Slashdot Mirror

The proper term is CORRUPTED, not copy protected.They do not conform to Red Book Standards.

Congressman Rick Boucher of VA has written a letter to the IFPI and the RIAA suggesting that under the AHRA this may illegal and asking for explanations of the methods used. Under the AHRA there is a 2% surcharge on every CD recorder sold in the US at the wholesale level (See section 1004), that goes to the RIAA, just as there is a 2% surcharge on "Music" designated CDR media.

In addition Philips refers to these corrupted discs as "silver disks with music on them, but which do not resemble CD's" See this article

Boycott-riaa and Fat Chucks are maintaining a list of the corrupted CDs. Also, Check out the Home Recording Rights Coalition

There certainly is: Boycott-riaa.com and Fatchucks.com lists all corrupted CDs not just UMG

A question that is often asked by John Perry Barlow when he speaks, is " How many of you can truthfully say you have never installed any unlicensed or 'pirated" software on your computer?" He continues on to point out that it is about the same percentage across the board regardless if it's a university, corporate, or the general public. The only group that shows a major deviation (which is usually lower) are lawyers.

There is a 18MB MP3 File of him speaking at the O'Reilly Conference, you can download it here

If you won't buy them they won't stock them. Basic business 101. These CDs are a corrupted version of the Redbook specification, and should be called that, "Corrupted" Over the past two years the recording industry has been winning the war of words. To even discuss "copy-protected" cds, implies the acceptance of the term, which is in fact should be refered to as "corrupted".

The LA Times has a quote from the CEO of the company that operates Tower Records states they will refund the money if need be. The Fast and Furious CD is supposed to have a sticker that designates that it is a protected CD. Boycott-riaa.com has a list known corrupted CDs as well as Fatchucks.

Perhaps a better alternative to buying then returning for refund, is to tell the store manager you will not purchase ANY copy protected discs, and then don't.

I live in VA. Rick Bouchers home state and have spoken with him about MOCA. While the RIAA and the recording labels spend millions to buy the congress, one thing has been emerging.

Your Congressperson and Senators need your vote MORE than they need the RIAA cash. Washington is about maintaining power, without the votes there is no cash, no lunches, no trips, no chance to make a difference. Make it clear to your congressperson that you support MOCA and as a consitutant of his you expect him to vote accordingly, not that of special interest groups such as the RIAA.

The text of the Music Online Competition Act can be Found Here . The MOCA is a even handed piece of legislation the strives to fix some of the roadblocks brought about by the DMCA, but faces a uphill battle. Congress is reading their e-mail these days, write, specify the topic in the subject line Music Online Competition Act, and as much as it pains you be nice. You catch a lot more flies with honey than vinegar.

The agreement only covers the royalties collected under the "statutory license" and not the "interactive licenses". In other words, if you can pick and chose your music, the artists royalties still go through the labels. By making the statutory licenses as narrow as possible to those wanting to "webcast", the RIAA has pretty effectively assured that those who chose to cater to the consumers and public wants with interactive webcasts must seek the interactive licenses (which are negotiated on a case by case basis and cost much more), thus assuring it is business as usual. (and thus bypassing this agreement). SoundExchange does not collect royalties for uses of music directly licensed by labels (or interactive uses), such as the Echo Networks and Warner deal earlier this week.

This still doesn't address the fact that the RIAA and SoundExchange are NOT paying the webcasting royalties this year, even though they were due to be paid in July. This they announced in May. CNet ran an article

According to Webnoize (subscription required) article, The $5.2 Million payment they made on October 15 represents only income from the cable, satellite and Muzak licenses collected from Feb 1996 to March 2000. They do not include any payment for webcasting that they have collected since 1999. Ina ddition their administrative fee is 20% meaning the RIAA collected $1.3 Million for that distribution.

Its a step in the right direction, but its only a baby step. One interesting side note: the payment directly to artists is one thing that is contained in the Music Online Competition Act (MOCA) introduced on Aug 3rd by Rick Boucher and Chris Cannon, that the RIAA has condemned in no uncertain terms.

There are already lots of groups "watching" the RIAA and getting on their case all the time. One of the most prominent ones is boycott-riaa.com, and there's also Die RIAA.

