thelinuxlink.net

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1229660 ... technology

After years of suing thousands of people for allegedly stealing music via the Internet, the recording industry is set to drop its legal assault as it searches for more effective ways to combat online music piracy.

The decision represents an abrupt shift of strategy for the industry, which has opened legal proceedings against about 35,000 people since 2003. Critics say the legal offensive ultimately did little to stem the tide of illegally downloaded music. And it created a public-relations disaster for the industry, whose lawsuits targeted, among others, several single mothers, a dead person and a 13-year-old girl.

I still hate the f'in music industry and the RIAA. But I'm glad they finally decided to stop suing their customers.

I agree, unless they are trying to lull everyone to sleep. I heard they have drm for linux now. I wonder if they are going to try to slip it in the back door. Ubuntu has already allowed that to happen at some colleges where the a special ubuntu cd was given to students.

Unfortunately, the lawsuits end and then they move to another tactic perhaps like England and France. Looks like they're going to dig in and track P2P users and send e-mails about you downloading music. This would require the cooperation of major ISPs which they say they have. Eventually when they have good documentation they may move to the England and France model where you lose your service after getting caught three times. We'll have to see how this plays out, but they're not done trying to stop illegal music downloading.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20 ... users.html

My take on this, why not come out with the license agreement like they're going to do with the colleges. Let us pay a blanket fee and download all we want. They could then host their own torrent servers for all the legitimate users and even track what people download to assist in dispersing royalties. When you catch illegal downloaders then force them to pay licensing fee if they didn't opt in.

Of course myself, I'm very conscious of which artists I support, mostly Christian artists, so I'll prefer to buy direct either CD or Amazon DRM free MP3s. I wouldn't want my money going to the mostly crappy labels and the music they produce.

Bugz

Someone should not have to automatically pay a fee if they have no intention of using copyrighted music. That is like saying where most everyone is doing it so you are guilty by association and you must pay a fine.Last I heard that was not according to Hoyle.

eddie wrote:Someone should not have to automatically pay a fee if they have no intention of using copyrighted music. That is like saying where most everyone is doing it so you are guilty by association and you must pay a fine.Last I heard that was not according to Hoyle.

You sir, sound guilty to me. I am forwarding your information to the RIAA, may they nail your thieving ass to the wall!

I would think it a great idea to offer this subscription as an opt-in, not a blanket tax on everyone.

By the way, I am sure my cousin Guido from New Joysee, would love to meet you. Strange thing though, people seem to disappear around him. I have no idea why. Seriously, opt-in sounds like what a reasonable man would do.