. overall i think riaa has gone overboard and the society as a whole should rethink about the music industry as a whole. riaa will do anything to make profit even falsify ip or even claiming someone else's song as part of theirs if it wasn't. they also do not go out to find artists and compensate them even though claiming that they are protecting artists on their behalf. anyways this is a major societal issue that must be questioned is it right?

further if songs and intellectual property weren't copied and borrowed there wouldn't be improvements of songs. people would be listening to the same ol ballads. hypothetically like gunpowder would still be used for fireworks instead of as weapons of life.

RE: News flash!
By LatinMessiah on 5/2/2008 8:23:51 PM , Rating: 3
Music companies are out to make money.

Exactly. They are nothing more than middle men that make money off of the talents of others.

RE: News flash!
By skitlets on 5/2/08, Rating: -1
RE: News flash!
By Some1ne on 5/2/2008 5:21:31 PM , Rating: 3
Downloading a copy, as opposed to buying a CD, deprives them of the money they would have made off of you. How is that not theft?

Because your assertion that I would purchase something that I downloaded, if I had not been able to download it, is faulty. If there's a group that I'm interested in enough to buy actual copies of their albums, then I buy them. The vast majority of the content that I download, however, I would simply do without if I could not download them for free. For example, I would not pay $15 to get an album with only 2 or 3 good songs on it, but I may pirate it (or at least pirate those individual songs). I haven't deprived anybody of my cash in that case, because if my only option were to buy the album, I would just pass completely.

Should we all get books for free?

Absolutely. The potential boon to society as a whole would be huge. Knowledge is too valuable to *not* be disseminated as broadly as possible.

That's assuming that the only money and labor going into the music... is its distribution. What about all the work of producing music, mixing, editing, etc...?

No, I was including production costs in my assertion that music is overpriced. Even if an album racks up several million dollars in production costs, you create 10 million copies of it, those production costs only contribute about a dollar or so per unit. Also, it's entirely possible to produce an album without racking up millions in production costs, Indie bands do it all the time. The consumer shouldn't be made to suffer just because the recording industry has allowed its production process to become bloated and inefficient.

RE: News flash!
By skitlets on 5/2/2008 5:32:37 PM , Rating: 4
You can always legimately buy the 2 or 3 good songs you enjoy as singles. I personally won't ever buy compressed music, but it's an option.
The vast majority of the content that I download, however, I would simply do without if I could not download them for free...
I haven't deprived anybody of my cash in that case, because if my only option were to buy the album, I would just pass completely.

So what makes you entitled to the content for free? If it isn't worth your money, you shouldn't be entitled to the content just because you can. You aren't depriving anyone else of a copy, but you surely are enjoying the benefits of it without due cost.

And if books were free... how are we going to compensate authors so that they can keep writing full time?

RE: News flash!
By Some1ne on 5/2/2008 5:50:20 PM , Rating: 1
So what makes you entitled to the content for free?

I don't know, why not something utilitarian like "the greatest gain for the greatest number of people"? For example, if I don't buy the album, and I don't pirate it, then there's 0 gain on both sides. I don't get to enjoy music, and the creators don't get to have cash. However if I pirate an album I wouldn't have purchased anyways, there's positive gain on one side (I get to enjoy music), and no effect on the other (the creators have the same amount of cash in either scenario). So instead of neutral-neutral, you have neutral-win. Hooray!

If it isn't worth your money, you shouldn't be entitled to the content just because you can.

My assertion wasn't that it isn't worth my money, it's that it isn't worth the amount that's being demanded. I would be happy to pay a more reasonable price. For example:

I would *gladly* pay an extra $5 per month to help subsidize my downloading. That's roughly what I feel music is actually worth. But $1 for each song, or $10 to $20 for each album? Screw that.

And if books were free... how are we going to compensate authors so that they can keep writing full time?

Well the program would need to be subsidized somehow. My point was just that providing people with free access to whatever books they may want could be hugely beneficial in general, so in that sense having there be free books is a no-brainer.

However, I'd be fine with another $5 per month to get the books on top of the music.

RE: News flash!
By michal1980 on 5/2/08, Rating: -1
RE: News flash!
By sporr on 5/4/2008 7:32:36 PM , Rating: 1
lets have a look at the definition of theft,

1. the act of stealing; the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods or property of another; larceny.

