RIAA sues 12 year old girl for file sharing

Senators backed the RIAA's first wave of legal moves, and media did their best to make it look like a good thing, honest!

After skimming stories about how the RIAA had gone too far, I was suprised to see good ol' Orrin Hatch couldn't keep his mouth shut. He just had to go support suing 12 year old girls and making them cry.

Senate lawmakers yesterday (Sept. 9) expressed support for the Recording Industry Association of America's legal tactics during a hearing on peer-to-peer networks, saying the music industry has the right to initiate lawsuits against egregious infringers.

Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) said "it's great" that the first slate of lawsuits, initiated this week, was widely reported on TV and in daily papers, because "it lets parents know what their kids are doing when they're downloading."

www.p2pnet.net...

I think this Topic demonstrates a misunderstanding of the legality of the situation and is driven by the emotiveness of media reporting on "innocent 12 year olds".

Love or hate the RIAA's methods, there will be continuation of proceedings against file swappers and P2P developers, and (ultimately of course) fines imposed for using P2Ps to download copyrighted material rather than time-and-money consuming civil suits.

The fact that P2P developers have contributed to the perception amongst idiot children that things in life are free (such stupidity backed up by idiot parents at the same time) does not mitigate against the fact that owners of intellectual property have no option but to catch up with the play and protect their interests.

This will get a whole lot more hateful, as both the downloaders and the RIAA are wrong in their actions.

use winmx....its a hell of alot better than kazaa and it will be always free...www.winmx.com...

BOYCOTT????

It seems that 20,000 people cannot be wrong... the RIAA just SUCKS.

The EFF recently launched a petition decrying the RIAA legal strong-arm tactics. Their goal was to collect some 10,000 signatures, but they're now about to break 20,000, and the weekend isn't even over yet. The EFF's stance is clear:

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is on a rampage, launching legal attacks against average Americans from coast to coast. Rather than working to create a rational, legal means by which its customers can take advantage of file-sharing technology and pay a fair price for the music they love, it has chosen to sue people like Brianna LaHara, a 12 year-old girl living in New York City public housing.

arstechnica.com...

The mother said she signed up for KaZaA, paying a $29.95 fee.

something sounds funny about that.

Two things...

1. If the RIAA uses programs to "look" inside a users computer wouldn't that qualify as a virus or worm? It seems to me that any sort of hacking or manipulation without a users consent would be illegal and open them to a substatial counter suit. Not to mention legal action.

2. I see a problem trying to subpeona information from ISPs and then suing the users. First off there is no proof that the person paying the ISP bill was actually the one downloading music. It's kind of like trying to force the owner of a car to pay a parking ticket... If you didn't catch the owner in the car then there is no way to prove that they were the one commiting the crime.

Just my .02...

MA, I think the point is that the RIAA is going after 12 year old girls and 71 year old ladies. What? They won't sue anyone who might put up a fight? Go after little kids scared to get in trouble and old people also scared to get in trouble? Why not a 25 year old who will be willing to fight for the right to not pay 30.00 for a crappy cd with two good songs on it.

RIAA needs to choose real targets, not little kids and old grannies who will draw sympathy from the people.

Like I said, there is much more to the supposed "innocence" of any 12-year old girl and her mother involved in extensive fileswapping using a premium Kazaa product that most ATS members haven't even heard of, than meets the eye.

The RIAA should take whomever they please to court wherever they please, but it's not very efficient and doesn't win them any popularity.

The legal system at large will see this matter differently before too long.

Go after the distributors, notthe listeners. What about the guys stealing packaged cds from their workplace a month before the crappy cds release and uploading it. why hit the listeners and let the ones doing the damage go scott free? It's a fact that 80% of people that download songs eventually get the cd, so whats the problem? Plus you can listen to it on the radio for free, why not download it?

Originally posted by WolfofWar
Go after the distributors, notthe listeners. What about the guys stealing packaged cds from their workplace a month before the crappy cds release and uploading it. why hit the listeners and let the ones doing the damage go scott free? It's a fact that 80% of people that download songs eventually get the cd, so whats the problem? Plus you can listen to it on the radio for free, why not download it?

1. It's illegal.
2. Radio is a licensed promo vehicle.
3. Your statistic has no basis anywhere at all.
4. It's all collateral damage to an industry sector already in ruins.
5. Look at the ATS motto, read the thread, and recognize again, it's illegal.

I'm afraid I cannot cry any tears for the RIAA. they've had six years to work out this situation. six years! they knew music downloads would eat their lunch, yet they dragged their feet on any solutions what would use the online distribution network to their advantage. people are quite rightly tired of being overcharged for a subpar product being distributed on a medium close to its end of life. (CDs? end of life? yes. I humbly submit that the store-bought pre-packaged album as we know it is close to its death.)
the thing about the recording industry is, their revenue comes solely from consumers. people stop buying, they're up a creek without a paddle. so they're undeniably running scared, but suing their consumers is not the way to turn things around. that's why topics like these absolutely fire people up, the absurdity is striking to even the most dispassionate viewer. not to mention this is not about compensation of artists at all; artists make darn near nothing off of record sales. this is about lining the pockets of the RIAA, who have built their sinking ship. they've had years to figure a way out, but now they're suing their customers as a last-ditch effort to not have to meet the future. sorry, RIAA. game over.

(oh, and the $29.95 version of Kazaa is actually for stuff like product support. so I'm told. I wouldn't touch Kazaa with a 10-foot-pole personally.)

Hey this is gettin' like gun laws,
the gang members commit a crime and then hand the gun over to the 12 and 13 year old members and say 'he did it.'

The juvenile gets detention and a long probation while the crook runs free.

So when they come knocking at your door say it was:

my younger brother or sister?
my daughter or son, you know how good kids are with computers right officer?
or .....

Now there's a plausible theory as to why a mother would part with $2000 quickly to protect her "daughter". Good one.

SBC champions for file sharers everywhere, apperently.

from /.
"SBC is the largest high-speed DSL provider with over 3 million subscribers. It continues to refuse a response to the 300 subpoenas served by the RIAA despite a ruling against Verizon earlier this year. 'We are going to challenge every single one of these that they file until we are told that our position is wrong as a matter of law,' said James D. Ellis, general counsel for SBC"

w000t! o_0!

www.tuscaloosanews.com.../20030916/ZNYT01/309160363