Slashdot Mirror

During the Napster days, my CD collection grew from a dozen CDs to over 200 for precisely that reason. Before I only knew a handful of artists I would want to buy CDs from. After I was exposed to Napster, I was able to download songs from people who had the similar tastes (you could search for obscure songs you like, find a user with that song, view all songs shared by that user, download away) and because of this I discovered tons more music I loved and bought (and also tons of weird stuff).

After the whole debacle where Napster was shut down I refused to buy any RIAA member label CDs. Thanks to sites like RIAA Radar, artists releasing their own albums (ex: NIN), and alternate labels (like Magnatune) this has been pretty easy so far.

Odd... Riaa radar seems to be down for now...

I came hee to post a link to RIAA Radar, but domain is not active. I hope it's just a problem with forgetting to renew the site. With all the labels the big labels own, it's hard to know if the album you're buying is actually from a small label. RIAA Radar is (was) a great way to check that out.

Check http://www.riaaradar.com/ before buying any music. If an artist / group is on this list, contact them and tell them why you will not be buying their music anymore.

You can buy music, just use this first: http://riaaradar.com/

if I cannot get it directly from the musician or for free I don't buy it. The website http://riaaradar.com/ helps figure out if the band is worth buying.

The RIAA Radar is a tool that music consumers can use to easily and instantly distinguish whether an album was released by a member of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA).

The RIAA is the best argument in the world not to buy music.

The RIAA is the best argument in the world why you SHOULD be buying music -- NON-RIAA MUSIC (see RIAA Radar).

it's all the middle men kicking each other back in between.

You may be interested in the RIAA Radar to avoid the majority of offending middlemen.

It is not that hard to check if music is from an RIAA company before you buy. Go to http://riaaradar.com./

"indie" is any non-RIAA music. It's short for "independantly produced". Note that the "alternative music" was in fact produced, recorded, and marketed by the major lablels; US started out as "alternative", as did Cheap Trick. Indie == "non-RIAA".

Correct.

Where it gets tricky for me is a label like Rounder Records, a traditionally independent label which has never been associated with the Big 4 record companies, and which has never been a part of the Big 4's litigation campaign, but which is a dues-paying member of the RIAA.

I'm classifying them as non-indie because their dues are contributing to the RIAA vendetta.

I.e., I go with your definition. indie=non RIAA. period. I attempt to never patronize any company associated with the RIAA, and I go to check at RIAARadar.com.

Wouldn't matter. You could shoot him and abuse his body, guillotine him, or drive him to suicide with his letter opener, and the next RIAA CEO would continue in the same vein (only with better security). It's the organization which needs to be destroyed, not any individual head of it.

It's not just one CEO.
That "RIAA Organization" is owned, or paid for, and representing, and suing people, at the behest of the record labels you buy your CD"s from.
These include;

Big Machine Records
BMG Entertainment
Disney
EMI ( Capitol, Capitol Nashville, Virgin Records, and others )
Flicker
HBO
MGM
MTV ( including Nick at Nite, Nickelodeon, VH-1 and others )
Paradigm
Sony BMG ( Columbia, Epic, RCA, Arista, and others )[ all part of the same family ]
Universal Music Group ( Universal Records )
Warner Music Group
etc.
There are hundreds of them.
If you haven't seen it before, here's a good list http://www.riaaradar.com/tree.asp
That is your RIAA. It isn't just one CEO. It's the group of companies in that list on that website.
Want to hurt them ? Stop buying their stuff and feeding their lawyers, till they fly right.
I haven't purchased a CD from any of these 'companies', or any Sony product in almost 4 years. And Counting. And I hear plenty of music all day long on the radio. It ain't killing me.
I don't want my money going to their lawyers to twist the laws the way they do. It's a matter of principle. And now, maybe even pride.
I'm not out to sink the RIAA. The record labels need that group to protect their interests. It's the way they are Going About protecting that interest that I am opposed to. And I don't want the record labels to disappear either. I like music.
But I won't give my money to any group that abuses peoples rights and the laws as they were Intended.
I'm not hurting them much, they seem to have made it through this last recession without having to ask for a handout from the feds.
Even if they do claim they are in such poor financial condition from the abundant volumes of piracy they say is going on, they seem to be in good financial shape. So Somebody is still buying their products and supporting their RIAA "lawyers".
Which leads me to a parting question. Don't lawyers have to take some kind of oath to uphold the spirit of our Constitution and obey the laws that protect the people ?

