Slashdot Mirror
What The RIAA Gets Out Of File Sharing
ChrisPaget writes "Wired have a fascinating article about a company called BigChampagne which sells regional P2P download statistics to most of the major record labels. When the labels know what people are downloading, they know what to put on the radio, and sales in the area increase. The record industry's lawsuits against file- sharing companies hang on their assertion that the programs have no use other than to help infringe copyrights. If the labels acknowledge a legitimate use for P2P programs, it would undercut their case as well as their zero-tolerance stance."
files.
to share.
Everyone... go download some Right Said Fred and Spice Girls. Let's see if we can get them back on the radio! I'm Too Sexy for Girl Power!
And using data about which cars are stolen most often to help redesign auto security makes auto theft ok too.
paintball
The RIAA is making the single mother of a 12 year old pay thousands to settle. Does anyone really think that they are just going to allow their plot to be undercut? Clearchannel and the RIAA run a tight squeeze on music and it won't change without some serious consumer action and hopefully federal litigation.
-ad105
If the labels acknowledge a legitimate use for P2P programs, it would undercut their case as well as their zero-tolerance stance.
I'm sure the RIAA will simply put a new spin on it, in a "we're not monitoring demand, we're monitoring privacy" kind of way. A legit use, but one that doesn't support file-sharing.
having a legitimate use doesn't really have any legal effect. File sharing programs already have many possible legitimate uses. They have already quit trying to outlaw the file sharing software. Guns have legitimate uses, however if I use it to kill somebody that doesn't limit my culpability.
Seriously now, they lose a lot too.
Sure, Joe Shmoe (haha it was funny on spike tv...but the guy looks handicapped so you feel guilty for laughing at him) anyways Joe Blow downloads some obscure song and buys the album...and it increases sales
But 100 other people download albums and burn them instead of buying the CD. It is quicker for me to download and burn an album then to go to the store...and cheaper...so there isnt even much of a reason NOT to (aside from morals...but we all lost those a long time ago).
Lucky I am Canadian...and pay that fee with my blank cds thats lets me more legally do that.
The recording industry is losing a TON, just based on common sense and my personal practices, as well as those I know. "Dont buy that cd! I have it! I will burn you a copy in 30 seconds!"
So, lets still feel a bit guilty, like laughing at the handicapped looking Joe Schmoe...but not guilty enough to stop doing it.
[I can picture a world without war, without hate. I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it]
1- The RIAA can tell what is popular via a digital pulse on the wrist of P2P users.
2- The RIAA pushes stations to play songs that are popular downloads.
3- The RIAA members get listeners in cars and offices.
4- The RIAA members sell more discs.
5- The RIAA sues 12 year olds and tries to slash the wrist mentioned in 1 above.
No wonder there's no:
6- PROFIT!
Trolling is a art,
If the labels acknowledge a legitimate use for P2P programs, it would undercut their case as well as their zero-tolerance stance
Right, and insurance companies get info on which vehicles are most popular, based on the ones that are stolen more frequently. They can adjust insurance rates accordingly.
Therefore it undercuts their case when an insurance company goes after a thief or vandal to recoup damages they've paid out.
Quit trying to justify widespread copyright infringement. Stations get the same info based on surveys and call-in request hours.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
is the ear of congress and our lawmakers using scare tactics and commericals with ben affleck telling people not to pirate -- it's just an excuse to legislate and gain more power by scaring people. I don't belive that file sharing effects peoples pocketbooks as much as they'd like us to belive -- it's about control and power.
We kinda already knew this. Many people go out and buy music based about what they download from p2p networks. I myself have done that.
Again though, this isnt in the main stream media so it will make little impact against this constant onslaught of press the RIAA is getting. We need more stories like this to come up on 60mins and the local news to debunk the crap that the RIAA is spewing forth.
I have written to my local news stations around my area about the other sides to many of the RIAA and DMCA related stories and havent even gotten back a form letter reply. I have done this via e-mail and snail mail. Looks like they really don't care to be objective (I know, I know, Thank you Captain Obvious!).
If they used the P2P date to figure out which CD's to, say... copy protect, that'd be a decent analogy. This is more like the car makers figuring out which cars are stolen in an area, then putting more of them on sale. Of course, we're talking about two different things with hugely different costs, not to mention the fact that one is real property and one is "intellectual property."
