Earlier this month the RIAA voluntarily dismissed the case—then refiled it last week but didn't mention it was the same lawsuit, which means it was assigned to a different judge. Now the RIAA is demanding immediate discovery (which includes depositions and hard drives), which the previous judge had blocked pending a rule on the dismissal motion. We tip our hats to you, RIAA lawyers. You bring every evil-lawyer cliche from TV to life.

"These people are psychos," Beckerman said in an interview.

Also, the case was captioned under the name Does, meaning the RIAA was somehow pretending it didn't know the family's name allegedly behind the IP address in question.

"This case, it's the exact same internet access account," he said. "It’s the very same act of copyright infringement charged. It's no different."

The RIAA did not immediately respond for comment.

Beckerman has penned letters to both judges alerting them to the switcheroo.

"They're trying to force a settlement and frightening people," Beckerman said in the interview. "That's the only point of this."

"Lawyer: RIAA Gets Sleazy in Disputed Downloading Lawsuit" [Wired Threat Level] (Thanks to Chris!)
(Photo: Getty)

Ian writes:

About a year and a half ago, I got a phone call on my cell phone from an unlisted number. I was busy doing something, but like an idiot I answered anyway. It was a solicitor from the Boston Symphony Orchestra, asking me to donate. I'd taken my fiancee to a concert of theirs about a month prior, and I had purchased the tickets online. I guess they thought just paying for my tickets wasn't enough. I told him I was busy and to send me something in the mail, and that was that.

A few weeks later I got what looked like a bill from the BSO, saying I had agreed to donate $25, and please pay up. I was pretty annoyed about getting a collection notice for a donation I never actually agreed to, so I tore up the letter and forgot about it. Over the next year, I received a copy of that same notice once every couple of months. Each time, I remembered the sleaziness of the circumstances under which they got my "pledge", so I just threw it out.

A couple of weeks ago, an unrecognized number appeared on my phone. Since this one wasn't blocked, I answered. On the other end was an unbelievably rude woman who immediately accused me of making a fraudulent pledge to the BSO because they never received my $25. Then she goes, "So would you please give me a credit card number so we can take care of this?" I was at a loss for words. I explained to her that giving my credit card information to a random person who called my cell phone would be incredibly stupid. She said, "Oh, I assure you I'm calling from the BSO," and went on to describe the tickets for my outing a year and a half ago—the date, the seats, the cost, etc. At this point I just wanted to get off the phone, so I told her she wasn't getting my credit card, and to please send me something in the mail. "Impossible," she said. "When is a good time to call back?" I said the first thing that came to my mind, which was "May", and she hung up abruptly.

About a week later, I got another letter in the mail asking me to pay up, and last night that familiar number appeared in my caller ID. This time though, I didn't answer it. I wonder if the BSO realizes it's telemarketers are acting like financial bounty hunters?

Anyway, I'd advise Consumerist readers to think twice before making a BSO ticket purchase online...

We have a mini-subscription to the New York Philharmonic and used to constantly receive solicitation calls from the "Friends of the New York Philharmonic." They had our Grandcentral number, and each time they called, we'd ask to be taken us off their lists before blocking the number. Those sneaky audiophiles, they'd call back from a different number and pretend we'd never requested anything other than another call. We must have received well over ten calls before they finally realized they were talking to a stingy blogger.

The experience was annoying enough to keep us from ever being friends with the New York Philharmonic, even if they give us their Cool Ranch Doritos and invite us over to play Grand Theft Auto. No, they blew that chance. Take note, symphony orchestras, your pushy tactics won't win you any friends.

The broader lesson is to be very careful when donating to any organization. Donating is the fastest way to put your name, number, and address on a slew of annoying solicitation lists. If you choose to give, give anonymously.

(Photo: Getty)

Although it won't affect other cases, the RIAA was handed a small smackdown this week when a U.S. district judge rejected their request for a summary judgement, and ruled that putting song files in a shared directory was not enough proof that infringement had occurred.

The judge said that the RIAA "must prove that the songs were actually downloaded," which is not a distinction past judges have made. Whether or not this ruling will cause other judges to look at the RIAA's future claims in a different light remains to be seen, however.

Wake's ruling pretty much contradicts many of the legal arguments the RIAA has presented in those peer-to-peer lawsuits the organization has brought against individual users. However, not that many cases actually make it to court, mainly because defendants often opt for settling for a few thousand dollars instead of shouldering expenses for a jaunt through the civil legal system.

Here's something interesting for you guys.

You may have seen ads for Bose ear buds or "In Ear" phones or whatever they call them; the little buggers retail for a hefty $99 a pair.

Their main claim to fame is supposed to be great sound and superior comfort.

Unfortunately, Bose's idea of comfort is, shall we say, a little undermined by the fact that their ear buds transmit static shocks to your inner ear!

That's right. If you take these for a walk - something ear bud wearers might CONCEIVABLY do - you can discover this shocking design flaw for yourself.

I contacted Bose to find out wassup with dis, and here's what they said:

We have received observations from a few customers that mild electrical shocks have been transmitted through their headsets. We have investigated these cases and found them to be related to environmental causes such as customers walking on carpeting, wearing clothing that discharges static electricity (wool, etc), or even using exercise equipment such as treadmills. Low humidity in the air can also make it more likely that you will receive shocks from objects such as doorknobs, clothing, other people, and electronic equipment. Static charges discharged through the headset will not cause any harm, and do not indicate an issue with the headset itself.

Well, excuse me, but I've never received static shocks from any other ear buds or headphones I've ever used, so I consider this an issue with Bose ear buds. And no, the shocks are NOT pleasant...

Check it out!

Jerry Danzig

NYC

(photo:The Joy Of The Mundane)

From AtEaseWeb.com (a Radiohead fansite):

Radiohead purchased ads in print and on radio to promote the sales of their concert tickets on Ticketmaster, but after those tickets are sold out on Ticketmaster, customers using the Ticketmaster website see a page with options with the "Find Tickets" link directing customers to TicketsNow, which is listed as Ticketmaster's "partner site." However, TicketsNow is a secondary ticket seller owned by Ticketmaster.

Ticketnews.com reveals that a source close to the situation, who requested anonymity, a TicketsNow executive helped assist with the sale of more than $1 million worth of Radiohead tickets on the TicketsNow website, which at a margin of 25 percent allowed TicketsNow to generate a gross of more than $250,000 from the deal.

What do you think? Should Ticketmaster be profiting off of ticket reselling?

Ticketmaster scalps Radiohead tickets [AtEastWeb] (Thanks, Clayton!)

Yet another reason not to buy DRM music. They are telling us that we have to burn our music to CD format since no additional computers or devices can be authorized after August 31, 2008. So let's see. Burn to CD, then rip said CD to MP3. Couldn't they just give us a tool to do it for us, just this once?

MSN Music is constantly striving to provide you, our user, with the most compelling music experience that we can. We want to tell you about an upcoming change to our support service to ensure you have a seamless experience with the music you've downloaded from MSN Music.

As you may recall from a November 14, 2006 mail, we entered into a new partnership for music downloads. The Zune Marketplace can be accessed directly from any MSN Music artist page and offers users thousands of tracks for users to download individually or with a season pass subscription. You can still come to MSN Music to find all the latest news and previews of your favorite artists and songs, but in order to buy music, we'll take you to our partners at the Zune Marketplace.

With the launch of our partnership with Zune Marketplace, we closed the MSN Music store and stopped selling music directly from MSN Music. However, we have continued to offer assistance and support for existing songs that you've purchased from MSN Music, including help to transfer songs that you've purchased to additional computers and MSN Music compatible devices.

I am writing to let you know that as of August 31, 2008, Microsoft will change the level of support to be offered for music purchased directly from MSN Music prior to November 14, 2006. As of August 31, 2008, we will no longer be able to support the retrieval of license keys for the songs you purchased from MSN Music or the authorization of additional computers. License keys already obtained as of August 31, 2008 will continue to allow you to listen to songs on all the computers that you previously authorized for service.

We wanted to send out this notification well in advance to remind you to backup your music and to provide you sufficient time to confirm license keys for the songs you've purchased from MSN Music.

This is also a good time to remind you that you can back up and secure your music by burning your purchased songs and playlists to CD. With Windows Media Player, you can burn your own Audio CDs from the music stored in your library. Complete instructions for this can be found at MSN Music online help.

Please take this opportunity to make sure you have the licenses you need to access your music. As a friendly reminder, please remember that the MSN Music service allows you to authorize up to 5 computers for songs purchased from MSN Music. You must have licenses for the songs on each authorized computer, in order to be able to play the songs successfully. If you have already played a given song on a computer, then you have successfully obtained the license key for that song. MSN Music keys do not expire. If you intend to transfer a previously downloaded song to a new computer (or an existing computer with a new operating system, such as an upgrade from Windows XP to Windows Vista) within the maximum allowed limit of 5 computers, please do so before August 31, 2008. You will need to obtain a license key for each of your songs downloaded from MSN Music on any new computer, and you must do so before August 31, 2008. If you attempt to transfer your songs to additional computers after August 31, 2008, those songs will not successfully play.

If you have additional questions about this process or any other questions about playing your music, please visit MSN Music online help for more information or feel free to contact our Technical Support representatives for assistance, prior to the August 31, 2007 date.

I'd like to personally thank you for your continued support of MSN Music and encourage you to send us your feedback and suggestions about how we can continue to improve the MSN Music experience.

Sincerely,
Rob Bennett
General Manager, MSN Entertainment & Video Services

In March, a court told EMI it couldn't demand that MP3tunes turn over all the music stored by customers on its servers. Robertson writes on his corporate blog that the request is absurd:

Files are not MP3tunes' possessions any more than the contents of a safety deposit box are owned by the bank that houses them. The storage provided by MP3tunes is the user's own space. A Locker is empty when someone opens an account and that customer decides what files are placed into their Locker. All files are stored at the request of the user. People who choose to utilize remote storage should be guaranteed the same level of privacy they have for the files stored on their local hard disk.

As you may be aware, the major record label EMI has sued MP3tunes, claiming our service is illegal. You can read about the case here. Much is at stake — if you don't have the right to store your own music online then you won't have the right to store ebooks, videos and other digital products as well. The notion of ownership in the 21st century will evaporate. The idea of ownership is important to me and I want to make sure I have that right and my kids do too.

"Court Ruling Denies EMI Access to Millions of Personal MP3 Files" [MIchael Robertson]

My nephew asked me to order May Day tickets for him since all the surrounding TM outlets are no longer TM agents so I agreed to do so. He wanted 3 lawn tickets priced at $13 each and he knew there would be fees so he collected $25 from each of his friends to cover them. I told him that I doubted that he had collected enough but we pressed on and placed the order. As you can see from the attached image, we paid 172% i fees which brought our $39 tickets to $106.20. What a sickening feeling to know that TM engages is such thievery and there's only one thing you can do about it. Don't go. A tip of the hat for Pearl Jam for spending years boycotting TM for the excessive fees they were charging even if it resulted in hurting Pearl Jam more than TM. Sincerely, Brent

"Official Dr Pepper Press Release" [Blogspot]

Google is like the elephant that never forgets... and it knows all of your personal information. Do you trust it not to be "evil?" Or is Google just a nice name for "Big Brother?" Let's not forget how they bowed to Chinese government demands that Chinese users be prevented from seeing certain search results, like information about the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre.

Sony is a member of former Worst Company in America winner, the RIAA. When its not fake blogging, it can be found installing a rootkit on your computer and finding lots of ways to void your warranty.

This is a post in our Worst Company In America 2008 series. Keep track of all the goings on at consumerist.com/tag/worst-company-in-america/

STILL OPEN FOR VOTING: Ticketmaster vs Wachovia, Facebook vs The American Arbitration Association, Comcast vs Menu Foods
(Photo:Jeff Sanquist)

Lawyers who have represented artists such as The Rolling Stones, Van Halen, and Christina Aguilera say artists and managers are upset that they haven't seen any of the settlement money the RIAA received after suing the popular file-sharing services. According to the New York Post, the artists are "girding for battle with their music overlords," who respond that they have "started the process" of figuring out how to share the money, most of which was received seven years ago in a settlement with Napster. The RIAA also claims that there isn't actually that much money available after subtracting legal fees. Whoops.

"INFRINGEMENT!" [New York Post]
"RIAA Keeps Settlement Money, Artists May Sue" [TorrentFreak](Thanks to Smitherd and Jim!)
(Photo: D.S.B.)

Ticketmaster's inability to fix their system allows scalpers to buy up all the tickets for a concert within minutes, depriving fans of their chance to get a ticket for a fair price. On top of that, Ticketmaster routinely obtains sole vendor relationships with venues, so that even the initial ticket prices are inflated.

For their part, Wachovia profited in millions by allowing scammers to use stolen identities to drain money from customers' accounts with unsigned checks, despite receiving thousands of warnings about the fraud.

Choose the greater of two evils.

This is a post in our Worst Company In America 2008 series. Keep track of all the goings on at consumerist.com/tag/worst-company-in-america/
STILL OPEN FOR VOTING: Facebook vs The American Arbitration Association, Comcast vs Menu Foods

Ars Tech reprinted Microsoft's letter:

We wanted to provide you with an update on your order status. Due to some issues in our fulfillment center there remains a chance we will miss getting your Zune to you by February 14th. We are working hard to get your order to you as quickly as possible and we currently plan to ship your Zune within the next 3-4 days. Once your order is in transit, we will send you a shipping confirmation with a link for tracking.

Our goal is to provide a smooth customer experience for ordering, customization, and delivery. We sincerely apologize for not meeting that goal in this specific case. We will be refunding the entire amount of your order, which you should be able to see on your credit/debit card within 7-10 days. We hope you love your Zune and that you will accept our sincere apology.

If you have additional questions, please call 1.877.GET.ZUNE. For fastest service, press 5 then press 1 and have your order information ready.

The Zune Originals Team

Microsoft says "sorry" with free Valentine's Zune 80 players [Ars Technica]

Ticketmaster won an injunction in October barring RMG from accessing their services, but RMG is countersuing, claiming that Ticketmaster is an illegal monopoly. We're torn because Ticketmaster is an illegal monopoly, but $195 is way too much to pay for tickets to the Police.

Man claims agency helps scalpers horde tickets for Hannah, Police, sports [AP]
(Photo: AFP/Getty Images)
PREVIOUSLY: Why Do Ticketmaster Events Sell Out Instantly?

"I will investigate this issue and get back to you as soon as I get the facts. Since its Friday it will probably be early next week [hopefully Monday].

I will tell you that Don Pitts is no longer with Gibson and has not been with us for some time.

I have no personal knowledge about this issue and I personally approve all promotions for the company. We have a formal system where any agent of Gibson needs to present a promotion, its benefits and its cost. This then needs to be approved by a least two people before it comes to my desk. We do take these commitments seriously, and we have very strict internal processes to insure we deliver on our promises.

Regardless, I will get to the bottom of this and we will get you what was legitimately promised.

I do not know who you talked to other than attempting to contact Don, but we do have people on the phone 24 hours a day, seven days a week to solve any Gibson related issue [1-800-4-GIBSON]. While they do not have the authority to send you $10,000 worth of gear on the spot they are literally less than a minute from my office and should/could have resolved this in a very short period of time. If you had an unsatisfactory conversation with anyone else at Gibson, let me know so we can insure that this will not happen in the future.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to address this problem."

Henry E. Juszkiewicz
Chief Executive Officer
Gibson Guitar Corp.
309 Plus Park

(Thanks to Mosten!)

RELATED
"Gibson Screws Musician Out Of $10,000 Worth Of Equipment"
(Photo: Getty)

When Tonedeff finally reached Gibson (they never called or emailed him after he won), Pitts told him to go online and pick out what he wanted. He picked out a Baldwin piano. Pitts wrote back, "Baldwin is the only division that's not part of the deal..." So Tonedeff picked out a list of guitars, using Sam Ash and Guitar Center to check prices because Pitt/Gibson wouldn't provide a price list. Pitt responded with revised prices that were at least 50% higher, reducing Tonedeff's prize list by half. After some back and forth on "suggested retail price" versus "actual price," Tonedeff gave up and opted instead to pick a single item, the most expensive he could find that came in under the $10k mark. Pitt just stopped talking to him at that point.

We're not sure if Gibson thinks it's okay to bail on their promise because Tonedeff doesn't play rock music (suspiciously, they never followed through on a promised promotional photo shoot either), or if they never intended to give any winning artist the prize package. But it's clear that they're doing everything they can to give the middle finger to the winner of a contest they supposedly "sponsored."

(Thanks to Chris!)

"[RANT] Gibson Hates Hip Hop." [QN5 Blog]

Microsoft's Zune actually came in second place, but when you compare price and battery life, the Sansa View is the better value.

• Apple iPod Touch - great sound and interface
• Microsoft Zune - great sound, great UI but hypersensitive
• SanDisk Sansa View - half the price of the Touch, navigation mimics traditional iPods, great sound
• Creative Zen - large screen but requires too much button mashing
• Samsung P2 - touchscreen is "finicky", sound is "flat"

What's particularly nice about the service is Last.fm has arranged to pay artists directly every time a song is streamed, and independent artists are treated as equals to those stuck under big labels.

We already have licenses with the various royalty collection societies, but now unsigned artists can put their music on Last.fm and be paid directly for every song played. This helps to level the playing-field—now you can make music, upload it to Last.fm and earn money for each play. If you make music, you can sign up to participate for free.

We're not printing money to pay for this—but the business model is simple enough: we are paying artists and labels a share of advertising revenue from the website.

In December, Nintendo had its biggest month ever with the hot-selling game system. Holiday shoppers bought 1.4 million Wiis, according to sales data released Thursday by the NPD Group. The Wii's success helped drive the video game industry to a record-setting $17.9 billion in sales, about 43% higher than 2006's $12.5 billion, which was also a record.

What's up, music? Video games are kicking your butt.

Gaming industry sales grow by 43% in 2007 [USAToday]
(Photo:largeprime)

The P2P-turned-legit subscription service announced this morning that it will begin selling unprotected copies of its entire catalog in MP3 format beginning in the second quarter of 2008. Users of the service will be able to buy individual DRM-free tracks and albums, but Napster's subscription service will remain unchanged. The company hailed the announcement as the first subscription service "featuring major label content" to announce plans to sell unprotected MP3s.

Sort of makes you wonder: Couldn't they have started doing this, like, 7 years ago?

Napster goes back to MP3s [Ars Technica]

Yahoo! Music was painless to cancel, but Napster took a half hour:

Napster
What a pain. There's no way to cancel online, so I called the cancellation number (800.839.4210) and waited on hold for about 20 minutes listening to messages like "Did you know that your Napster subscription lets you access over 5 million tracks? Please hold, and a customer service representative will be with you shortly."

A woman came on the line and asked me a bunch of questions (Was this my first call? Could I confirm my email? Is there a phone number on which she could call me back in case something goes wrong with the call? Can I hold again?). Granted, this is two days after Christmas, but still, I wasn't too happy at how long this was taking.

When she took me off hold again, I told her I wanted to cancel because 2007 was the year 3 of the major labels started selling music without DRM. Back on hold.

She came back — presumably after consulting a manager or the internet to find out what DRM is — and then responded, "I don't understand, because all of our music contains DRM." Back on hold. This time, I told her I wanted to cancel because the files were DRMed, and she finally canceled my subscription.

Total time for cancellation: 30 minutes and 32 seconds

Customers "can feel confident" their songs will play on whatever music device they buy in 2008, said Pete Baltaxe, Amazon's director of digital music.

"We're very pleased with where we are," Baltaxe said of customer adoption of the music service, though he would not provide data on downloads to date or site traffic.

U.S. album sales were down 14 percent in late November from a year earlier, according to Nielsen SoundScan data, as a growing number of fans buy individual songs online or use free file-sharing.

Digital music revenue has been growing in the double-digit percentages, but the total take is not enough to make up for the shortfall in compact disc sales.

Our favorite line is one of their warning signs that you might be buying a pirated product: "Compilation CDs that could only exist in the dreams of a music fan." In other words, "A product you would actually want, that is equal in value to what we're charging you for it."

"RIAA Fake News!" [LiveLeak]

The authors, Dierdre Mulligan and Aaron Perzanowski, point out that unless Sony deliberately tried to harm its customers, it neglected to properly evaluate its third-party DRM solutions before releasing them to the public—or else it would have been aware of the programs' potential for damage. From pages 1179-80:

Prior to inking the deal to provide XCP to Sony BMG, First4Internet's business focused on content filtering, particularly the automated recognition of pornographic images. Aside from an earlier revision on XCP used by a number of labels on a smattering of pre-release CDs, First4Internet had no apparent expertise or experience in content
protection software.

SunnComm, the company that delivered MediaMax, offered even more cause for concern. The company began as a provider of Elvis impersonation services. After a change in management following a false press release announcing a non-existent $25 million production deal with Warner Brothers, the company purchased a 3.5" floppy disk factory in 2001, displaying a disturbing dearth of technological savvy.

"The Magnificence of the Disaster: Reconstructiong the Sony BMG Rootkit Incident" (PDF) [Berkely Technology Law Journal via BoingBoing]

RELATED
"Universal Music CEO: Record industry can't tell when geeks are lying to us about technology"
Consumerist posts on the Sony Rootkit debacle
(Photo: Getty)

The question was posed in response to two incendiary articles in the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times which argued that improvements in compression technology have made sound quality irrelevant. Slate answered by redefining the question:

If you want the mere gist of music; if you like music wafting in the background; if you want to carry around 1,000 songs in your pocket; if you want to hear a beat and a melody while you jog or ride on the subway—and that's often what any of us want (even me)—then MP3s are plenty good enough. Convenience doesn't merely trump quality; it is quality.

But there are some things that only a really good home stereo, playing well-recorded CDs or vinyl LPs, can give you: the texture of an instrument (the woodiness of a bass, the golden brass of a trumpet, the fleshy skin of a bongo); the bouquet of harmonics that waft from an orchestra (the mingling overtones, the echoes off the concert hall's walls); the breath behind a voice; the warm percussiveness of a Steinway grand; the silky sheen of massed violins; the steely whoosh of brushes on a snare; the undistorted clarity of everything sung, blown, strummed, bowed, plucked, and smacked, all at once—in short, the sense that real musicians are playing real instruments in a real space right before you.

In Defense of Audiophiles [Slate]
(AP Photo/Hans Punz)

Walmart's online music store ditched DRM back in August, and one assumes that strategy has been more successful than their old Microsoft "PlaysForSure" store that sold music that wouldn't work on an iPod or even a Zune.

Go, free market, go!

Amazon and Wal-Mart unwittingly team up against DRM [Ars Technica via BoingBoing]
(Photo:Ms. Jessica)

Copyright law says the RIAA can elect to seek statutory damages "instead of actual damages and profit." The law also says that $750 is the minimum amount per infringement if you go the statutory route, which explains where the RIAA came up with that ridiculous figure.

But the defendant is claiming that $750 per song counts as an unconstitutional violation of due process because the figure is unreasonably high when compared against the actual value of a downloaded song—and that she should pay the wholesale price per song, which she estimates at 70 cents. By her argument, the $750-per-song fee is 1,071 times higher than the actual damages suffered by the RIAA.

From the judge's order:

[Plaintiff] shall set forth with more specificity the categories of expenses they incurred in making the song recordings, such as, for example, royalties. Plaintiffs shall also state with specificity which categories of expenses, if any, (a) they are unable to quantify or (b) they cannot quantify without unreasonable burden or expense—and in the latter event, they shall explain why.

"RIAA Must Divulge Expenses-Per-Download" [Slashdot]

RELATED
pdf of electronic filing of the judge's order [Pike & Fischer]
"§ 504. Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits" [Cornell University Law School]
(Photo: Getty)

I have read many comments and articles that I had my hard drive replaced after I learned of my suit. This could not be further from the truth. What most people don't know, if I did have my hard drive replaced after I was served the initial complaint to this suit, that would be considered spoliation of evidence, which is a criminally prosecutable offense. All the following dates, keep in mind so you can see the timeline yourself.

The day MediaSentry (the RIAAs 'investigative' company) said I was caught illegally sharing songs over KaZaa was February 21, 2005. My computer crashed approximately 2 weeks later. The only reason I know why it crashed is this: my boys were playing a video game and in the middle of some epic battle on their game, the computer froze up, then the screen went black, and in my child's frustration, the side of the computer was smacked. After that, the computer would not load and I would receive error messages.

I brought my computer into Best Buy for repairs on March 7, 2005. Remember, I brought it in for repairs under the extended warranty, not to have the hard drive replaced. And if anyone who has used a large chain electronic store to repair their electrical equipment knows, these companies do not replace hard drives on the whim of the customer if they have to pay for the hard drive replacement covered under warranty. They try to do whatever is cheaper for the company, which normally means fixing the issues with the hard drive. With my hard drive, the issues couldn't be fixed so Best Buy, not me but Best Buy, made the decision to replace the hard drive.

The RIAA didn't subpoena my personal information from Charter until late April 2005, almost 2 months AFTER my hard drive was replaced. As with all RIAA subpoenas to ISPs, I was not notified of the court date when the subpoena was issued. I was only notified after Charter Communications was served with the subpoena. This letter came late April 2005, again 2 months AFTER my hard drive was replaced. I didn't officially hear from the RIAA until late August 2005, almost 6 months AFTER my hard drive was replaced. The lawsuit itself wasn't officially started until April 2006, over 1 year AFTER my hard drive was replaced.

As you can see, I did not replace my hard drive to hide any evidence of anything. The replacement wasn't my choice and I would have to be psychic to know 2 months in advance my personal information was going to be subpoenaed and a year later, I would be sued.

Yes, all this information was given to the jury during the trial. The main problem that arose concerning my hard drive was the date I gave my attorney for when the hard drive was replaced. I didn't check the records for Best Buy before I gave my hard drive to Mr. Toder, so when I told him the hard drive had been replaced, the date I gave was January or February of 2004. Obviously, after we received all the information from Best Buy, we saw that the hard drive was replaced in March 2005. We also found out I didn't even own the computer until March 2004, one month after the date I told my attorney.

This story raises some interesting questions about the implications of surrendering broken hard drives to retailers like Best Buy. Interesting questions, and scary ones, too.

Jammie Thomas: her story in her own words [p2pnet](Thanks, David!)

What do you think about OiNK being shut down?
Trent: I'll admit I had an account there and frequented it quite often. At the end of the day, what made OiNK a great place was that it was like the world's greatest record store. Pretty much anything you could ever imagine, it was there, and it was there in the format you wanted. If OiNK cost anything, I would certainly have paid, but there isn't the equivalent of that in the retail space right now. iTunes kind of feels like Sam Goody to me.

I don't feel cool when I go there. I'm tired of seeing John Mayer's face pop up. I feel like I'm being hustled when I visit there, and I don't think their product is that great. DRM, low bit rate, etc. Amazon has potential, but none of them get around the issue of pre-release leaks. And that's what's such a difficult puzzle at the moment. If your favorite band in the world has a leaked record out, do you listen to it or do you not listen to it? People on those boards, they're grateful for the person that uploaded it — they're the hero. They're not stealing it because they're going to make money off of it; they're stealing it because they love the band. I'm not saying that I think OiNK is morally correct, but I do know that it existed because it filled a void of what people want.

Trent Reznor and Saul Williams Discuss Their New Collaboration, Mourn OiNK [NY Mag]
(Photo:AdamL212)

For comparison's sake, Verizon costs about the same, while Sprint apparently charges $0.99. iPhone users can download songs via the iTunes store for $0.99.

AT&T, Napster To Unveil Direct Mobile Music Download [CNNMoney]

The Forbes journalist writes, "But more surprising is that fans chose to steal music they could legally download for any price they choose," but it's not clear whether that's the analyst's opinion or the writer's. At any rate, we think it's overstating the issue. Even the analyst admits that it's not proof that Radiohead's fans are a mutinous lot of anarchists:

Garland argues that this kind of digital theft is more a matter of habit than of economics. "People don't know Radiohead's site. They do know their favorite BitTorrent site and they use it every day," he says. "It's quite simply easier for folks to get the illegal version than the legal version."

But for Doug Lichtman, an intellectual property professor at the UCLA School of Law, the volume of piracy following In Rainbows' release erodes the success of Radiohead's innovation. "If the community rejects even forward-thinking experiments like this one, real harm is done to the next generation of experimentation and change," he says.

Lichtman speculates that users may have interpreted Radiohead's offer as a giveaway and so felt more comfortable downloading the album from other free sources. Fans may also have been turned off by the band's requirement that users register by providing their name and e-mail and postal addresses.

"Free? Steal It Anyway" [Forbes via Slashdot]
(Photo: Getty)

Plug in your work headphones and get ready to rock out classic-easy-listening-style.

Gate Agent Plays Ukelele [YouTube] (Thanks to Brent!)

For example, the revamped SanDisk Sansa View has double the memory and a slightly bigger screen than the new iPod Nano, plus an FM tuner, microphone, and expansion slot, and it costs the same amount. Is it as nice looking? Meh, it's getting hard to tell at this point, if you value functionality over form. Even the Zune—with a capacity and price equal to the iPod—is starting to look decent, with its well-designed interface, strong styling, and broader format support.

The one thing you'll miss out on is the ease-of-use of being locked into the iTunes/iPod symbiotic relationship. Depending on how comfortable you are with figuring out a new syncing set-up, this may or may not be an issue for you.

The article brings up another potential drawback, depending on how you look at it: you won't find anywhere near the same aftermarket support when it comes to accessories and cases. But then again, if the product is made properly, it doesn't really need a case, whereas digital audio players that are designed to wear when working out usually come with straps or attachments.

(Disclaimer: we rely on a screenless Shuffle, which has its own obvious drawbacks, and our Nokia phone, which would be perfect if not for the battery drain.)

"Don't want an iPod? Lots of choices available" [Reuters]
(Photo: Getty)

"This is what can happen if you don't settle," RIAA attorney Richard Gabriel told reporters outside the courthouse, according to Wired. "I think we have sent a message we are willing to go to trial."

RIAA Jury Finds Minnesota Woman Liable for Piracy, Awards $222,000 [Wired Threat Level]