Guess who is trying to get these laws passed. When you buy music, make sure to check http://riaaradar.com/ to see if the album is from a company that funds the RIAA. If they do, don't buy it and stick it to them a couple dollars of lost earnings at a time.

When you buy music, make sure to check http://riaaradar.com/ to see if the album is from a company that funds the RIAA. If they do, don't buy it and stick it to them a couple dollars of lost earnings at a time.

Just tell people "These guys want to restrict your internet to their approved list."

Oh, and don't buy from them:
http://www.riaaradar.com/

When you buy music, make sure to check http://riaaradar.com/ [riaaradar.com] to see if the album is from a company that funds the RIAA. If they do, don't buy it and stick it to them a couple dollars of lost earnings at a time.

Yeah, because heaven forbid if we buy music from artists we enjoy listening to.

When you buy music, make sure to check http://riaaradar.com/ to see if the album is from a company that funds the RIAA. If they do, don't buy it and stick it to them a couple dollars of lost earnings at a time.

When you buy music, make sure to check http://riaaradar.com/ to see if the album is from a company that funds the RIAA. If they do, don't buy it and stick it to them a couple dollars of lost earnings at a time.

- anticompetitive business practices (price fixing, etc) that have given potential customers a sour attitude towards music labels There is some truth in that, but come on. People really stopped buying music because of that?

Absolutely. Or rather, I implemented client-side DRM on my music purchases - I manage my own rights over music media I purchase, or I simply do not purchase it.

- destruction of diversity in radio broadcasting (something the music industry ironically pushed for) via the death of media ownership regulations mid-'90s Wrong. Radio hardly has any influence on what music people listen to these days.

I listen to Pandora a fair bit and have found a lot of new music there. If Pandora can grasp, through technology, what customers want to hear and then generate sales, why can't radio? The simple answer is that media ownership chooses not to because they believe it costs less. Promoting goodwill between customers and product is a waste of resources and we have at least ten years of evidence backing up that statement.

And finally, the main reason: - replacement of almost all talented acts that produced good music, with hyperproduced kiddie-shit "artists" whose assets are not musical talent or singing voices, but barely-covered bikini bottoms and tits. Just you wait: in 4 years, tops, "Hannah Montana" will be pulling a Britney-style selfdestruct. And neither of them are capable of producing "music" even remotely worth listening to. I doubt very much that the music industry is replacing musicians who would sell more music with those who would sell less...Your personal problems with the music industry are not necessarily the same ones that are causing its troubles.

Oh but they have. It's a self-effecting prophecy, actually, because the largest acts are no longer pursuing contracts actively and are focusing on self-promotion (myspace/twitter/blog/tour/etc).

Say, if you own a restaurant and your star chef leaves to start a new restaurant or simply because they are frustrated with your management, do you hire another star chef? Maybe if you know one, but in all likelihood, some culinary production is about to take place in your kitchen that is merely 'good' or 'above average'. Your customers will notice the difference, too.

The less goodwill between industry and fans, the less artists will want to be associated with those industry players, despite all the perks. Small labels will get a larger piece of the pie, but the pie will get a lot smaller (at least temporarily) because those small labels don't have access to the same media promotion levers as the entrenched industry players and those industry players are still pulling the levers for the schlock that they need to turn out for the next quarterly statement. It really isn't fair to the artists who are trying to make a living, but it is completely and totally the industry's fault for treating their customers this way for over a decade. Running a crusade to chase after the last 10% of profits while sacrificing the experience of the other 90%? Not a good business model...

They also represent a massive number of smaller labels

The litigation campaign has involved only the Big 4, plus their affiliates, and has not involved any of the smaller labels. But the dues of the smaller labels are helping the RIAA carry out its dastardly work on behalf of the Big 4. So I think all RIAA labels should be boycotted, and I frequently consult RIAA Radar.

When you buy music, make sure to check http://riaaradar.com/ to see if the album is from a company that funds the RIAA. If they do, don't buy it and stick it to them a couple dollars of lost earnings at a time.

... The money I gave you for it still works. I don't get to take that back, do I?

