Plaintff in RIAA suit continues to download music

[Jorge]

<p>Justin Reynolds, one of the first consumers ever sued by the music industry, said he felt betrayed by the bands he once loved. Reynolds was forced to pay $4,000 as part of a settlement agreement with the RIAA. </p><p>&ldquo;This really affected my attitude towards music,&rdquo; said Reynolds, who continues to download music and refuses to buy any more CDs.</p>

Read the complete article (http://www.zeropaid.com/news/6109/Plaintff+in+RIAA+suit+continues+to+download+music/)

[mountain_rage]

Its nice when there are people that this that no matter what keep on fighting the good fight. The more people the riaa sue the more people they will have against them.

[Jorge]

downloading=discovery

[MrEricSir]

Right on. It's the customer's who's in charge, we can't stop until the industry understands we're their ONLY valuable asset.

[mcovey]

I'm with him. I'm not paying for music ever again, as I'm not about to stop downloading an "you can click but you cant hide" ... im sure to pay for it sometime soon..

[VAMPYRE BLADE]

I give him a ton of respect, few people would be so brave as to annouce they are still downloading music after being sued.

[Signa]

honestly, i dont think i would stop downloading if i got sued too. downloading is somewhat of an addiction with me.

[Pathtek24]

^^Yeah, I thought for the longest time I was an addicted to downloading. Until I ran out of disc space on my laptop. I'm still trying to burn it all, but I cant keep up with myself..

[kokanezub]

if i was offerd a service like audio galaxy satillite and download files remotly and a huge selection, its legal and a resnable price per month, i would be on top of it,and then movies too? wow id love that and id move till then im on the free stuff

[Jau_Peacecraft]

They're not gonna challenge him again, the RIAA are spineless, ancestrial capaitalist dinosaurs. No one wants to pay for YOUR music anymore, RIAA, because most of it sucks, and whatever is good or is at best mediocre, is ridiculously overpriced. I'll probably pay well over $200 a year even though I download, to cover for blank discs, paying for material from independant artists on the net making GOOD music, and seeing live events of many of those artists.

.begin hypothetical
I'd rather fund Joe Blow down the street who dosen't want to go back to his squat in philly and is so desperate he manages to mash up ragtime blues with japanese hardcorem, works on theat siht night and day making it sound GOOD and with my money gets better equipment and possibly money for food and when others chip in, hey, he might have a fucking dinky studio apartment and somehow gets back into college.
.end hypothetical

yeah, I wish the guilt trip worked on the RIAA, but they have to have a soul for that to work.

[Burd]

Damn straight! Keep downloading until you've gotten your $4000 back and then some. I feel betrayed too. And, I've been a "fan" a lot longer. I used to buy 45's with the big holes in the middle when I was a kid. I also taped a lot of songs off of the radio and gave them to my friends. They did the same for me. The record companies didn't try to sue us then. Now, because of changes in technology, it's easier to share...but it's no longer sharing, it's "illegal distribution." I haven't bought a CD in three years, and--thanks to the RIAA--I never will again. I haven't gone to a concert given by a signed band in two years, and--thanks to the RIAA--I never will again. The recording industry might say, "Who cares? He's only one person." But, I have a feeling that I am not the only one.

[nobodaddy]

hi zp,

I just want to point out that if he got sued, he's not the plaintiff.

[MorphineInduced]

i would compare the RIAA to the oil companies ...... they just trying to bide there time and squeeze out to the last cents........ but in all , they cant stop what is to come.... though if they tried to put more effort in scamming the mass population instead of trying to do what they have been then im sure they would have a better advantage in the days to come.....

[teto]

We should set up a collection, to get him his $4000 back. We could donate all that money we were going to spend on CDs.

[shawners]

Put it on visa charge card.
Four thousand dollars.. What is that, three cd's at retail price?

[AgainstMe]

I think all music should be made available for free via mp3. If you like the band you should go to there shows and buy merch. The argument that others pose, is that the bands work hard and deserve to make all the money they can. I understand, but no band works hard enough to earn 20 million in cd sales. If things were done they way I propose, I think that would eliminate the need for major labels and record executives. People say that bands need them to promote shows and for distrobution reasons. I don't buy that arguement either, bands are completely capable of being DIY. Successfully at that. Or at least hooking up with a DIY label. Take Jam Bands for example, they make almost all of thier money on tour. Another example is Ani DiFranco who does just about everything herself.

One more thing ....

A friend of mine tries to argue against my point saying, "you can't go to the department store pick up a pair of jeans and donate money to Jynco if you like how they fit."

This analogy doesn't fit because jeans are a tangible item. Mp3's, however, are information. Informantion is, and should always be, free to strengthen any good community. Thus trading music should be supported online by any means, and always will be. No matter thier lies they can't stop us. They'll say they have new and improved methods to control file sharing, but anything that can be constructed can be deconstucted. The thing they need to do is make CDs so inexpensive that its not worth the hassle to download and burn them yourself. However, to many hands are in the artists pocket so it is imposibe to do that with out cutting out the record excutives, promoters and such. There are lots of great DIY labels to check out such as http://www.plan-it-x.com

sorry no spell check too tierd.

Http://www.myspace.com/kill_your_leader

[microwiz]

It's not the artists that are evil - far from it. It's the middlemen who take the lion's share (and beyond!) of the money paid and give the artists little or nothing.

If I really could significantly "support the artists [I] listen to" (your words) by buying the music, I would. (I've dreamed more than once about going to an artist I support's concert, catching him or her after the show, giving them a $20 which they put in their pocket and KEEP, and having them give me a CD in return.)

Unfortunately what the money actually pretty much all goes to support is the bloated organization that defines sharing music as "illegal distribution" and likes to throw lawsuits. Where's the benefit in giving THEM my money?