By this definition it is safe to say that "theft" is the "taking" and/or "carrying away" of physical goods/items.

There is no hint at the ability to steal sound, however.

So please, from now on, please refer to this as "Copyright infringement", rather than theft. Because, for all you may believe, it is not theft. Well, not according to your language anyway.

And to answer your first question, who he thinks he is? I imagine he thinks he is the person he is.

RE: News flash!
By michal1980 on 5/4/2008 10:35:26 PM , Rating: 1
1 a: the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it b: an unlawful taking (as by embezzlement or burglary) of property.

given that you are taking 'property' from someone without paying for it, you are stealing. And commiting tefth.

But language aside.

Take something thats for sale, without paying for it...

Is what now? right?

or do we not have right and wrong in this world anymore?

RE: News flash!
By sporr on 5/5/2008 6:40:12 AM , Rating: 2
Whether it is right or wrong, is something that will be ultimately decided upon in court.

So far, by the lawsuits filed by the RIAA and MPAA, they appear to be very inefficient ways of tackling the issue. Some, including myself, believe the methods employed to be detrimental.

Unfortunately, due to the blind stubborness of the RIAA, it looks like this may continue for some time.

Myself, I have have a varied interest in music. If I were to buy 10 albums a month, which I could easily do, this would cost me around 80 pounds sterling. Which is roughly 160 dollars.

Unfortunately I do not earn enough to do this, and at best, I could afford maybe 2 albums a month. So by that estimate I can only afford 24 albums a year.

For someone with a varied musical interest, that isnt alot.

RE: News flash!
By HrilL on 5/3/2008 12:36:01 AM , Rating: 2
Books are free to read. Its called a library.

RE: News flash!
By JustTom on 5/4/2008 2:35:54 AM , Rating: 2
Who is going to write these free books?

While piracy is certainly not theft it is also ethically dodgy, not to mention illegal in most places.

RE: News flash!
By sporr on 5/4/2008 7:38:05 PM , Rating: 2
Who is going to write these free books?

I imagine people will. Unless we can get monkeys to do it, although I wouldn't hold your breath on that one.

RE: News flash!
By JustTom on 5/5/2008 4:16:50 AM , Rating: 2
Monkies are more likely.

RE: News flash!
By Shawn5961 on 5/2/2008 5:34:57 PM , Rating: 3
Just as a footnote to this rant, I understand that for professional recording, it takes longer and requires more money for all of the tools, but it also has much more of a payoff. Also, take into consideration that for a professional recording, there's much more man power involved as far as musicians, sound editors, etcetera.

That's assuming that the only money and labor going into the music... is its distribution. What about all the work of producing music, mixing, editing, etc...? Should we all get books for free? I wish textbooks were... they're easy to copy, can be scanned and uploaded, just like music. Just because copying doesn't take much effort doesn't mean producing it doesn't.

You should do research before using a statement such as this. Using free audio software, a cheap mixer, a guitar, an amp, a microphone, and maybe four cables total, I could create an entire album in a day or two (I'd give an estimate of a week including time to write the songs, if that long, depending on what type of creative mood I'm in). As far as the instruments and such, using only cheap, basic instruments would only cost me about $250, if that. And CDs aren't very expensive at all anymore.

So, for around $300 and with a week of time, I could crank out around 500 copies of my own personal album. Now, if they were being sold at the average CD price (around $18 if I recall correctly), about 17 of them would be enough to overlook the production cost.

RE: News flash!
By skitlets on 5/2/2008 5:47:51 PM , Rating: 2
I really don't care about how studio costs factor in the fundamental notion that labor should be paid for, nor do I need to "do my research" to understand that TIME is MONEY. Time spent writing and performing music is worth compensation. Mechanics don't charge enough to cover parts, they charge for parts AND for labor. As of now, do I feel that $18 is too much? Yes, and I won't buy a cd that costs that much. But I also recognize that time should be compensated and I shouldn't be given a download for free.

