Post new topic  Reply to topic Worldwide Rave Board (international) -> Re: ARIA playing dirty? (or are they really clueless?)
This is a reply to an article - See Article :: View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

PostPosted: 28 Oct 2003 20:16    Post subject: Re: EFA condemns music industry "piracy" raids Reply with quote

its pretty scary stuff...

also check out the related "Digital Agenda Review" article at

What does this mean for any sites with links directories (such as spraci) or search
engines (such as google, altavista, etc)?
(it would be impossible to manually check all the links every day in case someone has put
an illegal mp3 on one of the linked sites!)

What are the possible implications for unsigned artists wishing to
promote their own music (and possibly give some of it away for free to give people a
chance to hear what their music sounds like)?

Back to top
View user's profile

PostPosted: 29 Oct 2003 02:45    Post subject: Re: EFA condemns music industry Reply with quote

fuck thats wack..

im gonna steal music for the rest of my life. i dont believe that i should pay for music
that isnt live.

Back to top
View user's profile

PostPosted: 29 Oct 2003 20:51    Post subject: Re: EFA condemns music industry Reply with quote

masta wrote:
fuck thats wack..

im gonna steal music for the rest of my life. i dont believe that i should pay for music
that isnt live.

. . .

Unfortunatley that is the way it is heading Masta. Not because of what you believe, but
out of neccessity. The artists whom write the music that you are downloading are
literally starving.

I hope that you are comfortable with that. Please think about it as you sit back on your
couch eating potato chips. icon_evil.gif

Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website

PostPosted: 29 Oct 2003 21:06    Post subject: Re: EFA condemns music industry Reply with quote


stop believing everything you read in the tabloids!

How much did an artist ever get from releasing their music on cd or vinyl?
tell us what percentage!

What gives a few greedy lawyers and businessmen the right to screw the real artists? (as
they have always done)

then they go on about artists!?

Artists have always been struggling
and many pay lots of their money to get their music pressed themselves and some even set
up their own labels just to get their music out there and heard (so that maybe they might
get a few more gigs or some better opportunity).

The greedy corrupt businessmen don't want artists to find easier ways to get their music
directly to people (they want nothing less that total control, If there is someone out
there making music and they are not getting a cut they want to shut them down)

I'm not saying the public are saints either,
however do you really think all that bullying is going to stop people swapping music files
or cdrs any more than the "home taping is killing music" stuff on records years ago
stopped people taping on cassette?

Yes I say they SHOULD go out and buy music to support their favourite artists but I also
say they should buy direct from the artists and not give a cent to those greedy
multinationals who don't give a shit about any artist who isn't in the top 40.

Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website

PostPosted: 30 Oct 2003 20:32    Post subject: BOYCOTT!!!! Reply with quote

I say we should boycott them!!!

check this out:

Back to top
View user's profile

PostPosted: 29 Oct 2003 10:53    Post subject: Re: EFA condemns music industry Reply with quote

Wow! The legal implications are HUGE! The battles already been played out in court to date
have not made any clear roads into these issues and in fact have probably caused more
unsurities (is that a word)then anything else.

Surely it is not expected that webmasters have to check all links! I mean that would be
ridiculous! And could see the end for many sites. And for ISP's to police their clients in
an absurd notion!

I can see the point of view of the big music labels. They are large commercial
corporations watching money march out their doors and want to try and stop it, it make
good business sense whether you agree with it or not.

but as you say, what about unsigned artists?
And how on earth will they police the CD burners of the world. I haven't bought an album
in months! All mine are burnt from friends etc........ although I must admit I will always
support local talent by buying their CD's, particularly the small unsigned guys and


Keep us posted on this matter.....I feel there are some major issues about to be played
out in the courts!

Back to top
View user's profile

PostPosted: 30 Oct 2003 02:26    Post subject: Re: EFA condemns music industry Reply with quote

true true,,, good points

i wouldnt burn or download an aussie hip hop cd (or any genre) that i KNEW i liked. i
would buy it.

i also bought jurrasic 5's albums, and a few others here and there like london
elektricity,,, stuff i feel i should support and is not as popular (bad choice of word) as
it should be.... sort of..

but the point is when i buy a cd its
1) im in a record shop and want to try somthing new
2) its somthing i already like and i want to support AND its not heaps popular...

