2 ms·

> I remember when RIAA was shaking down 15 year olds for $7000 for a single Metallica download from Napster. Why didn't Metallica's fans rebel? That would have

by mmooss 2mo ago

> I remember when RIAA was shaking down 15 year olds for $7000 for a single Metallica download from Napster. Why didn't Metallica's fans rebel? That would have stopped it quickly and set a precedent and example for the rest.

bethekidyouwant 2mo ago
[flagged]
npongratz 2mo ago
Many of us did, and I certainly still do, but there obviously weren't enough of us rebelling to convince them of how reprehensible it is to sue your own fans and sic the guns of the state on them.
- mmooss 2mo ago
  > sue your own fans What an incredible strategy - and it worked! And in something that's entertainment and fandom-driven; it's not like the fans need a medication, job, or their auto warranty. How pathetic. The day rock'n'roll died.
tentacleuno 2mo ago
I have just been reading an article about it from the EFF[0]. What a vitriolic, hateful enterprise. > Take, for example, the case of the Tammy Lafky, a 41-year-old sugar mill worker and single mother in Minnesota. Because her teenage daughter downloaded some music last year—an activity both mother and daughter believed to be legal— Lafky now faces over $500,000 in penalties. The RIAA has offered to settle for $4000, but even that sum is well beyond Lafky’s means—she earns just $21,000 per year and receives no child support. It gets worse: > Among those sued was Brianna Lahara, a twelve-year-old girl living with her single mother in public housing in New York City. In order to settle the case, Brianna was forced to apologize publicly and pay $2,000. How could one justify tearing cash from the hands of poor children? The irony is that they may have been downloading music because they couldn't afford it in the first place, yet wanted to keep up with their peers. [0]: https://w2.eff.org/IP/P2P/RIAAatTWO_FINAL.pdf https://w2.eff.org/IP/P2P/RIAAatTWO_FINAL.pdf

by mmooss 2mo ago

bethekidyouwant 2mo ago

[flagged]

npongratz 2mo ago

Many of us did, and I certainly still do, but there obviously weren't enough of us rebelling to convince them of how reprehensible it is to sue your own fans and sic the guns of the state on them.

mmooss 2mo ago
> sue your own fans What an incredible strategy - and it worked! And in something that's entertainment and fandom-driven; it's not like the fans need a medication, job, or their auto warranty. How pathetic. The day rock'n'roll died.

tentacleuno 2mo ago

I have just been reading an article about it from the EFF[0]. What a vitriolic, hateful enterprise. > Take, for example, the case of the Tammy Lafky, a 41-year-old sugar mill worker and single mother in Minnesota. Because her teenage daughter downloaded some music last year—an activity both mother and daughter believed to be legal— Lafky now faces over $500,000 in penalties. The RIAA has offered to settle for $4000, but even that sum is well beyond Lafky’s means—she earns just $21,000 per year and receives no child support. It gets worse: > Among those sued was Brianna Lahara, a twelve-year-old girl living with her single mother in public housing in New York City. In order to settle the case, Brianna was forced to apologize publicly and pay $2,000. How could one justify tearing cash from the hands of poor children? The irony is that they may have been downloading music because they couldn't afford it in the first place, yet wanted to keep up with their peers. [0]: https://w2.eff.org/IP/P2P/RIAAatTWO_FINAL.pdf https://w2.eff.org/IP/P2P/RIAAatTWO_FINAL.pdf