There are also numerous groups which arguably monitor the RIAA and it's actions along the course of their actions. These include The Future Of Music Coalition, The Velvet Rope and Pho.

Not to mention all the news outlets that keep a close eye on them - this article being a prime example, as well as The Register's occasionally inaccurate coverage.

It seems that all of those indie artists on MP3.com just got sucked in by a big label. This is reminiscent of the ongoing pattern of indie labels being bought out (or fake indies being created by) the big labels.

Of course, you can always cross-check any so-called indie labels against the RIAA Memebership List. In fact, since I don't buy CDs from the RIAA anymore (thank goodness for Century Media!), I make use of that list quite often.

Alex Bischoff

www.boycott-riaa.com

www.riaaboycott.org

Napster Buycott (that's not a typo :))

RIAA Member List (for the boycotting, duh!)

RIAA Contact List (let your voice be heard!)

--

http://boycott-riaa.com/ is another boycott site.
No new info there, either.

Yesterday on CNN Headline News they stated that "studies have shown" that Napster users (or was it MP3 users?) tend to buy more music. I can attest to that.

I have been preaching for years how mp3's have facilitated the buying of better music for me. The thing is... and I wish the record companies realized this... I've actually bought cd's that I would -not- have bought otherwise if I had not been exposed to the music via mp3 first. I've downloaded songs out of curiosity then fell in love with the band and then bought multiple cd's by the artist. But just try to convince the record companies that it actually works this way!

I would be willing to pay for single-song downloads so long as they weren't any more money than a cassette single. I'd even pay for an entire cd via mp3 so long as it was a decent price. But so far these processes are not the norm, although it would save the record companies and artists the costs of a middle man and the media (cd or cassette) and they'd make more profit.

But no, the record companies are using "piracy" as an excuse to strip the rights of the individual because they are AFRAID.

Just like the DVD thing: They're not afraid of us copying the DVD's (it's not worth the trouble or the money). They just want to control what device we watch it on (devices produced by people who paid for the rights first). Thus aleinating Linux users, etc.

Did dual cassette decks or blank cassette tapes get outlawed? No. The public was -trusted- to obey copyright laws, and for the most part they did. Obviously! The recoding industry didn't crumble as soon as recordable cassettes came out.

The RIAA and other groups like it have to realize that they will keep customers if they respect them. This is why I support the boycotts, and agree with the statement at http://boycott-riaa.com/ that THE FANS control the music industry.

If the RIAA fights us on this, we will find other ways arond the issue and continue to do things behind their back, FOR FREE and they will lose out. If they give us respect and freedom by giving us the chance to use this new technology to it's fullest while obeying copyright laws at least as well as we did with cassettes, then they could make life easier and more fun for listeners, AND make more than a few bucks here and there by embracing this new technology and offering nice clean mp3 downloads for a small fee... heck, even via Napster!

But so far these stuffed-suits don't seem to be smart enough to see it this way.

$0.02

The boycott riaa site has a link to the riaa members here

The Boycott-RIAA site has two email addresses listed on it's support page where you can send emails to let them know that you're participating in the boycott.

There are two email addresses, one to which you can send comments that will be passed on to the RIAA, and one that remains private so they can count the number of supporters they have.

The current Napster vs. RIAA legal battle encompasses EVERYTHING we hold true. The effects of the legal precedents set forth here, will determine the balance of power when it comes to intellectual property.

Personally, I believe intellectual property is the right of recognition, and NOT the right of control. Information is non-susbsistance, so any attempt to control it in the same manner as other wordly objects goes against everything I believe in.

The recommendations for the boycott can be found here.

I think we are all well justified in our decisions to boycott the RIAA. We need to place a stranglehold on the RIAA.

If we boycott the RIAA, they need to know! We can't have those filthy record producing animals, screaming about Napster having caused them to lose millions of dollars worth of records. Remember, the boycott is only for the Month of August. If you intend on buying a CD, wait until September 1st.

Hopefully, with enough supporters, the RIAA will look closely at record sales between the month of August and the month of September. If this works, they will see a HUGE difference. And only if they know about the boycott, will they put two and two together.

I understand not buying music is difficult. We all need to band together, and make our collective voices heard!