Slashdot Mirror
Would a Boycott of the MPAA/RIAA Help Matters?
ChrisGoodwin asks: "Why do geeks support MPAA and RIAA? Here on Slashdot, the talk is all about how evil the film and record companies are. But when the next Star Wars or Matrix or Lord of the Rings comes out, it's all about camping out to get tickets. According to RIAA's web site, member companies distribute 90% of the legitimate sound recordings in the United States; chances are, if you've ever bought music, you've given them money. (Take a look at their list of members.) Heck, most of the film companies own, are owned by, or share a corporate parent with a record company, and many of us get our internet access from part of the MPAA/RIAA conglomerate. So why is it? Why do we continue to buy their product? Why are we giving them money so that they can harass us? Why hasn't there been a call for a boycott of the record and film industries?" This is in the FAQ, but this is certainly a discussion worth having. With the pervasiveness of media in our society, for some it is not as easy as "boycott" or "no boycott", and it may be unfair to the artists we like for us to do so, and as Big Media diversifies, a boycott on movies and music may still not be enough. So do you feel a boycott of mass media will help matters, or would such be counter-productive in some way?
Sure it would help. If you could actually convince people outside of Slashdot to do it.
I'm sorry, but it's just not feasible.
No one wants to stop buying from their favorite artist, who is most likely distributed through the RIAA. And no one wants to miss a much-anticipated movie, even though the MPAA is involved. I don't want to say we have no willpower or convictions, but there are just things people will always want to see and hear, and these things are provided by an evil company. Asking someone to give up these things is maybe asking a bit too much. Sure there are those of us who don't want to see LOTR, but there's a good chunk who would stop at nothing to see it, despite its "evil" ties.
There have to be alternatives to a boycott. Because if you're basing your entire revolution on something of that magnitude, you're going to be sorely disappointed. The masses need their entertainment, and will get it from the easiest source.
I would like to boycott the MPAA, but if I want to see a good movie they're the only game in town. I can't really see a movie in any way (except when on TV) without supporting them. The best I can do is to send a dollar to the EFF for every dollar I spend on movies.
However, I do boycott the RIAA.
In order to be successful, any boycott would have to be: 1) Well-Planned. Without sufficient planning, it would be too little to matter. 2) Big enough to matter. Remember, these are large companies. Fluctuation (both up and down)is nothing new to them, and your boycott would probably go unnoticed unotherwise. 3) Thourough. It doesn't do much good to boycott the RIAA, then turn around and give the money to them some other way. 4) Publicised. They would have to _know_ they were truly losing money, and why. Otherwise, any real loss could be considered a sign they need to _increase_ their stranglehold on the market. Let them know who they are losing money to, why they are, and what they can do to stop it. I have yet to see any attempt which did not fail in at least one of these aspects.
Contact Me (got tired of viruses emailing me).
A boycott would hurt more than it helps. All that the elimination of the slashdot market would do is make us a market not worth pursuing--and so we'd have a return to the days when all movies sucked, instead of having a good one every few (6-36) months.
A better idea would be for us to find RIAA/MPAA a business model adapted to the digial age--one that's more effective than the "Street Performer's Protocol" and more flexible than the current "pay per copy."
(Of course I have an idea. I'll write a journal about it, and y'all can see it there!)
What we need is someone to step up and provide what we DO want and then buy from them. So long as there is no alternative, then "boycotting" can never work. If you feel strongly about the issue, buy from and support those that are not funded or owned by the bad guys.
Anything you say will be held against you.
RIAA is disproportionately controlled by the Big 5 labels, despite the large membership including dozens of indie labels, few of those labels have anything to do with what RIAA says or does. Furthermore, many of those labels are members of RIAA more to gain legitimacy and access to basic distribution channels etc - not to fight your digital rights.
We'd be much better off boycotting the Big 5 of the music industry - Sony, Warner, EMI, BMG, Universal, and leaving indie labels and musicians that need every last bit of support alone.
The hard part is actually getting enough people to understand the issues and join the boycott. It's not simple, you can't tell people they're slaughtering cute little puppies for fur or something. You have to go into a huge explaination of the issues at the end of which, most people's response is "So what?".
I personally no longer purchase new CD's unless I'm buying them directly from an unsigned artist. I go to the used record store if I want something published by a label. It might take a little while for something specific to show up but I always have a list of 20-30 CD's that I want to buy at a given time anyhow. I would certainly participate in an official boycott and do my best to explain the position to non-geeks. However, my gut instinct is that the only way you can get a boycott against the record companies to work is to say they're drowning bags of kittens to make CD's or something.
Don't expect any support from the media either...