Back to top
View user's profile

PostPosted: 04 Nov 2003 20:15    Post subject: what would YOU like to see in the future? Reply with quote

yes the possible implications ARE huge!

Sueing an ISP because people can host websites with links on them which can help someone
find an illegal mp3 on a website not even hosted at the same ISP is like taking Australia
Post to court because someone was distributing lists via mail of mail order shops overseas
which sell cds and some of the overseas shops turned out to be selling pirated cds via
mail order!
(do we expect Australia Post to open everyone's mail and check every cd they find and
possibly even reject some legitimate cds because they can't find the copyright owner on a
list?... and also read every letter in case one of them contains an address of an overseas
pirate cd mail order service or even check if someone's letter contained a few lines
ripped from a book someone else wrote? - would we really be prepared to put up with

I'd also like to encourage more discussion about what everyone would like the future music
industry to be like and we don't hear very much from the angle of not-well-known artists
whos' views often differ from those of famous artists.

As long as I can remember its has always been hard for a new artist to get noticed, but in
these times of change maybe people could think of ideas which can give more people an
(and also create new opportunities for some of the other people in the music industry with
other important skills too)

Instead of everyone fighting each other, perhaps by seeing more perspectives on what
different people would like to see in the future we could collectively create new ways of
doing things which could help more artists to do what they love (and have an income from
it), keep the internet free of censorship and ridiculous or unenforcable laws and give all
music lovers the greatest choice of music to enjoy.

Back to top
View user's profile

PostPosted: 05 Nov 2003 16:40    Post subject: Re: what would YOU like to see in the future? Reply with quote

I would like to see music shared among friends, maybe a bit of bartering though...frindly
like. icon_wink.gif

Back to top
View user's profile

PostPosted: 15 Nov 2003 08:30    Post subject: ARIA playing dirty? (or are they really clueless?) Reply with quote,2000048590,20281016,00.htm

Again - it doesn't say that the site had only links to other sites rather than
actual music files.

also - its worrying that they are using dirty tactics like starting multiple court cases
against individuals involved with the ISP (probably to reduce their ability to fight the
original case where they are probably trying to get a precendent set so they can sue
anyone for having links (even unknowingly - eg directories/search engines or any site with
lots of links where it is impossible to constantly monitor the content of every linked

If a customer of an ISP asks and employee for the ISP for help with their domain/hosting
configuration or account what do they expect them to do other than to make sure they are
providing the service the customer has asked for? (given that the site had only links on
it and no evidence of any actual copyrighted sound files.)

You would think they would go after the sites that actually hosted the mp3s in question -

which of course is difficult because there would have been lots of different sites but
sueing over links potentially sets a dangerous precendent which could make legal music
content much harder to find, which would be bad for artists who want to promote themselves
by letting people hear their music on the internet - of course ARIA doesn't seem to care
about those artists! (who are potentially any artists who don't have corporate

Another important point that needs to be made is the estimated "losses" by the "music

How much of that music would actually have been bought if they couldn't find those mp3s on
those linked websites?

I suspect only a very small proportion!

If people can download music files for free they will often download anything that they
think they might be interested in to find out what it sounds like.

If they have to pay they will of course only buy what they already know they really like.
(and to know they like the music by a certain artist usually means they have heard some of
the music by that artist before).

- also regarding illegal copyrighted mp3s - how many people actually download those from
websites? (compared to using popular file-sharing systems or even individuals swapping
files directly) and how many people actually use "mp3 search engines" to find them? (when
you would probably find more of them using a proper search engine like the big general
ones people use to find anything else)

- how do they arrive at those "loss" figures? (do they just estimate the number of mp3
files they think are being downloaded by people on average (which may also include legal
ones that should not be included in such figures) and then multiply that by the cd retail
price of one of THEIR releases? (which of course has packaging and distribution costs that
would not be relevant for digital downloads)
- what about the cases of not-well-known artists actually selling more cds because someone
downloaded a couple of their tracks (ither legally from the artist's website or illegally
on a file-sharing system) and wanted to hear more of their music? - how much does that
offset "music industry losses"? (or do those cases not count because the companies coming
up with the figures don't get money out of them?)

