Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Looks To Stop KaZaA, Morpheus & Grokster
John Hampton writes: "The RIAA is going to try to sue KaZaZ, Morpheus and Grokster, according to this story. Internal memos from within the RIAA outline the record label's findings and strategy going ahead. Great story. Hilary Rosen begging executives to talk about the issue and the RIAA issuing the lamest statement ever. From DotcomScoop.com."
since the servers use encryption, someone must feel that the RIAA can't tell what's going on unless they break the DMCA. The funny thing is (and even the letter says so) they can get a court order to break the encryption to find out what is really going on. I am sorry to say, but the RIAA legal team has their shit together and these systems can expect to be taken down. There will always be something new that pops up, however.
They've proved that an automatic two tier system can work (with user-node and super-node systems automatically finding the most efficient way of aggregating data).
Now we need a piece of software that will do all of this without the need for a central company. That way the RIAAA _can't_ shut it down.
Come on guys, we're one step away from success here - the power of Napster/FastTrack with the freedom of Gnutella - let's show them it can be done.
My Journal
Show me one.
There are currently NO brand new markets in that industry, and if the RIAA gets it's way there will not be any. They are busy protecting their old market.
My take on this is that the RIAA is going to use their weight to form this "brand new market" to their liking. So we'll end up with a brand new market that's suspiciously like the good ole market: pay through your nose for music that you can't copy without a reduction in quality.
--Bud
after all you can find anything you want there as well, they may not promote it that way, but it can (and is) done
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
So how should artists afford to prosecute multi-million dolar VC funded companies like Napster or companies that are outside the United?
:)
I can't speak for the first case, but for your second statement, it's obvious. They don't. You don't prosecute someone from another country doing things that are legal there and not legal here. Oh wait, we already do that. It's not right, is it?
If you are an artist with the choice of getting a major label deal and maybe making a profit if you sell over a million copies (or being in debt otherwise) or making no money from the spread of your music while being popular among the fans that don't pay for your music, what would you choose?
Hold it. Remember that from the sale of each record, lesser known artists get as low as 1% or less of the total profits, with the RIAA keeping the other 99%. Artists literally can get checks from the RIAA of 0.12$US for a 20$US record sale. Artists could make a LOT more money if they distributed online and took all the profits from said sales (and more power to them on doing this - I would buy music if my money was going to the artist, and not the RIAA).
Eventually, when CD burners, Minidiscs and car MP3 players become cheap and popular enough, how do you propose artists make a living in this new world order?
What are you talking about? They're already cheap and popular. I can buy a pack of 100 blank CDRs for 15$US. Mp3's are free (as in beer, and not the algorithm of course). Minidiscs are just about there. But going back on topic, remember an obscure, ancient invention called the "tape recorder"? Old dinosaurs in the music industry said the same thing and pushed the issue in court. The courts said that people making copies was fair use. I propose that we RETAIN fair use for everything we buy, including music. In a free economy, you have to figure out ways to fend for yourself. Artists will deal with it.
Last thought on the issue of artists getting big and rich, well, that just is kind of absurd, isn't it? Someone's motivation for creating art should be for the sake of art, not the money they can get from it. Sure everyone has to live, but how many painters, sculpters, poets, etc, are rolling in the big bucks? If you are really good, you'll find a way. Take a look at J.R.R. Tolkien's estate.
Why bother.
Eventually, when CD burners, Minidiscs and car MP3 players become cheap and popular enough, how do you propose artists make a living in
this new world order?
Billy Corgan (of the late Smashing Pumpkins) has had the best "big name" take on this so far: music will increasingly become like sports. Major league sportscasts are available for free on network television; how do they make their money? Gate fees and advertising. In BC's view, you could soon see "the RIAA on NBC!" on Saturday afternoons. Dave Matthews, on stage, makes his money from the thousands of screaming fans packed into whatever arena he's playing, as well as by allowing Fender and Zildijan to digitally insert ads onto the front of the stage (or even onto his conveniently dull blue guitar.) The fans at home get to enjoy DM's performance (albeit in a reduced fashion, just like going to watch an NFL game is a much better experience than watching one on TV) while having to sit through commercials at the intermission.
Then, like in sports, there could arise a "minor league", farm club sort of structure where local bands play in smaller venues (which make most of their money from corporate sponsorship and billboard ads).
Of course, there will still be "street performers" who just play for the love of it (think the streetballers in Rucker Park in NYC).
I don't know if it would shape up exactly like this, but I think the possibility is intriguing at the very least.
I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
I am a wealthy IT professional, and I assume that a lot of you here are too.
Assuming that we could get a lot of people similar to myself to contribute $100, could we buy the ability to shut down the RIIA's legal efforts for awhile?
It appears to me that we have two options: attack their lawyers or attack their revenue sources. If we don't do one of these things effectively, they will continue to oppress the public (and us specifically).