People who buy DRM'ed media content are idiots. It's not as if the record companies have tried to hide their sense of entitlement, or their unethical beliefs and attitudes. It would be different if they had, but as things stand, there's nothing else to do but blame the "victims" who keep giving them their money.

Stop feeding the machine, people.

When you buy music, make sure to check http://riaaradar.com/ [riaaradar.com] to see if the album is from a company that funds the RIAA. If they do, don't buy it and stick it to them a couple dollars of lost earnings at a time.

When you buy music, make sure to check http://riaaradar.com/ to see if the album is from a company that funds the RIAA. If they do, don't buy it and stick it to them a couple dollars of lost earnings at a time.

But so long as you check it out at http://riaaradar.com/ if they say it's cool, it's cool. If they say it's RIAA-tainted, stay away.

Yeah, not falling for that one again after I was hanging out with an riaaradar.com maintainer and they kept trying to tell me that my pants were RIAA-tainted.

Sony, EMI, Warner Bros, and Universal are in real trouble. Make sure you check http://riaaradar.com/ [riaaradar.com] to make sure when you purchase music you don't buy anything from these companies that fund the RIAA.

Well most of their recordings are sold under their affiliate labels, with different names. But so long as you check it out at http://riaaradar.com/ if they say it's cool, it's cool. If they say it's RIAA-tainted, stay away.

Sony, EMI, Warner Bros, and Universal are in real trouble. Make sure you check http://riaaradar.com/ [riaaradar.com] to make sure when you purchase music you don't buy anything from these companies that fund the RIAA.

Well most of their recordings are sold under their affiliate labels, with different names. But so long as you check it out at http://riaaradar.com/ if they say it's cool, it's cool. If they say it's RIAA-tainted, stay away.

Sony, EMI, Warner Bros, and Universal are in real trouble. Make sure you check http://riaaradar.com/ to make sure when you purchase music you don't buy anything from these companies that fund the RIAA.

Don't go to law school. Become a legislator. That's the ONLY way any of this can possibly change.

In the meantime, as a consumer, and provided you still buy music from retail stores, websites such as Amazon or legal download services such as iTunes Store, use this site to make sure you never, ever put another cent into RIAA coffers again. Oh, and spread the word.
Feeling pangs of guilt for not supporting your favorite artists, who happen to work for a company under the RIAA's umbrella? Go to their concert and/or buy their merchandise, the RIAA doesn't make a dime off that.

I think it backfired on the RIAA. They are beating up on a mother of 4 and everyone agrees that the is a ridiculous judgment. I would even go so far as to say the RIAA has been begging Jamie to take a reduced settlement so they can say what great guys they are and still wave their judgment around. The backlash is taking root and people are really starting to stop buying RIAA member music. I have seen posing on http://riaaradar.com/ more than once.

After the Jamie verdict and the Pirate Bay verdict, it was enough stupid for people to get involved. This is exactly the opposite of what the RIAA wanted. As tools like the RIAA radar gain popularity and the brands of the RIAA are hurt more, they will eventually lose.

http://www.riaaradar.com/

Why would anyone knowingly pay the RIAA that actively suppresses music and does not take care of the very artists they say they are protecting. The RIAA demise is not coming soon enough, but nice to see the cracks in the dam.

http://www.boycott-riaa.com/
http://www.riaaradar.com/

[files]:
[pdf]: http://downhillbattle.org/riaa/sticker.pdf
[MS Publisher]: http://downhillbattle.org/riaa/sticker.pub
^^ the above are formatted for Avery 5160 labels, but I in no way suggest you to do anything specific with those stickers. For educational purposes only, view what others have done here http://downhillbattle.org/riaa/

Problem is, most "Indie Music" is really on a major label. Take Sub-Pop. Every band on Sub Pop has been called Indie at some point, and most think Sub Pop is an independent label. On the contrary. 49% of the label is owned by Warner Brothers. Sub Pop does not directly fund the RIAA, but every Sub Pop album you buy supports Warner Brothers, which does.

One can use RIAA Radar to cleanse their music collection, but it's not perfect, since it does not detect this sort of indirect RIAA support. Realistically, if one want's to boycott the RIAA, they might as well boycott the idea of record labels themselves. In an age where bands can make their own album with consumer recording equipment, and make it sound just as good or better than professional releases, then distribute that music with the most powerful communication medium known to humanity, why do we still have these record label middlemen?

Please stop saying "RIAA" unless you also name its constituent organizations. Calling them "RIAA" without naming them simply lets them off the hook: * EMI * Sony Music Entertainment * Universal Music Group * Warner Music Group

You are correct that it's those 4 corporations hiding behind the RIAA as a front. I use "RIAA" as shorthand. But knowing those 4 names doesn't really help because most of the records are sold under their affiliated labels. So the best way to know which are the real bad guys is to go to my Index of Litigation Documents and look at the plaintiffs' names. And the best way to avoid patronizing any RIAA label is to check them out on RIAA Radar.

Thanks for letting people know about riaaradar.com. Here's a link to a CBS Records search. Yep, they're part of RIAA.

Wrong. Columbia Records is not part of CBS any more: they are owned by Sony.

Sony, well that fixes everything. ;)

Why buy no CDs at all, instead of buying from independent labels like these that don't sue people for downloading their music? And if none of those record labels have music that suits your tastes (I'll admit I lean towards hipster garbage in music taste), check RIAA Radar before you buy.

Because a non-essential, impulse purchase is stifled by a "mother may I?" check?

For most people on slashdot, the RIAA is just a justification to make themselves feel better about downloading instead of buying.

No, the reason we don't buy CDs is because of network effects. Once we stopped buying and looking at the big label CDs we had much incentive to go to a music store to look at the other 1% or whatever (by volume).

For example, since CompUSA and Circuit City both went down the drain, I go to BestBuy and GameStop LESS often to look at stuff. Taking a trip for just one store isn't worth it to browse. This is why malls and shopping centers are good for business.

Personally, I think I've bought 5 CDs since Napster was shut down - 2 of those for the DVD with the videos, 2 japanese sountracks and a musical for my gf. I don't illegally download it, or buy it online now, I just don't bother with music. If I listened to music even a tenth as much as I used to, I would buy a Zune and a Zune pass and get it there.

Why buy no CDs at all, instead of buying from independent labels like these that don't sue people for downloading their music? And if none of those record labels have music that suits your tastes (I'll admit I lean towards hipster garbage in music taste), check RIAA Radar before you buy.

For most people on slashdot, the RIAA is just a justification to make themselves feel better about downloading instead of buying.

Or you could just use this.

http://www.riaaradar.com/

We need to wipe out RIAA's financing!

The best way I know of to do that is before buying any cd or mp3 go to RIAA Radar and make sure that the label is not a member of the RIAA... and of course to (a) spread awareness of the site, and (b) help the site out financially.

Apparently you've never heard of smaller or independent music shops that sell used CDs. You think they send portions of each sale from a used CD to the RIAA? Doubt it. Or, if you can't find what you want in a used format, check out RIAA Radar to determine if a band's album was released by a label that belongs to the RIAA.

I'm not sure I've ever heard people claim that "peer 2 peer file sharing promotes new music". If anything it's the opposite - you don't find music on p2p unless you go looking for it.

The majority of my MP3 collection are indie/obscure. I found it exactly because of p2p - keyword search.

I started searching on 'Techno' and 'Rave', came across the cool sub-genre 'Happy Hardcore', and many times I would find something I particularly liked and I'd re-search based on the artist or some other keyword. I also downloaded some music torrents from The Pirate Bay that were definitely obscure, and presumably non-RIAA, because they had several obscure P2p-search-discovered songs that I really liked, so I expected the rest of the torrent to have many great new discoveries. I've got an extremely promising .torrent file sitting on my desktop that I haven't downloaded yet because it's 4+ gigs and I'm already behind on sorting through what I have.... but I specifically checked some of the artists with RIAAradar and the majority are non-RIAA. In fact some of the artists don't even show up with ANY known CD releases on the riaaradar.com search.

I think the article submitter was mistaken to go by the Pirate bay top downloads list. Of course heavily promoted major label stuff is going to grab the top spots. The right question to ask is whether the total traffic - including the tons of low-to-medium traffic torrents - carries a higher percentage of indie stuff. I don't have any figures on it, but I suspect they do. Any particular indie isn't about to beat out mega-commercialized Madonna in download count, but I think the hordes of non-RIAA artists are eating away at the RIAA domination. There's an endless supply of stuff on p2p/torrents that doesn't even exist in any CD store.

