RIAA Wants Taxpayer-Funded IP Police

Sydney Weidman writes "RIAA has given testimony before the House Appropriations Committee asking for more federal money for Computer Hacking and Intellectual Property investigation teams. You can find RIAA's side of the story here and a Cnet story is available as well. Apparently, RIAA is not satisfied with the current deployment of CHIP teams since they have been more involved in anti-hacking activities than in anti-piracy. My favourite Hilary Rosen quote: "Piracy is not a private offense, it hurts everyone by diminishing the incentive to invest in the creation of music." I guess Rosen won't be happy until each and every pirate is charged with crimes against humanity and convicted by the International Court of Justice"

Comments

I wonder

[rutledjw]

If this is another "opportunity" to keep pressure on our local Congressmen/women and Senators? Sen Disney's SSSCA was killed outright due to the number of letters recieved on the matter.

It just seems that there is an awful lot of momentum right now against this kind of "Big Brother" activity from RIAA. Why not keep it up?

It just seems absurd to me that in this day and age where terrorism is such a focal point, that we would divert funds to fight music piracy. I'm quite certian that Al Qaeda is going after the latest Dave song instead of looking for a way to hack financial companies.

Hilary Rosen quote

[Dead Penis Bird]

Piracy is not a private offense, it hurts everyone by diminishing the incentive to invest in the creation of music.

When will she realize that there's more to creating music than money? Artists create because they enjoy doing so. It's one of the profession, IMHO that have a lot of job satisfaction.

Sometimes she'd further her cause by staying quiet.

not so crazy?

[tps12]

This will probably get modded down, as I can already hear the slashbots raising their voices in protest, but here goes...

Yes, the RIAA and the whole notion of intellectual property go against common sense, not to mention the Constitution (Article 2, IIRC).

And yes, the majority (note that word: majority) of IP is indefensible, and a waste of time to deal with (Britney Spears using Windows...wouldn't be surprised if she worked at Micro$oft!).

But we have built this great nation (and, to the extent that other countries have prospered, they have done so emulating the USA in this respect) on the rule of law, and the enforcement of said law by the appropriate Authorities.

Yes, they are funded by taxes, and we all find taxes a "necessary evil." But the right of taxation is firmly granted in the Constitution (Article 4) for the "protection of the Law of the Land."

To suggest that, given the current laws protecting intellectual property, we should then turn around and ignore them when it comes to enforcement, is going about it all wrong.

The result will be not only mass piracy (leading to more stringent laws!), but a complete collapse of all that we hold dear, the Order of Society.

No, until we reach that day when IP laws are stricken down from the books forever (I propose a new Amendment!), we must do our utmost to defend these laws, for they are the very things which make this country good.

Disclaimer: IANAL.

Here's the RIAA argument that kills me...

[banda]

You know what I'm sick of? The RIAA repeatedly states that only a small percentage of music titles are profitable. They go on to insinuate that when piracy reduces the profits of the few profitable albums, that it impacts the record companies' incentive to privide broad catalog.

This is utter hogwash. If the record companies had any idea beforehand which CDs would be profitable, they would only publish the profitable ones. But they don't know ahead of time. That's why they publish a broad catalog, so that they have a better chance of publishing a hit and making a profit. To insinuate that the record companies publish unprofitable albums out of the goodness of their hearts is the height of deception.

Let's look at this from the point of view of a fictional touring music act that we'll call "Zit Remedy". If "Megadisc Records", member of the RIAA decides to publish a CD of Zit Remedy's music, it has only a slim chance of being profitable. If Zit Remedy's CD isn't profitable, then Zit Remedy receives no royalty payments. However, the CD still stands as a tool for publicity, possibly increasing concert revenues and sales of merchandise. Except Zit Remedy's self-titled debut release is priced at $20 a copy, so it reaches a very small audience... unless college students start ripping and file sharing. Then the profit potential for Zit Remedy climbs. More buzz = more concert attendees = more revenues. The only loser here is Megadisc.

It's pretty clear that the record companies represented by the RIAA have a flawed business model. I don't think it's up to taxpayers to subsidize bad business models. If it were, I could start a buggy whip factory and retire wealthy. Let Megadisc figure it out for itself.

My Favorite Quote Too ...

[openbear]

"Piracy is not a private offense," Hilary Rosen, president of the RIAA, said in a statement. "It hurts everyone ... a crime ... against each of us."

Since she brought it up, lets discuss crimes "against each of us":

• Price fixing, why does an audio CD still cost about as much as a DVD? Isn't an album much cheeper to produce (as in creating the content, not the physical media) than a full length movie.
• Why is the market oversaturated with crappy boy bands and no-talent-big-fake-boobs-Brittany-Spears clones. The real crime against humanity is that our ears are violated daily with crappy corporate formula pop crap.

Just my $0.02

Re:My Favorite Quote Too ...

[radja]

about the pricefixing.. I've been wondering.. how come the average book has a higher production price, and takes more time to write. Still, the average price of a book here in the netherlands is E 12.95 (according to a recent article in the paper) whereas the average CD, with higher sales and lower costs for production is almost twice that??)

//rdj