Mweh,

I....well...kinda...like the idea.

At least it isn't as overboard as sueing little grandma's.

But like the article said, how would they enforce this ? Europeans ISP's wont pay SQUAT.

You know what?

KISS MY ASS!!!

I do not DL illegal music. WHY THE HELL should *I* be forced to pay $60.00 per year because my neighbor does!??! Why should my mother have her ISP rates go up? What about your mom? Or even DEP's mom?

What the hell gives them the right to assume I am a criminal and make me pay a fine to that effect?

Do the math...$60 per year PER ACCOUNT. Go outside, walk down your street and count the houses. Subtract off 20% for those that have no internet. Now multiply that by 60. Now again by the number of residential streets in your town.

We are talking BILLIONS of dollars per year!! And we are to trust these slobs to divvy it up to the right people based on what? Their amazing ability to figure out who is stealing music? So far as I can see, that ain't exactly a strong suit for them. And who get the change? I suppose, why THEY DO of course!

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, and no. F*ck that very very much. I am not a criminal, I have the right to not be convicted and fined as though I were. It is called DUE PROCESS AND TRIAL BY JURY.

Ugh. Our privacy and rights are being devoured before our eyes every. freaking. day. George Orwell was dead nuts on with the concept. He just missed it by about 25 years.

this is worse than the concept of taking some unlucky kid to court to ruin his life because he listened to some music, in order to make an example out of him.

with all this talk of riaa and asses, you might be interested in RIAA toiletpaper from jinx clothing (non affiliated)




edit: sorry, cant work outhow to do images here =( would love some help

Okay, RIAA, I will consider that a subscription fee. If you want to charge me $60/year and give me absolutely nothing in return, you can do exactly what Moe says above. At a buck per song I should get 60 songs for free.

Random thought. How about a deaf person who owns a computer. Are you going to charge them? They can't even hear the songs and you want to charge them a piracy fee? Oh, I can only imagine the backlash.

i agree, its very hard to enforce

any isps who jump on board will start losing customers. and so will do two things
1) deter other isps from doing the same
2) either go out of business or remove the surcharge

So 20% of people download but 100% would have to pay? That sounds like that pool of money is going to be very deep and ripe for fraud.

And that $5 would never decrease. It would only get steeper and steeper.

They can kiss my ass too.

Hey Music Industry: STOP WHINING!

Times have changed, so get used to it. For DECADES we were forced to buy entire crappy albums for one good song, and now we have iTunes. You guys tried to block the sale of CD-R because we were going to burn CDs, but you just can't stop the people.

Focus on making good music and you will still make money. It's time for you to figure out that the real cash comes from concerts and advertisements, not as much the CD sales anymore.

If this actually goes through I promise to start to stealing enough music to MORE than make up for the extra amount I would have to pay in fees. And I promise to get everyone I know to do the same.

Awesome double post ftl

I fixed your image, the problem was that at both ends it said [img] and [/img], you just have to add a few a's and e's to finish the word 'image'.

thanks!

btw, dont want to pay for music? www.last.fm is good

(non affiliated)

They already got away with it once. At least they did over here. We have a tax on blank CD's exactly for that reason: blank CD's are used to create illegal copies, so if there's a tax on it, at least the record labels get back some of their lost income.

Before that tax was introduced, I never once made an illegal copy. And since that tax was introduced, I feel that none of the copies I make are illegal. The record company gets its share after all, so they have no right to complain.

f**k the RIAA, nothing but a group of greedy f**kwads worried about THEIR money and not the artists they 'claim' to be protecting.

The idea is stupid, plain stupid.

I buy more CD's now than I did before P2P came about and from a much WIDER variety of artists.

How about I charge the RIAA a monthly fee for the horrible, cookie cutter, boy band, american idol, same song every 42 minutes bulls**t I have to put up with now. I think $5.00 USD a month sounds good, don't you?

If you buy Music Only cd/dvd's for home burners, not PC based ones, there is a tax on those blanks.

So if we pay the fee we can legally download music illegally? I doubt thats the case but They will still try and sue people who do giving them more money! And this will make it a lot easier, i can picture them saying something like this
"Hey look this person is paying us extra so he has enough bandwidth for file sharing. He must be downloading illegal music. Lets sue him!"