[Jenn]

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

Jenn wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Jenn wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Jenn" wrote
Eeyore wrote:
Jenn wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

I fail to see how the RIAA can force them to completely stop
carrying
binaries quite frankly.

I agree. The peer-to-peer sites are specifically set up to and
are
promoted for illegal activity. Usenet is not. Therefore the
argument
will be made that the problem is with the users, not the
service.

All it needs is one really BIG fast news server sited in Russia to
totally screw the RIAA.

But do we really want that?

Don't be silly Jenn. We already have several of them.

Sorry, what I meant is do we want to "screw" the RIAA?

Oh I see. I was going to say "don't care really" but after longer
thought,
yes I think it would teach them a lesson. The last people the RIAA care
about
are
the artists

What is your evidence for that?

Everything I've ever heard and read about the subject.

Well, that settles that!



and the public and the DRM enacted at their behest is an utter mess
that regularly stands in the way of one's legitimate use of music one has
paid

for.

So to "teach them a lesson" you're willing to cheat artists (and others)
out of their due income?

Do you have a better alternative ?

Something that doesn't cheat people for their work. If you don't like a
particular type of DRM, vote with your dollars.


Many artists now recognise that a more liberal interpretation of music
copyright
is needed.

Then it's up to those artists to do something about it.