RIAA or no RIAA?

[Mike]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

Being an artist I support them.
They worked hard to create their works of art and deserve to be rewarded for their work.

The RIAA didn't work hard to create the music, the musicians did. I have yet to see one artist claim to receive a penny from all of these settlements, however.

[Eugenia Gabrielov]

RIAA or no RIAA, most of us will continue to download music. However, I know there is a potential consequence. I do the only thing that can be done in the situation...I deal with it. Some bands want the protection of the RIAA - they get it. Those are the bands the RIAA exists for.

[thegathering]

Interesting so far. 18 no's and 1 yes. I had expected maybe a 2-1 ratio... not an 18-1.

[LordTalps]

Originally Posted by thegathering

Interesting so far. 18 no's and 1 yes. I had expected maybe a 2-1 ratio... not an 18-1.

19-1

edit: ChiefDelphi has smart people on it? Bet dslr wouldn't be far off.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by LordTalps

19-1

edit: ChiefDelphi has smart people on it? Bet dslr wouldn't be far off.

Yeah I'm the only one who voted otherwise and I have to admit I don't know much about the situation. Does the RIAA represent artist or record companies? Becasue I have seen artist who have openly endored the RIAA's side of the arguement.

[Steve W]

I did not vote. The reason is that even in this thread I could not find Proof of allegations or a definite mission statement from RIAA.

If they stand for the stopping of illegal downloads of music and videos, I am with them. If they stand for stopping file sharing of copyrighted property, I am with them. If however they are against my right to back legally purchased music for personal use, I am against that.

Downloading of music that is not purchased legally is against the law. This is a fact. Those that produce the music have rights. You and I have rights. I know that if I came into your pits at an event and took your laptop, robot or robot parts you might get upset. Why would you if you see no issue with downloading music or videos?

The thread on Legalities discusses a lot of what is right and wrong so I will not continue ranting. I will however answer questions if asked.

[Mike]

Originally Posted by Steve W

I know that if I came into your pits at an event and took your laptop, robot or robot parts you might get upset. Why would you if you see no issue with downloading music or videos?

Because I am using my time, utilities, equipment and expertise to, not steal your music, but copy it. I would have a problem with you taking my robot, however if you see a part you like on my robot and decide to machine it yourself next year, I have no problem with that.

Isn't copying other robots a large part of FIRST?

[Steve W]

Originally Posted by Mike

Because I am using my time, utilities, equipment and expertise to, not steal your music, but copy it. I would have a problem with you taking my robot, however if you see a part you like on my robot and decide to machine it yourself next year, I have no problem with that.

Isn't copying other robots a large part of FIRST?

First of all your robot design has not been copyrighted. Secondly I must try and reproduce something that you have designed. I am not taking the product that you created as you are if you take music that someone else recorded. The fact that if you design something for your robot and copyrighted it then it would be wrong for me to copy it without your permission.

When you use your time, utilities, equipment and expertise to "copy" (as in copyright) music, are you also using your musicians, your singing, your abilities to try and clone the music just as if it were a robot part?

[thegathering]

Originally Posted by Steve W

When you use your time, utilities, equipment and expertise to "copy" (as in copyright) music, are you also using your musicians, your singing, your abilities to try and clone the music just as if it were a robot part?

If you were to look at an omniwheel, copy it's design and machine one to suit the purposes of your robot, then do you have to pay huge sums of money in royalties for the patent?

I see the purchase of data as the purchase of an object, such as the omni wheel. If I want to give that omniwheel to a friend of mine, why would the gift be illegal? Distrobution of the omniwheel for proffit would surely be illegal, but why should giving my data to someone else for no proffit be illegal?

Sure there is a loss in proffit, but there's a loss in proffit to every business. I lend a wrench to my neighbor so he can fix his lawnmower, isn't Craftsman loosing that much proffit in wrenches for the wrench my neighbor didn't buy?

We use other's ideas and work all the time without fear of the Engineering Industry Association of America filing lawsuits for copying designs from patents that were not being marketted for proffit.

I understand that intellectual property is supposed to be considerably different than the example I gave above, but really, why should it be?

[Mike]

Originally Posted by Steve W

First of all your robot design has not been copyrighted. Secondly I must try and reproduce something that you have designed. I am not taking the product that you created as you are if you take music that someone else recorded. The fact that if you design something for your robot and copyrighted it then it would be wrong for me to copy it without your permission.

