-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Is there another position, i.e. that the RIAA's tactics are wrong, but
so is unauthorized filesharing?

I won't say that I've never copied a song from a friend. But I feel
uncomfortable arguing that massive-scale filesharing without the
artists' permission and without any remuneration is a fully justified
action.

Thoughts?

angel brown wrote:
>     Incidentally, this bodes well for me, and I hope NYU is taking notes.
> 
> 
> I know this is a little late, but I just wanted to say that if you
> disagree with the RIAA's actions (as presumably most of us do) then I'm
> curious as to how you ethically defend file-sharing RIAA affiliated
> music and hoping to not get caught.  If you think the RIAA's actions are
> unlawful or unconstitutional, it is your civic duty as a citizen of this
> country to challenge them in court (that is, intentionally get caught
> and fight it.)  If you don't feel like you can challenge the
> constitutionality of the laws the RIAA hides behind, then you should
> boycott all music and artists affiliated with the RIAA and loudly
> support (and share) the music of artists and labels that you feel are
> doing things correctly.  I have a hard time seeing any other choice of
> actions as ethically sound, but I'm willing to hear an argument in
> opposition if you have one.
> 
> angel.
> 
> On Nov 3, 2007 9:34 AM, Parker Higgins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> 
>     The University of Oregon just became the first institution in this
>     whole RIAA mess to not hand over the suspected file-sharers names
>     when served with a subpoena.  Part of their rationale was that five
>     of the John Does lived in double dorm rooms, and so there's no way
>     of knowing which student the RIAA is looking for, or even if it were
>     a visitor.  (Incidentally, this bodes well for me, and I hope NYU is
>     taking notes.)  The really cool thing is that the State AG is
>     totally behind the school in filing the motion.  What I'm wondering
>     is whether (and how) this is substantially different, in a technical
>     sense, from the Jammie Thomas case: both she and the university (on
>     behalf of the students) argue that there's no way of identifying the
>     actual human being behind the IP address.  Could the RIAA find more
>     information without the help of U of O, or are they effectively shut
>     down here?
> 
>     Slashdot:
>     http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/11/02/1317240.shtml
> 
>     RIAA v. People:
>     
> http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/11/oregon-attorney-general-says-no-to-riaa.html
> 
>     -Parker (Higgins)
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Discuss mailing list
>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss

- --
Gavin Baker
http://www.gavinbaker.com/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHOJIXtLXQdLhFpekRAgdFAJwIcG3mxk5IzYUUP0sVkX3OOsBrsQCfd0bK
gq0yHtc0qBlfCeM2MnrGO+k=
=gnRo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Reply via email to