This has gone too far- Grandads, roommates being sued over music downloading!

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

U2Kitten

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Jul 28, 2001
Messages
17,927
This pisses me off, and scares me. Who knows who among us will be the next 'example?' :mad:

Parents, Grandparents Targets In Internet Music-Sharing Subpoenas


By TED BRIDIS
AP Technology Writer

July 24 - Move over, college kids. Grandparents and roommates may be the first ones to pay in time and money for downloading songs on the Internet.




The music industry's earliest subpoenas are aimed at a surprisingly eclectic group, including a grandfather, an unsuspecting dad and an apartment roommate.

"Within five minutes, if I can get hold of her, this will come to an end," said Gordon Pate of Dana Point, Calif., when told by The Associated Press that a federal subpoena had been issued over his daughter's music downloads.

The legal papers required an Internet provider, Comcast Cable Communications Inc., to hand over Pate's name and address. They were among nearly 1,000 subpoenas issued as part of the recording industry's high-stakes campaign to cripple online piracy by suing some of music's biggest fans.

Pate, 67, confirmed that his 23-year-old daughter, Leah Pate, had installed file-sharing software using an account cited on the subpoena. But he said his daughter would stop immediately and the family did not know using such software could result in a stern warning, expensive lawsuit or even criminal prosecution.

"There's no way either us or our daughter would do anything we knew to be illegal," Pate said, promising to remove the software quickly. "I don't think anybody knew this was illegal, just a way to get some music."

The president of the Recording Industry Association of America, the trade group for the largest music labels, said lawyers will pursue downloaders regardless of personal circumstances because it would deter other Internet users.

"The idea really is not to be selective, to let people know that if they're offering a substantial number of files for others to copy, they are at risk," Cary Sherman said. "It doesn't matter who they are."

Over the coming months this may be the Internet's equivalent of shock and awe, the stunning discovery by music fans across America that copyright lawyers can pierce the presumed anonymity of file-sharing, even for computer users hiding behind nicknames such as "hottdude0587" or "bluemonkey13."

In Charleston, W.Va., college student Amy Boggs said she quickly deleted more than 1,400 music files on her computer after the AP told her she was the target of a subpoena. Boggs said she sometimes downloaded dozens of songs on any given day, including ones by Fleetwood Mac, Blondie, Incubus and Busta Rhymes.

Since Boggs used her roommates' Internet account, the roommates' name and address were being turned over to music industry lawyers.

"This scares me so bad I never want to download anything again," said Boggs, who turned 22 on Thursday. "I never thought this would happen. There are millions of people out there doing this."

In homes where parents or grandparents may not closely monitor the family's Internet use, the news could be especially surprising. A defendant's liability can depend on their age and whether anyone else knew about the music downloads.

Bob Barnes, a 50-year-old grandfather in Fresno, Calif., and the target of a subpoena, acknowledged sharing "several hundred" music files. He said he used the Internet to download hard-to-find recordings of European artists because he was unsatisfied with modern American artists and grew tired of buying CDs without the chance to listen to them first.

"If you don't like it, you can't take it back," said Barnes, who runs a small video production company with his wife from their three-bedroom home. "You have all your little blonde, blue-eyed clones. There's no originality."

Citing the numeric Internet addresses of music downloaders, the RIAA has said it can only track users by comparing those addresses against subscriber records held by Internet providers. But the AP used those addresses and other details culled from subpoenas and was able to locate some Internet users who are among the music industry's earliest targets.

Pate was wavering whether to call the RIAA to negotiate a settlement. "Should I call a lawyer?" he wondered.

The RIAA's president was not sure what advice to offer because he never imagined downloaders could be identified until Internet providers turned over subscriber records, as the federal Digital Millennium Copyright Act requires them to do.

"It's not a scenario we had truthfully envisaged," Sherman said. "If somebody wants to settle before a lawsuit is filed it would be fine to call us, but it's really not clear how we're going to perceive this."

The association has issued at least 911 subpoenas so far, according to court records. Lawyers have said they expect to file at least several hundred lawsuits within eight weeks, and copyright laws allow for damages of $750 to $150,000 for each song.