RE: News flash!
By VitalyTheUnknown on 5/2/2008 7:17:04 PM , Rating: 3
"I could create an entire album in a day or two (I'd give an estimate of a week including time to write the songs"

There's two possibilities: one is that Eric Clapton got old, really old, had chosen very creative internet nickname "Shawn5961" and brags about himself, and the other is that you Sir, are a biggest and brightest star in unknown universe of typical idiots.

RE: News flash!
By JustTom on 5/4/2008 2:37:53 AM , Rating: 2
I am sure you could create an album in a week, just as sure that it would suck.

RE: News flash!
By AnnihilatorX on 5/2/2008 5:03:52 PM , Rating: 2
I admits I prefer downloading pirated copy of CDs in loseless formats than to run to a shop to buy a CD.
The reason is not actually that I am a jerk I don't want to pay. It's probably my innate childish instinct to protest when the music industry isn't doing their job right in emerging market of digital downloads.

A 400MB lossless pirated CD album can be found and downloaded in less than 20 minutes. Completed with album scans, tagged in a package and ready for listening. If I have to buy a CD, I need to either go to the town, or go online to like Amazon and wait for delivery, I can't do that in 20 minutes. In addition, I have to rip the CD myself into say flac format. I may have to tag it myself if freedb entry is not created. I like to keep album information accessible so I will have to scan the album art too.

What about digital downloads? Legal digital downloads still have rooms for improvements. Until they improve I'd rather buy CDs. Ignoring infamous DRM at the moment. Most of the retailers don't offer album art downloads. Lossless formats are extremely rare, in fact I haven't heard of a good site offering that. Some doesn't even offer song previews. If I am paying for about the price of a CD for an album, I expect to have CD quality audio, complete with album arts. Some people say 192KB mp3 is enough. Tell the millions of users and developers who spent their life developing/enjoying lossless codecs that they are wasting their time.

If the music industry can provide such user friendliness that pirates can provide, I am more than happy to pay a little bit extra than an average CD cost. It's all about added value. Now the pirates have more added value than the music industry. Now if they offer 5.1 ch flac music online instead of requiring you to buy a SACD player I am all for it.

If I really like the song, I occasionally do buy the album. But they sit in the dust since I never touch them.

RE: News flash!
By just4U on 5/3/2008 6:28:24 AM , Rating: 3
I have a question. I've gone to movies that were not worth a nickel little own the 20+ dollars I spent on them, grabbed games that I felt severely ripped off with and uninstalled nearly as fast as I installed them, and bought music I only listened to once and thought it was crap.

How do I get reimbursed for all of that. I estimate that someone out there (or multiple someones) owe me aproximately.. 700 bucks, with interest. Factoring loss of time wasted and all that .. the figure could be alot higher..

I think it works both ways here. If the consumer can be nailed to the cross .. these folks need to pay to!

RE: News flash!
By eye smite on 5/2/2008 9:33:52 PM , Rating: 2
You can say the same thing about half the movies made too. They have really lost touch with the masses and can't entertain well enough to justify the cost. lol

Scare Tactic
By niks on 5/2/2008 2:39:24 PM , Rating: 3
The RIAA wants college campuses to monitor their traffic like Comcast does.

RE: Scare Tactic
By abzillah on 5/2/2008 3:36:34 PM , Rating: 5
Screw the RIAA, they can kiss my ass.

RE: Scare Tactic
By amanojaku on 5/2/2008 3:58:03 PM , Rating: 4
Watch out! They'll do it and pick your pockets!!!

RE: Scare Tactic
By Shawn5961 on 5/2/2008 5:36:58 PM , Rating: 2
Now that's what I call a reach-around!

RE: Scare Tactic
By mindless1 on 5/2/2008 5:45:38 PM , Rating: 2
I think RIAA knows they aren't going to sell the content if the piracy stops, that they just try to shift attention away from their lawsuits by saying it's yet another (peoples') fault instead of their own.

Suppose they shut down piracy, yet they have to keep paying for monitoring against it, and these people who weren't going to pay for the content still aren't. What then? They caught their ghost and still don't have the desired result. Maybe then they start making up fictional data, not tied to anyone just a massive effort trying to change public policy. Maybe that time is now.

What's the solution? Same thing as always, reject their content whenever reasonably possible and reject changes in policy. Do not make their failure to product valuable products anyone else's burden. They are not a charity.

