Stop pirating, sez the FBI

Top of the world, ma! Top of the world!

amazing how little press the new RIAA suits have gotten. they just sued another 532 people.

there is some good news. RIAA finally lost their lawsuit against Verizon after several years (i.e. when Verizon refused to identify it's online users to the RIAA, the RIAA sued Verizon claiming that they were obligated under the DMCA to provide the names.) While this case was being decided, all other internet providers sheepishly complied with the RIAA and handed over their users' names during last summer's round of 261 lawsuits, but now that the Verizon verdict is in, there's precedent; it's been proven by law that providers are not obligated by law to fink on their customers. So thanks to Verizon for fighting it.

the MPAA lawsuits are next. hint to anyone currently enjoying enough bandwidth to download films: if they're not readying the list of names right now, they will be very soon.

"They each carry the seal of the FBI, which says piracy is now its third biggest priority behind terrorism and counter-intelligence."

I feel much safer now...

"With hundreds of thousands of jobs at stake nationwide, piracy is a serious threat to the entire entertainment industry,"

And with the economy in the shitter, free is the most many people are willing to pay for low quality product from a bloated, inequitable industry.

man, i wish there was someway to bootleg the sports industry to take the money out of the pockets of these overpaid athlete assholes...

You could show the game without the express written consent of the National Football League.

RIAA countersued for racketeering.

evidently the RIAA lawsuits are being sent out with settlement offers attached. sign here, pay $3000, case dismissed. this might not have been smart of them: it does provide an arguable case that they are simply interesting in collecting settlement fees than any pursuit of justice, regardless of any 'guilt' on the part of the defendent. not sure if this case is going to go anywhere but bravo for fighting back.

simply 'interested', sorry. though they sure are interesting.

before, when they sure suing a mere 261 people, roughly $3000 a pop would have barely covered legal fees. now that they've upped the ante to an additional 532, it could begin to transparently look like greed.

one last reference point: first time shoplifters get a maximum of a $1000 fine (usually less), though people are usually simply sent to a day long class. first time downloaders are charged with a maximum of $250,000 per file, and charged a median fine of $3000, though in several cases where the defendants seemed to have more money, were charged $10-20,000.

god. learn to edit, I will.

it's just that this does make me angry

Woho exactly are they suing, people who upload and share MP3s or people who just download them?

Just checking because I'm somewhat apprehensive.

should have said 'filesharers' rather than 'downloaders'. thanks for proofing.