GNR Uploader Gets Two Months House Arrest, Plus Will Produce Propaganda For RIAA
from the yeah,-that'll-work dept
It still doesn't make much sense that the FBI got involved in trying to track down and arrest a guy who uploaded a pre-release version of Guns 'N Roses' long awaited new album before it was released. If anything, it should have been a civil matter -- and, honestly, there's little indication that the upload caused any harm whatsoever. In fact, it was the arrest, not the uploading that seemed to alert more people to the fact that the download was available in the first place. Should the FBI now investigate itself for better promoting the pre-release download?That said, the guy who uploaded the songs, Kevin Cogill, agreed to a plea bargain. While the FBI still pushed for jailtime for Cogill, it looks like he's getting two months of house arrest (plenty of time to sit at home and listen to the new GNR, I guess) and has agreed to make a propaganda video for the RIAA. I'm not quite sure what the RIAA thinks such propaganda will accomplish, other than alerting more people to how ridiculous the RIAA's anti-piracy campaign has been.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: guns 'n roses, house arrest, kevin cogill
Companies: fbi, riaa
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Perhaps 17 USC 506(a)
"Propoganda video"!
Is it propoganda for one who broke the law to fess up on camera and suggest to others it is not a smart thing to do?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
WTF? You busted him for uploading a bootleg GUNS N ROSES album? But wait, their music sucks. I heard that the detainees over in Guantanamo were forced to listen to Guns N Roses until they broke down and confessed to every unsolved crime in American history.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I'd say
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Not why in the law. Why in *common sense*?
Is it propoganda for one who broke the law to fess up on camera and suggest to others it is not a smart thing to do?
Yes. Because no one will believe he means it. If anything it will just expose the hypocrisy of the whole thing. It'll make people wonder why we're putting public resources towards punishing a guy who was just trying to promote a band he liked.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What's the problem?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What's the problem?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What's the problem?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Coolest
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Maybe this guy should have asked the band if they wanted him to promote its then upcoming album.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RIAA can scheme
it could happen
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Just Because You Can Do Something
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Federal crime, federal agency. How hard is that to understand? Who would you want on this beat, maybe some New York City meter maids?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Why?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
clearly the terrorists are not doing enough to show up on the FBI's radar. if osama bin laden was uploading 80's hair metal to the internets the FBI would have given him 2 in the chest and 1 in the head 5 years ago.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
just goes to show priorities
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Piracy Is The Tip Of The Iceberg
Read more at: http://www.themusicvoid.com/2009/05/parasite-small-time-non-promoters-ripping-of-artists/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So, enforce some laws, but not others?
(1) There there is some controversy over timing, the person in question appears to have illegally obtained material from a private computer and posted that material before anyone else. Just obtaining the material involved breaking a number of laws.
(2) The FBI enforces federal laws. Somehow people think they can prioritize FBI activities. Well, the FBI should not be sitting there saying, "Gee, what laws will we not enforce this week?" They have an obligation to enforce all federal laws, and the person in question broke one or more federal, criminal laws.
(3) The ire, cynicism and sarcasm of the posters here is misdirected. If you do not like the law, get Congress to change the law, do not blame the FBI for enforcing the law, as they are required to do, even if some of the laws are more akin to running traffic lights rather than bank robbery.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: What's the problem?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What's the problem?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So, enforce some laws, but not others?
Just because the RIAA had no problems getting congress write new laws for the recording industry, after spending 100's of millions in campaign contributions and lobbying, doesn't mean some emails from angry Techdirt readers will get congress to act for them.
IMHO
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I'm beginning to understand how the Iranians feel...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
we HATE U
for every cent u sold ur soul for theres a person u wishes u were dead
u should lie so many times in a commercial that so many innocent minds will be attacked by
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: So, enforce some laws, but not others?
Ultimately, the laws of the United States are affected by ordinary citizens, when enough of them care to make a difference. It does not matter how many millions lobbyists spend, if you galvanize enough citizens, you can overcome.
Witness the NRDC, which was gone up against big oil, loggers, and even El Presidente, and won - several times. How? By grass roots campaigns pulling together consortiums of support from a hodgepodge of groups including Greenpeace, NRDC supporters, The Sierra Club, and others. When Congress has had to face 5 million people over a bill to permit oil drilling or "dual use," meaning mining companies get to mine in national parts, guess what happens? They back down.
The difference is support. If there are millions of voters against something, you can keep if from happening. If there are tens of millions of voters against something, laws can be changed. I hear a lot of complaining about copyright, patents, etc., but relatively little action. Until someone equivalent to the NRDC galvanizes millions of people, you are right, nothing will be done. But, the lack of action also means that the laws have the implicit support of the majority of voters - which those in favor of the laws will claim is the VAST majority of supporters.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: So, enforce some laws, but not others?