RE: Scare Tactic
By just4U on 5/3/2008 6:40:27 AM , Rating: 2
media piracy will never stop. It's ingrained in our culture. If we didn't have the internet, people would just borrow the media from each other like they used to, or use media outlets such as tv/radio to copy it (never realizing they were doing anything wrong). Some pay for it, Some never do. It's always been that way.

The problem now is with the advent of the internet and powerful computing it's to easy to do and their taking a much more noticable hit overall. Especially when you factor in the one's the usually pay for such things are being more selective overall. They haven't adapted to it all yet. Haven't figured out a new buisness model that makes sense.

By DEredita on 5/2/2008 2:58:45 PM , Rating: 5
Have students, faculty, and staff boycott - have rally's that gather national media attention of students having protests destroying CDs and DVDs, and picketing and chanting something about the RIAA and no more buying music and movies until the RIAA stops trying to strip away university users' online privacy with aggressive bully-like legal tactics.

Once the word is out that the RIAA is trying to strip away online privacy with strict draconian monitoring methods, music and movie sales would drop by double digit percentages. Maybe then the RIAA will feel the pain of their actions.

RE: Boycott
By Obujuwami on 5/2/2008 5:06:46 PM , Rating: 2
Two reasons that wont work:

1) To get the CDs and DVDs someone will have to either buy them or steal them. Ifyou steal them then the RIAA is proven to be right in some aspect that they can then spin in the 24 hour new media.

2) To get that many people involved you would have to have millions of students, teacher, and administrators pissed at the RIAA. Frankly, i dont see that happening as they will try and sue the colleges, administrators, teachers, and students for defimation of charactor. (And I wouldn't put it past them either!)

Something we could do is to teach the public about anonomys* proxy servers and how to use them. We could then download music, movies, and anything else at our leisure with out fear of being tracked down.

On a more interesting note, have any of the Music/Movie/Software comapnies thought about what IF you bought the CD/DVD/software and lost the disc? You should be entitled to replace what you bought at no charge as you already paid for it. Most of what I have read online and in professional radio magazines has never even topuched this point in hte DMRA and I will be rather interested if anyone can point out anything on this thought.

*I can't spell

RE: Boycott
By AlphaVirus on 5/2/2008 5:38:54 PM , Rating: 2
On a more interesting note, have any of the Music/Movie/Software comapnies thought about what IF you bought the CD/DVD/software and lost the disc? You should be entitled to replace what you bought at no charge as you already paid for it. Most of what I have read online and in professional radio magazines has never even topuched this point in hte DMRA and I will be rather interested if anyone can point out anything on this thought.

I agree with this but not even speak on it to make the RIAA worried.
This is similar to if you have a bootleg OS download of XP or Vista and you need to activate, simply call the rep and tell them you had a virus or something. They can not contest because this does actually happen.

If I buy a music cd and it cracks or starts to skip, I have never known there to be decent warranty coverage to replace it with a new cd.

The main thing I like about being able to download any song online is because I get to sample tracks without having to leave the house or sign up to websites or deal with crazy voice overs on the track.

Heck, itunes being the "most popular" online music distributor only lets you sample a short clip of the songs.

RE: Boycott
By McFatty on 5/2/2008 5:11:47 PM , Rating: 2
have rally's that gather national media attention

A boycott is a great idea. I've been boycotting the RIAA for years, but I sincerely doubt it will gather national media attention. After all of the outrageous lawsuits, rootkits, and illegal behavior, we still haven't seen any real coverage. I highly doubt if a few rallies are going to make the news.

Corporate ties between national media and the RIAA will never let it happen. For example, Universal is tied closely with NBC. So you'll never see any negative news about the RIAA on NBC.

By Bioniccrackmonk on 5/2/2008 2:46:31 PM , Rating: 2
“The whole thing is very concerning, to be frank. We don't know why they are doing this and I'm not sure they know what they are doing.”

1) They do it to make income so they can keep their jobs of policing the world.

2) The more s&*t you throw at a wall, the more you get to stick.