A major problem for the RIAA is that the music market is fracturing - the major labels only makes a profit off of a handful of mega-promoted megahits representing a handful of genres. Rock, Pop, Country, R&B, and a few others. They have to sell a few hundred of thousand of copies of a CD just to break even. They are choking on the explosion of new genres and sub-genres of more narrowly targeted music. Wikipedia List_of_music_genres starts with 2-step garage, 2 tone, 4-beat, 4x4 Garage, 8-bit, then moves on with 27 genres starting under 'A' and 98 more starting with 'B', ending many hundreds of entries later with Zydeco. They need to sell a half million copies of an album representing a major music genre. If you've got 50,000 customers each for trance and ambient and trip-hop and intelligent-dance-music and industrial and darkcore and happy-hardcore and gabba and experimental and jungle and electronic-body-music and at least a dozen different sub-genres of house music, the major labels just can't touch any of it. They'd lose their shirts selling 50,000 units each across multiple sub-genres.

That's one of the areas that new internet technology is really killing them. They need a small number of mass-market categories of music. The fracturing music market is killing them. They can't touch non-mainstream genres or sub-genres. It's strangling the labels when people discover some non-mainstream category of music or get into some specific subcategory of music. That's a major reason they are trying to kill internet radio. They need Major Corporate Radio playing Rock channels and Pop channels and Country channels and other nice neat mass-market categories of music. The internet radio upstarts have this "annoying habit" of offering huge numbers of channels with narrow and obscure categories of music. Internet radio fractures the music market. It introduces people to the non-mainstream or sub-category of music they like best, it gets people into styles of music that the major labels just can't touch.

-

RIAA radar is your friend. Look for the labels not on the MAFIAA's payroll and support them for doing something right.

You are so right esocid. I consult that site every day.

RIAA radar is your friend. Look for the labels not on the MAFIAA's payroll and support them for doing something right.

For everyone else: RIAA Radar
Use it. Don't unknowingly endorse them.

So, all those other bands on RIAA labels, who by their association contribute just as much to the RIAA legal budget as does Metallica, do you boycott them as well? I bet you don't.

Actually yes I do. Not only that but I don't even listen to the radio (unless I'm stuck in someone else's car). Haven't for almost a decade now. If it wasn't for "piracy" I wouldn't even know about any of the bands I listen to now (and pay concert money for, and buy their CDs {believe it or not}, and their merch, and tell other friends about who buy their CDs, concert tickets, and merch).

You only boycott the outspoken and honest. All the other weasels, who want money for their music as well, but play it strategic and don't say anything that might upset anyone, you're okay with them. They sue their customers just as much, it's just that they leave it to the record companies to do it on their behalf, so they don't get their hands dirty.

The bands don't sue anyone (rarely, if ever). It is the companies that own the bands' copyrights that sue. The bands complain to the label, they think they'll get compensated but they never do. They just pointlessly ruin peoples' lives. It's fucking disgusting. I don't pay my plumber for the rest of my life for every flush. I pay for one job. You want more money you gotta perform another job. (ie, concert) Albums are publicity for concerts. Concerts are performances. I'd love to be paid for the rest of my life for crap I did once. But guess what, I don't. Nor should I. Nor should they. Where does this sense of entitlement come from? I owe them nothing.

Lars Ulrich is not the hypocrite here.

I do not think that word means what you think it means.

NYCL, I thought you were branching out to other legal issues, but then I saw your other comment about the RIAA lawyers being lawyers for this case also.

Well there are other things I'm interested in. Just thought it was an interesting 'aside' that others without my 'RIAA Radar' might not have picked up on the fact that the very same firm that so passionately fought for 'freedom' for its clients would deny freedom to others.

Download != Lost Sale

This is especially true for me, since I always check RIAA Radar before purchasing an album. If it's an RIAA artist, then they don't get any money.

http://www.riaaradar.com/

I love looking on this site and finding that my favourite bands aren't RIAA funded.

Well, for individual albums, you can always check RIAA Radar, which will tell you if an album is put out on an RIAA label or not.

According to RIAA Radar it's not "RIAA-free".