[zorba the geek]

Guilty verdict in music file-sharing case
Minnesota woman ordered to pay $222,000 to record companies for illegally sharing copyrighted material.
[url="http://edition.cnn.com"]

Edited by zorba the geek, 05 October 2007 - 11:45 AM.

[Advertisements]

*FPVDriF6 wonders how much malware she also shared...

[Troy]

*FPVDriF6 wonders how much malware she also shared...

[**Brian**]

*FPVDriF6 wonders how much malware she also shared...

heheehe: Thats why I don't download music anymore: When the RIAA started suing 12 year olds for millions based on the number of songs a person has on thier machine, that was enough for me - If I want music, I BUY it, because it is the safer way - I tell my friends that P2P Networks can be dangerous, because you really don't know for sure that the movie, song or other file you are downloading is actually legit, and who is to say that someone is NOT watching you as you download - too dangerous Not only that, but I feel that you run a high risk of malware infection, and I don't need to have the law coming after me, and its just a hassle I don't need and I cannot afford - I download legally (and pay for the songs I download)

When I realized what kinda junk you can get from P2P networks, I removed all of that stuff, and I cringe at all P2P software - No Music downloads are free - someone pays for it somewhere - The payment for a mistake with downloading from P2P networks may be a free song, but you also may get infected or worse, busted

If I see any P2P Apps in a HJT log, I list them as optional removals, telling the user WHY, and how using these apps can increase the chances of infections There is so much garbage that can be installed with them that it is NOT worth the time or energy to download using P2P Apps, regardless of how they are used I have been infected with garbage before, and it takes longer to remove the infection then some people realize

Take My advice: Stay clean, and if a staffer here tells you about how bad P2P Nets can be, Believe them!!

Brian

[zorba the geek]

Well said Brian !Just think what you can buy with$220000!!Instead of 2or3 Cd's,she could have bought the whole shop Sorry,i just dont feel sorry for those people

[**Brian**]

Well said Brian !Just think what you can buy with$220000!!Instead of 2or3 Cd's,she could have bought the whole shop Sorry,i just dont feel sorry for those people

Thanks - File Sharing may have it legal uses, such as on a network between PC's in an office or home enironment between Users in network situations. However, I don't like the fact that young kids (basically thier parents) could get sued for having music on thier machines, so I don't chance it. It is a "slippery slope" to try to climb, and there is too much at risk to even want to use P2P software. downloading music and files illegally is wrong, that is why I pay for music that I own, or I borrow music from family and friends - There are viruses and spyware that can be installed with all of these programs, and mostlikey you will get something you don't want along with something that you DO want - It's just too much of a risk with all the malware and spyware out there.

The reason I say that using P2P Software is a "slippry slope" is because P2P software can be used ligitimately, but it also can be used for other illegal things - that is why I do not have any P2P software on this machine, and will do everything I can to make sure that I can educate users as to why P2P software should be removed

Brian

[warriorscot]

To be honest you have two classes of P2P, you get the P2P for kids and idiots like limewire and its ilk the file sharing apps that get you infected with malware and caught by the scumbags at the RIAA. Their is a whole other class of P2P apps and protocols that are before secure an malware free and are used allot now by business and by the new movement to decentralise and reinvent the music industry.

I stopped buying music a long time ago basically because I dont wan't to support the RIAA and it's underhand tactics and would prefer the money I spend to go to the people that actually make the product not any middle men and companies that package CDs with malware and restrictive DRM systems, I don't like that CDs have gotten more expensive but artists don't see more money and earn more from concerts.

Allot of the bigger artists now seem to be spearheading the movement to make music affordable and make sure that people are getting a fair deal both the consumer and the artist who both at the moment get screwed the artists going independent now are selling albums at a third of the price and still earning significantly more or they are giving it away for free and relying on concerts and merchandise. And soon there will be little need for illegally downloading because half of the current problem is the prices and lack of a fair deal.

PS brian according to sony and the RIAA borrowing musically is stealing as well.

