RIAA To Sue Individual's for File Sharing (This could mean you!!!!)

Miami Herald ^ | 06/25/2003 | Ted Bridis

[gaucho]

If a CD sells for $20 and costs, say $2 to make, the markup is $18 or 900%, nine times what it cost. In any real market this is insane. If a retailer were to sell using 40% as a markup the price would be $3.34 per CD.

The Apple iTunes store sells and entire album for less then $10. Of that $10, Apple get's 40% and the rest goes to the label (and presumably a little of it goes to the artist).

As you point out, it probably costs $2 or even less to manufacture and ship that CD to a store. So even at $12, everybody is making lot's of money. So why do they sell for $18.99, or $20.99 or higher? A double CD for $40? It's an insane model and enough for any reasonably intelligent person, to know that they are being ripped off -- so they don't buy. It's also known as the 6 CD sales model. Consumers can only afford, on average, to buy 6 CD's a year. And the cartel has the audacity to say that they don't buy because they download. Please.

Now, if these lawyers could only lay off their coke habit and Hilldabeast worship long enough to study some economics, maybe they would get ahead.

Not only are the labels pricing themselves out of the market, they are going after the fans and not the real pirates, such as those operations that make entirely COUNTERFEIT CD's which you can buy all over the place in NYC for $5. Then again, being that they are organized crime lords, they probably get a cut from the gangs that produce those products too.

[Michael Barnes]

Thing is Golden Eagle, that p2p over encrypted connections will occur outside this country and filter it's way in. Although America has a supposed problem with file sharing/swapping/stealing, whatever term you chose, overseas makes us look like rank amateurs when it comes to copying.

[gd124]

Do libraries really buy authorized copies of books and CDs? What about books donated to the library?

[Imal]

The RIAA is the perpetual Darwin Award winner of the entertainment industry. They have opposed every significant technology in recording since the wax cylinder, and have failed each and every time (well, except for DAT I suppose, how many Americans ever owned a DAT deck?).

The irony is that they have always profited wildly from each technology they have tried to suppress. Here they go again, pissing into the wind, with predictable results. Instead of exploiting the Internet for billions in potential revenues, they fight it tooth and nail. They may as well try to stop the sun from rising, and it wouldn't surprise me if I heard about a lawsuit to that effect tomorrow.

They'll haul a few nameless unfortunates up on charges in big show trials, there will be a big flap as the cases go to trial, hackers like the Legion of Doom and others will mercilessly torment the RIAA and its supporters online, various artists will be trotted out with their stories of poverty and misery between double-platinum albums, yada yada yada.

And then, like Keyser Soze, it will all disappear. The ringmasters, jugglers, clowns and dog-faced boys of the media circus will pull up stakes and head out looking for the next cause du jour, while music file sharing continues uninterrupted throughout, and probably increases in a frenzy of fire-sale panic swapping.

I'll just yawn now and get it over with.

Personally, I think the heirs of Miguel De Cervantes Saavedra should sue the RIAA for copyright infringement. After all, this business of jousting with windmills is not an original idea on the RIAA's part.

The RIAA: Definitive proof that you don't have to be smart to be rich.

[Imal]

My tagline is an inside joke.

I got that joke the first time I saw it, and yes, it's pretty damn funny.

[Z-28]

Question: Does anyone know if it is illegal to download songs you already own in another format?

Such as if I update all my already paid-for owned cassette albums from the 80's (my favorite music era) with the more moderm .mp3 format I can play on our computers and in our newer cars and from which I can burn CDs and DVDs.

Seems to me it should be legal. "Fair use" allows one legal copy.

[Z-28]

I trird to use that new Apple pay-per-download music dealy and it completely bombed-out on my new Dell 2.26 GHz... I finally gave up in disgust.

[Z-28]

There's a lot of good pop and rock music today (Z-28 says with tongue in cheek).

Am I showing my age when I say I haven't liked hardly any pop or rock music since 1988?

[perez24]

100% agreed. I resent paying a lot of money for one song...but I have bought A LOT of CD's as a result of downloading songs.

I think the real problem the music industry has is the crap they put out.

[Crusher138]

Check out Shareaza.

Gnutella based, no ads. Nice interface.

[Orangedog]

Sorry, didn't know I was being graded on spelling here. Would you like to go over the email I sent to my purchasing department requesting some new note pads for gramatical errors?

[wizzler]

Do libraries really buy authorized copies of books and CDs?

No -- libraries go to a dark alley and steal illegally printed versions of books and CDs.

What do you mean? Of course libraries buy authorized copies. Or maybe somebody donates them. Whatever. The point isn't whether the library has to pay cash in the transaction, the point is that each book and CD is a legitimate copy, sanctioned by the copyright holder.

Good grief, why is this so difficult for people to understand?

[gd124]

I interpreted what you said before as meaning that the libraries get special authorization for the books they buy.

[Golden Eagle]

Thing is Golden Eagle, that p2p over encrypted connections will occur outside this country and filter it's way in.

They are free to do as they wish, however as they continue to go to further extremes, expect the courts to deal with them even more harshly.

[Calpernia]

Why would a library pay cash in a transaction for donated copies?

[wizzler]

I don't know. Who said they did? And what does that have to do with anything?

[Calpernia]

I think it has a lot to do with this topic. Can't follow what exactly RIAA is saying is illegal. Not all my questions I posted here got answered either.

What is a legal copy?

Libraries/Music Resellers/Storefront Swaps offer what you deem as licensed copies that they haven't paid for. Royalties don't go to the industry.

You personally stated in a previous post that the Supreme Court copying TV was deemed fair use, based on "time-shifting".

To me this means I can copy music from the radio.

So what I have concluded here is, I can copy music from the radio. I can sell, swap, borrow and buy used music.

Now, explain why downloading is different?

[budwiesest]

It's also known as the 6 CD sales model. Consumers can only afford, on average, to buy 6 CD's a year.

Hadn't heard of this but it describes my buying habit pretty well. While browsing a CD rack I'll often find two or three that I'd like to buy but usually decide on one as the combined amount seems way too high. I usually find other ways to maximize my utility with the unspent $40.(Like gas to drive the rest of the week)

[dmz]

Well sir, I'm not stopping...because I've never started! RIAA can't have me - because I refuse to have their garbage. I'm not touching it even with a ten foot pole... It stinks.
____

well that sentiment belies your handle.

from whence comes your song?

[thoughtomator]

I think the real problem the music industry has is the crap they put out.

This is really the heart of the problem. Will the RIAA companies destroy themselves avoiding notice of the 800-pound gorilla in the middle of the room?