These companies have spent billions brainwashing us to think that we actually want these things. The new evolutionary strength is going be people's ability to filter out media and advertising. Wise Up.
love is just extroverted narcissism
I must have it...
I must watch it...
I must own it...
My own...
My preciousssssss
Put your energy and time and $$$ into lobbyists who will push your agenda in Washington.
otherwise, cut out your eyes and ears. 'cause, really, there's no way of stopping yourself from putting money into their hands. When you listen to the radio, you are supporting the RIAA via advertisers. Same with network television. a media boycott is just not feasible in a media saturated country (it's one of the US' largest exports)
If you want a boycott to be effective you have RIAA/MPAA has to be aware there IS a boycott. To quote Dr. Strangelove "What good is a Doomsday weapon if you don't tell anyone you have it?!?"
A bunch of people suddenly stopping use of a product(s) does not send a company a message. It must involve some sort of media frenzy so that the message is clear. If we just stop buying/supporting RIAA/MPAA without letting them know that there is a boycott, then they'll just see that as further justification that pirates are cutting into their profits.
"I drank what?" - Socrates
There is a simple way you can take action against the MPAA and RIAA. Donate your old music CDs and movie videos to your public library.
If you later decide that you want to hear or watch something you donated, just get it out of the library.
At least, that what's the RIAA is going to say.
If sales happened to go down because of this, they would probably blame lack of sales on file sharing and piracy. They've done it before.
For this reason and because we geeks make up a small portion of all who give money to them, it's probably best for us to increase awareness of all the bad that the MPAA/RIAA are doing and support groups like the EFF.
Wow.. great minds think alike (whilst fools seldom differ)
:-)
/. community proclaimed a boycott and refused to buy CDs for a month.
I was just pondering the practicalities of a RIAA boycot this morning (okay, who installed the trojan on my PC???
Unfortunately, such boycotts can backfire very, very badly.
Imagine if the
If CD sales remained unaffected then the RIAA could simply turn around and say that this proves most people are happy with their pricing, their product and their attitudes to the marketplace.
Or, even worse, if such a boycott did affect sales in a negative way, they'd simply say that this was due to piracy and that it endorses their stand on copy-protection, the DMCA, etc.
In effect, we'd be hoist by our own petard.
Anyone contemplating a boycott ought to be very sure they've got the numbers (and I'm talking *big* numbers) before they embark on such an action.
A better way might be to incite people to get active in starting a petition protesting the loss of fair use due to recent and proposed moves by the RIAA/MPAA.
This would have to be a petition where signatures are collected in ink, on sheets of paper. Cyber petitions are too easily discredited.
I'm sure, given the seven degrees of separation principle, that if everyone here solicited everyone they knew to sign such a petition, and got them to do likewise, it wouldn't be too hard to dump a very large truckload of dead-tree pulp and ink on the doorstep of Congress.
That's the way democracy works isn't it?
It wouldn't be counter productive, but just like anything else, one has to determine what they are trying to achieve and choose the best way to get there.
/. is composed of many technical, knowledgeable people (well one or two and then everyone else ;), why don't we as the open source community do the unthinkable, and come up with a os technology to help the MPAA/RIAA attain their goal of making their content harder to illegally copy, but yet still allows fair use use. We regularly bash their attempts at doing this because they would rather err on the side of making the thing totally uncopyable, so why not pitch in and help to try to achieve a mutally agreeable (well as much as possible) solution.
As far as I can tell (and this applies to me personally) the biggest gripe that people have about MPAA/RIAA is that they want to squelch a persons right to fair use. I don't think anyone begrudges their attempts to keep actually pirating at bay, it's only when these attempts prevent the legitimate owners from doing things that the copyright laws appear to allow is when hackles get raised. Please feel free to add anything else (like artists rights, but I don't really have an opinion on this personally as it is more contract law imho).
OK, so we want to make sure our fair use rights are kept intact. How is the best way to go about doing this? I see two possible approaches. One approach that falls into the category of "why can't we all just get along", is this.
The second approach (and probably more realistic) is to say, "hey, no matter what technology we throw at it, people will copy it". Fine, this is a valid point. But lets be realists here and accept that the MP/RIAA will not take this for an answer. So again, I think having us as a community help them come up with a solution to their needs that is mutually beneficial. Suggest alternatives, create/push these alternatives. Put youself into their shoes, say "I need to protect my IP from those who would illegally gain/attain it" and say, how would I solve this issue?
I guess both my suggestions fall into the category of, lets solve the problems instead of fighting wars. Not that I have anything against fighting wars, it's just that, like in "War Games", there can't be a winner. Sure we could "boycott", but would that REALLY do any good? We're just to small a segment to make any real impact with our wallets, but we could potentially make more impact with our heads.