I'm tired of listening to the RIAA tell me how bad I am. Let's do something!
Doing so may be a breach of agreement when you use the software for those purposes. It could open the RIAA and it's member organizations to countersuits, etc.
They're not entirely stupid- they want the upper hand on this situation from start to finish. If they don't go about it in a just-so manner, they don't have the upper hand.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Artists have copyright collectives.
ASCAP, BMI and SOCAN are three that I know of. These are large, well-funded organizations, that actually include more artists than the RIAA - plenty of independent artists belong to them. Also, they represent artists' interests directly.
They are set up mainly to collect licensing fees from radio.
None of them have gotten involved.
How about: Burn your own CDs, sell them at shows for $10 Canadian. Maybe spend $2 or so per CD on media and the insert. Make $8 per CD. Compare this to the RIAA system, where you make about $.12 US ($.18 Canadian) per CD. By my math, you'll make about the same amount of money by selling 22 thousand CDs this way as you would be selling a million CDs with the RIAA.
And this way, you get to record what you like, and you don't have to go in debt.
Plenty of bands do it. They Might Be Giants are an excellent example of a band that's made much more money than they could have in the RIAA world.
By burning their own CDs for fifty cents a pop. :)
Car MP3 players seem to be disappearing gradually. I'm not sure if MD really has much of a future either. CD-R, on the other hand...
CD-R is the biggest threat to the RIAA that has ever happened, because it takes the power of recording out of their hands. Now, all you need them for is distribution. Internet distribution is insufficient thus yet to replace in-store distribution (mainly due to lack of available bandwidth), but stores are opening up to selling more independent artists.
I can't wait to see what DVD-R is going to do for independent filmmaking.
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
This interpretation actually likens Hillary the Harpie's strategy to that of the US government, under the leadership of the winged monkey, in pursuing "war" against a methodology called terrorism (which is about as bright, in my book, as pursuing war against methodologies like pragmatism, or immunochemical histology, but then winged monkeys ain't made to be bright). I'd have the same advice for H the H as I have for W the Schmuck - give peace a chance, and, for the love of all that is decent and right, STEP DOWN NOW!
People like you make me sick! The U.S. always gives peace a chance. We promote it in Ireland and with Israel's problems. We offer a peace-loving country, open to all religions, including Islam. We were then ruthlessly attacked by delusional psychotics clinging to their pseudo-Islam religion to brainwash similarly disenfranchised, pissed off Middle Easterners.
In exchange, has Bush launched a carpet bombing of Afghanistan, or any other nation that sponsors or harbors terrorists? No. He has been making careful plans for weeks now, while Americans have been screaming for blood. Presumably if they were going to carpet bomb some place, it would have been done by now. They've made it clear they are going after surgical strikes and unique ways of fighting terrorism (cutting off funding, putting extreme pressure on those countries that harbor them, etc).
And you propose to Bush to 'give peace a chance.'
If anyone's a schmuck here, it's you. You should be saying the same thing to Osama bin Laden, et. al., not to anyone in the United States government.
And no, I did not, nor would not vote for W. I'm a card-carrying libertarian.
But I know a load of ignorant bullshit when I smell it.
"And like that
Musicians and record labels have had a good run, but perhaps it's time to give up. With few exceptions, I don't think any popular major-label musician is talented enough to earn what they make from their music. The money they make is a result of the recording industry's ability to promote.
Consider the hundreds of thousands of musical artists that aren't signed to a major label. What separates them from their signed counterparts? Promotion. The money the signed artists receive isn't based on their talent, but their management's ability to drive up demand for their art through many marketing techniques. Of course one entity controlling both the supply and demand of something is a dangerous situation.
I wonder some times if the RIAA is really afraid of peer-to-peer file sharing, or something deeper. It may be that they're not just losing their ability to control the supply, but losing control of demand as well. When I found songs I likes on Napster, I would always view other songs that that user was sharing, and inevitably find more songs I liked. In many cases these songs were not artists under RIAA-member managers. Could this be what RIAA is afraid of?
_______
2B1ASK1
The RIAA is intent on suing our rights out of existence, so why aren't we suing them into the ground? Is there a class action suit against them out there? If not, can one be begun? According to new sites online there are millions of users who are affected by this, and it seems to me that if even half of those people donated $10 to a legal effort we'd have a real war chest. Clearly the EFF is not going to do this, so we need to find someone/thing who will. If you know of one, please pipe up.
And the second thing I wonder about is how can we build an alternative to the record companies and their business model for the musicians? The fans and consumers are pissed off, but as long as the musicians largely stay with the record companies, then the RIAA and its ilk will still act like they control the music supply. If the musicians believe they'll starve without the record companies, then they sure won't be on our side. We need a real plan to convince the musicians that there is a better way to reach their fans.