My guess is that they'd be fine with losing this resource if it meant people would stop downloading music that didn't belong to them, but as long as the latter keeps occurring they might as well take advantage of the statistics they can generate from it. Lemons, lemonade.
...will undermine their long-term legal case. I love it.
This is only a test Sig. If this were a real Sig, it would be witty, pithy, or rude, just like all the other Sigs.
There are certainly other benefits for the music industry from P2P sharing. For the artists, especially those who aren't part of the small handful of superstars who get massive marketing, it allows their music to be heard. Typically only a few songs by smaller artists are available via P2P, so if there if a downloader who likes the music, they must purchase a CD if they want to hear more. This theory is based only on my own experiences for a dozen or so smaller artists whom I "discovered" through Kazaa and then bought CDs for.
I always save my last mod point to mod up a good troll. You people are too serious.
They blame piracy for their declining profits...on riaa.com (presuming, of course, that it's up), right under the article about suing the next batch, they blame piracy for their declining profits...how about they start looking in their lawyers' wallets?
This can't be cheap for them to continue this way - suing everyone and their 12-year-old child. It's only a matter of time...
Go on, prove me wrong. Destroy the fabric of the universe. See if I care. ~Terry Pratchett
Lawsuit Filed Against RIAA Amnesty Program
Contributed by Mike on Wednesday, September 10th, 2003 @ 03:00AM
from the coming-from-all-angles dept.
Even more backlash against the RIAA. I'm really surprised that this hasn't gotten more attention. The story is being squeezed in on some copies of the AP report about the RIAA's settlement with the 12-year-old "threat to the future of the music industry", but a California lawyer has apparently filed a lawsuit against the RIAA (warning: PDF file) for their "amnesty program", claiming that it is "unlawful, unfair and deceptive". The lawyer points out that the RIAA does not provide any actual amnesty in their offer. If the offer really is deceptive, then it seems like the sort of thing the government should step in and point out - but it is nice to at least see a lawsuit bringing more attention to the ridiculousness of the amnesty offer. Found via JD Lasica.
This matters because it's a legitimate use FOR the RIAA. They can't continue arguing that there are no legitimate uses when they have one themselves.
I mean, it's about same as if some company made statistics about stolen stuff (I mean stuff that can be stolen in the legal sense of the word). If that company sold their results to other companies for marketing research, I don't think that would be an argument in favor of allowing theft...
So why is RIAA compromising their position if they get statistics on P2P copyright infringement, even if it is for marketing purposes?
I'm sorry, but this is bullshit.
I don't like copyright. I don't like RIAA. I don't like people who sue 12 year olds. I don't like the way they treat people. I think both we (customers) and artists will be better off when music industry as we know it is gone.
That was a disclaimer.
Now I find the attitude of most people to this question completely fucked up. Like this article for example. Sharing files is illegal. They have every right to prosecute. We need to change system so that it will be legal: direct music distribution from artist to customer, micropayments, whatever (if I knew the right way I would be a fucking billionare by now). Saying that RIAA can't sue people who steal (yes, yes) from it just because it uses the information about stealing is bullshit. You know, there is this statistic published -- the most stolen vehicle in the US. Does this make stealing cars legal?
I passed the Turing test.
I, for one, welcome our new record executive overlords.
...I think you hit the nail on the head in your first post!
Here is how I could really see them working it...
1) study which songs are downloaded
2) play on radio more so more people download
3) sue innocent unknowing downloaders for thousands more than they would have spent on CDs!
Law suits necassary but crazy.. and its even crazier people can actually make stable profit from them!
GIS Search for Kim Delaney
Dude, you could do better.
But I guess you could also do worse too.
The RIAA is launching these lawsuits, not the RIAA. This is like saying that Microsoft wants to know which of its programs are most frequently pirated, therefore it is hypocritical of the BSA to try and stop software piracy. Not quite.
....
Also, this could turn out to be somewhat of a "self-fulfilling prophesy." People tend to search out and download the latest tunes they hear on the radio, so the radio plays more of those tunes, so more people share and download them, so the radio plays
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
Just let people download all the music they want.
Then, market CDs as gifts...nothing says "I love you" like a new original CD, instead of a home-burned one with a Sharpie-scrawl label. They could even go for the Hallmark market share, or perhaps go into Valentine's candy boxes with a CD inside, surrounded by chocolate. Employees can be rewarded not with a simple "You're #1!" keyring, but a "You're #1!" keyring which is also a mini-CD single with their favorite song!