Boycotting is a complete waste of time in this case. We are not talking about boycotting fur which has a negative stigma attached to it, nor are we walking about sticking it to some small company that doesn't want to play by the rules. Media is just too pervasive in society and the next round of teenyboppers can keep the big media companies afloat with their rampant desire for the next N'Sync and Power Rangers.
Beyond that, while there are many Slashdotters who have no problem skipping Star Wars or LOTR until it comes out on video, ask them to not purchase the next Resident Evil when it comes out. Video games (something geeks love) and the movies are hopelessly intertwined. When you support the video game or the console (hello!?! PS2 is made by SONY!) you support the DRM bills we all hate.
If the geeks on Slashdot want to make a difference, they should
There are a lot of smart people reading Slashdot. I read a number of posts on any given topic that the author should just cut and paste into a letter, throw it in an envelope and send it to his or her legislator.
That is how you make a difference... not by boycotting.
-AThe church where I go pays a license fee (based on the size of the church) to sing a bunch of the newer songs. I protested to the guy who pays the bills, saying we should only sing public domain stuff. The fee (which is not all that much, really) goes to some company which is part of the RIAA. I figured all this out and am still trying to determine how upset I should be. I love the image of a Christian musician offering his works to the church "for the glory of God", and looming behind him is the dark visage of the State: "don't even think about singing these without paying!"
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
How many posts have the theme "I've been boycotting RIAA for years -- the last new CD I bought was xx years ago."
News flash -- this means that RIAA doesn't care about you. By definition, you are not their customer. Hell, you're not even close to their target demographic. Why would they care if you love/hate/support/boycott/praise/condemn them?
You, personally, have absolutely zero impact on their bottom line.
Zip
Nada
--
The problem is that only a small percentage of the money I pay to see a movie is going toward funding the evil lawyers attacking fair use law. The vast majority is going toward stuff I *want* to support. I *want* to vote with my wallet by giving Peter Jackson money for Two Towers. I *want* to give money to the actors. I *want* to give money to the scriptwriters. I do *not* want to live in a world where there is no more entertainment industry. So what's to do? If you say a policy of zero tolerance is in order, such that as long as a company does any small thing I don't like I should never buy their products, then I'd never be buying anything at all, and would have to go off into the mountains to live as a hermit, growing my own food, sewing my own clothes, and so on.
So what's the *practical* answer? What can drive the message home to the entertainment industry without making it cease to exist? From the point of view of the MPAA members, reduced movie attendance because of a grievance over their legal policies looks indistinguishable from reduced movie attendance because people don't like their movies. It just looks like there is less of an audience.
This is especially a problem with the kinds of movies geeks like to see. If the industry sees that geek-friendly movies are not doing well, their reaction is NOT going to be to change their legal policies to appeal to the geeks. Their reaction is going to be, "Oh, I guess we should stop making movies like this - they don't seem to do very well for some reason." And then no more movies we like get made.
So, yes, I *am* going to be giving my money to see The Two Towers - multiple times. But I will be sure to balance that out with donations to the EFF.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Hey, guys:
;)
Boycotting the MPAA and RIAA won't do any good, for one major reason: the number of people who actually care about this issue is so small compared to the population at large that the RIAA and MPAA is unlikely to even notice that a boycott is occurring.
What WILL happen is that the people involved in the boycott will punish themselves, suffering weeks without internet access, movies, music, and so on, all just to find out that their suffering has all been in vain.
Then, there are the logistical problems. How, for instance, will boycotters coordinate their activities if they cannot read Slashdot because their ISP is their cable company? And, if they cannot coordinate their efforts, isn't it possible that at least some of them will never realize the boycott is over, ending up forty years from now like latter-day Rip Van Winkles, trying to plug decades-old Linux boxen into some hyper-modern network? Hair down to their ankles, teeth rotten away, eyes frozen into a thousand-yard stare?
Let alone the withdrawl symptoms they'll experience when they give up their favorite games. Public-service wards will fill with people whose thumbs continually twitch, twitch, twitch in a memorized UT sequence... Periodically they'll yell "BUY A BIGGER GUN!" The orderlies will be nervous wrecks. Electroshock will certainly follow.
No, friends, I think I'll pass. I think it will be a lot more fun if one of us creates a half-life mod oriented around the MPAA and/or RIAA headquarters and posts it to a friendly mirror. Surely at least ONE employee of one of these agencies reads slashdot? And, surely SOMEONE out there likes doing game mods, and has a few hours to spare?
