"Now go apologize... or else"

[instantdeath999]

http://www.ultimate-guitar.com/news/general_music_news/chinese_democracy_leaker_sentenced_to_house_arrest .html

This is absolutely pathetic, in my humble opinion. This is no better than forcing a child to apologize... it only leads to an empty apology.

Of course, that aside, everything about this is ridiculous. I am sorry if this is old news, but I'm currently very out of the loop, and this made me rage.

[KingProgdor]

More proof that the RIAA needs to get its head out of its ass.

[Soror_YZBL]

IMNSHO, he's just as responsible as Axl for unleashing that travesty onto the world, and both of them should be sent to Gitmo for the rest of their lives!

[Lolicat]

Home confinement? That's plenty of time to torrent lots of things :D

[TheCrimsonSaint]

The good news is that this is the first time I've heard about something like this since the Napster case.

[AxlVanHagar]

Do the crime, do the time, simple as that.

[KingProgdor]

Do the crime, do the time, simple as that.

This is my point; the RIAA is going overboard with their crusade to stamp out 'illegal' downloading.

[AxlVanHagar]

This is my point; the RIAA is going overboard with their crusade to stamp out 'illegal' downloading.

How so? Not saying you're wrong but in what sense are they going overboard?

[MrFruitLord]

IMNSHO, he's just as responsible as Axl for unleashing that travesty onto the world, and both of them should be sent to Gitmo for the rest of their lives!

No, I think they should have to listen to the album. A far worse punishment.

[KingProgdor]

How so? Not saying you're wrong but in what sense are they going overboard?

Well, first you'd have to understand that I believe music as an artform should be made free to anybody who wishes to listen, and if that person wants to hear more then they can contribute to an artist on their own volition, not because the RIAA wants them to.

I also believe music in a commercial sense to be soulless in an artistic sense, but I digress. Any form of legal action to me constitutes going overboard.

[instantdeath999]

Do the crime, do the time, simple as that.

Sure, but the crime should be proportionate to the time. This is like getting jail time for burping in public.

It's really the apology thing that pisses me off. It's so damn elementary.

[Gatorguy91]

Knock, knock, knocking on Kevin's dooooorrrr.


I laughed pretty hard at this.

[Quinarvy]

It's so damn elementary.

Welcome to the RIAA!

"Hey! They copied our the artists whom we don't pay anyway's stuff! Charge them!"

[Mystlyfe77]

How so? Not saying you're wrong but in what sense are they going overboard?

He posted what iTunes values at $8.91 and ended up getting two years of home confinement. I call that overboard.

[KingProgdor]

He posted what iTunes values at $8.91 and ended up getting two years of home confinement. I call that overboard.

I agree. That whole idea of 'making an example' out of somebody is not only ridiculous, but it's also not really doing the RIAA any favours.

[AxlVanHagar]

Well, first you'd have to understand that I believe music as an artform should be made free to anybody who wishes to listen, and if that person wants to hear more then they can contribute to an artist on their own volition, not because the RIAA wants them to.

I also believe music in a commercial sense to be soulless in an artistic sense, but I digress. Any form of legal action to me constitutes going overboard.

Fair enough, I too see music as an art form. That being said musicians have chosen this art form to make a living doing something they love. It's their music and their copyright, hopefully anyway providing they retained publishing rights but that's a whole other discussion. At any rate IMO it's plain wrong for someone to choose to distrubute someone else's product, music in this case, for free just because they can. Fundamentally it's no different than walking into a store and taking something without paying.

Yes the RIAA is out of step and out of touch, the recording industry as a whole needs to completely re-think the way they do business but it's the system that's in place at this point in time. Like the song says "if there's a new way I'll be the first in line" but for me illegal downloading isn't the answer. Especially when you factor in the trickle down effect. Take the labels and artists out of the equation for moment and consider the little guys behind the scenes, the studio monkeys that run the cables, art designers for the album covers, etc. The decline of album sales will and has affected them too, not directly sure, but they too are feeling it.

I dunno, perhaps I see it differently since I've been on the other side of the fence on this topic. This fella was looking at a max sentence of a 30 thousand dollar and a year in prison? He got a two year probation and two month house arrest and he has to make a silly PSA. I'd say he got off pretty easy really.

[Mystlyfe77]

Fair enough, I too see music as an art form. That being said musicians have chosen this art form to make a living doing something they love. It's their music and their copyright, hopefully anyway providing they retained publishing rights but that's a whole other discussion. At any rate IMO it's plain wrong for someone to choose to distrubute someone else's product, music in this case, for free just because they can. Fundamentally it's no different than walking into a store and taking something without paying.

Yes the RIAA is out of step and out of touch, the recording industry as a whole needs to completely re-think the way they do business but it's the system that's in place at this point in time. Like the song says "if there's a new way I'll be the first in line" but for me illegal downloading isn't the answer. Especially when you factor in the trickle down effect. Take the labels and artists out of the equation for moment and consider the little guys behind the scenes, the studio monkeys that run the cables, art designers for the album covers, etc. The decline of album sales will and has affected them too, not directly sure, but they too are feeling it.

I dunno, perhaps I see it differently since I've been on the other side of the fence on this topic. This fella was looking at a max sentence of a 30 thousand dollar and a year in prison? He got a two year probation and two month house arrest and he has to make a silly PSA. I'd say he got off pretty easy really.

While, to a certain extent, I agree, there's also a fundamental flaw in the way the current system is set up. Intellectual property laws are getting more and more protective of the "property" regardless of any actual harm that comes via sharing it. The fundamental basis of IP laws in the United States is NOT to ensure that the creators (or whoever they sign the rights to) is paid for their endeavor. In fact, the basis of the law, as stated in the United States Constitution, is "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts."

The RIAA, and American IP laws, have grown clearly out of touch with not only the public, but the basis of their existence. File-sharing has been repeatedly shown to not hamper the growth and production of music (or any other science or useful art), and there have been numerous examples of how it can help them. File-sharing has launched the careers of various artists and authors, and the current age of information has tons of untapped potential for the growth of music. And as soon as the daft record industries catch on and stop fighting progress, we'll see a new age of music.

[AxlVanHagar]

While, to a certain extent, I agree, there's also a fundamental flaw in the way the current system is set up. Intellectual property laws are getting more and more protective of the "property" regardless of any actual harm that comes via sharing it. The fundamental basis of IP laws in the United States is NOT to ensure that the creators (or whoever they sign the rights to) is paid for their endeavor. In fact, the basis of the law, as stated in the United States Constitution, is "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts."

The RIAA, and American IP laws, have grown clearly out of touch with not only the public, but the basis of their existence. File-sharing has been repeatedly shown to not hamper the growth and production of music (or any other science or useful art), and there have been numerous examples of how it can help them. File-sharing has launched the careers of various artists and authors, and the current age of information has tons of untapped potential for the growth of music. And as soon as the daft record industries catch on and stop fighting progress, we'll see a new age of music.

Pretty much agreed. Like I said earlier the Recording Industry as a whole needs to re-think the way they do business. I also agree that file sharing isn't entirely evil, it is a very useful tool if used correctly. Again, as someone who's been in the music business perhaps my view of things may be skewed or biased, I am more than willing to concede that.