"Say it with a CD," that's the ticket. Just watch out for proper etiquette: an "I'm sorry honey" CD-bouquet should not include the song "Oops! I Did It Again."
...
A) I am getting this document and all the comments here and putting it aside as my defense if I'm ever accused of P2P downloading of copyright material.
B) Let's just face it, it's the new radio.
C) I'll countersue for obstruction of justice.
The RIAA is getting it both ways. They can use P2P as their own little advertizing mechanism and for demographic research aswell. Plus they can use it as a way to rake in money from the lawsuits that follow.
Have they sued any Time-Warner Customers yet?
See the Pictures of the Flood of '08
But it will also increase their profits. So who's going to win - money or the law? I'd bet on money, but I'd also bet on a period of schizophrenic behaviour while the RIAA tries to figure out which side it's bread is buttered on...
Is this a vile practice? Yes. Is it illegal for the RIAA to do? No. They are liars and hypocrites, nothing new about that.
absolutely nothing!they still aint gettin any!
1. there's the company BigChampagne, but there still aint no sex in the champagne room
2. it's all about p2p! it's THE future! when music is forbidden to be downloaded off p2p, it'll go back to it's original purpose - to share hardcore pr0n. people will go back to downloading pr0n off kazaa - while most of us still aint gettin any.
Q.E.D
my blog
i can see how they can get indexes of what is being shared by who, but how (do you think) they are able to monitor the queries. i was thinking one of two:
a) sniffing traffic
b) they have deals with kazaa (etc) master servers and get their logs
any other ideas - or facts?
I don't know about you, but to me, YRO posts are the most important out of all tech stories. Privacy and speech are going to be the next huge battles fought in government, and it's going to be a big war, one that we'll all have to fight. I would hardly call any of the YRO posts "minor."
The whole "comparing a study on P2P usage to a study on which cars are stolen" kinda makes any further comemnts on this article moot, but on the subject of filesharing, Napster came out when, 1999?
:D).
I just dug out this PDF showing CD shipments and dollar value "in millions, after net returns"
Singles are sucking and dying (boo-hoo) but album sales (at lest through 2002) were still pretty strong, in fact, in terms of most profitable years, the frontrunners are
1. 2000
2. 2001
3. 1999
4. 2003
All post-filesharing years. P2P doesn't seem to be hurting album sales any, maybe it's time to just give up on singles (they suck anyway and ensure the charts are full of the only faddy pop crap little kids can afford, and apparently 12y/os just download all that these days anyway
What I find interesting is the list of top file swaps. Seems more hip-hop than pop are being swapped (although there is now some overlap). Does this mean that Radio stations should look to change their formats (words in a lot of the songs might prevent that). How many pop stations are in your area vs. true hip hop unless you live in New York or L.A. The top ten list was:
50 Cent P.I.M.P.
Chingy Right Thurr
Black Eyed Peas Where Is The Love
The Ataris Boys Of Summer
Lil' Bow Wow Let's Get Down
Lumidee Never Leave You
Beyonce Knowles Crazy In Love
Christina Aguilera Can't Hold Us Down
Smile Empty Soul Bottom Of A Bottle
Lil' Kim Magic Stick
Just set up a company called "Champagne" in the EU and if you arent selling sparkling wines produced in the Champagne region by the method champagnoise(spelling?) watch the legal actions from Reims or Epernay roll in. Think Mobilix and you'll see what I mean.
Oxford Dictionaries Online
On the whole lawsuit as business practice.
Disclaimer: If I disagree with you I'm probably trolling...
I always thought that if a band didn't want to have their crap "shared", they should have a level of obscurity in their name and in the titles of their songs.
My band would be called "Jenna", my first album would be called "Jameson", and the songs would go like...
01 - Jenna - Jameson - Blowjob
02 - Jenna - Jameson - Cumshot
03 - Jenna - Jameson - Threesome
04 - Jenna - Jameson - Orgy
05 - Jenna - Jameson - Lesbian
Try to find these on kazaa !
commercials.
Alot of people blame riaa for the situation they were placed into. I just got out of my car this morning after hearing a vice president of communications at riaa on the radio. When asked about CD prices dropping and if they are really starting to realize what an appropriate value is for their product is. The vice president was kind enough to inform us all that adjusting the prices was impossible due to "anti trust" violations.
*BLINK*
That's the last straw! If the RIAA is getting profit from P2P, i say boycott P2P networks!
That'll show 'em.
s/2003/2002
I don't know if you're spouting flames or being serious, but if you were to eliminate the system of copyrights, how do you ensure fair compensation for artists? Not flaming back, just asking.
the blood has stopped pumping, and he's left to decay
the me that you know is now made up of wires
it seems irrelevant if the labels cull trending data from P2P use. I think you would have a very hard time using against them in any way.
no wonder all music "artists" sign up with the riaa's puppet... i mean companies. they just get free coverage, so everyone benefits. apart from the consumer.
aterr - an open source threaded discussion board.
The record labels' "case" is that copying their products is against the law. The possiblity that they might extract some incidental compensation from it doesn't undercut their case in the least.
Similarly, if everyone who downloaded a song voluntarily sent 2 cents to the record company, that wouldn't make any difference either.
The record companies are a nasty lot. They illegally fix prices. They corrupt lawmakers. They try to ban useful technologies just because those technologies can be used in ways that are illegal and harmful to their business. They have gained legal powers of search which are an invasion of privacy and ought to be repealed.
But they've called their opponents' bluff and gone after illegal file-sharers, and I've noticed that on slashdot at least, I'm seeing a really poor hand. People don't care about defending freedom or privacy, they just want to copy albums.
It's not the selfishness I object to, it's the stupidity. Even if you do only care about copying albums, can't you see that you'd look better if you pretended to be like me and care about freedom?
How'd they tie the usage to a 12-year-old anyway?
It was my understanding they the RIAA essentially sued whoever's name was on the internet bill. I know when I was 12, I wasn't paying the internet bill, (hell, if I remember correctly, I was just setting up back-to-back free net accounts with the local ISP).
Anyway, did they ACTUALLY sue the 12 year old, or did they sue the mother? I know it ends up being one-and-the-same, but I'm curious.
Anyone who disagrees is clearly a criminal/pirate/terrorist! Mend your ways and submit to RIAA amnesty!=)
"You know why you do not see me styling wit my homies? Because I have no homies!!" -Mojo Jojo
She's got the name "Jenna" trademarked up the wazoo for marketing.
Anyone know how bigchampagne works? What does it do? Hack other computers and see what they have on their to-do download list?
What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
The RIAA will not take a step back with th rhetoric because they have gained too much power to turn back. With the power they now possess they will soon be a new goverment bureaucracy entitled "Ministry of Sound Sueing".
/.'s only. I'm talking about Joe Average. Everyone will start to boycott and our representatives will also get involved because they will see it as an opportunity to get new votes. The RIAA will have to back off and come up with a "fair and balanced" (don't sue me Fox) approach for copyright infringement.
We all know that everything they have been saying is in direct opposition of what's actually occuring with cd sales. Yes p2p plays a role but it isn't anything near what they claim it to be. The point is the RIAA will take this as far as they can or until the backlash is so severe that they have no choice other than alienating consumers and pissing off the goverment even more.
I will make the following prediction...
Due to the RIAA calous and careless approach on p2p and their so-called loss of sales they will continue to piss off consumers who will then come together in a massive boycott. I'm not talking about
We will beat the bad rap and the RIAA will continue to do business but in a goverment imposed andfair/legal manner.
The goverment has spent billions on the war on drugs and it hasn't done a thing so does the RIAA really think a few lawsuits will stop p2p? As the RIAA's tactics on finding, pursuing, and prodding p2p users come out in the open it will only help coders take it more underground and guarantee our privacy. The RIAA had their chance to make p2p work with Napster in a centralized server setup but they blew their chance and with it the centralization of p2p. Decentralized servers, new anonimity, and a general interest in going more underground are the way now.
The RIAA better enjoy these days because they are the best they're going to have. Reality is going to bite their ass pretty soon...
You aren't free to do anything, until you've lost everything.
Anyone have any thoughts as to how they are able to figure out who is downloading what without being able to sniff at large networks?
I mean, they would have to have deals in place at major ISPs to gleam the kind of data they claim to have.
If all they are doing is looking at gnutella search terms, then that's easy, but exact location of user and when the song was being downloaded isn't possible in the current protocol, right?
See this page for a peek at the amnesty form the RIAA wants you to fill out.
