MAFIAA at it again - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to General Talk

MAFIAA at it again

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Re: MAFIAA at it again

Postby AussieDodger » Sun Apr 18, 2010 12:13 pm

AussieDodger wrote:I hate that they have started to disclude countries on Youtube and other sites.
Sometimes I get "you are not allowed to view this in your country" and that really ___s me off.
Hulu doesn't work here at all either. :-t :-t



Found one:

This video contains content from Sony Music Entertainment. It is no longer available in your country.



Dear Sony Music,

___ you and the horse you rode in on.

Regards,

AussieDodger
ATTENTION LONG-TIMERS! NEW FBC: http://fbc2.freeforums.net/
AussieDodger
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterEagle Eye
Posts: 11363
(Past Year: 25)
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: What do you mean, Flash Gordon approaching?

Re: MAFIAA at it again

Postby StlSluggers » Wed Jul 14, 2010 9:56 pm

RIAA paid its lawyers more than $16,000,000 in 2008 to recover only $391,000!!!

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Big hat tip to my friend Jon Newton at p2pnet.net for uncovering these documents.

The RIAA's "business plan" is even worse than I'd guessed it was.

The RIAA paid Holmes Roberts & Owen $9,364,901 in 2008, Jenner & Block more than $7,000,000, and Cravath Swain & Moore $1.25 million, to pursue its "copyright infringement" claims, in order to recover a mere $391,000. [ps there were many other law firms feeding at the trough too; these were just the ones listed among the top 5 independent contractors.]

Embarrassing.

If the average settlement were $3,900, that would mean 100 settlements for the entire year.

As bad as it was, I guess it was better than the numbers for 2007, in which more than $21 million was spent on legal fees, and $3.5 million on "investigative operations" ... presumably MediaSentry. And the amount recovered was $515,929.

And 2006 was similar: they spent more than $19,000,000 in legal fees and more than $3,600,000 in "investigative operations" expenses to recover $455,000.

So all in all, for a 3 year period, they spent around $64,000,000 in legal and investigative expenses to recover around $1,361,000.

Shrewd.

No wonder they get paid the big bucks
StlSluggers
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterWeb Supporter
Posts: 14716
Joined: 24 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Parking in the gov't bldg @ 7th and Pine. It's only $3.00 on game day!

Re: MAFIAA at it again

Postby Dan Lambskin » Thu Jul 15, 2010 8:13 am

cant they just write it off though
Image
Dan Lambskin
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeLucky Ladders ChampionPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorTrivia Time Trial Monthly Winner
Posts: 10225
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: MAFIAA at it again

Postby StlSluggers » Thu Jul 15, 2010 8:19 am

Dan Lambskin wrote:cant they just write it off though

most of the time, when people "write off" something, they mark it as a business expense and get a tax break for it
the only other time that term really applies is when companies change future expenses (liabilities) into current expenses

this is already a business expense
so there's nothing to "write off", because it's already being "written off"
StlSluggers
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterWeb Supporter
Posts: 14716
Joined: 24 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Parking in the gov't bldg @ 7th and Pine. It's only $3.00 on game day!

Re: MAFIAA at it again

Postby Neato Torpedo » Thu Jul 15, 2010 1:01 pm

StlSluggers wrote:
Dan Lambskin wrote:cant they just write it off though

most of the time, when people "write off" something, they mark it as a business expense and get a tax break for it
the only other time that term really applies is when companies change future expenses (liabilities) into current expenses

this is already a business expense
so there's nothing to "write off", because it's already being "written off"

Kramer : It's just a write off for them .

Jerry : How is it a write off ?

Kramer : They just write it off .

Jerry : Write it off what ?

Kramer : Jerry all these big companies they write off everything

Jerry : You don't even know what a write off is .

Kramer : Do you ?

Jerry : No . I don't .

Kramer : But they do and they are the ones writing it off .

Jerry : I wish I just had the last twenty seconds of my life back .
Image

Rocinante2: you know
Rocinante2: its easy to dismiss the orioles as a bad team
ofanrex: go on
Rocinante2: i'm done
Rocinante2: lmao

Play Brushback Baseball! (we need more people)
Neato Torpedo
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerWeb Supporter
Posts: 8618
Joined: 4 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: we don't burn gasoline, we burn our dreams

Re: MAFIAA at it again

Postby knapplc » Wed Jul 28, 2010 12:16 pm

This crap really sank home for me over the weekend. I've D/L a bunch of songs from the webz, but because I'm Dudley Do-Right it was all stuff I already own. I figured it was easier to d/l all this stuff since it's right there and so easy to find, and not go through the hassle of ripping it off of my CDs, many of which are scratched, yaddax3.

So this weekend I decide to play it absolutely straight and actually go through the process of ripping the discs, then putting it all on my mp3 player and everyone's a happy camper if the Federales come knocking down my door, right?

Wrong. I spent the better part of two days off and on ripping about 300 CDs into iTunes, then sending them off to my mp3 player, which I initially emptied and then reloaded.