The AP tracked targets of subpoenas to neighborhoods in Boston; Chicago; St. Louis; San Francisco; New York and Ann Arbor, Mich.

Outside legal experts urged the music industry to carefully select targets for its earliest lawsuits. Several lawyers said they were doubtful the RIAA ultimately will choose to sue computer users like the Pate family.

"If they end up picking on individuals who are perceived to be grandmothers or junior high students who have only downloaded in isolated incidents, they run the risk of a backlash," said Christopher Caldwell, a lawyer in Los Angeles who works with major studios and the Motion Picture Association of America.

The recording industry said Pate's daughter was offering songs by Billy Idol, Missy Elliot, Duran Duran, Def Leppard and other artists. Pate said that he never personally downloaded music and that he so zealously respects copyrights that he does not videotape movies off cable television channels.

Barnes, who used the Napster service until the music industry shut it down, said he rarely uses file-sharing software these days unless his grandson visits. The RIAA found songs on his computer by Marvin Gaye, Savage Garden, Berlin, the Eagles, Dire Straits and others.

Barnes expressed some concern about a possible lawsuit but was confident that "more likely they will probably come out with a cease and desist order" to stop him sharing music files on the Internet.

"I think they're trying to scare people," Barnes said.


Copyright 2003 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
 
Last edited:
Don't you guys think this is outrageous? How is file downloading any different from taping off the radio or sharing home taping among friends, which has always happened?
 
disclaimer: i don't want to seem like i'm holding a grudge leftover from the coldplay thread, or like i'm pretending to be a mod when i'm not one.

you know that thread up at the top talking about not starting threads that have already been started? it's just that this discussion has come up in a ton of other threads in the past couple weeks.
 
But this is a brand new story, it just hit the wires today! So the topic might have been brought in some way up but not this new, extreme measures lawsuit story. That's why I thought it was new news, and I was not frequenting here back then. If anyone thinks it's too much like the old one it'll be merged.
 
Last edited:
RIAA Hit List


The subpoenas are flying, and we're naming names. Are you on the list?

By Tech Live staff
Printer-friendly format
Email this story


Video Highlight
The Silicon Valley company that stops swappers





The recording industry has launched a sweeping effort to identify and shut down individual song swappers, making good on recent threats to expand its legal battle against copyright theft.


The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has now issued more than 911 subpoenas to Internet service providers across the United States, trying to get the names of people still offering music on file-sharing networks such as KaZaA and Grokster.


Today, "Tech Live" brings you the RIAA Hit List, the user names of file traders targeted in the recording industry subpoenas.


Last month, we brought you the story of Jesse Jordan, a 19-year-old college student who became one of the first to be hit with a lawsuit by the RIAA. Jordan settled his case by paying $12,000 to the RIAA.


The following user names were culled from subpoenas filed with the US District Court in Washington, DC. All subpoenas, incidentally, are being served by the Los Angeles law firm of Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp. A total of 253 RIAA subpoenas were listed as of July 22 through the federal court system's paid online database, PACER. The actual subpoenas are available to view online in about half the cases.


The court documents don't show individual users' real names. They do show file-sharing network user names, the user's ISP, the user's IP address, and a sampling of copyright songs the user allegedly made available for download. To date, many ISPs have been contacted, including Pac Bell Internet, SBC, Charter Communications, Comcast, Adelphia, RCN, and Time Warner.


Following is a list of the first user names from our review of the subpoenas.



Aab@Kazaa
Aboggs2@Kazaa
allstatetide@Kazaa
Amissann2@Kazaa
AngelaMikesell@Kazaa
anon39023@Kazaa
anthonybotz@Kazaa
aoster1@Kazaa
Ariel167@fileshare
asheejojo@Kazaa
Ashley@Grokster
azn_bahamut@Kazaa
B.B.C@Kazaa
badandy@Kazaa
Benchy987@Kazaa
Bigeasssy24@Kazaa
Bigpimpinitopey187@Kazaa
bigjohnhc@Kazaa
blazel@Kazaa
bluemonkey13@Kazaa
Boilermaker1214@Kazaa
brentandjonna@Kazaa
brich410@Kazaa
budman5000@Kazaa
Bush323@Kazaa
cado@Kazaa
Carolyn@fileshare
Casal@Kazaa
cbegalle@Kazaa
cherriie@Kazaa
CLOVER77@Kazaa
Corky101@Kazaa
Cortez1023@Kazaa
CowgirlMDR@Kazaa
crazyface@Kazaa
d-dubb@Grokster
dallass@Kazaa
daredevil@Kazaa
DEFAINCE357@Kazaa
definitely_ditzy@Kazaa
dimples0530@Kazaa
dmadigan@Kazaa
dotzbadger@Kazaa
dubcha@Kazaa
dulfingurl2@Kazaa
Dyellagurl22@Kazaa
Dziion@Kazaa
eddieh@Kazaa
emmi4@Kazaa
enbbarnes@Kazaa
ERIKA@Kazaa
felicia_alvarado@Kazaa
flowerpower0818@fileshare
fox3j@Kazaa
freckles72587@Kazaa
fritzbuilding@Kazaa
Generalby@Kazaa
Ghettobootybabe8@Kazaa
h2ochamp@kazaa
harris@Kazaa
heather_thee_amazing@Kazaa
hoami316@Kazaa
hooterzzz@Kazaa
hottdude0587@Kazaa
HyDang@Kazaa
ilovemydez@Kazaa
indepunk74@Kazaa
inthisroom@Kazaa
jamonie@Kazaa
JE_WV@Kazaa
Jeff@Kazaa
Jessica@Kazaa
jim@Kazaa
joanjett@Kazaa
joe@Kazaa
jomada@Kazaa
JustineRiot@Kazaa
kelney12@Kazaa
kenne007@Kazaa
KrAyZiE@Kazaa
ktgurl13@Grokster
kunstrukter@Kazaa
ladypimp8669@Kazaa
laurelbean@Kazaa
leahpate@Kazaa
LiLHuNnIe1480@Kazaa
Lisweet@Kazaa
Lyssy348@Kazaa
madkirk@fileshare
Marge4131@Kazaa
Marla262@Kazaa
mgokey@Kazaa
mike@Kazaa
Motivator@Kazaa
munkeyspanker21@Kazaa
nikki@Kazaa
Niltiak@Kazaa
Nodopefor2@Kazaa
paulina@Kazaa
pdia@Kazaa
PDJ1846@Kazaa
Playgirlmama@Kazaa
Prtythug23@Kazaa
qjade512@Kazaa
rebecca_m_122@Kazaa
rips42@Kazaa
rochelle@Kazaa
RockOn182@Kazaa
samlionofzino@Kazaa
shakobe@Kazaa
shonga84@Kazaa
sk8boyben@Kazaa
sneil@Kazaa
soccerdog@Kazaa
StolenSi@Kazaa
sus@Kazaa
Sweet3114@Kazaa
sweetthang1421@Kazaa
TheLastReal7@Kazaa
TMONEYNDHIZOUSE@kazaa
Tyler@Kazaa
Unit984@Kazaa
Westly_NoGood@Kazaa
www.k_lite.tk_Kazaa_Lite@Kazaa

We want to know how you feel now that song-swapping user names are being made public. Sound off on our message boards!



Originally aired July 23, 2003
 
This is worse than I thought! But maybe they all used bogus addresses and phone numbers when they made those names so they'll never get caught. This is crazy though. Maybe they can sue for the public humiliation.
 
this is so sad. does the RIAA think that suing its consumers that it will make them buy cds again?

besides think of how much money in legal costs they will waste by suing all these people.

the backlash of this will be nasty.

ps..isn't www.k_lite.tk_Kazaa_Lite@kazaa the default username when you d/l the program til ya change it?
 
I read about this the other day. I gotta say, if they are hoping to make people feel sorry for them (the record companies), they sure are going about it the wrong way. :down:
 
I read or heard on the news, today that some Universitie's are refusing to turn over the student's named on the subpoenas by citing privacy laws that protect the students. They are not allowed to give out personal information on students. The subpoenas only have the email address and the school's name on them.
 
terrible. it makes me feel sick. the riaa should be destroyed.

it honestly makes me feel like not downloading another song again.

and btw, have you noticed the wording in all these articles? people who download arent getting trouble - its those who offer files for others to download who are.

interesting.
 
It never occurs to the music industry to try to create a better product, they'd rather blame fans for "stealing" and causing profits to slide than accept fault for churning out garbage. Why would you pay $19 for a CD that you like one or two songs from if you can go online and get that song for nothing? Please, this isn't rocket science!
 
in 1996 I got fairly involved in the mp3 'movement'....
I leaked a certain unreleased song of a certain Irish band...
I said to friends, family, and coworkers..... that in a decade the music industry will have collapsed, if not entirely, mostly.

In 2000 I met with executives of one of the largest labels to discuss the 'problem', offer ideas/solutions, and a view point from a well informed consumer.

Unfortunately, they don't listen to consumers.

Warner is in the process of being broken up and sold.
4 majors left.

Looks like my prediction will become reality.
 
ya the music industy needs a revolution of sorts, but as the current monsters of the trade are going down theyre doing everything they can to take the consumers down with them.

btw does anyone know if theyre only going after people who have stuff available to download or the downloaders themselves?
 
well that means im safe, but at the same time it just means more and more people are gonna stop sharing and make it impossible to download anything.

hopefully that will still take time.
 
Sweet Tart said:
this is so sad. does the RIAA think that suing its consumers that it will make them buy cds again?

Really!

So many people in this country are (thankfully) pissed off about this whole thing...this is NOT making the RIAA popular, it's only making them look really stupid.

Originally posted by Sweet Tart
besides think of how much money in legal costs they will waste by suing all these people.

Exactly.

Originally posted by Sweet Tart
the backlash of this will be nasty.

Yep, it sure will. :|.

Originally posted by dsmith2904
It never occurs to the music industry to try to create a better product, they'd rather blame fans for "stealing" and causing profits to slide than accept fault for churning out garbage. Why would you pay $19 for a CD that you like one or two songs from if you can go online and get that song for nothing? Please, this isn't rocket science!

Precisely!

Not to mention, I've complained before about my small town-we only have a Wal-Mart (which is restrictive with what they sell to begin with when it comes to music) and a Sam Goody store in our mall. Even with the Sam Goody store there, I can't find a good 90 to 95% of the CDs from my favorite bands there. All the CDs they have I'd already brought at one time there. And it's basically just greatest hits CDs and maybe one or two of their other albums. And that's it.

So I have to download a lot of the stuff since it's not being sold in the stores here in town.

But the RIAA doesn't think about any of that stuff that dsmith and I mentioned, all they care about is that they're losing a little money (yeah, like they're really suffering money-wise in the first place :rolleyes:...).

At least for now it's only those who are sharing files who are being targeted, and my family made it so we're just downloading songs, not sharing them.

But still, this is really stupid. This proves the RIAA is nothing more than a bunch of greedy creeps.

Angela
 
well i live in canada so as far as i know they haven't moved across the border. still it's really disheartening that this is happening. i have discovered so many bands that i never would have heard of if it wasn't for the internet/P2P. our city has only 4 radio stations which play a very limited song selection. how am i suppose to find music that i like when i have no way of even hearing it.

they are saying that it's hurting their record sales. i think it's mainly of the bigger bands/artists like eminem, j lo, linkin park. bands that are already well known. on the other hand i believe that it's helping smaller unknown artists get a break because the record companies only make a push for more mainstream artists that are more mtv friendly.

because of these file sharing programs i have fell in love with the music of doves. a band that i had never heard about before and never to this day have i seen any airplay on either radio or video stations in my area.

the music needs to get out their and this is the best way. yes i d/l music but every band that i love their music i go out and buy their album and support them.

maybe the record companies should find away around this. maybe a monthly fee so that people can d/l stuff and then the record companies can split the moneies up accordingly. (say by # of d/l of a specific band/artist, etc.)

i don't know....i'm just mad and ranting. :rant:
 
Last edited:
Red Ships of Scalla-Festa said:
terrible. it makes me feel sick. the riaa should be destroyed.

it honestly makes me feel like not downloading another song again.

and btw, have you noticed the wording in all these articles? people who download arent getting trouble - its those who offer files for others to download who are.

interesting.


