RIAA sues 532 music downloaders | iLounge News


RIAA sues 532 music downloaders

“In its largest legal action to date, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) filed another 532 lawsuits Wednesday against alleged music pirates operating through peer-to-peer (P2P) networks.

The lawsuits use the “John Doe” process, which is used to sue defendants whose names aren’t known.

The lawsuits identify the defendants by their Internet protocol computer address. Once a John Doe suit has been filed and approved by a judge, the RIAA can subpoena the information needed to identify the defendant by name from an Internet service provider (ISP).”

« Shure E2 for $76 at MicrophoneSolutions.com

Shakespeare’s Sonnets on your iPod »

Related Stories



Glad I live in Canada :)

Posted by |x| in PEI, Canada on January 21, 2004 at 1:13 PM (CST)



Posted by Archer in Charlotte, NC on January 21, 2004 at 1:14 PM (CST)


When the “h” are people going to band together to form an organization to counter-sue these thieves. The RIAA is not a government agency. It’s an organization setup by the greedy record industry to prey on individuals. What law gives them LAW ENFORCEMENT credentials? Somebody has to challenge them. I don’t think what they are doing is legal. They are using Snooping/Spy software…That’s an invasion of privacy. Has anybody challenged them on this and exactly who gave them the authority to be the POLICE of the Internet. I believe if people go together and contributed money and resources (Legal) we could sue these worthless pieces of excrement and make them ineffectual. Does anybody have any information on real organizations doing legal battle with the RIAA on their snooping and illegal activites?

Posted by Downloader on January 21, 2004 at 1:26 PM (CST)


The RIAA is actually an organization set up to for the record labels, not one set up to “prey on” anyone. They aren’t enforcing laws; they are exercising their rights under US civil law. If your house was broken into and your iPod was stolen, you’d want restitution from the thief. So you might sue him. That’s all they’re doing.

I’m so sick of you cheap whining idiots who feel justified for stealing something just because it is so easy to do. You have driven the RIAA to this, and yet you deplore them for it. Get a life and get a job so you can buy the frickin’ music you pathetic maggots.

Posted by Uploader on January 21, 2004 at 1:36 PM (CST)


Downloader - do you understand the term: Hypocrite?

Posted by voodoo on January 21, 2004 at 1:39 PM (CST)


“I believe if people go together and contributed money…” - Downloader

How about using the money you pool together to pay for the music and avoid the whole mess. Moron.

Posted by U.R.A. Dumba$$ on January 21, 2004 at 1:41 PM (CST)


seems like there are only saints on this board ;)

Posted by jaroni on January 21, 2004 at 2:00 PM (CST)


hey… why are you getting so personal?
if the guy wants to download for free thats his
choice. dont tell me you have never downloaded anything ilegal in your life…
The music industry has manipulated the prices, products, you named they have done it..
One word…......Karma…....

Posted by hb2 in Phoenix arizona on January 21, 2004 at 2:08 PM (CST)


say, what’s the ruling that happened a few weeks ago dealing with the RIAA and ISP’s? Can someone clarify that?

Posted by Fiddytree on January 21, 2004 at 2:10 PM (CST)


Let me remind some of you: Any abusive comments toward other readers will be deleted and in some cases the person making the comment will be banned.

There ARE constructive ways to make your points without having to get nasty with each other.

Posted by Dennis Lloyd in Irvine, CA on January 21, 2004 at 2:11 PM (CST)


Downloader:  and I bet you don’t even jay walk.  You ppl are a bunch of wussies.  The RIAA are scum and all they do is try to save an obsolete industry plagued with shallow superficial pop stars.  GET A LIFE and DOWHATCHALIKE!

Posted by MrJones on January 21, 2004 at 2:49 PM (CST)



I agree with you insofar as you criticise those who are getting abusive. But to treat this like any other debate seems bizarre. On one side of this debate you have those loudly claiming their ‘right’ to steal what they are not entitled to. You should perhaps consider whether it’s responsible to take quite such a ‘detached’ view of what is, in essence, simple theft. I would have thought it politic for the owner of iPodlounge to stay on the right side of the music industry, and would have thought that actively discouraging illegal downloading would show moral strength, and, in the long term, might benefeit law-abiding iPodders.

Or are we going to have unmoderated threads giving advice on how best to shop-lift CDs from HMV, or whining about how the record stores prosecute you when you try and walk out with twelve CDs under your jacket?

If you don’t like the price of CDs the alternative isn’t to steal them.

Posted by Jacko on January 21, 2004 at 2:59 PM (CST)


Downloading unauthorized music is not “theft”, and it is not a crime. It is a actionable in civil court by copyright holders, or their agents.

Any attempts to conflate the theft of physical property that deprives the owner of possession against a duplication of information contrary to a copyright owner’s specifications is mendacious.

Downloading is not theft. No CDs have been stolen.

Posted by IANALBIPOOTV on January 21, 2004 at 3:17 PM (CST)


If you don’t like the price of CDs the alternative isn’t to steal them - jacko.

  Why not :)

Posted by irtehpod on January 21, 2004 at 3:25 PM (CST)


IANALBIPOOTV, copying copywritten material without the consent of the copywrite holder is theft plain and simple.

Property is property, regardless if its physical or intellectual.

Posted by Jason on January 21, 2004 at 3:35 PM (CST)


Property is theft.

Downloads are not property.

Posted by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon on January 21, 2004 at 3:48 PM (CST)


Yes, downloads ARE property.  Intellectual Property isn’t that difficult a concept to grasp, Pierre.

Posted by djhitman on January 21, 2004 at 3:56 PM (CST)


From your link:
(which I srongly suspect you did not bother to read)

The term intellectual property is problematic because the rights conferred by IP laws are limited, in contrast with the legal rights associated with property interests in physical goods or land. Not entirely coincidentally, the presence of the word property in the term favours the position of proponents of the expansion of intellectual property rights, who may thereby more readily draw on the rhetoric of property itself to remove the many restrictions built into intellectual property law which would be inappropriate if applied to physical goods.

Opponents of the term also point out that the law itself treats these rights differently than those involving physical property. To give three examples, copyright infringement is not punishable by laws against theft, but rather by an entirely different set of laws with different penalities. Patent infringement is not a criminal offense although it may subject the infringer to civil liability. Possessing stolen physical goods is a criminal offense while mere possessing of goods which infringe on copyright is not.

Posted by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon on January 21, 2004 at 4:03 PM (CST)


Pierre, you forgot to highlight rest of the sentence:

_but rather by an entirely different set of laws with different penalties_

copyright infringement is breaking the law, and while it might not be physical property theft, it is intellectual property theft.

Swiping a piece of physical property is the illegal acquisition of the physic property.  Downloading, photocopying, etc. (duplicating) without permission of the copyright holder is the illegal acquisition of the intellectual property.  They are both the unlawful acquisition of property causing loss of money to the property’s lawful owner, and that is theft in any language.

Posted by Jason on January 21, 2004 at 4:23 PM (CST)


“If any of you is without sin, let him throw the first stone.”
thats my favorite quote…..
I dont care what you download, porn,graphics, movies its all the same ,, not just music

Posted by hb2 in Phoenix arizona on January 21, 2004 at 4:40 PM (CST)

Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 > 

If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods/iPhones/iPad or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod/iPhone/iPad products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter


Recent News

Recent Reviews

Recent Articles

Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter


iLounge is an independent resource for all things iPod, iPhone, iPad, and beyond.
iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, Apple TV, Mac, and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc.
iLounge is © 2001 - 2014 iLounge, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy