Is the RIAA only going after americans?

[maxpower311]

I live in Canada and I want to know if they plan on suing people outside of the U.S.A.


Any information would be greatly appreciated thanks.

[Sephiroth]

The RIAA is a USA only trade group. So no if you dont live in the USA then you dont have to worry about the RIAA, or any other US trade organization.

However there is a very good chance that a similar trade group that is in your country which doesnt mean that you dont have to worry about them.

[MarkB]

I haven't heard anything yet. But from what I understand, they are watching with interest very closely & is exploring it.

http://www.zeropaid.com/news/articles/auto/06272003a

[mp3vampire]

I wouldn't put it past them to be shareing the information with other trade groups, they probably all have contact with each other helping keep there cartel going.

[FrozenShadow23]

I would assume that they could go after anyone outside of the US if that country's gov agreed to it. They seem to just want Americans cause it's easier. Stupid music nazis.

[RIAA_MUST_DIE]

Yes, the RIAA is only going after their own customers in the States! It's much more difficult to go after them in other countries.

Since you live outside the States do your part and increase your mp3 content.

Destroy the RIAA!

[The Hunter]

Originally posted by RIAA_MUST_DIE
Yes, the RIAA is only going after their own customers in the States! It's much more difficult to go after them in other countries.

Since you live outside the States do your part and increase your mp3 content.

Destroy the RIAA!
Note, i just closed one of your threads, and if you continue to be a troll, you will be banned.

[PowerMan57two]

Yet another RIAA thread. Bummer, these RIAA threads are killing me!

[The Hunter]

They dont do squat for me either, but this was a legitimate question.

[inflikted_damage]

Maybe this question will be constructive: what can those of us in the states do to continue file sharing without too much fear of getting busted? I unfortunately chickened out the moment I read about the statement put out by the RIAA and stopped sharing. I have no desire to get busted by some random ip search but I also feel bad about not sharing and helping out the p2p community. What can I do?

[FileHoover]

Originally posted by RIAA_MUST_DIE
Yes, the RIAA is only going after their own customers in the States! It's much more difficult to go after them in other countries.

Since you live outside the States do your part and increase your mp3 content.

Destroy the RIAA! Copyright holders have rights to enforce their copyrights virtually worldwide (Bern Convention) by treaty. With a few exceptions, Palestine being one.

Will they?

Probably not. Unless they want to make an example of someone. Remember, all they have to do is sue ONE person and that has a chilling effect on everyone even if it isn't practical for them so sue every p2p'er in say, Bulgaria.

It's more expensive for them to come over to Europe because they have to hire local attorneys and often those attorneys really gouge them and in Arab Countries, you can get ripped off completely with absolutely NO results! Arab lawyers will string you along, taking your money forever, let me tell you!

So, I think they will clean up house in the United States first. Just a guess, but a good one.

Here is a FAQ on international copyrights.

http://bricolage.bel-epa.com/resources/lounge/bureau/copyright/faq/part4.html

[Lamourlady]

Originally posted by inflikted_damage
Maybe this question will be constructive: what can those of us in the states do to continue file sharing without too much fear of getting busted? I unfortunately chickened out the moment I read about the statement put out by the RIAA and stopped sharing. I have no desire to get busted by some random ip search but I also feel bad about not sharing and helping out the p2p community. What can I do?

well, if you're not sharing and want something from me....well, sorry.....you're Hammered immediately.
as to what u can do???
i say fuck em' and continue sharing.
there are many other Americans who share and take that risk and so should every other "chicken-shit".
why should only a handful put their necks out for u others???
if u can't do this, then i would imagine u should just stop downloading period.
i don't think u will gather much sympathy from many of the users here.
sorry.

[NDGAARONDI]

Thanks for the link, Filehoover. But there's a bog hoo-har on treaties like this. And that's enforcement. I remembered one American guy who broke an English law (IP), forgot his name, think he's in Congress.

Oh well. There's other treaties too, but I'm unsure if USA has stuck to them too. I heard the jellow or something sandwich was patented. But you can't do that, since the orginal was English, you just modify it, and call it your own. I've seen computer companies take action over each other on this like Adobe v Macromedia, so why should the sandwich be different huh? I'm guess that this DID happen.......

Every country I know hasn't stuck to every treaty obligation it has assigned to, even Switzerland. Unless anyone can correct me here :fire

[Winphuk]

Originally posted by inflikted_damage
Maybe this question will be constructive: what can those of us in the states do to continue file sharing without too much fear of getting busted? I unfortunately chickened out the moment I read about the statement put out by the RIAA and stopped sharing. I have no desire to get busted by some random ip search but I also feel bad about not sharing and helping out the p2p community. What can I do?

If your worried about getting caught you can disable the feature that allows the browsing of your folder, so that they will believe you are only sharing that one file.

[WRFan]

Is the RIAA only going after americans?

lol. I think you misunderstand the very nature of RIAA: riaa is not a organisation interested in pure morality or some kind of ethics. It's a mere economic organisation, and therefore it pursues only economic interests of its own. RIAA represents the recording industry of the US, and therefore only goes after US citizens. If you are living in another country and download music from the net, then the respective businesses of other countries lose money, but not american businesses, because if you live in Canada, you wouldn't go to the US to buy music, even if you decided to buy it instead of downloading it. American music businesses sell distrubution licences to foreign firms. If you download music, then those european or asian or whatever distributors lose money, but not the american businesses, 'cause they already got their money from the foreign distributors. Meaning RIAA doesn't care. But of course there may be equivalent organisations in other countries too. But all this depends on the respective laws of the respective countries. Maybe your country doesn't allow isps to reveal information about their users. Then nobody will get your real identity, even if they request that info from your ISP. The US may allow/force isps to reveal info about their users, but thanx to God there are also some democratic countries out there, which, as opposed to the US, still believe in the concept of privacy as a basic human right, even if such privacy might hurt the economic interests of some greedy businesses

[Aaron73153]

The international version of the RIAA is called the IFPI. Although it is the RIAA making all the news it wouldn't suprise me if the IFPI and the RIAA are sharing information and it isn't much of a stretch that the IFPI would start to use the smae tactics as the RIAA. Although it looks like its just us Americans right now, the rest of the world will probably be under the gun soon from lawsuits from the IFPI. I remember that case with the Russian programmer who cracked Adobe's Ebook in Russia and then was taken to court when he came to the US under the DMCA. Would the American record companies only then be allowed to sue international file traders if they set foot in the US? How does this case affect international traders?

[NDGAARONDI]

Sounds like WRFan is a fellow European! :fire :fire :fire

[NDGAARONDI]

I'm very surprised Russia allowed this. I know Europe won't be too hasty in something like this.

Well, may be England should force USA to take English judgments on defamation etc huh?

What was the name of this case with this Russian who cracked the e-books? I would like to see if I can find it on the net please :wings

[Aaron73153]

His name was Dmitry Sklyarov . Here is a link about the outcome of the case: http://news.com.com/2100-1023-978176.html

Although he was found not-guilty, it was becuase the judge agreed that he didn't know what he was doing was illegal, that same defence wouldn't work in a P2P case.

[Triple_T]

well first stop and think of what the RIAA stands for......... yea thats what i thought dumbass

[NDGAARONDI]

Thanks, Aaron73153.
:fire :fire :fire :fire :fire

[WRFan]

Although he was found not-guilty, it was becuase the judge agreed that he didn't know what he was doing was illegal, that same defence wouldn't work in a P2P case.

what kind of an argument is that? lack of law knowledge doesn't free you from the responsibility for your crimes. Not, in reality he was found guilty, but got immunity, because he agreed to cooperate with the FBI. The US authorities were going after Elcomsoft, not after its employees. anyway, this case really made that programme famous. I didn't even know about it prior to the case, but after the case started it was in the news, I learnt about the programme, went to the internet, searched a little, found it and since then I am using it pretty often. which is of course exactly the opposite of what adobe wanted.

[NDGAARONDI]

You can have defenses for certain crimes I know. Just depends which ones, and what they do, and how you qualify for them etc.

Like if you kill someone but lacked the mens rea, you did not commit muder, you committed manslaughter. :fire

[Aaron73153]

Another good example is with someone who kills someone in a car accident becuase they are driving drunk, the law sees it as they were not in the capacity to commit murder and didn't mean to. (opinion: i think that if you choose to drink you should be responsible to find a ride and not to drive drunk, if you are irrisponsible to that extent you should be charged with murder and have the chance of life without parole.) The other thing is that Dimitri admitted to making the software and created somewhat of a plea bargain with the prosecution. After the OJ Simpson trial I believe that if you get a good lawyer he can get you off no matter what the evidence.

[NDGAARONDI]

Well apparently in some countries voluntary intoxication is an excuse for one charge but not another, so killing would make murder down to manslaughter in England due to diminshed responsibilty, but if ur drunk and u commit rapre, that's no defence.

Also for some reason drink driving seems aacount for drunken drivers. Stupid, it's a homicide. And should be manslaughter by gross negligence. But jurors refuse to convict as they are car drivers!

Easy way to get round that, just up the sentence and everything for each charge so they're equal, but called differently. :fire

[Aaron73153]

Sane here, if the woman is drunk, irregardless if she agrees to sex your subject to rape charges. It will be interesting to see if there can ever be agreement on enforcing laws internationally, the UN can't enforce laws of the nations so it will be difficult for the RIAA to enforce US laws in other countries.

[NDGAARONDI]

How do u mean a woman with rape? Just sometimes in England it might not be as clear cut at times.........that's why it's good to study law IMHO

[RIAA_MUST_DIE]

Originally posted by The Hunter
Note, i just closed one of your threads, and if you continue to be a troll, you will be banned.

Excuse me, but why are you threatening to ban me???

I've been a Zeropaid lurker for over a year and half and recently registered because of the latest scare tactics the RIAA is putting out.

I suggested 3 times that as of now, a good counter move against the RIAA's recent crap was to ask others outside the states to increased their shared mp3's, than I'm labeled a troll.

I don't get it, what was it that I said that was so offensive? I would have thought there would be others behind me, in that taking on a billion dollar industry is no easy feat.

Here is what I believe the RIAA is trying to do.

1-1998, they tried to use the legal system to outlaw the mp3 format. Didn't work.

2-2001, They were successful in shutting down Napster

3-2003, They tried to use the legal system to stop the distribution of p2p. Didn't work.

All along, they tried to distance themselves from the members and also resisted going after end users, basically their customers.

Now they have resorted to using the legal system to issue subpoena's to hundred or thousands of users.

As a p2p site, I'm sure you guys are aware this has had a affect on the p2p community, Kazaa users have dropped 15%.

So, I'm simply giving my thoughts of what p2p users can do in the meantime until more anonymous systems are developed.

I'm sorry if I've come off as a troll, but I've take p2p very serious and I'm very upset and concerned that end users are basically letting the RIAA push them around.

[FutureIverson]

kazaa users have dropped 15%? BS.... I saw that downloads actually increaseD!!!!!!! this week. Increased... it's hard to believe but it's true. Some people have quit but those are 13 year olds sharing 100 songs, or people who don't share anyways. Kazaa still has just as many users. some music file shares have decreased, but software, and video is constant. i don't think someone should be banned unless they keep starting threads, flame, spam, or troll, do you fall under this riaa must die, if not then don't worry.

[squirm]

Originally posted by FutureIverson
kazaa users have dropped 15%? BS.... I saw that downloads actually increaseD!!!!!!! this week. Increased... it's hard to believe but it's true. Some people have quit but those are 13 year olds sharing 100 songs, or people who don't share anyways. Kazaa still has just as many users. some music file shares have decreased, but software, and video is constant. i don't think someone should be banned unless they keep starting threads, flame, spam, or troll, do you fall under this riaa must die, if not then don't worry.

On average, I've seen the numbers of users drop by about 15%, the size of downloadable files, seems to have only dropped by around 8%. However, mp3 files are relatively small compared to video files.

[NDGAARONDI]

Well I got one friend p2ping now :fire :fire :fire

[HansG]

I'm very surprised Russia allowed this. I know Europe won't be too hasty in something like this.
NDGAARONDI, different case but a few weeks ago a Dutch citizen was turned over to the American authorities for drugs smoggle. He was a Dutch citizen in a Dutch prison but America has forced a turn-over treaty down our throats (if we didn't comply there would be serious repercussions). Things change, but American terror never does.

In a way we were much better off in the 80s with America vs Russia. They balanced each other out, today America can demand anything they want and never gets punished. Does anyone ever question why America has military bases in every country? Another example is the International Justice Court in The Hague. If an American ever needs to stand trial there, American marines will invade The Hague/Holland and take him by force. We give in. Belgium was forced to change it's laws because America wasn't happy with the fact that a person like Bush would be accused of violating human rights (which is true). Belgium gave in and changed the law. America wants to violate our privacy and demands to know the size of our underwear among other things before we are allowed in the country. The European Union bows. The list goes on.

[NDGAARONDI]

It's a shame the EU bows as you say. I know the Westminster passed an Act entitled, "Implications of Withdrawal from the European Union". But we all know what Parliament and legislation is like.

Speaking of treaties. They are no angels either. I don't see any halo! I remember hearing a case in the International Court of Justice where USA wanted to execute these Mexicans, but couldn't because of a treaty. USA complained as it was taking away their soverignty etc. but this what happens when you sign up to treaties, unless you make the laws of treaties discretionary!

.....and how about America's fiasco over the International Criminal Court huh? If you don't know it all, read it.

I remember not so long ago that a Briton got executed in USA, and may be there may have been a chance for the criminal to stand trial in Britain and serve his time there, but it never happened. Sorry don't know the full facts here! And it's very rare for Britons to be executed in USA as I've heard.

Oh and how about those Britons held in Cuba huh? Standing a military trial, which is unappropriate and better to have a proper one in England.

So yes, the list does go on. May be they should choose their allies carefully..... :fire :shy

I wander if any American hackers who send virii, worms and do DoS etc. that invade citizens' computers within the EU, to stand trial where the victim is located huh? No idea on this fact either.

All I know is 90% of all spam in the EU comes from........you guess it for yourselves.....

So the list does go on...........I'm going a bit OT here......oops

[bigbuffyfreak]

Does anybody know what the equivalant of the RIAA is in England, and what the laws are in England about p2p and isps disclosing information about their clients?

Wow, first post :)

[NDGAARONDI]

Only record label that made any hoohar in England that I know of is EMI. But they soon backed down.

If you want any information about English law, try to research on the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, or just get a real good IP book, since that will cover treaties we have assigned to too.

Welcome, bigbuffyfreak. :fire :fire

[shawners]

you know what sucks about all this, you can run a server off an island of china, with all the mp3's, riaa simply call up the isps, tell them to block off all the ips of that island.. Simple done deal the way they will force other countries isp to stop connecting to supernodes.

[NDGAARONDI]

huh?

[Wolfie]

Originally posted by NDGAARONDI
huh?

Ditto.

[Theinfamousone]

shawners, do you have any source evidence for that statement?

[bigbuffyfreak]

thanks NDGAARONDI!

[jonnymnemonic]

"If an American ever needs to stand trial there, American marines will invade The Hague/Holland and take him by force."

Nope. I almost had to stand trial in Turkey (I'm an American), and almost saw the inside of a Turkish prison. A female friend DID get sent to Turkish prison (for stomping on a Turkish flag the night before she was due to return to the States). And never was there even the IDEA of the U.S. invading Turkey to prevent either of us from going to prison.

Ultimately, I found my own way to avoid Turkish prison, and last I heard, they were negotiating a prisoner swap to get the female U.S. soldier back to the States (trade a Turkish prisoner in the States for her).

One thing they tell you when you go to a foreign country, at least as a military person, is that we must abide by the laws of the country we are in, and they really mean that. That doesn't mean the U.S. embassy won't try to work something out to get you back to the States (they do try), but if they can't, then you do the time, and the U.S. doesn't invade that country. Lol, that idea is ludicrous.

[NDGAARONDI]

If every country invaded another one because of this, then the United Kingdom would invade USA and Cuba for the British detainees in Guatamelo Bay (?) Now I doubt anyone would see these two allies turn against each other like that now......

[jonnymnemonic]

If you wondered what *I* did to almost get sent to Turkish prison, well, it's a little complicated. I went to a Turkish wedding, got drunk, and near the end, three Turkish girls came up to me and pretty much told me to pick one. So, being drunk and horny, I picked the hottest one (and all three were good looking). We went back to my apartment to do the nasty, but I ask3ed her her age and she said 18. Since 18 is the bare minimum legal age, I got paranoid, and asked her for ID, which she showed me. I did the math and it came up 17 to me, but she explained that they count differently there, that when you are born you are in the first year of life and so they say you are 1. By THAT math, she was in her 18th year of life and thus considered to be 18.

Well, that was a bunch of bull, they count the same way we do, you're 18 on your 18th birthday, not your 17th birthday. But liquor and hormones made me believe her, so we had sex. Two hours later I was in handcuffs - it was an entrapment scheme, to force me to marry her and (presumeably) take her and her family to the States, where we're all rich (yeah, right).

They gave me the choice, marriage or Turkish prison. I tried to avoid that and went AWOL from my own wedding twice (losing two ranks in the process via field grade Article 15s). Finally, I came up with my OWN plan. I had an intermediary (Turkish friend of mine) go to her family and tell them that if I had to, okay, I would marry her, rather than go to prison. And I would then bring her back to the States and sell her as a prostitute on the streets and milk her fine body for piles of money, and the rest of the family would NOT be coming with us. Or....they could acept a small pile of cash, three thousand dollars. (Of course, I wouldn't actually have done that, since I am a nice guy, but when my back is to the wall, I can ACT like a cold-hearted bastard very convincingly.)

They counteroffered, accpeting the money, but on the condition that we actually have the wedding, and at the wedding they would have the flowers pointed backwards, against the wall, and when asked if she would accept marriage, SHE would be the one to say 'no'. This presented them a way to save face, and gave me the opportunity to neither marry her OR go to prison, so that's what we did. I am one of the very few people on the planet to go to his own wedding, have the bride refuse to marry me, and throw a party.

I wasn't out of the woods though. The family tried to hurt me physically, motivated by desire for revenge. My sarge assigned another soldier, a big guy, to stay with me 24 hours a day for my final three months in country, and we slept in a different place every night. Even so, they caught us out in the street one night, chased us, and beat the shit out of my bodyguard (since he couldn't run as fast as I could). The army also offered to send me home early, but only if I accepted a General Under Honorable Conditions discharge, which I refused to do, since an Honorable Discharge looks good on a resume and a General Under Honorable looks horrible on a resume. And they took me off my normal duties (psyops, communications) and put me on duties where I was always armed (inspecting baggage at American-used hotels during terror threats, guard duty, that kind of thing), figuring that if the family did try to get me at work, well, I'd be able to defend myself at least.

But like I said, there was NEVER any idea of invading Turkey to prevent me from going to prison. Had I not worked something out myself, and had I refused to marry that girl, I *would* have gone to prison, absolutely.

[NDGAARONDI]

Man and I thought American law sucks. I don't know why what you did was illegal in Turkey, but there are more stupider laws than I thought. Bodyguard should have just killed them all, hand to hand combat, or severly beat them. Should get all miliary prople trained in martial arts :fire :fire

Well after hearing this I like to know why Turkey wants to become part of the EU now, and no idea why they have signed with treaties like the ECHR, oh well.

At least you're not in prison :fire :fire :fire

[jonnymnemonic]

That bodyguard and me got drunk one night, and he said, trying to be macho, 'hit me, anywhere, I can take it'. So I chopped his larynx and he went down gagging and choking while I rolled around and laughed. Then he got up and beat my face against the balcony railing.

I was so driunk though, that I woke up the next day, with my face swollen and beat up, and I couldn't even remember how it'd happened, total blackout. Then my first sergeant came by to make sure I'd survived the night, saw my face, and asked me if that Turkish family had done it. And I told him honestly, I didn't even know how my face got beat up. Lol!

Later on, my bodyguard, Tony, apologized for beating me up like that and I told him that if I remembered it, I'd be pretty goddamn pissed! But since I didn't remember it, ah well. ;)

[The Hunter]

This fall the Canadian parliment is going to do the same thing. The only saving grace for us for now is that the governing party, is fighting within the party about who the next leader will be. IE they have other priorities, but they have been working on it. So we might be going the way of our neighbours.

[HansG]

One thing they tell you when you go to a foreign country, at least as a military person, is that we must abide by the laws of the country we are in, and they really mean that. That doesn't mean the U.S. embassy won't try to work something out to get you back to the States (they do try), but if they can't, then you do the time, and the U.S. doesn't invade that country. Lol, that idea is ludicrous. jonnymnemonic, unfortunately you are wrong. You are talking about an American soldier fucking up in a foreign country (like you, man what a story!!). I was referring to the International Court which is in The Hague, Holland. Your country has passed a bill that authorizes American soldiers to invade The Hague to prevent your American soldier from standing trial in the International Court (for warcrimes). Perhaps a ludicrous idea, but nevertheless the truth.
Is it just me or was the world a lot better some 5-10 years ago...

[metale]

Originally posted by Sephiroth

However there is a very good chance that a similar trade group that is in your country which doesnt mean that you dont have to worry about them.

BAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!

[NDGAARONDI]

What's the Bill called that was passed? Is it possible to look it up?

USA may have passed this Bill but how enforceable do you think it really is? If they don't want their citizens facing war crime charges, then say the same for everyone else!

[HansG]

What's the Bill called that was passed? Is it possible to look it up?
NDGAARONDI, here's a link that has details about the bill:

http://septemberhearts.com/2002A/waronhague.htm

It is as enforceable as the Americans want it to be. I mean, sure they asked before invading Iraq, but when the answer was no they did it anyway. In fact, without the UN's approval they have taken a hostile act towards another UN member and officially the other UN nations are obliged to attack America and protect Iraq. No one ever dared to bring this up though...
History has shown so many times that the most powerful voice with few or no powerful opponents is simply going to do whatever it wants.
America has the most powerful army and if they decide to attack some country, they can and they will. In the old days when they had Russia as an opponent they'd go to more lengths to justify certain actions but in recent years the response seems to be "you don't like it? blow me". Another reason why no one acts is because America is still regarded as 'slightly normal' and therefore not to be compared to other countries playing little war games with other countries. If one was to look at the end results of all the conflicts America has started or supported the conclusion can only be that there is in fact no difference between America and those war loving countries. I'm sure the Afghanistan people (blown to the stone age and no better off than they were) and the Iraqi's will certainly agree.

[neoufo51]

Interesting....

[NDGAARONDI]

Thanks, HansG.

I can't believe they'd do something like this......

Well I saw on an American website complaining that England were spying on them, and they didn't like it. Good for England, at least we know who the real allies are...ummmm lol

I'd laugh if they tried to invade though and their tactics failed. If the British Commonwealth was one whole country, oh boy lol

Reading that Bill about national security, looks like they won't have that many friends. Some that aren't party to the Rome Statute are NOT friends with USA as well. Nearly all of Europe are party to it.

They actually don't understand the ICC, that is why they fear it!

If they're on about sovereignty so much - pull out of the UN, NATO and all existing treaties etc. And everyone will foloow, and be forever and more divide than we once were.

Might speak to my MP and see if there is a provision where any UK citizen on foreign soil accused of a tort and/or crime in foreign land, is to be brought back to the UK. Any failure by the foreign country in question will result in military action. MUHAHAHA.

Wander why the 29% oppose it exactly......

From my understand because of all this is happening English judges have been extra careful over any agreements such as extradition. Remember the Divisional Court of the High Court refused extradition for a hacker, unfortunately American Gov't appealed to the House of Lords (judicial review). Oh well.

[HansG]

Well what can I say? Everyday another chapter is added ot the big book called America, and every page contains more slapsticks than any movie I can remember. It would be a lot more funnier if it weren't all really happening though.

Should the world blow up in our face, I hope Mr Bush will be the first to admit that perhaps he overdid things a little bit :)

A sad world. I hear they're going to re-elect everyone's favourite monkey because he looks great in a pilot's uniform and speaks that harsh military talk. (I think he always speaks great, you can never tell if he really knows what is coming out of his mouth). Who needs pensions anyway and taxes are fun... even if there's no money we'll always find a few 100 millions for the next presidential compaign.

[NDGAARONDI]

every country should refuse to change laws etc where pressurised from another country, unless obliged by treaties etc. They should use a perfectly good excuse like, it's a potential threat to national security ;D