RIAA's New Settlement Website Promoting P2P File Sharing Clients?

from the nice-work,-fellas dept

Wed, Feb 14th 2007 12:44am — Mike Masnick

While lots of folks have been talking about the RIAA's latest attempt to pressure ISPs into handing over subscriber info, Eliot Van Buskirk over at Wired noticed something interesting. The domain name that the RIAA registered for their new "pre-lawsuit" settlement packages (where you get a discount for not pointing out that their evidence is flimsy), it appears that the RIAA has put up a parked page that is full of ads pointing to all sorts of file sharing programs, many that include adware and spyware. As Eliot notes: "does this mean the RIAA can be sued for contributory infringement?" Considering that the entertainment industry was just pissed off at the Google ads on a different site for similar reasons -- you'd think they might want to consider suing themselves here. Of course, it seems that someone over at the RIAA got wise to this and has now switched off the advertising on the domain. Still, I wonder how much money they made promoting P2P programs...

13 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

worldscolide, 14 Feb 2007 @ 3:47am

DUHHHHH
the RIAA will never learn, its kinda sad really.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sandy, 14 Feb 2007 @ 5:31am

huh?
The RIAA's days are numbered! I discovered encrypted file-sharing last month and there's several new file-sharing programs out there that encrypt exchanges, that means that ISPs and the RIAA wont be able to see anything that people exchange. I use GigaTribe ( http://www.gigatribe.com ) which keeps me out of the radar and lets me share as I please!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Matt (profile), 14 Feb 2007 @ 5:49am

RE: huh?
Yes, encrypted file sharing is nice, but the issue here is proprietary technologies. If encrypted streams are to be successfully used, someone must develop a standard for the implementation. I think there are already such things at encrypted Torrents, but they haven't really caught on yet because of all the overhead that has to be transmitted and the diverse BitTorrent clients that are in use.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Feb 2007 @ 6:45am

They were using the page to find you
As soon as you showed up they had you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Xiera, 14 Feb 2007 @ 7:23am
  
  Re: They were using the page to find you
  Possibly, but it'd make more sense if they used a neutral site to host the advertisements. By putting it on their own site, the provide a reasonable defense for anyone that may have been 'caught' -- that by advertising for the P2Ps in question, they are okaying the use of such programs.
  
  I'm not entirely sure what to make of this move by the RIAA, though. My only guess is that they were trying to make back some of the money they were 'losing' to the P2P programs to begin with.
  
  Actually, it would make sense if the RIAA created a search engine for P2P software that requires the P2P software developers to pay an 'advertising' fee to be included in the database.
  
  ...Then they could get a patent to protect the idea of displaying P2P software results from a search engine. [/sarcasm]...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
KB, 14 Feb 2007 @ 6:47am

Whoever holds the patent on 'P2P' should tell them they can't use that domain name.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Erv, 14 Feb 2007 @ 7:24am

When I went to their website my anti virus scanner gave me an alert
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
|333173|3|_||3, 14 Feb 2007 @ 6:12pm

Re: Re: They were using the page to find you
No they couldn't it is obvious.

also, would this be considered a liscencing fee for the content?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
شبية الريح, 15 Feb 2007 @ 4:11am

windows masngeer
h cant faound
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Indiie Music Man, 15 Feb 2007 @ 1:55pm

while the RIAA's announced website is running ads, the counter website is up and running. p2plawsuitssuck.com - site for people who receive letters alleging copyright infringement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ian, 21 May 2007 @ 9:27pm

RIAA lawsuits ara joke
I would love for the RIAA to sue me for downloading music...

Let's look at it this way: I download music illegally. However, I do not share my music. According to the RIAA, this is stealing. Fine.

Let's say I stop downloading music, but instead do what id used to do in middle school, and create mix tapes off of the radio, and onto casettes. From there, I burn them onto CD's, and then upload them to my computer, for my own enjoyment, not for sharing or selling. Am I still a pirate?

Second point: Let's say the RIAA sues me over downloading an album from one artist, let's say Usher (which I haven't done, I actually bought his). Is Usher suing me, or the RIAA? If it is truly intellectual property theft, whose intellectual property am I stealing? If it belongs to Usher and his writers/producers, does the RIAA directly represent them? If not, who are they to sue in their stead?

Third point: Let's say I buy either a CD or a CD from itunes. If I paid for it, isn't it mine, the same way my house and car are mine? If so, doesn't my ownership of said property allow me to loan it to my friends/family, the same way I can loan my car or house to a buddy? I would love to know where the line is drawn.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
dodo, 7 May 2008 @ 4:44am

hotmail.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
kkjkbc, 23 Jul 2008 @ 11:38am

iyg
u
[ link to this | view in chronology ]