RIAA Declares War!!

The RIAA announced today that they will be scouring P2P services and bringing lawsuits against the worst offenders. I may not agree with most of their tactics, However Downloading music off Limewire/Kazza/etc, is illegal no matter how you look at it.

t's one thing to grab a couple tracks, but when people have gigs of stolen music on their drives, that's a little much. Yeah, the music industry can be bastards, but that doesn't mean that they're completely wrong. They have a point. If they have to make an example out of some of them, so it gives another potential pirate a moment of pause before freely downloading from Kazaa, then so be it.

Hello iTunes Music Store.

See the story below:

Music labels to sue hundreds of music sharers

WASHINGTON (AP) � The music industry disclosed aggressive plans Wednesday for an unprecedented escalation in its fight against Internet piracy, threatening to sue hundreds of individual computer users who illegally share music files online.
The Recording Industry Association of America, citing substantial sales declines, said it will begin Thursday to search Internet file-sharing networks to identify users who offer "substantial" collections of MP3-format music files for downloading. It expects to file at least several hundred lawsuits seeking financial damages within eight to 10 weeks.

Executives for the RIAA, the Washington-based lobbying group that represents major labels, would not say how many songs on a user's computer will qualify for a lawsuit. The new campaign comes just weeks after U.S. appeals court rulings requiring Internet providers to identify subscribers suspected of illegally sharing music and movie files.

The RIAA's president, Carey Sherman, said tens of millions of Internet users of popular file-sharing software after Thursday will expose themselves to "the real risk of having to face the music."

"It's stealing. It's both wrong and illegal," Sherman said. Alluding to the court decisions, Sherman said Internet users who believe they can hide behind an alias online were mistaken. "You are not anonymous," Sherman said. "We're going to begin taking names."

Critics accused the RIAA of resorting to heavy-handed tactics likely to alienate millions of Internet file-sharers.

"This latest effort really indicates the recording industry has lost touch with reality completely," said Fred von Lohmann, a lawyer for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "Does anyone think more lawsuits are going to be the answer? Today they have declared war on the American consumer."

Sherman disputed that consumers, who are gradually turning to legitimate Web sites to buy music legally, will object to the industry's latest efforts against pirates.

"You have to look at exactly who are your customers," he said. "You could say the same thing about shoplifters � are you worried about alienating them? All sorts of industries and retailers have come to the conclusion that they need to be able to protect their rights. We have come to the same conclusion."

Mike Godwin of Public Knowledge, a consumer group that has challenged broad crackdowns on file-sharing networks, said Wednesday's announcement was appropriate because it targeted users illegally sharing copyrighted files.

"I'm sure it's going to freak them out," Godwin said. "The free ride is over." He added: "I wouldn't be surprised if at least some people engaged in file-trading decide to resist and try to find ways to thwart the litigation strategy."

The RIAA said its lawyers will file lawsuits initially against people with the largest collections of music files they can find online. U.S. copyright laws allow for damages of $750 to $150,000 for each song offered illegally on a person's computer, but Sherman said the RIAA will be open to settlement proposals from defendants.

"We have no hard and fast rule on how many files you have to be distributing ... to come within our radar screen," Sherman said. "We will go after the worst offenders first."

The RIAA said it expected to file "at least several hundred lawsuits" within eight to 10 weeks but will continue to file lawsuits afterward on a regular basis.

I would say this is the ultimate stupidity for the recording industry, which means it doesnt surprise me in the least...

Hello, these same music sharers are the CUSTOMER... you dont declare war on your customer and expect them to keep coming to you money in hand... Unless of course you decide to hijack them...

Never mind that the sinking record revenues are far more due to a combination of the absolute crap the stuff into a CD for an outrageous amount of money, along with complete mismanagement of talent and finances.

I would say that it is indeed time for a full fledged boycott of all music labels.

Let the record labels drown in bankruptcy.

I would say this is the ultimate stupidity for the recording industry, which means it doesnt surprise me in the least...

Hello, these same music sharers are the CUSTOMER... you dont declare war on your customer and expect them to keep coming to you money in hand... Unless of course you decide to hijack them...

Never mind that the sinking record revenues are far more due to a combination of the absolute crap the stuff into a CD for an outrageous amount of money, along with complete mismanagement of talent and finances.

I would say that it is indeed time for a full fledged boycott of all music labels.

Let the record labels drown in bankruptcy.

Bravo. *clap , clap , clap* Couldn't have said it better myself.

meh. bunch of jerkballs, they are. I know the kid at Michigan Tech that the RIAA went after a few months ago for file sharing (they sued him for $90 million or something), and it was an absolute mess. they messed up a kid's life, alienated the hell out of a ton of their target market (college students), and wasted a lot of money on what basically amounted to really bad publicity.

besides, who in their right mind sues college students? I don't know a whole lot of college kids with $90 in the bank, much less $90 million. the RIAA is scared, and they're grasping at straws. it's the stupidity of the desperate.

Wayne Rosso, president of the West Indies-based Grokster file-trading service, said the RIAA's tactics are "nothing short of lunacy."

"I can't wait to see what happens when a congressman or senator's child is sued," he said. "They've taken leave of their senses. They lost their [Los Angeles] lawsuit against us and they're pissed about it, so their answer is to sue their customers.

"We know this piracy is wrong and can't go on, but for God's sake, they won't work with us under any circumstances," he added.

The RIAA today also released documents showing that its critics have expressed support for tracking down individual pirates.

One document quoted Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) attorney Fred von Lohmann as saying: "the Copyright Act, like most of our laws, has been built on the premise that you go after the guy who actually breaks the law."

Von Lohmann said he stands by the quote, which came from an interview earlier this year with Techfocus.org, though he added that the RIAA's decision is misguided.

"If they think they can sue 57 million Americans into submission, I think they're going to find it much harder than they think," von Lohmann said.

www.washingtonpost.com...

By the way, did I mention BOYCOTT yet?

Granted the RIAA's tactics are bit primitive, However is there a better way to attack the P2P networks. The reason why the RIAA, hasn't won a successful campaign against Kazza, Limewire, ETC, is becasue there is really no central body to attack.

I personally see no alternative, they can't just lower the prices of cd's. How would you expect the RIAA to recover from all the revenue already lost? Plus why would you pay for a cd when you can just download it for FREE (no matter the cost).

Its an interesting topic, But is there a better way to go about this?

For me this doesn't affect me to much, casue I love my itunes music store.

Even though I download music... I still buy a lot of CD's. I download a CD if I like it enough I will always go out and buy it. Hell I dont have space to put my cd's anymore.

How would you expect the RIAA to recover from all the revenue already lost? Posted by Twisted Vertex

What have they lost??? The labels never invested any significant amount of money in the talent in the first place! Look at the contracts, if a musician gets a $20 million contract, out of that contract, the MUSICIAN has to pay for the pressing of the CDs, the distribution, promotion, advertising, ect. Out of that $20 Million, he might be lucky to take home $1 Million or less, and there are several cases where after signing a contract a musician OWES the labels money!

That sounds like endentured servitude to me.

As for the cost of the CD? Why pay $18.99 for 1 maybe 2 songs and 10+ crap songs? With mass production, the total cost for production is probably $0.50 per disc... And the Artist is lucky to see $1 a disc. The remainder goes into the Fat Cat Label pockets.

all I gotta say is...

HARR!




[Edited on 26-6-2003 by Fury]

I dont download, but it is absolute loonacy for the labels to declare war on thier customers and still remain profitable.

What does piss me off is that they are leading the charge in passing legistlation to completely destroy our right to privacy on the internet. Sure, right now its just geared to filesharing, but look at the law:

If you get someones IP address, all you have to do is go to a county clerk, sign an affadavit ACCUSING that person of having infringed on your copyright (you DO NOT have to show evidence of the alledged infringement, or even explain what the infringement was on), pay a $30 fee, and walk out with a court order to release any and all personal information on a person.

This is completely against Due Process as guaranteed by the constitution, has absolutely no judicial oversight, therefore the law is being taken into the labels hands, which THEY STRICTLY DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO DO SO.

What if a stalker or an abusive ex wants to use this law to hunt someone down?

Let them, I sharpened my katana in case they knock on my door.

Yesterday there was a Dutch idols jury member on the radio. Well you obviously know idols is just another desperet attempt by the music industry to make some money on dumb kids that have no idea of what contract they had to sign.

Anyway that guy agreed that downloading of music is actually good for the industry. He also said that the 99 censt Itunes is charging it's members is even too expensive.

If they would lower the prize of downloading music to 99 cents per hour downloading, the industry would make more money than is has ever done.

Of course kazaa and other p2p programs have to be illigalized and removed, otherwise people still can get the songs for free.

If the would lauch a website/program that charges me 99 cents per hour, and guaranty me a fast download speed, perfect, cd quality music, count me in

With this war they are digging their own grave...


[Edited on 26-6-2003 by Zion Mainframe]

this is what happens when we computer geeks tell everyone else about something cool, like the internet.

I say it's time to design something new.

Originally posted by IronDragon
How would you expect the RIAA to recover from all the revenue already lost? Posted by Twisted Vertex

What have they lost??? The labels never invested any significant amount of money in the talent in the first place! Look at the contracts, if a musician gets a $20 million contract, out of that contract, the MUSICIAN has to pay for the pressing of the CDs, the distribution, promotion, advertising, ect. Out of that $20 Million, he might be lucky to take home $1 Million or less, and there are several cases where after signing a contract a musician OWES the labels money!

That sounds like endentured servitude to me.

As for the cost of the CD? Why pay $18.99 for 1 maybe 2 songs and 10+ crap songs? With mass production, the total cost for production is probably $0.50 per disc... And the Artist is lucky to see $1 a disc. The remainder goes into the Fat Cat Label pockets.

exactly. fat cat owners of the system old boys' club bastard reptiles.
endentured servitude indeed. programmed since birth to except all existing systems as the only viable way to survive as a people.
throw off the psychological yoke. rage against the machine.

Originally posted by IronDragon

Look at the contracts, if a musician gets a $20 million contract, out of that contract, the MUSICIAN has to pay for the pressing of the CDs, the distribution, promotion, advertising, ect. Out of that $20 Million, he might be lucky to take home $1 Million or less, and there are several cases where after signing a contract a musician OWES the labels money!

That sounds like endentured servitude to me.

$1 Million is still a lot of money.
It isn't just the record labels.
The whole industry is a rip off.

Originally posted by Leveller

Originally posted by IronDragon

Look at the contracts, if a musician gets a $20 million contract, out of that contract, the MUSICIAN has to pay for the pressing of the CDs, the distribution, promotion, advertising, ect. Out of that $20 Million, he might be lucky to take home $1 Million or less, and there are several cases where after signing a contract a musician OWES the labels money!

That sounds like endentured servitude to me.

$1 Million is still a lot of money.
It isn't just the record labels.
The whole industry is a rip off.

Its not a lot of money when a CD grosses $20-$50 million and you only get $1 million of it, or in some cases, still owe the record labels!

It isn't just the record labels.
The whole industry is a rip off.

Well Said.

What people forget is that a lot of underground artists, or anyone who puts in a bit of effort can exploit file sharing for their own benefit, it's good for some areas of the industry.
And it would be very difficult for them to remove these programs because they come from all over the world, there are lots of different laws about this in different countries.

Well, The RIAA operates like this.....

Lets say a band, lets call them ATS for the sake of the agrument. ATS some how gets in talks with one of the five major record labels.. The Deal is made ATS has come out with five albums in a period of 6-7 years. They are GIVEN a farily large sum of money, this is to be used for such things as, Writting and produciing the music, all the equipment needed...ETC...

Ok so ATS just scored a nice deal with Sony, Where they have to crank out five albums in the period of seven years. Not to bad considering the RIAA used to demand 5 albums in 4 years. On top of this ATS must complete 3 tours, and is given 5 million for all expense..This is all done even before they PRODUCE anything. For each cd sold, ATS then scores 50 cents off each one sold.

Now ATS has just released there first album under Sony records, and have a strong fan base, becasue they had just completed one tour with, lets say Korn, and limp bizkit (for sake of agrument )..The album is released, but sales are very low, casue the cd was thrown onto all major P2P networks. So, instead of reaching a potential of over 3 millions cds, ATS only scores 1.2 million cds. ATS only nets 500,000 dollars in total sales. Sony walks away with a potentional 14,400,000 in total sales...However 43,200,000 is what they could of earned without P2P networks...

Even the Artisit get hurts really bad in this, the artist could of easily netted 1.5 million...But still they more that artist makes for Sony, the bigger percent they get on each CD.

Sure some artist's are for P2P netowrks, espically up and coming aritist's. However already established Bands are more often than not, against P2P networks. Though they are fearful to express themselves, for fear of fans turning on them. So they have the Big Brother do the work, with out destroying their image.

The album is released, but sales are very low, casue the cd was thrown onto all major P2P networks. So, instead of reaching a potential of over 3 millions cds, ATS only scores 1.2 million cds. ATS only nets 500,000 dollars in total sales. Sony walks away with a potentional 14,400,000 in total sales...However 43,200,000 is what they could of earned without P2P networks... Posted by Twisted Vertex

There is ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF that a download translates into a lost sale.

As Ocelot has pointed out, a lot of downloads are to try out a song and decide if it is worth buying. A lot of downloaders do subsequently go buy a CD.

Now, considering that the majority of mass produced crap music that the labels are shoveling down the consumers throats, I guess you could make an arguement that file trading gives the consumers the chance to find out just how badly the rest of the "filler" songs suck, and therefore decide not to waste thier money on a CD.

However, there is NO credible evidence that just because someone downloads a song that person would have bought that CD if he/she didnt download it.

Ok, I agree that nobody on this earth can produce numbers that will give you an exact idea on how much has been lost (or if any). However by simply examining the amount of warez sites, and associated sites, you can concluded that a good portion of people are trying to get out of the whole purchasing of Music/software.

Granted Many people probably do pratice song sampling, similar to Ocelot. However, I believe in those whole topic, we are ignoring the people who completely abuse this network...I know the RIAA is a shady organization, however some action must be taken. The artist is going to stand up and take action, casue it will completly destroy their fan base.

The biggest Problem the RIAA is facing is proving how much they have lost through P2P....Becasue they can't.