It did not work. I ended up with about 30 songs instead of 250, because the ripped files are m4a, not mp3, and they won't play on my Sanza Clip. So then I have to go through two more hours of erasing, finding the stupid m4a files, finding a converter online, converting them, verifying that they play in iTunes, then loading them onto the Sanza. Only to find out, after that's all done, that the quality of the converted files isn't as good as the quality of the "illegal" downloads from the webz.

So I do it right, I play by the rules, and I'm penalized for it. Same thing if you d/l a movie from torrents – you don't have to sit through all the garbage in front, you just get to watch the movie. But if you buy the DVD you have to sit through the piracy warnings, the previews, the other crap, all before you can just hit play and watch your flick.

This is why these people are fighting a losing battle. Their way is needlessly hard, full of extra steps and nonsense, while the illegal way is super easy and has far less hassle.
Keep wreves in General Talk in 2011!
knapplc
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicGolden Eagle Eye
Posts: 7871
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: It's "ell see." ELL SEE!!!

Re: MAFIAA at it again

Postby StlSluggers » Wed Jul 28, 2010 12:38 pm

Needless? You don't understand.

What you just did - moving songs you purchased to another listening medium - is sooooo illegal. You should not be able to do it, because it breaks the law.

:-t
StlSluggers
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterWeb Supporter
Posts: 14716
Joined: 24 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Parking in the gov't bldg @ 7th and Pine. It's only $3.00 on game day!

Re: MAFIAA at it again

Postby bleach168 » Sun Aug 08, 2010 6:13 pm

knapplc wrote:This crap really sank home for me over the weekend. I've D/L a bunch of songs from the webz, but because I'm Dudley Do-Right it was all stuff I already own. I figured it was easier to d/l all this stuff since it's right there and so easy to find, and not go through the hassle of ripping it off of my CDs, many of which are scratched, yaddax3.

So this weekend I decide to play it absolutely straight and actually go through the process of ripping the discs, then putting it all on my mp3 player and everyone's a happy camper if the Federales come knocking down my door, right?

Wrong. I spent the better part of two days off and on ripping about 300 CDs into iTunes, then sending them off to my mp3 player, which I initially emptied and then reloaded.

It did not work. I ended up with about 30 songs instead of 250, because the ripped files are m4a, not mp3, and they won't play on my Sanza Clip. So then I have to go through two more hours of erasing, finding the stupid m4a files, finding a converter online, converting them, verifying that they play in iTunes, then loading them onto the Sanza. Only to find out, after that's all done, that the quality of the converted files isn't as good as the quality of the "illegal" downloads from the webz.

So I do it right, I play by the rules, and I'm penalized for it. Same thing if you d/l a movie from torrents – you don't have to sit through all the garbage in front, you just get to watch the movie. But if you buy the DVD you have to sit through the piracy warnings, the previews, the other crap, all before you can just hit play and watch your flick.

This is why these people are fighting a losing battle. Their way is needlessly hard, full of extra steps and nonsense, while the illegal way is super easy and has far less hassle.


If you want to support a band you like, buy merchandise from their website. They get a lot more money from that than CD sales and you get a cool t-shirt or poster. Then you can pirate their music guilt free.

Everyone wins except the RIAA. And that's the way it should be.
"And so he spoke, and so he spoke, that lord of Castamere. But now the rains weep o'er his hall, with no one there to hear." - The Rains of Castamere
bleach168
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy Expert
Posts: 5058
(Past Year: 16)
Joined: 22 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: MAFIAA at it again

Postby ironman » Tue Aug 10, 2010 1:04 pm

bleach168 wrote:
knapplc wrote:This crap really sank home for me over the weekend. I've D/L a bunch of songs from the webz, but because I'm Dudley Do-Right it was all stuff I already own. I figured it was easier to d/l all this stuff since it's right there and so easy to find, and not go through the hassle of ripping it off of my CDs, many of which are scratched, yaddax3.

So this weekend I decide to play it absolutely straight and actually go through the process of ripping the discs, then putting it all on my mp3 player and everyone's a happy camper if the Federales come knocking down my door, right?

Wrong. I spent the better part of two days off and on ripping about 300 CDs into iTunes, then sending them off to my mp3 player, which I initially emptied and then reloaded.

It did not work. I ended up with about 30 songs instead of 250, because the ripped files are m4a, not mp3, and they won't play on my Sanza Clip. So then I have to go through two more hours of erasing, finding the stupid m4a files, finding a converter online, converting them, verifying that they play in iTunes, then loading them onto the Sanza. Only to find out, after that's all done, that the quality of the converted files isn't as good as the quality of the "illegal" downloads from the webz.

So I do it right, I play by the rules, and I'm penalized for it. Same thing if you d/l a movie from torrents – you don't have to sit through all the garbage in front, you just get to watch the movie. But if you buy the DVD you have to sit through the piracy warnings, the previews, the other crap, all before you can just hit play and watch your flick.

