RIAA hit list
Jul 30, 2003 at 6:25 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 37

kelly

Herr Babelfish der Übersetzer, he wore a whipped-cream-covered tutu for this title.
Joined
Jan 1, 2002
Posts
5,435
Likes
12
I know there are very different opinions on this topic and most of you already know mine. Please keep this thread informational and post anything inflamatory in a separate thread in the Take It Outside forum.

Here's an interesting article I found on the internet that was mentioned on Tech Live.
http://www.techtv.com/news/culture/s...484600,00.html

Please post any other informational stuff you come across in this thread.
 
Jul 30, 2003 at 6:37 PM Post #2 of 37
Couple things to note --

a) Looks like the RIAA is only going after Kazaa users for now. That means Soulseek users can rest easy for now.

b) It also seems (from what I've read) they're focusing on a set assortment of songs. So if you're sharing obscure, non-mainstream stuff, I wouldn't worry, either.

- Chris
 
Jul 30, 2003 at 8:57 PM Post #7 of 37
I was watching tv news yesterday and they had this guy on there, a grandfather, and he said that he was being sued for file sharing. Said he was away at some party and his son logged on and did some swapping and now he's contacted and waiting to see if he'll get a subpoena.

More info.
 
Aug 1, 2003 at 12:57 AM Post #11 of 37
www.k_lite.tk_Kazaa_Lite@Kazaa is on there.

this is also the default address put in when you install kazaalite (some editions)

surely they cant go after everyone using this email adress, becuase there is no proof who is sharing how much is there?

(i could be being painfully stupid and wrong here, someone correct me if i am)

oh well, for the rare occasions i use kazaalite, i shall change my username to this.

i never share that much anyway, i have a teeny hard drive, and prefer to back-up my stuff on cd
 
Aug 1, 2003 at 10:27 AM Post #13 of 37
and again with certian versions of kazaa lite, ithink it's puts the default user name as that.
 
Aug 1, 2003 at 3:07 PM Post #14 of 37
Quote:

Originally posted by MERTON
there has to be something illegal about charging someone with something they didn't do like in that grandpa case.


The law is the law whether you are aware of it being the law or not. Try driving 55 in a 35 where you didn't see a sign. Guess what? You still get a ticket and "I didn't see the sign" won't get it dismissed.
 
Aug 1, 2003 at 3:42 PM Post #15 of 37
not necessarily.

there are two elements to a crime, the mens rea and the actus rea.

mens rea being the guilty mind, the intent to commit a crime.

the actus reus, actually being the guilty act.

you need both in order for a crime to have been comitted.

a basic example, if you kill someone, but didn't mean to do it, you only have the the actus reus, and not the mens rea, so you will not be guilty of murder, only manslaughter. (i'm not going to get into wether it would be reckless or gross negligant, becuase that confuses me! and i an aware it's different in the us, probably second degree murder as opposed to first or something, i dont know anything about american law though).


however, crimes such as speeding, running a red light, in fact most road traffic offences, and some other crimes, are state of affairs offences (i think), meaning you are guilty whether you meant to do it or not.

i don't know wether piracy falls under this or not.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top