RIAA wins

Celltek · Post by **Celltek** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 5:30 pm

$9,250 per song!! Thats insane! For that money I want fellatio from Shakira included!

thomasjaldemark · Post by **thomasjaldemark** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 5:45 pm

JCH wrote:
apanell wrote:ridiculous.. they extort people out of money and if they don't win there they sue, and charge something ridiculous like 10000 usd for music. they aren't out there protecting copyright or art, they are there to protect profits that they can't make off shite music
What do you think copyright and RIAA is about? It is about securing the the income for artists and corporations.

..........She was found guilty in a court of law, end of story.

because someone is guilty in court doesn't mean that everything is right/fair. the law system is nothing written in stone ya know, was not long time ago black ppl didnt have any rights in america for example..

anyway, they will loose in the end if they continue this bizniz. if all the youth today hear about is RIAA and the dinosaurcompanies behind them chasing pirates and letting them pay 10 000 dollars a track they downloaded illegaly etcetc the morality about paying for music will sure go even more down... if it's cheaper to speeding drunk than downloading a track so what message is that bringing?

i guess this is not securing any incomes at all, it's just bringing them down. many ppl want to pay for the music (just look at radiohead's new album...) but they don't want to give the money to the majors..

JCH · Post by **JCH** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:13 pm

apanell wrote:
JCH wrote:
apanell wrote:ridiculous.. they extort people out of money and if they don't win there they sue, and charge something ridiculous like 10000 usd for music. they aren't out there protecting copyright or art, they are there to protect profits that they can't make off shite music
What do you think copyright and RIAA is about? It is about securing the the income for artists and corporations.

..........She was found guilty in a court of law, end of story.
the RIAA is not about securing income for artists, who don't get much money from big labels anyway... its about keeping big time executives with huge amounts of income.

yeah and homosexuality would get you guilty in the court of law in the 50's... look at alan turing. it doesn't mean anything what you said at the end !

Please back it up with some theory that supports your claims.

......oh, so you are saying that all states are corrupt? We are living in the year 2007. Who do you thinks give you this freedom to speak and live a good life? Santa...We live in the year 2007, not in the 50s.

Robot Criminal · Post by **Robot Criminal** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:24 pm

lol

seems we got ourselwes a what?
a mor...

JCH · Post by **JCH** » Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:39 pm

thomasjaldemark wrote:
JCH wrote:
apanell wrote:ridiculous.. they extort people out of money and if they don't win there they sue, and charge something ridiculous like 10000 usd for music. they aren't out there protecting copyright or art, they are there to protect profits that they can't make off shite music
What do you think copyright and RIAA is about? It is about securing the the income for artists and corporations.

..........She was found guilty in a court of law, end of story.
because someone is guilty in court doesn't mean that everything is right/fair. the law system is nothing written in stone ya know, was not long time ago black ppl didnt have any rights in america for example..

anyway, they will loose in the end if they continue this bizniz. if all the youth today hear about is RIAA and the dinosaurcompanies behind them chasing pirates and letting them pay 10 000 dollars a track they downloaded illegaly etcetc the morality about paying for music will sure go even more down... if it's cheaper to speeding drunk than downloading a track so what message is that bringing?

i guess this is not securing any incomes at all, it's just bringing them down. many ppl want to pay for the music (just look at radiohead's new album...) but they don't want to give the money to the majors..

What the fck are you on about? We are living in the year 2007. Don`t try to link this sh!t to human rights. What "dinosaur-companies" are you talking about? Apple? Beatport? Kompakt? Bleep? Warp? Perlon?

She was tried for a jury. Both sides had a chance to tell their side of the story. The message they are sending is that music is a intellectual copyright that is worth protecting.

Do you think the session musician, producer, teaboy, graphic artist, mastering engineer, recording engineer,accountant,secretary, guy in warehouse, owner of the indie record store, lawyer the works for free?

If you don`t think this sh!t don`t affect the little man in the end, after the majors are dead as you put it, I feel sorry for you.

Do you think that the leeches apply a different set of logic to a release by Villalobos, than say a release by Timbaland? Most of them will not even know if label is major or a indie. They don`t give a fck.

TiEZ · Post by **TiEZ** » Thu Oct 25, 2007 12:13 am

who cares about p2p sh!t...

Robot Criminal · Post by **Robot Criminal** » Thu Oct 25, 2007 12:22 pm

u don't seem to understand where the real money goes here...

hint: not to the musicians.

JCH · Post by **JCH** » Thu Oct 25, 2007 3:10 pm

Robot Criminal wrote:u don't seem to understand where the real money goes here...

hint: not to the musicians.