RIAA: Stop, or we will sue

June 25, 2003 2:51 PM

RIAA: Stop, or we will sue fresh from its victory against Verizon, the RIAA gears up to go head to head with individual users of P2P. Run and hide!
posted by FearTormento (17 comments total)

Yes, they did.
posted by jonson at 2:55 PM on June 25, 2003

*boom*
posted by BirdD0g at 3:16 PM on June 25, 2003

thread deletion in 5, 4 , 3, 2, we have thread deletion
posted by Outlawyr at 3:19 PM on June 25, 2003

We must not fall! Quickly, everyone back to FTP and IRC!
posted by Keyser Soze at 3:25 PM on June 25, 2003

by the way, crappy quality songs come from p2p. The RIAA would be shaking in its boots on the full album lists out there that can be had by.... other means.
posted by Keyser Soze at 3:26 PM on June 25, 2003

"...we cannot stand by while piracy takes a devastating toll on artists, musicians, songwriters, retailers, and everyone in the music industry."
And the artists see how much from the sales of their CD's? Like 3%? While the rest goes to music industry execs, the RIAA's lawsuits, sales reps, distributors, and other middlemen. And then they charge us $16 for something that costs them about $.30 to produce?
Stick with dischord and other real independents.
posted by trbrts at 3:40 PM on June 25, 2003

I'm not sure what this means for people that use P2P as ways to sample music before buying it.

And my other initial thought is, who gets to pay for the millions of lawsuits that might come out of this insanity? Oh yeah, customers get to pay. How nice! Think about that, they are contemplating suing millions of people.

I love the final line in the story where the RIAA says they've worked to provide legal means to download songs. Yet they don't say where you can download legally, just that they've "worked" on it.

Give me a means to buy my music directly from the artists I want and I'll use it. Until then, sample online. Buy offline.
posted by fenriq at 3:53 PM on June 25, 2003

They won't lainch millions of lawsuits, they'll just do 50 to 100 at a time, and then US citizens using Kazaa, can play the RIAA p2p lottery, and hope it won't be them.
posted by Blue Stone at 4:45 PM on June 25, 2003

We tried to offer a legal means at Napster (working with Bertlesmann) to download quality music, and offer direct payment to labels, independents, and artists.

The RIAA turned down all offers with extreme prejudice. They fought tooth and nail to prevent us from having any reasonable way to pay for the music, and to kill any chance of our offering an above-ground and legitimate music distribution service. Even when we went to court to challenge their right to micro-manage copyrights that we felt they didn't even own, they trembled, but fought blindly on unbowed.

We're talking about an industry that reported worldwide unit sales income of $36.9 billion (IFPI Report, 2001) and U.S. sales of $14.3 billion (RIAA Report, 2001). It's simple...It's about the money, consumers.

You know, all kidding aside, as a consumer I really would prefer to download music rather than troop to a Megastore, collect and mix digital music rather than load up on clunky CDs, and I'd even rather choose my cuts as singles and not be forced to buy a complete album just to get one song. (Although, as a classical listener, I'm off the RIAA's prime demographic.)

If the RIAA was really thinking about the consumer, or in favor of seeing artists get more than an average of $0.015 per artist for each $18.00 CD...but, I digress.

Piano players vilified the player piano. Player piano manufacturers decried radio. Radio renounced television.

And so it goes...and things, inevitably, will change.

Since I'll be speaking on this issue in August, I've been taking more careful note of the developments and watching this wayward weirdness unfold for some time now. And from my perch (and research) it looks like it's shaping up to be a very hot and (for some file-swappers) scary "I Know What You Did!" summer.
posted by Dunvegan at 5:33 PM on June 25, 2003

"The RIAA would be shaking in its boots on the full album lists out there that can be had by.... other means."

Irc? The Secret Masonic Underground Fileswapping Network?
posted by mecran01 at 6:40 PM on June 25, 2003

The law says the traders of copywritten commerical music/movies is illegal.

Good for the RIAA/MPAA going after them.

Now, if you think this law is wrong, then get the congress-kritters to change the law. Your argument: English Common law. If many people violate a law, perhaps the law is wrong.

Good luck to all of you traders of the property of RIAA/MPAA.
posted by rough ashlar at 6:57 PM on June 25, 2003

Agreed - the DMCA is the law (albeit a noxious, poisonous, bribe-fed law) and as long as it exists, it has to be followed.

So get up & do something about it. Support the Electronic Frontier Foundation, protest, bitch at your local officials, educate.

But don't whine if you get caught breaking the law.
posted by FormlessOne at 8:00 PM on June 25, 2003

On post-preview-post, what Formless said.
posted by Dunvegan at 10:09 PM on June 25, 2003

the DMCA is the law

Not over in sunny Europe it's not. Does everyone agree that us foreigners can keep on doing what we do, using the old defence of 'fair use'?
posted by ascullion at 10:46 PM on June 25, 2003

Massive civil disobedience: what if hundreds of thousands of people who use p2p file sharing all simultaneously sent letters to the RIAA boasting of violating the DMCA, and daring the RIAA to sue them?
posted by Rebis at 11:58 PM on June 25, 2003

um, say, kids... this conversation is happening over here.. This one sounds cool, too, buuuut...
posted by squirrel at 1:28 AM on June 26, 2003

"Now, if you think this law is wrong, then get the congress-kritters to change the law. Your argument: English Common law. If many people violate a law, perhaps the law is wrong."

My opinion is that this is a subtle reenactment of the boston tea party. This time recording companies are the taxers, and the majority of the music buying public are the taxees. We got sick of it, started complaining... waiting for the right moment that we can get back what weve been paying a lot more for than we should. $18 for a cd? I would gladly buy CD's if you could buy them brand new for $10, and the artist gets $5. Hell, even $4. Thats a lot more than what they are getting nowadays.
posted by Keyser Soze at 4:44 PM on June 26, 2003