ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board

Today is the last day to submit your answers for the trivia
[THE WET PAGE] [IORR NEWS] [IORR TOUR SCHEDULE 2003] [LICKS TOUR EN ESPAŅOL] [SETLISTS 1962-2003] [THE A/V ROOM] [THE ART GALLERY] [MICK JAGGER] [KEITHFUCIUS] [CHARLIE WATTS ] [RON WOOD] [BRIAN JONES] [MICK TAYLOR] [BILL WYMAN] [IAN STEWART ] [NICKY HOPKINS] [MERRY CLAYTON] [IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN] [BERNARD FOWLER] [LISA FISCHER] [DARRYL JONES] [BOBBY KEYS] [JAMES PHELGE] [CHUCK LEAVELL] [LINKS] [PHOTOS] [MAGAZINE COVERS] [MUSIC COVERS ] [JIMI HENDRIX] [BOOTLEGS] [TEMPLE] [GUESTBOOK] [ADMIN]

[CHAT ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [RESTROOMS]

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED) inside.
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: File Sharing (Please Read) Return to archive
06-26-03 10:10 PM
Soul Survivor For all of you that use Kazaa and other programs like it, you HAVE to read this: http://www.freep.com/money/tech/newman26_20030626.htm
06-26-03 10:16 PM
steel driving hammer Old news...

They've been saying that ever since the Stones opened in Chicago 97.

Can't stop the train you gotta let it roll on....
06-26-03 10:23 PM
Soul Survivor Well do you think I should be worried then? I've had Kazaa Lite (The one with no spywear) for about half a year now
06-26-03 10:46 PM
steel driving hammer Hey I have Kazaa lite too!

There's sure alot of people swapping files on Kazza. If you look at the bottom right, you can see the current files being downloaded and most of the time the number is in the 500,000 range.

These days, the Feds have more to worry about than chasing music lovers.

Trust me we have nothing to worry about. If at all, they'll go after the pedofiles (or should), then ones who bootleg feature length movies prolly etc. Not ones who carry MP3 into concerts.

For us, it just makes good bar converstation.
06-27-03 09:23 AM
Sir Stonesalot Not this time guys.

The RIAA is putting big lobby money up to get something done about file sharing. The reports that I have seen state that they are going to send out hefty fines to between 500-800 folks who have large amounts of files up for swap. It's a drop in the bucket to be sure, but it isn't meant as a deterent...it's a warning shot. The big trouble will come on down the road, once precedent has been set.

Ever since their successes vs Napster, they have had a hard on for other file sharing sites. Look, CD sales have been tanking for several years in a row. The big record companies, the distribution network, the RIAA, all need someplace to point their collective finger. So they have chosen file sharing as the scapegoat. They certainly can't point fingers at themselves, now can they.

This is another reason why I don't download. Big Brother can watch too easily. For right now, trading by email is a little safer. But they will get around to that too. Ftp sites too.

The record industry sees this as a fight for survival. They are rich and have a lot of influence in Washington DC. You know what an animal is like when they get cornered.
06-27-03 09:44 AM
nankerphelge Damn right! RIAA is no shrinking violet. And their fingerprints are all over any piece of copyright legislation! Especially "statutory damages" -- these are a different animal because unlike other civil suits where the plaintiff must prove his/her damages (put on evidence of commercial loss), copyright law allows for damages set by law -- up to $500k per violation. Once liability is proven, just figure out the fine. You download two files, you may have racked up $1 Million dollars of liability.

Granted, filing a civil suit against lil' old you for downloading 2 files will probably never happen and they would never get that kind of money -- they'll have to go after the bigger fish for that. But Stoney is right -- their distribution party is almost over and they need to make some examples of people.

06-27-03 10:38 AM
Sir Stonesalot Exactly Nank.

It's like when the cops can't stop the flow of drugs into a community...they go after the users. Same thing here.

They shut down Napster. A pile more file share sites pop up. RIAA said, OK that didn't work, let's get us some users, and make it VERY public. Put the scare into them.

IMO, this is very foolish.

Instead of wasting their time and money on this, they should be using it to figure out how to use the technology to their advantage.

What a bunch of morons.
06-27-03 11:02 AM
Zeeta So do you reckon the RIAA should work on destroying sharing file programs or come out with a new system themselves?

The logical answer would be for it to be like tap water and bottled water - tap water is free downloads which are of relatively low quality and bottled water would be downloaded files that the consumer paid a small amount for but the quality was very high e.g. Video extras etc.

I agree though fuckin' set of fat cats - get off your asses and do something worthwhile! What a piss take for some geek in in his room to be fined for downloading some tunes! Some of the files downloaded by some people ARE criminal and they should be fined - i.e. Kid Rock etc. BUT it doesn't exactly say on Kazaa or whatever "You are commiting a criminal offence - for possessing 2 files you will be fined $1,000,000" piss take or what??!

Get to the problem AT SOURCE or sort something out yourselves!
06-27-03 11:04 AM
Soul Survivor I agree SS, but also, when you think about all the people that use Kazaa, Morpheous, etc....you cant get to EVERYBODY idividually. And why spend big bucks on this, doesnt the world have better problems to worry about?


I only have about 30 files downloaded. Actually, my estimate would be that they are targeting people over about 300

[Edited by Soul Survivor]
06-27-03 01:25 PM
Sir Stonesalot Zeeta...I guess I should have made that more clear. Yeah, I think they should find a way to USE file sharing to their advantage...it just makes the most sense. Why fight something that you can't really stop, you know? Make it work FOR you, instead of against you. Your analogy with water is a pretty good one...except I pay a monthly water bill for tap water, so it isn't free per se, but it is cheap.

Soulie...the whole point that they are trying to make is that YES they CAN go after anyone who uses a file sharing site. And if they WANT to, they can nail the guy with 500 downloaded songs or the guy with 5.

My suggestion to you is burn off whatever you have downloaded, and get it off your hard drive. And don't download anything else until Big Brother backs off.

I think the RIAA will back off a little once they feel that they have made their point.
06-27-03 03:16 PM
Factory Girl Sir Stonesy, how do you delete stuff off your hard drive?? TIA!
06-27-03 03:28 PM
Sir Stonesalot Find whatever files you want deleted, right click, select delete. When you have deleted all the files you want deleted, go to the recycle bin, and empty it out.
06-27-03 03:36 PM
mac_daddy this is why I will not torrent studio outtakes or material. it is also why I stay away from the payperview stuff - if HBO and the stones jointly release a dvd of the january msg show, they might not take kindly to the illegitimate digital rips of the audio and video that are floating around...

I would like to know what they plan on doing with those of us who are sharing live, amateur recordings. I think that the users at the top of the RIAA shitlist are the ones who rip commercially available music and spread it around via kazaa, et al. But there is a difference with the live tapes, though there are some grey areas to the whole live boot thing that make me none to happy...

I do feel that we might be alright, as sharing the live recordings has no negative effect on the financial bottom line. For instance, if the Stones released their master of the circus krone show, I would guess that every person who received the tree would go out and buy the commercial release. I am not so sure the same would happen with the Black Box set...

06-28-03 12:37 AM
Sir Stonesalot Yeah, I know what you mean. The problem is gonna come when bands start emulating(as the Stones are rumored to be considering) Pearl Jam by making all their live shows available for purchase.

This is the RIAAs inroad against people like us. The argument will be, "The Rolling Stones want to release selected live shows from the current tour, but the illegitimate recordings that are being passed around are supressing the market. This prevents The Rolling Stones from making any money on their live concert recordings."

And then, BANG, we are fucked.

Pearl Jam charges about $10.00 for one of their "official bootlegs". The Who charged me $30.00 for a copy of the show I saw in Hershey. If the Stones follow through on this rumor...I'd expect to see anything from $35.00 to $50.00. And that will suck. Who here besides Josh could afford to shell out $2500 to collect the US leg of a tour? Or $5000+ to get the whole tour?

I don't think there is any doubt that we are ALL going to have to be a little more careful.
06-28-03 12:58 AM
mac_daddy I would be surprised if they didn't offer the Licks Tour up for sale - which is why I think it is a bad idea to share the hbo or ppv gigs - esp if ripped from the broadcast. But I still do not see how amateur live recordings are taking away market share - they are free, and they are inferior to the product the band could offer if they have the inclination. The same avid fans that go after live recordings will go after official releases - and probably collect them all...

also, while a big deal to us, live amateur recordings are not the target. I have seen nothing about the RIAA going after tapers - only the ones that host the studio releases. and the number of tape fans compared to the numbers of people downloading the top40 mp3 is miniscule - for instance, I would wager that most of the people here are on iorr, shidoobee, rsb, etc. - I am sure the same snitches/studio reps are on them all...

06-28-03 01:43 AM
Sir Stonesalot I don't see us being the target either...right now.

They will come after us eventually though...it's what they do.

We are on the same side of this thing, so I don't really mean to debate...but what we collect IS, technically speaking, illegal. I think we all need to take this thing a little on the serious side.

It really isn't a matter of ARE they going to come after us...it's that they COULD come after us whenever they feel like it. Let's face it, none of us have the cash to stand up against them if they decide to litigate. And we would lose anyhow.

I don't see the need for us to stop sharing with each other...but I do think we all need to be a little more cautious.
06-28-03 05:08 AM
mac_daddy correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the RIAA represent the labels, not the artists? thus I don't think they can sue (and they are the ones suing, right?) for trading/sharing of amateur live recordings - these recordings may be unauthorized, but they certainly don't belong to the labels. When you play other people's music, you pay ascap and/or bmi - but these agents are not the ones threatening to sue (and they are responsible for enforcement). So really it is up to the band or the publishers to do the suing for what we do here...

doesn't a c + d letter precede the filing of the suit?

if they are going after the etraders, they will come after the mailing list traders soon enough - these boards are sweet for that: they record date, what was viewed, downloaded, read, etc, and are impossible to get rid of (esp. the public mailing list ones).
06-30-03 11:07 PM
mac_daddy there is also the issue that those we are trading/sharing with are people we know - even if it is in an online community, it is not the blind ripping and hosting that goes on with Kazaa (and again, it is not commercially available, studio-owned material)...

somebody must have some thoughts on the matter...
07-01-03 04:08 PM
NHStonesfan Yeah, I know what you mean. The problem is gonna come when bands start emulating(as the Stones are rumored to be considering) Pearl Jam by making all their live shows available for purchase.



That would be awesome I'd buy em all.
07-01-03 11:20 PM
Sir Stonesalot Really? They'll charge at least $35.00usd....and if I know the Stones, they'll charge $50.00.

You made of money?
07-02-03 01:48 AM
Dandelion*
quote:
Sir Stonesalot wrote:
Really? They'll charge at least $35.00usd....and if I know the Stones, they'll charge $50.00.

You made of money?



So - it's their music, their recording equipment, their selves performing it, their money hiring the staff - and because some of their fans want every possible version in existence they are supposed to make it available cheaply, or free?
07-02-03 10:34 PM
Sir Stonesalot When did I say it should be free?

If Pearl Jam can offer up their shows at $10 or $12, so could the Stones.

These shows would cost the Stones next to nothing to produce. They wouldn't have to charge an outrageous price if they didn't WANT to.

Visits since January 9, 2003 - 10:46 PM EST
Licks World Tour 2002 - 2003