Music Industry suing file sharers

Wednesday, June 25, 2003 by The DJ | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk

WASHINGTON -- The embattled music industry disclosed plans today for an unprecedented escalation in its fight against Internet piracy, threatening to sue hundreds of individual computer users who illegally share music files online.

The Recording Industry Association of America, citing significant sales declines, said it will begin today to search Internet file-sharing networks to identify music fans who offer "substantial" collections of mp3 song files for downloading.

It expects to file at least several hundred lawsuits seeking financial damages within eight to 10 weeks.

Executives for the RIAA, the Washington-based lobbying group that represents major labels, would not say how many songs on a user's computer might qualify for a lawsuit. The new campaign comes just weeks after U.S. appeals court rulings requiring Internet providers to identify subscribers suspected of illegally sharing music and movie files.

The RIAA's president, Carey Sherman, said tens of millions of Internet users of popular file-sharing software after Thursday will expose themselves to "the real risk of having to face the music."

Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., who has proposed giving the entertainment industry new powers to disrupt downloads of pirated music and movies, said the RIAA's actions were overdue. "It's about time," Berman said in a statement. "For too long ... file-traffickers have robbed copyright creators with impunity."

The RIAA said its lawyers will file lawsuits initially against people with the largest collections of music files they can find online. U.S. copyright laws allow for damages of $750 to $150,000 for each song offered illegally on a person's computer, but Sherman said the RIAA will be open to settlement proposals from defendants.

"We have no hard and fast rule on how many files you have to be distributing ... to come within our radar screen," Sherman said. "We will go after the worst offenders first."

The RIAA said it expected to file "at least several hundred lawsuits" within eight to 10 weeks but will continue to file lawsuits afterward on a regular basis.






For the whole story:
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Entertainment/ap20030625_1212.html
[Message Edited]
First Previous Page 5 of 5 Next Last
CerebroJD
Reply #81 Monday, June 30, 2003 6:06 AM
I wasnt sure what the difference in quality was between Mp3 and full cd quality so I d/l Kazaa and got some of the THX sound tests. I have a CD of them too. When played back, the Mp3's had alit of distortion as the ranges cahnged from low to mid and from mid to high. It gave kind of a warbling sound. Not good. The CDs however did not have this problem. Clear as a bell the whole way through.
voo
Reply #82 Monday, June 30, 2003 8:53 AM
depends how the person converted mp3, as you can make MP3's alot better than cd quality
Doomgaze
Reply #83 Monday, June 30, 2003 9:14 AM
you CAN'T make an mp3 better than the quality of the cd it came from
DaWebMassa
Reply #84 Monday, June 30, 2003 9:58 AM
Sure you can likwid... crank up the gain, bass and treble.
I.R. Brainiac
Reply #85 Monday, June 30, 2003 10:03 AM
I tweak every song in cooledit pro before burning for the car.Many songs are eq'd poorly and volumes are not the same from track to track.
The DJ
Reply #86 Monday, June 30, 2003 10:29 AM
depends how the person converted mp3, as you can make MP3's alot better than cd quality


Doomgaze is correct.

Do not forget that CDs stream data at more than a megabit per second. 128 falls short, especially with high frequencies; higher bit rates may be indistinguishable with the normal ear and average setup, however, with a good ear and a high end system, this isn't always the case.

Do not foget either about SACD and DVD-A.
paxx
Reply #87 Monday, June 30, 2003 3:23 PM

I don't have a fancy ear. To me, even 64 bits sounds good enough. That's how I compress my MP3's. The difference in weight is huge, and I really don't see that much difference (especially to listen on my cheapo speakers with my cheapo sound card).

joetheblow
Reply #88 Monday, June 30, 2003 6:56 PM
I don't notice the difference either... or maybe I didn't really care to much about it at most times.

CD's to me wer always better and depending on how you make it into a MP3, it can sound worst or better.

CognitoToo
Reply #89 Monday, June 30, 2003 11:05 PM
Sure, you can remaster a song and add effects and eq'ing. But the original ripped song cannot be better than the quality of the original. MP3 compression doesn't remaster or declick. Nor, does WMA compression. But, I too have improved the quality of CD songs with programs such as Cool edit Pro and Sound Forge. But, one has to start with the original which can only be as good as the original CD track.
Sugaree
Reply #90 Monday, June 30, 2003 11:24 PM
I don't have a good ear either...It's all sounds good to me, umm.. unless I'm listening to an AM station

My hubby is like "shocked", that I can't tell the diff from a vcr tape or a dvd....I tell him, If the story is good, It's all that matters!

Now he want's one of those plasma flat screens!

Grrrrrrr, Men!
werewolf
Reply #91 Tuesday, July 1, 2003 10:51 AM
yeah, we're suckers for cool stuff!!



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Doomgaze
Reply #92 Tuesday, July 1, 2003 11:09 AM
i have 2 sets of car mp3 cd's
1: jeep set... 96kbs/128kbs why? jeeps are noisy as hell... you don't notice when its "ok" quality.. but i do alot of distance in the jeep so... lots of music = better

2: audi set... the car has a Bose custom sound system... all 192kbs (they're as good as the origional cd's) just more cd's *shrug* (audi's have notoriously quiet interiors in comparison to just about every other make)
mooshoo
Reply #93 Tuesday, July 1, 2003 3:07 PM
...don't they have more important things to be doing?

maybe worry about educating all the stupid people in our world, then we wouldn't have to worry about crimes so much.
Fuzzy Logic
Reply #94 Tuesday, July 1, 2003 4:12 PM
Most people have better things to do than educate stupid people...
kona0197
Reply #95 Tuesday, July 1, 2003 4:24 PM
I think stupid people should wear signs that say I'm stupid so we would not have to waste or time...

Wait a minute I would have to wear one! >
Fuzzy Logic
Reply #96 Tuesday, July 1, 2003 4:27 PM
So all stupid people wear signs saying 'Kona0197 is stupid' OK...
Doomgaze
Reply #97 Tuesday, July 1, 2003 4:31 PM
Hey, tipping the attendants on their corporate jets is important to the RIAA.
Tech-Cat
Reply #98 Tuesday, July 1, 2003 5:31 PM
Paying for their pet chefs is important to RIAA too.



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Chef Garry
Reply #99 Tuesday, July 1, 2003 7:31 PM
Paying for chefs is VERY important!



Powered by SkinBrowser!

Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

  • Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
  • Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
  • Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
  • It's simple, and FREE!



web-wc01