fafster Posted December 8, 2009 Posted December 8, 2009 (edited) Record Labels Face $6 Billion Damages for Pirating Artists | TorrentFreak I wonder what their reasoning will be. I mean, if "we were going to pay them later" can work in court for the CRIA why not for everyone else? ZeroHour Edit: a less blocked link: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/12/artists-lawsuit-major-record-labels-are-the-real-pirates.ars Edited December 8, 2009 by ZeroHour
Guest TheLibrarian Posted December 8, 2009 Posted December 8, 2009 Rats, filtered on the Criminal Skills rule.
fafster Posted December 8, 2009 Author Posted December 8, 2009 Rats, filtered on the Criminal Skills rule. Ouch! I plug my Android phone into the PC and use it as a modem if I need filtered sites!
Guest TheLibrarian Posted December 8, 2009 Posted December 8, 2009 For that to work for me, it would mean having to mobile 'phone. I love gadgets, but 'phones leave me cold. I could unblock it temporarily, but I don't suppose I should just so I can read that now. I will read it tonight at home though.
ZeroHour Posted December 8, 2009 Posted December 8, 2009 Here is an ars link Artists' lawsuit: major record labels are the real pirates 1
Guest TheLibrarian Posted December 8, 2009 Posted December 8, 2009 That is way too funny! That link should have come with a warning!
mpe Posted December 8, 2009 Posted December 8, 2009 Record Labels Face $6 Billion Damages for Pirating Artists | TorrentFreak According to SWGfL this is "Pornography and Illegal or Age-Restricted Activity". I wonder what their reasoning will be. I mean, if "we were going to pay them later" can work in court for the CRIA why not for everyone else? "Later" equating to 20 odd years in some cases. ZeroHour Edit: a less blocked link: Artists' lawsuit: major record labels are the real pirates And this is "Non-Educational Games". Wonder if they'll block the CEOP website
mpe Posted December 8, 2009 Posted December 8, 2009 Isn't it ironic... Don't you think? The sooner the big labels implode, the better. An explosion might be more appropriate for their being hoist with their own petards...
CAM Posted December 9, 2009 Posted December 9, 2009 Hmm first link isn't blocked here. Maybe I should investigate that. At least I know not to touch compilation CDs if I want to support an artist. Hency why I order the albums of small upcoming bands at their gigs so I know my cash is going towards them.
fafster Posted December 9, 2009 Author Posted December 9, 2009 Hmm first link isn't blocked here. Maybe I should investigate that. At least I know not to touch compilation CDs if I want to support an artist. Hency why I order the albums of small upcoming bands at their gigs so I know my cash is going towards them. Checking the following chart, you're not the only one with the same reasoning. Do music artists fare better in a world with illegal file-sharing? — Times Labs Blog
sparkeh Posted December 9, 2009 Posted December 9, 2009 (edited) According to SWGfL this is "Pornography and Illegal or Age-Restricted Activity". Heh embc class it as Pornography too The article is beautiful, just beautiful. Edited December 9, 2009 by sparkeh
SteveBentley Posted December 9, 2009 Posted December 9, 2009 I wonder what their reasoning will be. I mean, if "we were going to pay them later" can work in court for the CRIA why not for everyone else? I wonder if "prove that your label has the rights to put this on the compilation you're accusing me of ripping it off from" will work as a defence?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now