This is why these people are fighting a losing battle. Their way is needlessly hard, full of extra steps and nonsense, while the illegal way is super easy and has far less hassle.


If you want to support a band you like, buy merchandise from their website. They get a lot more money from that than CD sales and you get a cool t-shirt or poster. Then you can pirate their music guilt free.

Everyone wins except the RIAA. And that's the way it should be.


If you're going to rip your library to digital make sure you verify the file format it's being imported to first. I would recommend Mp3 with a bitrate no lower than 192kbps. I took on this task a few years ago and put 350 CDs into a digital library. I just hacked away at it hear and there when I had time. Took about two months to get it all done.
Image
Wendigo's Camaro
ironman
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerEagle EyeWeb Supporter
Posts: 4901
(Past Year: 94)
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Dubuque

Re: MAFIAA at it again

Postby StlSluggers » Fri Dec 16, 2011 12:30 pm

UMG claims "right to block or remove" YouTube videos it doesn't own

Universal Music Group has responded to Megaupload's request for a temporary restraining order barring the music giant from further interference with the distribution of its "Mega Song." UMG insists that it had a right to take down the video—not under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, as Megaupload had assumed, but under a private contractual arrangement between UMG and YouTube.

UMG's filing raises more questions than it answers. Most obviously, the firm has not explained why it took down the video in the first place. But the filing also raises deeper questions about UMG's effort to essentially opt out of the DMCA takedown rules. UMG seems to believe it can take down videos even if it doesn't hold the copyright to them, and that when UMG takes a video down from YouTube, the owner of that video can't avail herself of even the weak protections against takedown abuse provided by the DMCA.

A different kind of takedown
As we discussed on Thursday, UMG casts Megaupload as a major villain in the war over illegal file-sharing. Last week, Megaupload sought to bolster its image by releasing a pop-star-studded promotional video. UMG's takedown request was an unexpected publicity coup. Megaupload took full advantage, suing UMG on Monday and asking the judge for an immediate restraining order to prevent UMG from further interfering with the video's distribution.

UMG's response, filed late on Thursday, focuses on the narrow question of whether Judge Claudia Wilken should grant such a restraining order. The recording giant makes two principle arguments in opposition.

First, UMG says such a restraining order is not authorized by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The DMCA's notice-and-takedown safe harbor includes a provision for monetary damages against copyright holders who abuse the takedown process, but it does not give the courts the power to block copyright holders from sending takedown requests.

But more importantly, Universal argues that its takedown is not governed by the DMCA in the first place. In a statement supporting Megaupload's complaint, CIO Kim Dotcom had stated "it is my understanding" that Universal had invoked the DMCA's notice-and-takedown provisions. But UMG says Dotcom got it wrong: the takedown was sent "pursuant to the UMG-YouTube agreement," which gives UMG "the right to block or remove user-posted videos through YouTube's CMS based on a number of contractually specified criteria."

In other words, when UMG removes a video using YouTube's CMS, that might be a takedown, but it's not a DMCA takedown. And that, UMG argues, means that the DMCA's rule against sending takedown requests for files you don't own doesn't apply.


"Not limited to copyright infringement"
UMG underscored the point by including a letter UMG lawyer Kelly Klaus sent to YouTube on Wednesday. In that letter, Klaus wrote:

Your letter could be read to suggest that UMG's rights to use the YouTube "Content Management System" with respect to certain user-posted videos are limited to instances in which UMG asserts a claim that a user-posted video contains material that infringes a UMG copyright. As you know, UMG's rights in this regard are not limited to copyright infringement, as set forth more completely in the March 31, 2009 Video License Agreement for UGC Video Service Providers, including without limitation Paragraphs 1(b) and 1(g) thereof.

This appears to be a reference to the agreement underlying the VEVO partnership between Google and UMG announced in April 2009. As far as we know, the agreement isn't public, so we can only speculate on what's in Paragraphs 1(b) and 1(g). But we plan to ask Google for a copy.

UMG's response also sheds some light on another mystery: why Monday's issue of Tech News Today was yanked from YouTube. When UMG removes a video via YouTube's CMS, a "reference file" is created that "in theory is supposed to identify other instances of postings of the same content." UMG speculates that this "reference file" system was responsible for the accidental removal from YouTube of a Tech News Today episode featuring the Megaupload video.

The recording industry is currently lobbying for passage of the Stop Online Piracy Act, which would create a DMCA-style takedown regime for advertising and credit card networks. Critics may question whether it's wise to give new takedown powers to copyright holders that demonstrate such a cavalier attitude toward the rights of others.

So UMG appears to have privately negotiated a deal with youTube that allows them to just take down whatever they want from youTube, and it's not subject to the DMCA because it's a private agreement.

:-t
StlSluggers
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterWeb Supporter
Posts: 14716
Joined: 24 May 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Parking in the gov't bldg @ 7th and Pine. It's only $3.00 on game day!

PreviousNext

Return to General Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Friday, Oct. 24
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

Kansas City at San Francisco
(8:07 pm)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact