RIAA Sues Audiogalaxy

Frizzled writes "The RIAA has struck again, this time filing suit against Audiogalaxy's "Satellite" file sharing program. (Nevermind that Satellite is loaded with spy-ware ... good riddance)." News.com has a story. The RIAA's press release links to their complaint.

Damn it - software is innocent

[Sabalon]

Yes...AudioGalaxy is out there stealing songs?

And Sears should be held responsiable for all illegal breaking&entering done with a craftsman hammer. And there has already been the Wincherster case. And Buck should be held liable for all knife crimes, and rap for all crimes of insanity, etc...

What's next - RIAA against Berkeley for creating FTP cause they found an FTP mp3 site? RIAA against DARPA for creating the Internet?

Good Riddance?

[Rayonic]

Sure, it's riddled with spyware, but every case the RIAA wins against services that could be used to share their songs, the more legal precedence they have to pull more of that bullshit in the future.

It doesn't matter how much spyware or other nasty stuff AudioGalaxy comes with, they are still on "our side" when it comes to the p2p issue as a whole. You'd better hope they win, though they probably won't.

Re:Control vs. Cash

[speedfreak_5]

2) Alot more people would buy the music if they sold them directly over the internet.

If they just dropped the price of a regular CD to a reasonable amount, I would be happy to buy it. As long as it's not any of that "music" that they whore on TRL.

Turbopoo

[Graymalkin]

What is most entertaining about the RIAA's continuing legal attacks is they are obviously attacking these companies with legal fees rather than substantitive claims and then turning around and flat out denying it. The problem legally with AG, Napster, and Kazaa is they have to maintain servers somewhere that not only distribute programs to share MP3s but also facilitate in their transfer. What none of these companies have managed to do is show a court that their software can be used for anything besides piracy* and in reality they can't be despite specious claims to the contrary. AG is going to fold under just like Kazaa did because there is no way their VC is going to hold out under the RIAA's assault, unless of course they have a retained attorney that works cheap.

It will be interesting to see what happens next after AG goes down, the biggest network left that I know of is Gnutella and with that the RIAA faces a pretty tough battle. The Gnutella network was not specifically designed for MP3 sharing and there is no single company responsible for its maintenance. If they did try to bring a suit against it it would be interesting how they could attack GPL'ed code.

* Yes trading MP3s or movies without paying for them is piracy. Unless you made it yourself or own the distribution rights to it, you giving it to other people isn't legal. The home recording act and time shifting statutes don't let you make recordings for distribution, only personal use. That is fair use. Kazaa, Napster, and AG aren't promoting fair use they ARE promoting piracy. It may seem unfair that you can't go download any song you want for free but those are the breaks. If you want cheap CDs buy them cheap either used or from swap meets. Mixing a CD for a friend can be fair use, a 70 gig MP3 collection downloaded entirely from some sharing service is not. Copying a CD you own to put in your car so your original doesn't get fucked up is fair use, downloading and watching AoTC instead of paying for it in some way is not.

Re:spyware on linux too?

[nesthigh]

And now that we have OpenAG - Open Audiogalaxy Satellite [mac.com], all that's missing is an open server. Next

I like AudioGalaxy

[GuNgA-DiN]

It's too bad... I like the program. I joined their "Gold" program for like $2.75 a month you get access to faster servers and better quality downloads. I've been happy with it. I always find what I want. A song pops into my head -- and 5 minutes later: I'm listening to it. I wish that all of these dying companies would open-source their code. Since they will be getting a new asshole from the RIAA and the US legal system anyway they might as well "leak" the source to the Net. That way a 1000 new networks could spring up in their place. The further we spread the RIAA the weaker they get! Muahahahahahahahaha!

Big deal

[dh003i]

Audiogalaxy, KazaaLite, aren't great compared to P2P Limewire. LimeWire and other true P2P (completely decentralized) software can't be regulated or banned. Not only that, but its getting better in terms of speed and reliability; also, its getting more users, and LimeWire's usually the place I go to find rare songs, like "Now You Suck," by the Yeastie Girls.

I still use KazaaLite in tandem with LimeWire, but LimeWire is becoming more and more my primary option. Not to mention, its RMS-friendly, since it uses the GNU GPL.