You are refreshingly naive and dumbfoundedly ignorant of the real world. Money always trumps voices. Although in a funny way you are kind-of right: if more "ordinary citizens" put their money where their mouth is, they could probably accomplish change the way lobbyists do... and become lobbyists in the process. I'll leave it up to the individual whether "lobbyist" is a dirty word.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
fair use is not illegal
those who pirate and make a profit? my full blessings to go after them. im not going to pay for a song then end up not liking it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wow
RT
www.anonymize.tk
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: So, enforce some laws, but not others?
The NRDC has shown it can be done, if someone acts as an organizer. So, rather than sitting back and joining the other naysayers who claim that big money always wins, which NRDC has proven false multiple times, why don't you be the catalyst for leadership in copyright reform and galvanize a coalition that has some power?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: So, enforce some laws, but not others?
The current laws are not working for the people obviously, because the RIAA wouldnt have to sue 20k+ people "to send a message" and obviously their current method of giving the consumer their media fails due to having to resort to this too.
File sharers will not be given their time because A) The big media companies are fighting against them.
B) Supposed support from the public to prosecute them.
The reason for A being a problem is pretty obvious, big media can blast their ads for saying "ALL FILE SHARING IS ILLEGAL, 1 DOWNLOAD IS 1 LOST SALE WHICH ADDS UP TO BILLIONS A YEAR" to mum&dad and they will believe it.
B is a trickier thing because its obvious that the general public does see a problem with the current laws and they would attempt to change the laws, even help the companies develop a new method of buying media. Politicians dont see the issue of point A coming to light therefore they only see 1 side of the issue and will just continue down this path.
Governments are meant to embody the will of the people.
They should not force the will of the elites onto the people as it currently is.
File sharers are gathering support. How else did the Pirate Party get two seats and more votes than quite a few parties in the EU election?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: So, enforce some laws, but not others?
Actually, PETA was not and is typically not part of NRDC's coalition. Also, NRDC does not "have alot [sic] of funding." Usually they appeal for funding from membership and aligned organizations for each activity. It has taken them weeks to pull together funding for a single television commercial, unlike PETA, which advertises all the time.
File sharers will not be given their time because A) The big media companies are fighting against them.
B) Supposed support from the public to prosecute them.
Now, that is a problem, is it not? Fundamentally, you are saying that the public likes the law the way it is, which means it will never be changed. Ergo, Mike is wasting his time. Somehow, I think that many of the people who post here believe change is possible, in spite of your beliefs. I think big media is like any other organization. When you get enough people galvanized to fight them, they will be relatively powerless. As for support from public, that is just a matter of education, right? Education should be the real mission of people trying to change the law, and that is one of Mike Masnick's purposes.
The reason for A being a problem is pretty obvious, big media can blast their ads for saying "ALL FILE SHARING IS ILLEGAL, 1 DOWNLOAD IS 1 LOST SALE WHICH ADDS UP TO BILLIONS A YEAR" to mum&dad and they will believe it.
Oh, please. Mum and dad grew up in the 60's and no longer believe everything they are told. Indeed, mum and dad may have a bigger distrust of big business than they let on. Give mum and dad some credit for intelligence. Educate them and they will choose the side that makes the most sense.
B is a trickier thing because its obvious that the general public does see a problem with the current laws and they would attempt to change the laws, even help the companies develop a new method of buying media. Politicians dont see the issue of point A coming to light therefore they only see 1 side of the issue and will just continue down this path.
This issue was the entire point of the earlier post. People will only change when they are motivated to change. Part of that motivation comes from education, which comes from exposure. While Mike's blog is interesting, it reaches dozens or hundreds of people, but in order to effect change you have to reach millions, which takes a larger, concerted effort. Yes, it is work. Welcome to the real world.
Governments are meant to embody the will of the people.
They should not force the will of the elites onto the people as it currently is.
I cannot believe you said this. You essentially said that the government is executing the will of the people, and then you turn around and say that the government is enforcing the will of the "elites," whoever or whatever they may be. Again, the will of the people has been shown to have power again and again and again. Jimmy Carter was swept into office by the will of the people, not the "elites." Ronald Reagan appealed to the public, not the "elites," to support his programs, asking Americans to call their congressmen. Millions did. The NRDC and PETA have shown that with advertising and education, people will support just causes. Invoking "elites" is admitting to defeat before the battle has even begun.
File sharers are gathering support. How else did the Pirate Party get two seats and more votes than quite a few parties in the EU election?
Oh, goody. An obscure party gets two seats. Two does not a revolution make. If you consider this a victory, your standards are quite low. If you consider this a beginning, better, but this statement contradicts your defeatism in the rest of your post.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
GNR
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
newest jordan shoes
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Good post
[ link to this | view in thread ]