Slashdot Mirror
RIAA nominated for "Internet Villain of the Year"
Joey Patterson writes "Slyck reports that the UK's Internet Industry Awards organization has nominated the RIAA for its Internet Villain of the Year award because they support "'right to hack' proposals and other unworkable solutions to curb copyright abuse"." Congratulations to them on being nominated for this prestigious and appropriate award ;)
You mean they expect more nominations, and didn't just go ahead and award them the prize?
Villian? How about Villain
...nah, I'm just going to be complacent about it like everyone else and keep buying CDs. Hooray for unchecked capitalism and industry lobbying.
Hammer of Truth
...the sky has been nominated for the prestigious "Big Blue Thing" award...
Honey, I shrunk the Cygwin
It's sad to realize, that when you step back, all that this will amount to is a good chuckle for the geek community and a *shrug* so what? from the record industry. What needes to happen is for publications on what the RIAA is doing to reach farther than the tech community and get on mainstream news. Of course, for reasons you can already probably figure out, it won't.
SecondPageMedia - Wha
Does everyone really think the RIAA is evil for not letting people get away with piracy, or is this just the usual wanky groupthink?
Ok, I'll bite and reply to the troll...
Piracy is wrong. I agree with them on that. But trying to get legislation passed that would allow you to hack, cripple, and even disable networks and computers that you just think might have copyrighted material on them is worse than piracy in my opinion.
By your (And the RIAA's) logic, since I own the copyright on this post, and I'm pretty sure it is on your computer since you are probably reading it, I should now be legally allowed to hack your computer and bring it down because you have my copyrighted material on your computer. See why we don't like the RIAA now?
They won the award for hacking into peoples computers, which may or may not be a pirates. Who really knows with IP Spoofing, etc .. For all we know, they could hack into some CIA machine and wipe it out because someone spoofed the address .. Joy of joys. Read a little, would ya? The RIAA is evil, no doubt. But not because of piracy, but because their sales model is failing and they can't see it's obvious that $15 CDs cant compete with feature loaded $15 DVD movies with the soundtracks included as "extras" as an afterthought. They dont want to come to the conclusion that the only way to make money is to sell their music CDs for 5 bux a pop, cuz thats all that they're worth today compared to music based feature rich $15 DVDs.
The RIAA is evil because they buy senators and use them to buy laws that restrict our fundamental freedoms like the Fair Use of copyright law. Also, their copy-protected CDs crashed many machines, and destroyed the firmware on many drives. To add to this, the RIAA is NOW trying to get DRM into every media device and is trying to get laws passed that allow them to hack and DoS your computer so that they can keep you from "pirating" their music. Also, let's not forget their journalistic bullshit, like claiming that 4x CD burners are the equivalent of 4 CD burners.
1. It doesn't have a handlebar moustache to twirl
2. It doesn't shoot its own henchmen to prove how evil it is
3. It may be incorporated, but it isn't corporeal enough to die of impalement, the default method of bad guy death since the heyday of 70's action films.
What, they're going to vote for anyone else on the list? Hardly...
So who are the other nominees? The nominations are: BBC Watchdog: 'for a report on the important issue of spam that was more intent on vilifying ISP's than educating consumers' The Home Office: 'for the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security (ATCS) Act and continued delays associated with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA)' Oftel 'for (amongst a host of other things) failing to ensure expedient local loop unbundling by BT which has hindered both competition in the telco sector and the development of Broadband Britain' The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA): 'for supporting "right to hack" proposals and other unworkable solutions to curb copyright abuse' Telecommunications analysts: 'for their substantial contribution to the meltdown in the telecommunications and Internet sector'
From: Santa
I hope this little award shows just how much very you're appreciated. Merry Christmas and have a happy New Year.
Santa Clause
P.S. I still haven't seen any royalty checks for "Santa Got Run Over By a Reindeer."
--SuperBug
Their icon should be a dog with shifty eyes.
ts.com, who "is Europe's leading online ticketing service, enabling venues and promoters throughout the sporting, entertainment and travel industries to sell, market and distribute their tickets directly from their own websites.".
Anyone want to take bets who won't be getting a lot of contracts with RIAA member-backed acts if the RIAA wins this one?
Nah, Wal-mart was sueing because the information was leaked and publishde without permission. Most people here already *know* the RIAA is evil, so it's not a secret... and they don't seem to be trying to keep it a secret that they're either.
--
Hollywood representatives have publicly stated that skipping commercials is "stealing."
2. Grossly inflating their statistics and numbers to boost their reputation. Got a 5x CD burner? It's 5 CD burners according to the RIAA. The mainstream press (i.e., CNN) doesn't know the difference and reports the bogus numbers. They also inflate their losses, neglecting to tell us they cut their production during the same period.
3. Supporting digitally "protected" CD's that aren't guaranteed to work on your CD player with no recourse if you were stuck with unusable disks.
4. Driving scientists and researchers out of the US, due to their threatening to sue researchers who wish to expose security vulnerabilities in copy protection (Felten vs. RIAA).
5. Harassing manufacturers that make digital recordings more portable, like in the Diamond Rio(RIAA v. Diamond).
6. Harassing ISP's like AT&T and Optimum Online (successfully) for allowing P2P networks to exist.
etc. 7.
Pardon me for speaking for many on /. but:
We don't think they're evil, we think they are greedy. Most of the RIAA's actions toward computer and consumer electronics technology have been driven by a desire to control their customers. Many of the industry's business plans were built around locking in customers to pay-per-use media distribution schemes or straight CD sales.
Recently, they've tumbled to the fact that campaign contributions can cause legislation to skew in their favor. They've "requested" laws that make fair use illegal, and require that disabling technologies be embedded in any consumer device. Essentially, they've asked the U.S. government to create a "safe" market for them.
There's a precendent for this: RCA attacking, then coopting the whole television thing out from under Farnsworth (television's inventor).
The RIAA's actions do little to prevent piracy. For example, the measures asked for only apply to the U.S. electronics market, and the most serious piracy happens overseas, in China. China's suppliers will not manufacture devices for that market that include crippled features when it is cheaper to manufacture and sell devices with all the features enabled. The manufacturers would be forced to add the technology to sell in the U.S., but they'd simply raise the price a notch or two to compensate.
The RIAA's moves are bad for consumers, and especially bad for computer-literate folks like those at /. Evil? Perhaps not, but very, very greedy.
RIAA nominates You for "Internet Villian of the Year"
Oh,
Wait a second, that's this country, never mind.
...should really go to the Organisation of UK ISPs for nominating RIAA and ts.com for sponsoring this particular award.
This isn;t about stopping software piracy, this is about authority. The RIAA as a private company has no authority to do that, and it should stay that way. Any enforcement of copyright violations should be delt with by the goverment, and ONLY the goverment, which has been elected by the people and for the people. The RIAA is not a goverment agency and therefor has NO LEGAL RIGHT TO law enforcement.
Even if it was the secret service, they still need a warrant from a judge. The new law would give the RIAA Jurisdiction to be cop, judge, and jurry over the internet.
Are you on drug(s)?!! Why not?
To the leader of the Internet Villian of the Year, H i l l a r y!
Ok, so am I to understand that law enforcement are now allowed to shoot people that they THINK are criminals, and that includes all crimes such as speeding, running stop signs, jaywalking, and not having your dog on a leash? And just in case youve forgotten, police are granted the right to authority, and this kind of action is not acceptible. So by that rationale, the RIAA, whom are not an authority nor do I recognize them as an authority, do not have the right to brute force the law in this manner. So if they are not an authority, why should they be granted an immunity to the law. It seems almost like a crackpot scheme that a mad scientist bent on world domination would come up with, hence classifying them as villians. So to answer your question of do I think a corporate organization that is trying to pass legislation to enforce laws that they have no right or authority to enforce, spy, burglerize, cripple my property, and take away my civil liberties is evil, then yes, I do.
The nominations are:
BBC Watchdog: 'for a report on the important issue of spam that was more intent on vilifying ISP's than educating consumers'
The Home Office: 'for the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security (ATCS) Act and continued delays associated with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA)'
Oftel: 'for (amongst a host of other things) failing to ensure expedient local loop unbundling by BT which has hindered both competition in the telco sector and the development of Broadband Britain'
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA): 'for supporting "right to hack" proposals and other unworkable solutions to curb copyright abuse'
Telecommunications analysts: 'for their substantial contribution to the meltdown in the telecommunications and Internet sector'
That really is a nasty group of suspects, but we might want to add:
John Poindexter: 'for attempting to destroy world-wide privacy.'
The United States Congress (both houses): 'for (among too many other offenses to list in detail) passing the PATRIOT Act and other privacy-invading and security-compromising legislation that will be completely ineffective in stopping terrorism.'
utter rubbish
I guess the RIAA is going to win the intermural Evil Cup from the MPAA this year. Talk about a tough match!
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
However, ultimately, the success of a business depends on it's customers. If we buy RIAA CDs, even as used products, we support their methods. If we go out, find other music, and purchase those non-RIAA CDs, we support an alternate model that depends on quality and personal customer service, not mass appeal and copy protection. There is no way to legislate the RIAA from destroying the right of fair use anymore than there was a way to legislate Wal-Mart from destroying main street. In both cases, the presence of customers determines success.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
"boris and natasha are going to be pissed."
Nah. After the collapse of the communist bloc, they had their names legally changed to "Jack Valenti" and "Hillary Rosen."
I think I speak for the majority of /.'ers when I say:
What the fuck?
mstyne: real name, no gimmicks
Do we really need an award to let them know this? Stop encouraging them!
This must be the first award anyone has ever given them...
I was hoping to yet that award, but I don't think I'm nearly as villainous as the RIAA... I was hoping everyone would forget about them and notice those movies on Kazaa that say they are Harry Potter but are really porno or all those files that say they are GTA3 or MS office but are really Mechwarrior 4. I think you all know how villainous I am, but even I don't compare to the blasted RIAA.
--average internet script kiddie
Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
". If we buy RIAA CDs, even as used products, we support their methods. "
It has been my experience that many independant/small artists get there first "distribution"(usually self made) from small 'used' music stores. If we didn't buy Used stuff from them, they wouldn't be able to support themselves as a Business, and then there would be even fewer outlets for independent/small artists to become 'known'.
OTOH it has also been my experience that artist who complain about the riaa's methods would happily accept a contract with them. If the people creating the content won't bite the bullet and use alternative means so they don't get screwed, how can the consumers be expected to boycott?
the only way to fix this is to create a music production/distibution company that doesn't enforce the draconian methods on the artists the current music companies do, and to entice signings by giving a higher percentage of sales, and not lovking them into more then 2 or 3 records per contract.
Of course that means:
a)low to no signing bonus
b)musicians will have to actual have a track record of sales before they become rich.
c)Huge start up capital.
I consider both a and b to be good for music and consumers, but not to enticing to the big name musicians.
*Bold added by me
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
You contradict yourself. The RIAA's membership consists of record companies who want to sell me their products. This is not evil. However, to do so and THEN try to control what I can do with the product I now OWN violates the First Sale doctrine in that they are now trying to assert control over MY property without even having a potentially-unenforceable contract with me like an EULA. This IS evil.
Actually, it goes somewhat farther than that. They are asking Congress to give them powers that exceed the powers of law enforcement agencies (under the Berman Act) AND to then to pick up the costs of enforcing their purely private rights via criminal prosecution under the DMCA.
I do not support "piracy" (although I see no connection between copyright infringement and piracy (which is a crime of violence and victimization)). However, I do, and always WILL, oppose the RIAA's and the MPAA's attempts to leverage their position as content VENDORS into making themselves America's secret police.
Oh, BTW, Merry Christmas and
utter rubbish
anyone who posted a link to goatse.cx
Maybe in 2003 the girl and boy begin sneaking around to date behind the father's back (via limited direct distributions direct from the artist's website?). How long until the couple are enagaged (using the Internet to directly market the music?)? The question is, will the father walk the daughter down the aisle or will the couple elope?
In 2002, the public began to dislike the RIAA. I predict wedding bells by 2006.
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello
"driven by a desire to control their customers"
I would call that Evil.
Plus the assumption that everyone is a liar, thief, and copyright infringer, unless proven innocent.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Maybe you mean Hillary Rosen, the evil dictator of the RIAA. Of course, you could just be misspelling Hillary Rodham, the maiden name of Hillary Rodham Clintan, former first lady and senator of NY, who has nothing to do with this post. Is that it?
PUBLIC SPLIT ON WHETHER BUSH IS A DIVIDER -CNN scrolling banner, 10/15/2004
Would that they had ... at least THEN watching Rosen and Valenti at work would be AMUSING ...
utter rubbish
like he said:
"boris and natasha are going to be pissed."
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Why isn't Slashdot doing this? Let's have a Slashdot villain of the year contest.