I'd just like to see the boss battle against Valenti. THAT would be SOMETHING. Do a sort of "ROBOVALENTI" theme, maybe. Use really bad, color mug shots from the media. Animate it like on SouthPark. Maybe do something like the "bedroom" scene between Saddam and the devil? Um... Or not.
Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
Movies: Only attend matinees, if you MUST see it in a theatre.
MPAA still gets a cut; even if not directly, the cost is offset in the feature price.
DVD's: Only buy used. Period. It's not that difficult to find a pawn shop, or ebay, or whatever.
Music: Only buy used. Again, it's not that hard to find your favorite artists.
Sorry, somebody originally had to buy it in the first place, which means that MPAA or RIAA still got its share. Creating a demand in the secondary market is only going to stimulate a surge in supply in the primary market.
Wanna support the artist? Go see their show, buy their ts-shirt or cd AT THE SHOW.
Sorry, the RIAA gets its cut here as well, at least from the CD sales (the T-shirt sales and concert tickets will vary depending on the artist's contract).
You are missing out on another thing: even if somehow the distribution channel is completely bypassed, that means that the artist didn't get paid either.
The problem with both RIAA and MPAA is that neither one consists of a single corporation, but that they are "trusts" which have succeeded in sustaining oligopoly power.
A boycott truly means: never watching movies outside of independent films, and never listening to music outside of independent music. Most of us (myself included here) are all consumerist victims to the mass market.
Sorry, we can't beat them using these tactics.
I say boycotting RIAA/MPAA will *hurt* the cause. Furthermore, if you don't buy (license) MORE movies and music, you just might be responsible for new draconian laws designed to keep content dealers afloat.
(irony intended)
Sound absurd? Not really. All of the television and much of the print news has some affiliation with the RIAA/MPAA. On the news, slumping music sales are attributed to piracy by kids. If THAT is true, then declining automobile sales must be caused by little green men from mars, because the media is pretty much ignoring the economy right now.
News outlets like CNN run -- unedited -- the RIAA's claim of 400 burners siezed in that NY piracy raid. Never mind that it is NOT TRUE, the news doesn't care about accuracy and even if they are aware of an error, they have a vested interest in the RIAA/MPAA.
Anyways, they'll just spin it so the boycott gets no mention, and dropping sales is because of filesharing on that evil Gnutella network, and obviously the RIAA needs a license to hack your system looking for loot... blah blah
-S
"They're grups! bonk, bonk, on the head."
It's good to see that people are actually talking about this again. As the founder of boycott-riaa.com on July 13, 2002, I've been at this for quite sometime. When the original threat of Napster being shutdown loomed, people got incensed and it made difference. That lasted right up until other file sharing programs became available.
We still get a large number of visitors who drop by the site on a daily basis, to check to see what the news is. Some of the most recent articles include: "RIAA's Statistics Don't Add Up to Piracy" (article) and The RIAA's response to "How many CD Burners were there actually in the Queens Bust?"(article) seems there were a heck of a lot less than the equivalent the stated. Straight from the horse's mouth
My personal boycotting lead me to start buying independent music and I've actually been buying more music than I ever did from RIAA artists and labels. Partially because its often cheaper, around $8.00 -$10.00, and partially because the music is often much better, than what the majors are putting out.
In 2001 RIAA sales were down 5% and they RIAA laid off 16 people in Jan 2002. This year the sales are down 7% to 9% (depending on whose numbers you read) hopefully we can look forward to more layoffs. Less staff less impact. The RIAA membership dues are a portion of the labels sales, lower sales=smaller budget=less impact.
Those that say there is no affect on the RIAA and MPAA are misguided. In the past 2 1/2 years I've bought over 150 CDs from independent musicians, money that went to them, not to RIAA labels. But the largest affect that has taken place is that people are begining to discover independent music, are buying it, ignoring the majors offerings, and as a result the RIAA is becoming the Maginot Line of the music industry. We make them irrelvant by bypassing them. What else is happening is that artists are beginning to wake up speaking out as well, Joni Mitchell, Janis Ian, Elton John, The RAC headed by Don Henley, just to name a few. The RIAA's positions coupled with a loss of sales, has come to the attention of Congress, The DOJ to name but a few and many former backers in congress are finding that the RIAA isn't always right or even telling them the truth. Unethical business practices are coming to light that have been the industry standard for years, that are forcing changes in the way the industry works, in their actions toward artists and consumers.
This is not an if/then type of thing, there are a lot of varibles involved, that each action has an effect somewhere, maybe very subtle, but the overall result is that while the RIAA is winning the battles, they are losing the war. And their desperation is showing.