RE: Answers
By 440sixpack on 5/2/2008 4:38:38 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly, the more letters you send out, the more people who will just pay off the claim without attempting to fight or investigate the claim's validity.

the reality is a nightmare for the RIAA
By LumbergTech on 5/2/2008 8:23:21 PM , Rating: 2
the new music consumer wants to buy a product based on its merit and not just blindly buy whatever is crapped out to them

they cant handle this industry where the consumer dictates what they want instead of being fooled by idiotic marketing campaigns etc

By JustTom on 5/4/2008 2:43:53 AM , Rating: 2
The new music consumer wants stuff for free, anything else is justification. If people could digitally rip Bentleys or filet mignons they damn well would too.

email from CIO
By chiguy2891 on 5/3/2008 1:10:27 AM , Rating: 2
this is an email that the CIO of my university sent out to the student body about a week ago.

The end of every academic year can be hectic with finals, graduation, moving out and wrapping up loose ends before leaving campus for break. Copyright holders are also staying busy by using this time to put in extra effort to track down people that are illegally sharing and downloading files online. At the end of every semester, groups like the RIAA dramatically increase the number of copyright notifications that they send to the campus to investigate. In the past few days the security office has received more copyright infringement notices than it received in the previous year. Clearly, the RIAA is watching the network closely right now.

If you are caught downloading or sharing files illegally, not only do you face the very real possibility of being sued for thousands of dollars this summer by groups like the RIAA, but your connection to the campus network will be immediately shut off. Access may not be restored until a formal disciplinary process has been completed. Take a moment to think about your finals study schedule and think if you can afford in these final weeks to lose your ability to access your email, course forum and even your ability to surf the web.

Music and videos can be obtained at no or low-cost and legally at sites such as Ruckus and iTunes. Please use these or similar services instead of limewire, bit torrent or other peer to peer programs.

RE: email from CIO
By Regs on 5/5/2008 6:46:51 AM , Rating: 2
Don't most of you college students cheat on your exams and get fired on your first day of work anyway?

Minority Report?
By DaveLessnau on 5/2/2008 3:42:05 PM , Rating: 3
We are not sure [whether] what we have is an allegation of copyright infringement or an allegation of possible future illegal behavior,”

Possible future illegal behavior? Is this the Minority Report? Is Tom Cruise going to swoop in or something?

Old downloads
By Screwballl on 5/2/2008 4:10:08 PM , Rating: 2
It is no surprise that many of the notices being sent out now were from downloads dated 2-5 years ago. Very few of these notices are from downloads that happened in the past year.

witch hunts
By sphyder on 5/2/2008 4:27:19 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder how much lost money was attributed to "piracy" that was really money spent on lawyers and others to maintain this witch hunt. I do not condone piracy, but if you want me to spend 20dollars on a cd, it better have more than 2 songs that are good to listen to. The reason they don't have cd's full of content is their own fault as well. They push artists to make x amount of albums in x amount of time or they violate their contract. Notice how much staying power older music has compared to the last 20 years? That is what happens when you put the importance on the creativity and not the profitability. -me 2 cents

A quick story..
By Xonoahbin on 5/2/2008 6:47:08 PM , Rating: 2
True story too. Yesterday, I hopped on and I pirated the entire ASHES dIVIDE album. I listened through it, liked it a lot, and said "I'm really going to have to buy this." I don't currently have the money to buy it, but when I do, I very well will. Why? Because I think the album was well done and worth my time. I feel the artist deserves for me to actually buy the album. I've downloaded an album or two and said "This is crap." I never bought those. On the other hand, I've downloaded probably 5-6 and subsequently bought them because they're legitimately good. Genuinely quality music will generate revenue because it deserves it. Crap will be pirated and never paid for because.. it's crap.

I'm innocent, Your Honour
By Techno Pride on 5/3/2008 4:06:01 PM , Rating: 2
I only downloaded Chocolate Rain!

Why even ask the RIAA?
By Regs on 5/5/2008 6:43:11 AM , Rating: 2
Everything coming from their mouths is in the form of bull*hit and proof-read by a bunch of lawyers who know nothing about technology.

The way the economy is going, I don't think anybody is going to be buying their crap anyway.

I Can Explain It
By blaster5k on 5/2/2008 4:02:03 PM , Rating: 1
Revenues from music sales are going down as a result of the recent economic downturn, so they're just making up for that by filing more lawsuits.

"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" -- Sir Arthur C. Clarke

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki