Yeah really
I think they would have a really hard time proving to any court that the people who bought this were "willfully infringing" anything.
Maybe they should have included a disclaimer on the payment page saying that the buyer should be sure that they are purchasing something that has actually been released
No, I don't think people who bought the tracks are infringing anything. But if you bought the tracks ahead of the release date and seeded a torrent that was then downloaded 200,000 times, well, you're on some pretty shaky legal ground.
You're 100% right, but technically you'd be in similar shaky ground as if you'd bought it from Best Buy after release date and then seeded a torrent with it that was downloaded whatever number of times.
Was waiting until Friday or Saturday to be able to listen without the weekday work stresses.
The only thing I am thinking is it was a guy who signed up, pointed us to the page, then vanished.
Never saw him again. It was his first post.
Maybe they wanted feedback as to what the next single should be?
I have no idea why it happened, but thank fuck that it did!
If you open the files in iTunes and look at the "comments" tag, there's a long alphanumeric code. I've been wondering if that code is unique to each purchaser and could be used to trace the leak.
I hope whoever shared realized the code was there and deleted it, though I've read that people were sharing the original zip file so probably not.
Sicy, Interference won't get in trouble for this will it? Are any news agencies aware that the leak originated here?
Is this a bit too high profile to be comfortable...? Just wondered if it had crossed anyone's mind?
I thought about that, and Uni would have a decent case if they chose to come after Interference, unfortunately. However, I honestly don't think they ever would... pissing the 500 fans or so who downloaded directly here would just piss us off, and we are a group that spends a lot of money on this band (I'm sure many people here will be spending well over $1000 on band-related stuff this album cycle). Plus, this is just a minutia of the people who have downloaded the leak - it is all over the torrent world (I read that an estimated 200k people downloaded the leak via torrent yesterday, but God only knows if that's true).
We do know that someone over at Uni Australia is going to be in trouble.
Oh, I'm going to look when I get home. Do you still have your code? Maybe we can compare the last few digits to see if they're the same.
500 fans or so who downloaded directly here
I thought about that, and Uni would have a decent case if they chose to come after Interference, unfortunately. However, I honestly don't think they ever would... pissing the 500 fans or so who downloaded directly here would just piss us off, and we are a group that spends a lot of money on this band (I'm sure many people here will be spending well over $1000 on band-related stuff this album cycle). Plus, this is just a minutia of the people who have downloaded the leak - it is all over the torrent world (I read that an estimated 200k people downloaded the leak via torrent yesterday, but God only knows if that's true).
We do know that someone over at Uni Australia is going to be in trouble.
Sicy, Interference won't get in trouble for this will it? Are any news agencies aware that the leak originated here?
Is this a bit too high profile to be comfortable...? Just wondered if it had crossed anyone's mind?
Is the GetMusic leak 256kbps?
The one thing about U2 fans is that we all enjoy having a physical copy of the album.
We also like having various special editions.
And we like sharing with our friends.
Tally all this up and you can see why U2's albums tend to go Platinum or more within a few months of release. Die-hard Fans alone will ensure big sales even if there isn't a huge hit song. Most bands probably can't say that.
So many unmentioned interference references in that article.