That of course doesn't justify the RIAA/MPAA's actions. Centralized services for distribution should not be held responsible for the content being distributed, not any more than ISP's should have to micro-monitor their users. File-sharing services can be used for many many purposes, most of which have nothing to do with sharing copyrighted works. Since the pattern seems to be like Wack-a-mole -- where RIAA/MPAA sue one file-sharing service, then another pops up -- perhaps eventually we'll get a SANE ruling from a judge who isn't paid for and owned by big money.

Not An Easy Case?

[mckelveyf]

I have been using Audiogalaxy for quite sometime now and have actually been pretty happy with it. But I think its structure may make it a harder target for the RIAA than something like Kazaa or Napster. Audiogalaxy already has built in copy protecting. Audiogalaxy has and is preventing a user from downloading certain more main stream songs. You can't get alot of music off Audiogalaxy. This fact is poorly criticized in section 3 of the RIAA statement where it compares its copy-protection to a fishnet filtering water. Also many artists are hosted by Audiogalaxy and it provides the user with a link to buy the album. This is in direct conflict with the RIAA claim that Audiogalaxy has "the ability to download entire sound recording albums, cover artwork..." As well for a fileshare program Audiogalaxy has been one of the most supportive of underground bands and community exchange. Just look at the monthly columns to see why the RIAA is sueing. The bands that are reviewed and advertised on Audiogalaxy are usually ones that aren't controlled by major labels. Although I won't defend the spyware, to me audiogalaxy was the first filesharing that was starting to actually look more like an alternative to the major labels.

fenn

source code

[puck71]

I could be wrong, but I seem to remember they used to have the source code for the Satellite posted. This was a couple years ago, before it was a phenomenon, and I can't find a copy of it or anything, but I just seem to remember there being source code posted. Can anyone set me straight? I'm probably wrong but I wanted to throw it out there.

Open Audiogalaxy?

[DanThe1Man]

Remember when Napster got into all the legal troubles that things like 'Open Nap' and Napagator became popular to access non offical open source servers? Why can't the same thing happen with Audiogalaxy? I know at least part of their code is open source, so that would help.

It would also be nice because AG blocked a lot of popular songs from being downloaded, and I'm sure the open servers wouldn't do that.

An Association Named Sue

[jcsehak]

That was so cool I had to make a recording [rootrecords.org] of it. If this pisses you off, I'll take it off the site, but what I'd really like to do is make it public domain. Nothing educates the public like a catchy song (one of the many reasons Woody Guthrie was the man). I'd also like to give you proper credit, of course. It could probably stand another take or two, and some more practice, but it's great for a few hours' work. I had to edit the words a bit to make them more singable. Here's my revised version:

Been pirating from the RIAA since I was ten and three, and I don't think I've missed a single MP3, Just this old hard drive's space to lose,
Now, it isn't just the fact that they sued, it's the stupidest thing they ever did, was to claim that their actions protected revenues.

Well, they must o' thought that is quite a joke, And it got a lot of laughs from a' lots of folk, It seems I've downloaded my whole life through.
Hell, I never even thought of it as wrong, cause I'd buy more CDs after hearing more songs, I tell ya, it had nothing to do with their "revenue"

Well, I grew up quick and I grew up l33t, My hacking got hard and my wits got street, I'd roam backdoor to backdoor to hide my name.
But I made a vow to the moon and stars That I'd search the databases and systems far And kill that connection before it got too lame

Well, just finished with a shell I had since July, I kissed my DSL connection goodbye and I battled a round of security with big blue
At an old cybercafe in case they pulled the lud's, There at a table, spewing FUD Sat the dirty, mangy dog that "protected" the RIAA's Revenue

Well, I knew that snake was a lawyer so bad From the way he jumped up and down so mad cause Kazzaa Lite was installed on every PC, it's true
He was big and bent and gray and old, And I looked at him and my blood ran cold And I said: "If you're defending your bands, how come all the money goes to you?"

I was so pissed off I hit him between the eyes And he went down, but to my surprise, He come up with a lawsuit in his hand
But I called right back and marked him the theif, And he forced the conversation into the non-witnessed street Acronym'in and a' cursing, I made my stand

I tell ya, I've stolen identities of tougher men But I really can't remember when, He tricked like a mule, brought out a Pocket PC and filed
Another suit, he said I'd pay for this fuss, He went for his digital pen and initialed first, He stood there lookin' at me and I saw him smile.

And he said: "Son, this world is rough And if an Association is gonna make it, their legal gotta be tough and you know, to keep the Music Monopoly along.
We'll crush independents until they die, we'll overexpose until you buy and from those sales major labels go on strong"

He said: "Now you just fought one hell of a fight And I know you hate me, and you got the right To report me now, and I wouldn't blame you if you do.
But ya ought to thank me, before your case is tried, For the l33t circles, and coding skillz in ya eye Cause I'm the son-of-a-bitch that forces you underground when I yell "Sue.'"

I got all choked up and I threw down my palm And I recognized his crooked law, and I saw that everytime he sue'd it's true.
My skillz improve, and my knack gets better every time I find a P2P that's l33ter, but in the end, even though I think I win, we all still lose

Cause the RIAA has got control over music, congress and America's soul and if you want to download, sample or even use
any music you've bought and paid for, without fail, you'll be fined and put in jail, all in the name of their goddam revenues

I think about him every time I see, a young coder writing stuff that's free, And if I ever have a son, I think I'm gonna teach him...

to fight the corporations from a legal and political standpoint, so he won't need to hack, and support free music with all his back, and maybe after a generation or two
Their greed'll thin, and freedom will win, sampling songs won't be a sin, and we'll have taken and farmed all their grounds to sue.

Re:Not An Easy Case?

[uebernewby]

Audiogalaxy is, as they say, da shit: contrary to your claim you *can* get a lot of music on it, just not of the regular, mainstream RIAA crap variety. So I don't see why the RIAA is trying to sue them: their songs are already banned! Sure, some users give creative names to their files to bypass the system, but that can't be worrisome - a creative name means the file won't be found.

Perhaps they're afraid AudioGalaxy is turning RIAA listening folks into indie heads? There's a ton of obscure electronica on AudioGalaxy ready for the taking. Get hooked on that and you'll never be buying a Sony CD again (interestingly enough, btw, even somewhat mainstream electronica, such as Aphex Twin, is banned).

Re:But what about the struggling artists...

[Anonymous Coward]

The cold, hard, facts about trying to make money from being a musician are that it is a very hard thing to make a living out of: you either keep your artistic integrity and eke out the rest of your career like a pauper, or get marketing savvy and money behind you and you sell out. Hardly anybody gets to do both.

Everybody who complains about free file sharing causing them loss of income seem to be either:

1. Dickheads like Eminem and Metallica, who expect to rake in the spondoolies every time they fart. These guys suck.

2. Complete nobodies who complain about "losing" money from free sharing... get a grip! The chances that you'd be making money if free file sharing didn't exist are remote anyway, and you're probably using free file sharing as a scapegoat. These guys suck just as bad. I say to the OP: /chances/ are that your friend is in this category.

Music is generally /not/ a career to go into if you want to make money, unless you have a marketable image, have good marketing behind you, and are prepared to sell out. For every Madonna, you have 1000 unknown artists, each with more /raw musical talent/ in their little finger than she has in her whole body. If having money is so important to you (and it is to most people), then you'd be better off studying really hard and getting a good job that you like and that pays well. Or you can bet the farm on the slim chance that you get to be a rock star one day. I think it's stupid to complain when you find that you can't have your cake and eat it too.

It doesn't matter whether you're living in the 1950's and buying vinyl from the local music shop, or living in the year 2020 and getting all your music in Ogg/Vorbis form from the 'net, the performers who have the big bucks behind them will win out every time... always has been, always will be. That's the way the world works.

Re:But what about the struggling artists...

[Alan Cox]

Audiogalaxy was actually helping small artists sell stuff. People who *wanted* their stuff on it to get URL's known and for people to buy actual albums. That seems to me much more likely -why- the RIAA wanted to sue them.

After all if there are alternatives to the kind of contracts the big media companies push who is going to sign up with the big boys ?

Frivolous suits

[terrymr]

I'm still trying to figure out why the judge didn't get mad and toss the napster suit after all BMG one of the plaintiffs owns Napster the defendent - which is almost exactly like suing yourself.