When you use your time, utilities, equipment and expertise to "copy" (as in copyright) music, are you also using your musicians, your singing, your abilities to try and clone the music just as if it were a robot part?

I'm going to assume by copyrighted you meant patented. This is where real world analogies break down.

Lets say that my friend buys a CD from the store. He goes "Hey Mike, this song is pretty good, you might like it." and then sends me that song. I didn't pay for that song, yet I now have it on my computer. My friend was just trying to be... well... friendly and we are now eligible to be put into a position of extortion by the RIAA. What if I say "This song is worse than the US' foreign affairs policy" and delete it, should I still be prosecuted?

What if I happen to like the song, should I now delete it and go pay $15 in order for another executive to afford his fifth Porsche?

My friend purchased the CD, is it not for him to do what he wishes with it? If this includes giving out free (not for profit) copies to his friends, and the RIAA has a problem with that, they should not have sold him the CD.

[Steve W]

I will agree that if you buy an omni wheel and give it to a friend then that is OK. I also do not have a problem with you buying a CD/Video and giving that to a friend as long as you don't keep a copy. It says that unauthorized copying is strictly forbidden. Unless I am mistaken, and I have been before, you are legally allowed to make a copy for your personal use as long as you own the original. If you give away the purchased copy then you are required by law to remove any and all copies.

Mike said " My friend purchased the CD, is it not for him to do what he wishes with it? If this includes giving out free (not for profit) copies to his friends, and the RIAA has a problem with that, they should not have sold him the CD."

Again, on the CD it states that you are not allowed to copy. If your friend has an issue with not distributing music that he has no right to distribute, then he/she should not purchased the CD. The rights to the music belong to the recording company or maybe musician not the person that purchases the music.

[Mike]

Originally Posted by Steve W

Again, on the CD it states that you are not allowed to copy. If your friend has an issue with not distributing music that he has no right to distribute, then he/she should not purchased the CD.

I think the OP was questioning if it should be legal, not if it is legal.

All of us in this conversation know downloading and sharing music is illegal, however (as of now) 23 of us believe that it should be legal. Civil disobedience is thus far the prevailing method of attempting to get it legalized.

[Steve W]

Originally Posted by Mike

I think the OP was questioning if it should be legal, not if it is legal.

All of us in this conversation know downloading and sharing music is illegal, however (as of now) 23 of us believe that it should be legal. Civil disobedience is thus far the prevailing method of attempting to get it legalized.

So if I can find people that are willing to say that we should be able to print money then this civil disobedience is OK. Laws are written to prevent anarchy. Why does everyone think that it is OK as long as it doesn't effect them. For example, I see that your team has lots of money.Sitting right there in front of our poor team is 6 laptops. We ask to use one of the laptops for price of a box of Krispy Kreams.We all agree that your team has too much money so we should have the the right to the laptop. We leave the event with the laptop and feel good that we have equaled the playing field some what.

Are you OK with this?

[Mike]

Originally Posted by Steve W

So if I can find people that are willing to say that we should be able to print money then this civil disobedience is OK. Laws are written to prevent anarchy. Why does everyone think that it is OK as long as it doesn't effect them. For example, I see that your team has lots of money.Sitting right there in front of our poor team is 6 laptops. We ask to use one of the laptops for price of a box of Krispy Kreams.We all agree that your team has too much money so we should have the the right to the laptop. We leave the event with the laptop and feel good that we have equaled the playing field some what.

Are you OK with this?

If a majority of the population thinks it is ok, then it should be legal. That is democracy.

If my team and your team both agree that you can have a laptop for a box of Krispy Kremes, then go right ahead. The problem lies in the fact that only your team agrees, not mine.

I'm pretty sure the 18-25 demograph that wish to download music outnumber the population of artists and whatnot.

Welcome to the democratically capitalistic society we call America. Heres a 1,200 calorie burger and 25g sugar soda.

[Adam Richards]

I am personally opposed to the RIAA. They make decisions based upon their own opinions, not those of the artists that they're trying to "protect". There is no need for the organization as a whole, since the actions that they take do not reflect the music community as a whole, just the executives that operate the members of the RIAA.