It's always disturbing to me when I realize that a person or organization that is a SOSC (Sucker of Satan's Cock) turns out to be smarter and even more devious than I originally imagined.
I really hoped they were taking a blanket "fear all change" policy and would eventually choke on the very cock they were sucking.
Unfortunately, it seems they are privately taking full advantage of that which they publicly are not trying to kill but rather trying to control!
Not that this has anything to do with this, but what if for a p2p service, you pay nothing to listen to a song(songs are streamed from various users, sort of like peercast but with no preset station), and if you wanna actually download a copyrighted song, you pay a fee like 99 cents. This way, people who download music to listen to new stuff on their pc can do it without paying, major labels would kill for the stats on songs, and if you really want a song to put on a cd, you pay the fee and download it. I don't know about everyone else, but 95% of the time i listen to music, its while im doing stuff on my pc. I'd be willing to pay money to burn it to cd if i really liked a song
Dvorak made a similar point a year or so ago. Like airplay, downloads make good advertisement. How much this cooresponds to a drop in sales has really never been studied, rather the RIAA has just assumed it hurts sales. JAV
Wired:
"If the labels acknowledge a legitimate use for P2P programs, it would undercut their case as well as their zero-tolerance stance."
I'm not so sure. They aren't acknowledging the legitimacy of the programs or their use, they're observing a market that they believe to be illegitimate. Spying on the activity doesn't mean that they endorse it.
The point of that sentence in the article (and it's buried pretty deep, so I wonder why it got bumped up to the summary here) seems to be "why are they fighting KaZaA if they love it so much?" While the information they glean from KaZaA may be valuable to them in many ways, the two markets can only coexist uncomfortably. Nobody will go before a judge and claim that they were doing the labels a favor by not paying for music in exchange for consenting to being watched while stealing it.
I guess my argument hindges on whether Big Champagne is sharing copyrighted files and tracking their download (which would at least dirty the labels' hands) or simply tracking searches (observing the activity, and not participating in it).
Or maybe Big Champagne is responsible for all those mislabeled or dummy tracks.
They've got an interesting position in the debate, though.
It's more important to eliminate unnatural laws.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
The RIAA is USING p2p networks to determine which files are popular. USING.
A more appropriate anology would be for General Motors to hire some criminals to hang out with other criminals to figure out which cars are the best and use that aquired data as a marketing tool. ("We spent 3 days with Jimmy Fingers, and man do those dudes love stealing our cars!")
Doing that would be, in part, sanctioning theft by associating with those that commit it.
Thats effectively what the RIAA is doing, if we are to believe their argument that file sharing is theft and not copyright infringment. They're HIRING somebody to use and observe a community and activity they deem is highly criminal.
Then again, the RIAA has acted as if they have been above the law for awhile tho, so this shouldn't really be a surprising development in the whole file sharing issue.
"Old man yells at systemd"
By matching partial IP addresses to zip codes
This sucks. When is a P2P app with good speed going to come out with good anonymity?
With all the lawsuits and shit, good ideas and code should be flowing.
Is there a law that we can use to smack the RIAA around for pretending to be a law enforcement agency? The RIAA has absolutely no right under the law to offer amnesty for a crime, and they ought to be smacked to hell and back for trying. Why in all hell isn't the FBI/government all over their ass for this? I mean, if Microsoft said they would offer amnesty to all software pirates, it would pretty much be the same thing. WTF?
I, for one, welcome the (-1, OffTopic) score I will get for this post from our moderator overlords.
First, what a great idea. Congrats to these guys, as long as they aren't compromising anyone's privacy...
The only songs I download are singles I hear off the radio and want to listen to a little more before purchase. The RIAA could profit off of this if they wouldn't make a cd single cost $8.99 (what bull!). Just sell them in cheap paper/plastic cases (like most pee-cee games, once you get them out of the enormous box, hehe, enormous box...) If only SOMEONE would come up with a way to profit off of cheap, highly available music singles *sigh*
Intel transfer the difficult from Hadware to software, for get more power, programmer need more technology. -- chinaitn
They are happy they got that kind of publicity...
Power grid information to determine chances of blackouts, and ships and sells more generators to prone areas, then that must legitimize blackouts!! I get it!!! *sarcasm off*
Slashdot not only digs up the news, it digs up the dirt as well... I can see it now "S&D, Attorneys at Law". I just need to prove that I was no where near that cow when it fell over, HELP SLASHDOT!