This is so wrong. This means that if you buy cds and then convert them to mp3 to store on your pc, you could possibly be sued for sharing?
 
Citron said:



This is so wrong. This means that if you buy cds and then convert them to mp3 to store on your pc, you could possibly be sued for sharing?


Only if you share them on a filesharing network/program.

I have over 50gigs of cds i've encoded to mp3, for my personal use. that is totally legal. now if I shared them with the world, I'd be in serious trouble.. or could be.
 
Of course this is all still pretty reactionary, like the reaction of record companies to The Wherehouse starting to sell used CDs in the early '90s. To "punish" The Wherehouse, many record labels refused to send promo items to their stores, meaning Wherehouse stores wouldn't get posters or cool premium items to giveaway with purchases. But more than 10 years later Wherehouse stores (what's left of them anyway) are still selling used CDs and monster independent stores like Amoeba are mostly stocking used CDs. You can't keep customers from getting what they want and the record companies have to find some way of working with the public, iTunes is a great step in that direction, lowering the price of CDs and investing in artist development would also make a huge difference.
 
Sweet Tart said:
i have discovered so many bands that i never would have heard of if it wasn't for the internet/P2P. our city has only 4 radio stations which play a very limited song selection. how am i suppose to find music that i like when i have no way of even hearing it.

Exactly.

Originally posted by Sweet Tart
the music needs to get out their and this is the best way. yes i d/l music but every band that i love their music i go out and buy their album and support them.

Yep.

If I really, truly love a certain band's music, I will always go out and buy their albums (basically because I'm pretty much guaranteed that their albums are going to be, for the most part, if not totally, good and worth the money).

Angela
 
this is kinda disgusting. What I find particularly disgusting is that all the money that the RIAA gets from these lawsuits will probably come out of the pockets of regular, kind, hard working folk and get sucked up by the record industry.. and I would be surprised if the artists themselves see any of the money at all.
 
That's true Skeek. They are getting vicious and are going to ruin the lives of hard working people and college students who won't be able to pay for their remaining years. People could lose everything. It's a power play, it's greed, it's more like terrorism and a war. The RIAA's message is, we are bigger, richer and more powerful than you, and we will win. Everybody bow down or run now. It only makes me hate them. They could have taken it the other way and compromised selling online like Apple. But they have to go for the kill, and knockout, but it's their CUSTOMERS they are screwing!!
 
Exactly ^^^^.

As stated earlier, if they want people to start supporting them again and buying music in stores and all that, this is not the way for them to go about it. Do they not notice how many people in this country are pissed off about this whole mess? This lawsuit business will hurt them. Not help them.

SkeeK said:
this is kinda disgusting. What I find particularly disgusting is that all the money that the RIAA gets from these lawsuits will probably come out of the pockets of regular, kind, hard working folk and get sucked up by the record industry.. and I would be surprised if the artists themselves see any of the money at all.

Good point. Exactly right. They'll get richer, the artists won't see a cent, and we consumers will be poorer as a result.

Yep. This is a brilliant idea, RIAA. :rolleyes:.

The RIAA can go screw themselves.

Angela
 
ft030728.gif
 
Honestly, this development alarms me. What is wrong with the RIAA. One pressing question: are people outside America, such as myself (I'm in Australia) safe, or can we be prosecuted too? My friend earlier today told me some story he heard about a university in Sydney being forced by the RIAA to hand over names, although I can't verify if this is true or not.

Personally, I download stuff when I can't find it, or when I simply cannot afford it. I do not have the money to go out and buy lots of CDs, and I'm always conscious of the risk that a fair chunk of the songs on it may be utter crap. I download because that's the best, easiest, and most convenient way to get music. If CDs were sold at a more affordable price, then I wouldn't have as much need to download. Plus, some rare stuff simply is not available. The only way I could get U2's A Celebration was via download, and the same can be said about some live mp3s I have of U2.

One would hope the backlash against the RIAA becomes organised. It's a shame I'm in Australia, 16, and have no idea how to organise a backlash, because otherwise I would. Boycotts, thousands upon thousands of letters and phone calls of complaint, you get the idea.
 
Back
Top Bottom