Yeah, we can joke. We KNOW one of the nominees will be CowboyNeil. But in all seriousness, perhaps this is another way Slashdot can do some good. Have people suggest villains, send the reasons why, and the most popular and best-explained ones go up.
Sure, it may seem silly, but today, on the net, a little spectacle and some humor can break down barriers and make a point.
"The Sage treasures Unity and measures all things by it" - Lao Tzu
here let me fix that..
$perl -pi -e s/Rodam/Rosen/g parent.post
:)(smile)
I couldn't agree with you more...assuming that everyone who uses your product is going to steal it is one of the most irritatingly exasperating stances an organization can take. I just today had a real world experience of that very nature at Best Buy purchasing a DVD player as a present for my daughter's family.
I went through the check out lane, paid for my purchase, had the player in my cart and looking at the receipt on my way out the door when a kid on a power trip in a yellow tee-shirt comes up to me demanding to see the perfectly visible receipt. I said no and continued walking towards the door and he took the damn DVD player out of my cart and said "then you don't get this!"
Talk about pissed...I did end up showing him the receipt, got MY Dvd player back and headed straight for the return counter. Of course, the lines there were long, and I just said fuck it and left with the player.
The power trip the kid at Best Buy today was on is the same power trip that the RIAA is on. It's about control and subjugation to their will.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
I think the RIAA is stupid for its militant stance on the destruction of a technology that could have saved their industry from their own extinction, and personally, I think the music industry deserves to be pirated, as it costs aprx. $0.17 to completly manufacture a compact disc (including booklet, case, and other factors.) From each $15.99 unit sold, the artist usually only recieves $0.04 per unit sold in royalties. And as far as the retailers are concerned, they have no choice but to charge that $15.99, as they buy the units for about 20% to 35% less than the consumer pays, which I assume is the general markup of pretty much everything these days. So if the retailer pays $12.79, less $0.04 to the artist and another $0.17 for manufacturing costs, they gross aprx. $12.58 per unit sold. My point is this: I have been paying these prices for years; they aren't in any financial difficulty, and the artists themselves aren't making $12.50 off a cd. This justifies the "piracy" of the music industry, in my mind, so long as you aren't bootlegging. Fight fire with fire, I say.
Not to toot my own horn or anything, but perhaps Boris & Natasha would be a good icon for a new MPAA/RIAA category.
I think the RIAA is more evil simply because of how much their product sucks, and they don't care. I may not like the MPAA, or a lot of what they do, but at least they can still give out a quality product (LOT2 is worth the money, for example)... whereas you may pay the RIAA for a CD full of crap just to get a little goodness. 2003 is looking like the movie companies are going to bring out a lot of goodness, to bad some people piss them off by not paying for it.
:-)
They're both evil though... but the sludge of the RIAA tends to float at a lower level...
Awww Bullwinkle, that trick never works!
Presto!
(click) RRRROOOOAAAARRRR!
No doubt about it, Rock. MS audio stinks.
Sigs are bad for your health.
And there's a substantial part of the problem: With the money they are spending in Washington, they decide what those laws will be.
They own the ones who rule you; in other words, nothing they do is illegal, or to put a finer point on it, by the time they're ready to do it, it will be legal for them to do it. It's as easy for them to change a law is it is for you to pick up a dagger.
This is not my sandwich.
I say we take away The Biggest Douche in the Universe award away from John Edward and give it to the RIAA.
"Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
-Marilyn Manson
But on the upside when RIAA came to the podium to accept it's award it was struck with 200 trillion tons of flaming shit sent down from heaven.
Sure, it's a lack of trust and you're treated like a criminal before the fact....But, the fact is that many stores lose lots of merchandise this time of year. I don't like it, but I don't falt them one bit.
And what would be wrong with a simple "paid" sticker placed on the box by the cashier who cheerfully accepted the money instead of forcing every single one of their customers to prove their innocence with a gruff "I need to see your recipt" at the door?
The point is there are many ways to solve both the RIAA's and Best Buy's perceived losses through theft. Treating everyone of your customers as a potential thief may certainly be one, but certainly not the only or best method.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
I suspect that Best Buy, like many stores, suffers higher losses from Employee Theft than from it's customers. Hiring more employees to abuse customers won't fix this problem. Wouldn't it make more sense to just watch the customers that go through the checkout line, and then go back into the store instead of leaving?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
It means we can refer to their business model as Fractured Fairy Tale.