It strikes me that these legal proceedings are just an attempt at pure short-term
money-grabbing and nothing to do with any concern for the long-term future livelyhood of

- Or are those multinationals really that clueless about the real world?

If they had any real concern for artists you would think they would be creating new ways
to more easily buy the diverse range of music people want and better ways for artists to
promote themselves!

I do believe people (whatever their personal attitude towards copyright issues) are
usually prepares to pay something for convenience.

In other words - make it EASY TO FIND and EASY TO BUY at a reasonable price and create
convenient payment methods that are suitable for small transactions (such as buying a
single track as a downloadable file for $2)

I have been saying this for many years but it seems like what seems so obvious to me seems
to be something the big players have difficulty understanding. (even when understanding
such concepts might actually allow them to run a viable business in future - lets face it
- they are the ones with the resources to actually build what would be needed!)

Perhaps they could build a service for a network of online specialist store resellers with
good search and money transaction capabilities which could make use of the excellent
promotional ability found in many current day specialist record stores.

... but what do they do? - waste their money on court cases!

Lets get some discussion going on ideas for creating a better long-term long term future
for artists and all people who enjoy a diverse range of music (in the real world - without
restricting individual freedom of expression or compromising civil liberties)

Back to top
View user's profile

PostPosted: 15 Nov 2003 12:50    Post subject: Re: ARIA playing dirty? (or are they really clueless?) Reply with quote,4057,7865082%255E15306,00.html

"Michael Speck of the Music Piracy Investigation Force (MIPI), which gathered information
on behalf of the applicants, said 140 million songs linked to on the website had been
downloaded during a 12-month period. "

what a load of bollox!

How would they be able to measure how many songs were downloaded?

All they could see from the server logs of the site in question is how many times any of
its pages were loaded.
Given that none of the mp3s were hosted on the site they would not be able to tell from
the server logs what music people may have actually downloaded.

Even if they could find a way to determine how many times someone clicked on a link to an
mp3 they would not be able to tell if that person actually downloaded the mp3 file without
seeing the server logs of the sites which actually hosted the file or actually inspecting
the hard drives of the people they claim have downloaded the files. (in which case they
would not be able to tell where they were downloaded from!)

How many of those links actually went to an mp3 file that you could actually download? -
how many were dead links? - how many of the linked sites actually let you download
anything? How many people are patent enough to follow a trail of links to an mp3 and put
up with lots of popup ads (and browser crashes caused by popups) and sites attempting to
install adware along the way when they could find the same song much more easily on a
file-sharing system or borrowing a friend's cd?

anyway - allowing anyone to sue anyone over ANY links to other websites is dangerous.
Do we want to see a situation where only those who can afford top lawyers can run any kind
of website and where no website can allow realtime message boards in case someone posts a

Do we want to end up with no access to the internet at all.
(perhaps this is what those corporations want)

Do we want to see ISPs forced to monitor everyones data (including personal email) and
remove all audio files (including legal ones) and pass on the ridiculous costs to all of
us the (as increased access costs)
How many thousand people would be needed to police everyones data like that - it is not
feasable - more likely they would end up having to have some kind of expensive insurance
policy just in case they get sued by these people (or also customers annoyed at reduced
service or having their websites removed "just in case")

Back to top
View user's profile

PostPosted: 16 Nov 2003 01:41    Post subject: Re: ARIA playing dirty? (or are they really clueless?) Reply with quote

yeeee,,, thats true hey,, bullocks indeeed...

tha future of this sorta case will be interesting,,,

Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic  Reply to topic SPRACI Forum Index -> Worldwide Rave Board (international) All times are GMT + 9 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can vote in polls in this forum

The URI to trackback this topic is:

Some parts of this forum are powered by phpBB 2.0.4 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group - Modified for SPRACI by Michael MD