method
July 8th, 2002, 05:22 AM
Open Letter To The RIAA:
Okay, here's a question that I'd really appreciate an answer to.
Assume a legitimate p2p user downloads a back-up copy of a song they have already bought (some might not have the tech. savvy to rip them to mp3 themselves) - If that user downloads a file only to find it's one of the spoofed files you have inserted into the p2p network they use, you have been guilty of abusing the network AND theft of service. (something that countless 'hackers' have been imprisoned for) - I understand that you're a big organization with a lot of money and friends in govt. - But where is the justification in you forcing legitimate users to use up services (bandwidth) which they pay for only to be fooled by the spoof files. You are effectively STEALING from legitimate users by your actions of intentionally inserting these files into such networks. 'Protection' could be one way of looking at it, but if I gave deceitful or corrupt information to an organisation such as the FBI, that meant any losses to individuals or associated organisations, i'd probably be dragged into a court and sued left right and centre.
Why does the RIAA feel that it should have two sets of rules and should be allowed to work above the law by justifying their criminal actions.
The RIAA are technically breaking the law but are being allowed to get away with it because the US govt. is too weak to stand up where civil rights abuse occurs, especially in organisations such as the RIAA.
Who's decision is it to make these judgements, can you disproove that your actions are illegal and not in violation of policies/agreements associated with all the networks in which 'spoofed' files have been submitted?
I'm looking at ways of getting all p2p users and developers working together with other organisations like the EFF in a combined network abuse/theft of service lawsuit against the RIAA and was interested to see what you can say in your defence against the LEGITIMATE users of p2p networks, those who have done nothing wrong, but you have stolen service/bandwidth/etc. from??
You can justify so much, but there is a line that you appear to have crossed. Why are you causing unnecessary costs to legitimate users and how do you plan to compensate these thousands, possibly millions of people?
--------------------
Obviously, I'm not expecting any sort of intelligent or reasonable reply, but if I get a reply, I'll post it here so you can all laugh at the dumb motherfuckers and the way they try to justify this shit.
May we never forget AudioGalaxy, May we never forgive the RIAA.
Okay, here's a question that I'd really appreciate an answer to.
Assume a legitimate p2p user downloads a back-up copy of a song they have already bought (some might not have the tech. savvy to rip them to mp3 themselves) - If that user downloads a file only to find it's one of the spoofed files you have inserted into the p2p network they use, you have been guilty of abusing the network AND theft of service. (something that countless 'hackers' have been imprisoned for) - I understand that you're a big organization with a lot of money and friends in govt. - But where is the justification in you forcing legitimate users to use up services (bandwidth) which they pay for only to be fooled by the spoof files. You are effectively STEALING from legitimate users by your actions of intentionally inserting these files into such networks. 'Protection' could be one way of looking at it, but if I gave deceitful or corrupt information to an organisation such as the FBI, that meant any losses to individuals or associated organisations, i'd probably be dragged into a court and sued left right and centre.
Why does the RIAA feel that it should have two sets of rules and should be allowed to work above the law by justifying their criminal actions.
The RIAA are technically breaking the law but are being allowed to get away with it because the US govt. is too weak to stand up where civil rights abuse occurs, especially in organisations such as the RIAA.
Who's decision is it to make these judgements, can you disproove that your actions are illegal and not in violation of policies/agreements associated with all the networks in which 'spoofed' files have been submitted?
I'm looking at ways of getting all p2p users and developers working together with other organisations like the EFF in a combined network abuse/theft of service lawsuit against the RIAA and was interested to see what you can say in your defence against the LEGITIMATE users of p2p networks, those who have done nothing wrong, but you have stolen service/bandwidth/etc. from??
You can justify so much, but there is a line that you appear to have crossed. Why are you causing unnecessary costs to legitimate users and how do you plan to compensate these thousands, possibly millions of people?
--------------------
Obviously, I'm not expecting any sort of intelligent or reasonable reply, but if I get a reply, I'll post it here so you can all laugh at the dumb motherfuckers and the way they try to justify this shit.
May we never forget AudioGalaxy, May we never forgive the RIAA.