[**Brian**]

To be honest you have two classes of P2P, you get the P2P for kids and idiots like limewire and its ilk the file sharing apps that get you infected with malware and caught by the scumbags at the RIAA. Their is a whole other class of P2P apps and protocols that are before secure an malware free and are used allot now by business and by the new movement to decentralise and reinvent the music industry.

I stopped buying music a long time ago basically because I dont wan't to support the RIAA and it's underhand tactics and would prefer the money I spend to go to the people that actually make the product not any middle men and companies that package CDs with malware and restrictive DRM systems, I don't like that CDs have gotten more expensive but artists don't see more money and earn more from concerts.

PS brian according to sony and the RIAA borrowing musically is stealing as well.

I understand that this is technically illegal. I didn't like the way the RIAA was doing things either, so I stopped using P2P altogether - I guess the idea of downloading music does NOT appeal to me - especially when they say that they can monitor you and tell what you are doing, and what you have on your machine - I'd rather buy the music then take the chance of spending millions in fines.

Brian

[warriorscot]

You could just stop buying the music from the record industries and only get it from independents, if I buy I buy smart I don't want to give money to people that shouldn't be getting it.

And to be honest P2P is only risky if you don't know what you are doing you have to be pretty daft to A get malware and B get ccaught, which is why all the law suits are against 12 year olds and there parents.

[sari]

You're starting to walk a fine line, warriorscot. Since Geeks to Go does not support P2P apps and filesharing, we're not going to discuss whether it can be done in a manner that keeps you malware and prosecution-free. There are people who've robbed banks and committed other felonies without being caught, but that doesn't make it okay.

[Ryan]

You don't have to be daft to get infected at all...I can get a system crippling virus in a minute, doing something that most people would think is harmless...but that's another discussion for another thread elsewhere...

[don77]

A get malware and B get ccaught, which is why all the law suits are against 12 year olds and there parents.

A very high percentage of logs in the malware forum are the result of p2p its not just 12 year olds posting them

[therock247uk]

And to be honest P2P is only risky if you don't know what you are doing you have to be pretty daft to A get malware and B get ccaught, which is why all the law suits are against 12 year olds and there parents.

No you are wrong there... You don't have to be daft or anything to get infected some files on p2p look legit but when you download them theres something hidden...

Thats my 2 cents...

[zorba the geek]

Originally I posted this thread with the thought in my mind, that it might open some peoples eyes to the consequences of downloading music illigaly!The malware&virus infections can be fixed by the smart people of Geeks to go,but a fine?Not even a smart lawyer can’t help you!Now i can see that even at gtg,opinions are divided!? A few things i’d like to point out:1:show me a singer or group who made it to the top without the help from the industry.2:it takes a lot of money to make someone a superstar.3:name one group/singer who’s poor!Look at it this way:let’s say Brian spends all his sparetime to find a program/software to repair windows for good.After months of hard labour he’s found the solution!What to do next?Give it away or collect the fruits of your minds labour?Make money of course.OptionA:use it at gtg and hope for donations.B:have your own Website,burn the program on discs and TRY to sell it(someone who Googles at lot will sooner or later stumble onto your site)C:get heavy advertising,some company to back you and start selling your program.Bravo,you’ve made it!Along comes zorba the geek,buys your cd and makes a few copies for his buddies.Each of his buddies makes copies for their friends too.I don’t think it’s neither fair to you or the people helping you to sell you product,to steal/download/copy……..the fruits of your labour!But that’s only my 2cents

Edited by zorba the geek, 09 October 2007 - 12:29 PM.

[Tal]

To be honest you have two classes of P2P, you get the P2P for kids and idiots like limewire and its ilk the file sharing apps that get you infected with malware and caught by the scumbags at the RIAA. Their is a whole other class of P2P apps and protocols that are before secure an malware free and are used allot now by business and by the new movement to decentralise and reinvent the music industry.

I stopped buying music a long time ago basically because I dont wan't to support the RIAA and it's underhand tactics and would prefer the money I spend to go to the people that actually make the product not any middle men and companies that package CDs with malware and restrictive DRM systems, I don't like that CDs have gotten more expensive but artists don't see more money and earn more from concerts.

Allot of the bigger artists now seem to be spearheading the movement to make music affordable and make sure that people are getting a fair deal both the consumer and the artist who both at the moment get screwed the artists going independent now are selling albums at a third of the price and still earning significantly more or they are giving it away for free and relying on concerts and merchandise. And soon there will be little need for illegally downloading because half of the current problem is the prices and lack of a fair deal.

PS brian according to sony and the RIAA borrowing musically is stealing as well.

I think warriorscott's point was that the moment that the MPAA and RIAA stop fighting P2P, people will flock to legal P2P downloads, not that P2P is not dangerous - it is.

After all, think about it from a downloader's point of view. Would you not like to save yourself the trouble of looking for a full, speedy download, in exchange for a smaller fee than what you pay in the store, and without needing to even leave the house, with a single click - you can download all you want in a convenient location, no need to stay in line. It's especially true in countries like Israel, where it's hot most of the year and if you're looking for a good music store that has all you want, you have to go to Tel Aviv. That means traffic jams, since most stores are in the city center. And that means that you have to go look for parking, which is [bleep], then you have to walk 15 minutes until you reach the store, in very hot weather. Plus the fee for parking.

I don't support the methods of the RIAA and MPAA too. They're against any privacy law, and sometimes they are ready to employ every method possible to catch the downloders. For example, there was a fake torrent site they've set up not a long time ago - meevex - something like that, where they offered illegal torrents. Users downloading them - because of the fake information offered, regarding the download's speed and quality - would be prosecuted.

So think about it. Every downloader would prefer dumping his illegal downloads if he's offered cheap music and movies. Think about all the money you can save on buying areas for movie rental stores (and it has to be in city centers so it's expensive), movie covers, membership IDs, computers for each store, electricity, shelves. Same goes for music stores.

As for DRM - I don't support it. I'm not talking about programs that limit the amount you have a specific movie or music (movie or music rental), that DRM is legit, and although it can easily be bypassed, it's no easier than copying a DVD from the rental store and bypassing its protection or just ripping an audio CD to your computer. I'm talking specifically about DRM meant to limit you from copying a DVD you've purchased (or a CD for that matter). Just as I'm free to use the Beatles CD I just purchased in my brand new CD player, in my cousin's car or just throw it at someone, I'd like to be able to do the same with my digital media (well, except the throwing part ). If someone purchases a CD or a digital media - and he wants to upload it - he will, there's nothing you can do to stop him, there are programs that can bypass DRM. Or, just record the background audio.

So, my question is - why anger people and complicate matters? Remove DRM from all songs, and people would be glad to download them - the prices are excellent. The only reason people don't buy DRM'd music is because they want to play it on their portable MP3 player - I wonder if the RIAA thought about that option. Or, for example - play it in the car. Or in the audio system. Experience has shown us that stores that offered some sections or all of their music without DRM (even with much higher prices!) had instant, tremendous success, and none has regretted it.

Think about it - if the RIAA and MPAA stop trying to DRM everything, all people will start downloading legal music. And since people upload illegal content because they get benefits (access to other sites, etc) from it, not because they're loving and caring people, would download their music legally because it's available and DRM-free, there would be very little pirating. Just as it was years ago, when people bootlegged CDs and movies on the streets - it will remain, but in much, much, much smaller amounts.

Just my 2 cents.

[sari]

I think the primary reason people go file-sharing sites is they want something for nothing. They don't want to pay $13.99 for a cd, or $0.99 per song, if there's a possibility they can get it free somewhere. I'm not saying that's true of everyone, and if there were legal and safe filesharing sites, that would be great. However, I don't think this statement is true:

So think about it. Every downloader would prefer dumping his illegal downloads if he's offered cheap music and movies. Think about all the money you can save on buying areas for movie rental stores (and it has to be in city centers so it's expensive), movie covers, membership IDs, computers for each store, electricity, shelves. Same goes for music stores.

There are some people out there who always think you should get something for nothing, and as long as you have that, you'll have illegal filesharing and its incumbent issues. I'm not saying that there isn't more that can be done to make legal downloads more accessible, but you will never do away with the illegal side of it.