File Swappers to RIAA: Download This!

Washington Post ^ | July 6, 2003 | Leslie Walker

[John Jorsett]

The Recording Industry Association of America's announcement on June 25 that it will start tracking down and suing users of file-sharing programs has yet to spook people, say developers of these applications.

"Forget about it, dude -- even genocidal litigation can't stop file sharers," said Wayne Rosso, president of Grokster, one of several systems that allow users to upload and download files -- many of which are unauthorized MP3 copies of songs published by the RIAA's member companies. Rosso said file-trading activity among Grokster users has increased by 10 percent in the past few days. Morpheus, another file-trading program, has seen similar growth.

Maybe MP3 downloaders are interpreting the recording industry's threat -- an escalation from its earlier strategy of targeting file-sharing developers -- as a sort of "last call" announcement. Starting June 26, RIAA President Cary Sherman said in a news conference, the group would collect evidence against consumers illegally trading files of copyrighted music, with lawsuits to follow in a couple of months.

[visualops]

The pigopolists continue to bite the hands that feed them.
If it wasn't for the fact that they also hold the production and distribution monopolies they'd be dead already.

[Question_Assumptions]

Of course Linkin Park and others are refusing to sell anything but full albums on Apple's iTunes store or they are avoiding putting their music on the service at all. Apple has a model for legal music sales and the artists are making themselves part of the problem by avoiding a good solution.

[Astronaut]

Avoiding iTunes is pure greed and stupidity. Would a so-called "artist" rather make 99¢ for one song, or make nothing when people illegally copy and share the same song on another service? Apple has the music distribution model of the future, and "artists" should be thanking them for it.

[friendly]

The pigopolists continue to bite the hands that feed them. If it wasn't for the fact that they also hold the production and distribution monopolies they'd be dead already.

The anti-American, degenerate "artists" who suddenly become mega-capitalists are getting their just rewards. The music industry is on a BIG decline.

I especially love the little plastic CDs that cost 25 cents to make that sell for $17.00. Serves the greedy vermin right. If they think all of this is going to work, the RIAA is lost in space.

[vikzilla]

I would love to buy dozens and dozens of new CD's. At 5$ a piece that could be done. At 17$ a piece it won't be done. The industry needs to realize that if they give the public what they want at the right price, the stealing will stop. It just easier to buy new. Just not at those prices.

[Nick Danger]

How do you spend your life in Hollywood, around the music business, without learning the lesson of Reefer Madness?

It is a basic principle of the Universe that adolescents and near-adolescents view all threats and warnings from adults as an opportunity to display independence from adult authority. The more you wag your finger at them, the more they wonder what secret pleasure you're trying to keep them from this time.

Tell 'em it will drive them insane. They laugh. Tell them the police will arrest them and throw them in jail. They call the police 'pigs,' and keep right on smokin' the stuff.

Have these RIAA nitwits never been teenagers? This is Reefer Madness all over again. "Booga Booga! It's wrong! It's illegal! We'll come and get you!" This has stopped adolescent sex and drug use how well?

Free rock & roll... might as well be sex or drugs as far as teenagers are concerned. On Monday they get the adults telling them not to screw, on Tuesday they get the adults telling them that weed will rot their brains, and here come these guys to tell them not to download songs from the Internet. Teenagers interpret this as meaning "screwing, smoking dope, and downloading music are forbidden pleasures. Let's go do 'em!"

If the RIAA's target market wasn't so young, you could see them doing this. But as a strategy for changing adolescent behavior, they have hit on the one thing that is guaranteed to create more of what they don't want. Challenging teenagers to be rebellious is like daring a snake to bite you.

[zeugma]

Back when napster was big, I used to share out my own rather massive collection of CD/ripped albums on the days when news articles would come out with Rosen or one of those other bozos making stupid comments about how it was destroying their business.

The RIAA is destroying themselves.

I have more than 19GB of now of my CDs and albums that I've ripped. I really enjoy starting XMMS, and putting it on random play. It is a heck of a lot more convienient for me than it would be to try to do something similar with my collection. I even bought an FM transmitter so I can tune it in on my home stereo.

The recording industry is today's version of the buggy whip manufacturers of the early 1900s. They need to look at what the public wants and provide it, or tehy will get completely run over.

One of the things I thought was interesting about napster was watching what people would download. I have very little 'pop' music, because I don't really like that kind of stuff. Most of it is 'classic rock', big band, classical, blues, bluegrass and early country (pre-60s). I'd see people hit my box when searching for something obscure, then start looking really closely at what I had, and download stuff that was even more obscure, or even just random picks. It didn't seem to fit the profile of what the media was reporting as being the typical napster user.

I've looked into itunes, and think it is closer to the model that will ultimately win out, but at $1/tune, they are still buying into the RIAA arguments too much IMO. 25¢ is probably a better long-term price point, but the problem with that is, the RIAA members won't be making $17/album at that price.

[strela]

"Forget about it, dude -- even genocidal litigation can't stop file sharers," said Wayne Rosso, president of Grokster, one of several systems that allow users to upload and download files -- many of which are unauthorized MP3 copies of songs published by the RIAA's member companies.

Keep whistling past the graveyard, friend. And hide your assets well, because you might very well be living in a refrigerator box under a bridge somewhere when RIAA gets through with you.

RIAA has the perfect right to protect their member's intellectual property. Good for them and bad for those thieves out there who think they have some sort of Constitutional "right" to listen to and trade free music without paying for it.

[visualops]

The fact is; for every malleable, marketable, preened "artist" the industry foists upon us, there are literally hundreds of talented, worthwhile musicians and performers who are ignored by the industry precisely because they are not malleable, aren't pretty, or don't take kindly to someone else's preening. The industry's concerns over the internet have little to do with copyrights and lost profits and everything to do with control. Heaven forbid we should seek out and make our own discoveries, and buy direct from the artist or small independent label.

[visualops]

but the problem with that is, the RIAA members won't be making $17/album at that price

They wouldn't need to.
What has a better cost/profit ratio- producing hard CD's that need to be manufactutred, packaged and distributed (andfactor in retail markup), or making the same songs available on innumerable websites for download?
The RIAA would be making money hand over fist already if they had jumped on Napster et al as a distrbution medium and charged membership fees or pennies per song. Let people try before they buy and compile their own CDs.
One of the most useful aspects of file sharing networks is the opportunity to be exposed to new material and new artists and genres. That equals a bigger audience and more profits.

[visualops]

Don't refer to copyright infringement as theft, it isn't.
The material isn't being "stolen", it's being copied without recompense.

[T Lady]

Well said, Mr. Danger! Well said.

...Not to mention the fact that the majority of the garbage the 'artists' and the RIAA passess off as music isn't worth paying $17-$20 for anyhow. The only saving grace the Recording Industry has in my mind is re-issuing Classic Pop/Rock or R&B Old School on CD; the songs sound much better.

-Regards, T.

[jonathanmo]

Well said...I owned a cd shop recently and all the guys that downloaded stuff NEVER bought new cds...they were always searching for used copies of everything...the people that bought new cds were the non-computer people...the ones who couldn't figure out or take the time to mess with mp3s and burning their own cds...

[longtermmemmory]

(s) and where is the teamster's cut on that 99cents? 99cents does not cover payola.(/s)

[longtermmemmory]

what about the fact that once a person is paid the ORIGINAL copyright fee, after that copyright law stops. Therein lies fair use. This is not about swapping this is about eliminating fair use.

Those that have ripped their cd's are not violating the law. Those that have shared their rips with their neighbors are not violating the law.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

RIAA has the perfect right to protect their member's intellectual property. Good for them and bad for those thieves out there who think they have some sort of Constitutional "right" to listen to and trade free music without paying for it.

As one of the RIAA's clients once said, "The times they are a'changin'."

The current recording industry model made sense and worked in the days when the means of production and distribution of recorded music required a large investment of capital, technical expertise and access to marketing channels. In those days, the recording industry provided an indispensible service to their clients and to their customers, and they deserved their profits.

Technology has changed.

Anybody with a PC, studio software, a sound card and a website can record, mix, publish and distribute music.

The recording industry no longer provides an indispensible service to their clients and to their customers.

Quite the contrary, the RIAA wants all technological innovation to cease so they can continue to collect royalties on other people's work, while cheating the artists out of everything they possibly can at every step of the process.

The RIAA wants all computer hardware crippled so that PCs are nothing more than copyright protection appliances.

If all the RIAA wanted was to collect royalties from downloaders, I would not give a rat's ass.

But that's not what they want. They want to force me to accept crippled technology so they can continue to exploit an anachronstic business model.

Screw them. I don't even listen to music anymore, but I download MP3s whenever the RIAA starts squawking about going after people.

I download them and never listen to them.

Come and get me, you creeps.

[SauronOfMordor]

One of the RIAA's more recent ploys is to try to flood cyberspace with bogus copies of RIAA music, with the bogus cut having something like "you should not steal" repeated N times. The obvious counterploy is for some blogger to post the checksums of the real cuts so that the real can be distinguished from the bogus.

[aruanan]

Don't refer to copyright infringement as theft, it isn't. The material isn't being "stolen", it's being copied without recompense.

And rape in prison isn't rape; it's just being rectally-challenged. Stop with the Clinton word games already.

[Pravious]

I agree that the iTunes store is a good model, but I, too, think the price is too much. Anyone remember when CDs started and the record companies justified their outlandish prices (more than double the price of vinyl) because it was a new medium, and promised the price would come down when CDs caught on? Well, it's 20 years later, and we're still waiting.