Posted on 06/25/2003 6:15:06 PM PDT by jimmccleod
Music Labels Step Up Internet Piracy Hunt
TED BRIDIS
Associated Press
WASHINGTON - The embattled music industry disclosed 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 significant sales declines, said it will begin Thursday to search Internet file-sharing networks to identify music fans who offer "substantial" collections of MP3 song 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 might 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, Cary 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." He said the RIAA plans only to file lawsuits against Internet users in the United States.
"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 are mistaken. "You are not anonymous," Sherman said. "We're going to begin taking names."
Shopping at a Virgin Megastore in San Francisco, Jason Yoder was planning to delete file-sharing software he uses from his home computer because of the new lawsuit threat. He acknowledged using the Internet recently to find a copy of a rare 1970s soul recording, but he agreed that illegal downloads should be curtailed.
"It's sort of like a serial drunk driver has to have their license taken away at some point," said Yoder, 30.
Sharman Networks Ltd., which makes the popular Kazaa software and operates one of the world's largest file-sharing networks, said in a statement, "It is unfortunate that the RIAA has chosen to declare war on its customers by engaging in protracted and expensive litigation." Sharman said it was interested in a business relationship with music labels and could protect their songs from illegal downloads using technology.
Country songwriter Hugh Prestwood, who has worked with Randy Travis, Trisha Yearwood and Jimmy Buffett, likened the RIAA's effort to a roadside police officer on a busy highway.
"It doesn't take too many tickets to get everybody to obey the speed limit," Prestwood said.
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 entertainment industry has gradually escalated its fight against piracy. The RIAA has previously sued four college students it accused of making thousands of songs available for illegal downloading on campus networks. But Wednesday's announcement was the first effort to target users who offer music on broadly accessible, public networks.
The Motion Picture Association of America said it supported the efforts, but notably did not indicate it plans to file large numbers of civil lawsuits against Internet users who trade movies online.
MPAA Chief Jack Valenti said in a statement it was "our most sincere desire" to find technology solutions to protect digital copies of movies.
Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., who has proposed giving the entertainment industry new powers to disrupt downloads of pirated music and movies, said the RIAA's actions were overdue. "It's about time," Berman said in a statement. "For too long ... file-traffickers have robbed copyright creators with impunity."
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.
Actually, that's simply not true.
I really wish people would quit pulling stuff out of their rumpuses when it comes to the subject of copyright.
Now. If I were to buy a loaf of Wonder bread, find out their exact recipe, start baking my own loaves and distribute them free (not for profit) to my friends and family -- if millions of people had access to that recipe and shared it with others -- would the Wonder Corporation have a snowball's chance in hell trying to sue thousands and thousands of people for "infringement" of a patented recipe in court? Remember, there's no profit, just sharing. Think about that for a second.
As for the RIAA, they are victims of their own lethargy. For the same reason companies like United Airlines and Xerox file for bankruptcy and become shadows of their former influence and market dominance, the RIAA finally figured out that rickety noise in back wasn't a bump in the road, but the entire wagon getting unhitched and left in the dust.
At the rate they are going, certain artists can become (and some are) corporations unto themselves. The Madonnas and Celine Dion's of the world can finance their own music and publicity and will always have products that people will buy in the store (for pleasure, for gifts, etc.) Others, for example, The White Stripes, have grown in immense popularity by word of mouth. Someone downloaded such-and-such by the White Stripes from Kazaa and brought it into work and played it on the computer and everyone heard it and loved it, blah blah blah -- instant sales. Self promotion with little or no effort except having written and performed the music and technological Fate made for COST FREE publicity across the globe.
But if it's on your hard drive, you're going to jail.
The thing that makes America awesome is that we are never allowed to rest on our laurels -- in any facet of life. RIAA fell asleep at the wheel. Someone stepped into the gap and developed the kind of computer technology that would bring near-professional level recording capabilities to your den (at the cost of buying a computer).
The next play belongs to the RIAA. They'd better think twice before making a move that will leave them with a real checkmate.
True or not, I recall radio stations on the west coast telling listeners when they would play a particular new song and get their tape decks ready.
You know, when you sign a contract with those guy's what you're in for.
But now, it's so easy.. they can simply bypass RIAA, and that suits me fine. If they're a bunch of legal begals and fat cats, then they are nothing more than dead weight.
Just cut them right out if they are so bad.
As you said, they may well end up being the big losers in this deal when it's all played out.
They don't "have" to argue these things. These things are already violations of copyright law. The logic behind the anti-downloading argument is not contingent on this things being true. You're making something of a tautology here.
I think a lot of folks around here are gonna be mighty surprised when more of this stuff gets into court. There's a real lack of understanding among a lot of folks on what copyright is all about. The decisions that come down from the bench -- including from our beloved conservative judges -- are going to favor copyright holders. Because there's not a lot of wiggle room for interpretation of the law here.
(If you're a thief.)
How many of you will stop downloading any music because of this?
Some of us never started.
That's because I'm such a nice guy..
You know, respectful, honest.. Not the kind you would find filching your music..
Stuff like that.
How much "copyrighted" Material is cut and reposted on FR? I think the courts need to weigh "intent". No one here intends to rip off printed media.
As I said, good luck!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.