The Warring States of NPF - RIAA makes another attack on people's rights

The Warring States of NPF (http://www.nuklearforums.com/index.php)

- Dead threads (http://www.nuklearforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=91)

- - RIAA makes another attack on people's rights (http://www.nuklearforums.com/showthread.php?t=3575)

RIAA makes another attack on people's rights

http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/11797

This sounds really, really bad. Remember when I said the U.S was under seige by companies wanting to keep us under their jackboots? Media consolidation, TCPA, and the RIAA... Anyway.

I am going to fire off a letter to my congressman on this one for sure. It was already going too far years ago.

For posterity:

Quote:

Originally Posted by codewarrior's form letter for sending to congressmen

The Honorable
Address
City, State Zip
via fax to Fax#

Dear Representative :
I write to you as a concerned citizen about HR 4077, "The Piracy Deterrence and Education Act of 2004." I agree with Public Knowledge and others that this bill is misguided and you should oppose it for the following reasons:
The Bill Could Make My Legal Downloads a Crime: I am concerned with the way in which the Congress seems to change copyright law at the whim of the content industry. This bill drastically changes how criminal copyright infringement is enforced, while at the same time it lowers the standard to prove such infringement. Recent raids by the Department of Justice under �Operation Fastlink� indicate that current law is more than sufficient to apprehend copyright infringers. The bill would effectively criminalize the built-in music sharing features of Apple's iTunes, the market-leading online music store, as well as uses of WiFi technology. Additionally, HR 4077 could make the use of copyrighted works for criticism and education a crime.
The Bill Takes Sharing My Information Too Far: The bill directs the FBI to facilitate the sharing of information among law enforcement agencies, Internet Service Providers (ISPs), and copyright owners concerning copyright infringement on the Internet. Essentially, content companies want ISPs to keep a database on their subscribers' online activities. It is disconcerting that at a minimum, the bill does not specify: what information ISPs may track; what information ISPs may share; or one single procedure that government agencies and / or copyright owners must comply with to gain access to the information. This is a violation of my privacy and my constitutional rights. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act set up specific procedures for obtaining information on alleged copyright infringers�procedures that protect my rights to privacy and due process. HR 4077 puts my constitutional rights in the hands of large content companies.
For these reasons, I ask that you vote against HR 4077.
Sincerely,
Mr John Doe cc:
The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner Jr.
The Honorable John Conyers Jr.
The Honorable Lamar S. Smith
The Honorable Howard L. Berman

i am a uk citizen and well i am a bit out of touch with all the laws and bills of the USA but i take it that this HR 4077 allows companies and the fbi to track everyone subscribed to any isp's internet trafficing and movments and impose restrictions on downloading? i am forced to scream WHAT THE HELL AND WHAT IN GODS NAME !?!?!? how the *@#! are they supposed to monitor this whithout compromising some basic rights as you have stated? well were i in america i would support you fully oh and good letter! i dont know how it works in america but i assume you will be sending lots of these for them to ever get processed. Oh also is it just for your state or the entire country?

This'd be a federal law; that is, it'll affect the every American citizen.

You're a Brit, though? You should keep a close eye on things going on in Europe... Similar battles are taking place. Hell, we might as well be in World War III - the people of the world versus companies and corporate control.

By the way, that letter wasn't written by me, that's the form letter Codewarrior of Boycott RIAA (or was it originally by Public Knowledge...? Not sure).

I'm Pro-Privacy and am ready to support you but first would someone post a link to the full copy of HR 4077. As soon as I give it te once over I'll start firing off letters

Trev, you post in the articles at Dmusic.com? I haven't seen you there unless you post by another name.

Nah, but I ought to. I see your name in the Boycott RIAA comments from time to time.

I'm just curious, I have my own opinions but for the sake of discussion I will play devil's advocate. Do not confuse this with my actual beliefs, I think that the RIAA is an obsolete system, I think Mp3s are the future, and that they absolutely have to be free, since you will not be able to get people to start paying for something they previously had gotten for free.

why do you guys think that this is not stealing? What makes downloading a copywritten song any better or worse than stealing a cd?

If a percentage of money that the CD makes goes back to the muscicians, then wouldn't downloading a CD rather than buying it deny the muscician money that they rightfully earned?

If everyone has a right to what happens with their own property, and intellectual property is in fact property, why do we have the right to take it? Is it any more or less ethical to sneak onto a farmer's orchard and steal oranges or apples?

Ok, I'll bite: the argument for not stealing is because normally, when you steal, the victim loses possession of something. The biggest argument for music downloading is: "I would hot have paid for the full CD because I didn't think I'd like the music," and for me, this has been true. Example: Linkin Park. I downloaded a Final Fantasy music video that used "Pushing Me Away", and I liked the song. So I downloaded two more music videos. I liked those ones too, So I bought the CDs, and I've stuck with it ever since.

My point is that: until I had heard the music from an "illegally" obtained source, I never would have bought the CD. So that's why many people think the RIAA is out of place, because many times the "profit" they say they've lost, is really "profit" they never had.

so if I sneak onto that farmer's Orchard and steal apples and give them to people to try, and they eat them, thus developing a taste for apples, does that justify the fact that you committed theft?

How about John Eatherly, the pilot of the Enola Gay (the B-24 that dropped the hiroshima bomb) who after the war would rob convenience stores and give the money to Japanese war widows. Is that ethical? Do the ends justify the means?