Business \Busi"ness\, n.;
A scam in which all people involved perceive as beneficial...
Ok...you hear a song on the radio. The RIAA and radio execs decide "I Saw the Sign" is popular and play it every ten minutes on almost every station in your listening area. It's popular, it's the execs job to keep pumping it out there so you hear it. Now take a less popular song from say Rob Zombie, Stone Temple Pilots, whoever. These songs aren't getting nearly the same radio play.
Fast forward to your purchasing and downloading decisions. I know I sure wouldn't want to download a song I hear every ten minutes anyway. But man...there's that one song by STP...what is it? Download it. Damn...I'll just buy the CD. It's good and I don't hear all this on the radio.
Granted, there are a million similar and different scenarios, but I can see how the filesharing can stimulate the lesser-known album sales. The well-known don't really need help, do they?
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
Nothing. Because we are all Boycotting the RIAA.
If you had made that post about the snapshot and the mona lisa without all the swearing, i would of modded you up. nice point, shame about the signal:noise ratio.
from
"Why are they picking on me?" she asked reporters after learning about the suit Monday night. "My stomach is all in knots." At first, her mother, Sylvia Torres, vowed to fight the industry. "For crying out loud, she's just a child," Ms. Torres said.
to
But late [Tuesday] the RIAA issued a statement announcing that Brianna's mother had settled for $2,000 and quoting the little girl as saying: "I am sorry for what I have done. I love music and don't want to hurt the artists I love." The release also quoted Ms. Torres as saying: "We understand now that file-sharing the music was illegal. You can be sure Brianna won't be doing it any more."
in less than 24 hours!!!
what is IM? isn't that an app that uses P2P, or couldn't be designed that way. isn't grid computing and other forms of distributed computing P2P? how can ANYONE say that there is only ONE use for ANY program?
"They (record companies) will call these stations and say, 'You need to bang this shit. You're barely playing it, and it's already in the top 15 among alt-rock downloaders in your market. You need to step on this at least 20 more times a week, and not while people are sleeping.'"
... Since when are record companies supposed to dictate radio programming?
Oh-no!!!
Is this P2P (Push2Play) networking legal?!
When the labels know what people are downloading, they know what to put on the radio, and sales in the area increase.
I wasn't aware that the labels [legally] "put anything on the radio". It probably wouldn't be the best idea for them to build the idea that they do into their business model, since that would be an admission of payola.
While this is interesting from a legal standpoint, I doubt this will turn out to be significant. the RIAA is in an interesting position of percieved moral superiority that far surpasses any logic. They could line file-traders up against a wall and shoot them, and they'd probably spin it as a good thing for everyone. What I'm waiting for is the hacking legislation they want so bad to be enacted. At that point, I'll put my machine on-line with several thousand deceptively named MP3s, watch my firewall, and keep my lawyer on the speeddial.
Well, not really. I could though. More than likely, I'll say I am morally outraged, post about it on slashdot, and feel more like some fundamentalist unabomber for a few hours before I calm down and realize I'm completely immune to their attempts at bribery in the US for various reasons.
See? I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist.
It's been a long time.
Well I was always for P2P since I grab a lot of things other than music, however I would occassionally snag a Supercharger or Hellbillies mp3. But it seems that the majority of people dlowding are grabbing the SHITTY music they keep complaining about. Looking at the site it seems to prove this with the top 10 listed songs/albums including 50 Cent, beyonce, Lil Kim, and every other bullshit artist on MTV. If people stopped lsitening to crap and started only dloading songs from GOOD non-commercialized bands or at least bands that were not the latest-and-greatest-company-endorsed-sings-through -a-voicebox-shows-their-ass-whore "musician" the RIAA wouldn't be sueing 12 years olds or college kids.
STOP MTV MUSIC NOW
Ave Molech Setting
They also get potential customers who become exposed to genres and thousands of songs they would never have heard or remembered otherwise.
i am not so sure this method holds water because isn't the top #1 download where it is because 50 cent is just popular these days? you don't need to look at kazaa statistics to know that. i don't see how this information is useful other than to reaffirm pre-existing knowledge... just my 2 cents (no pun intended)
If the Major Lables start reacting to what the public is actualy listening to, instead of trying to convince people to buy a product thaey have produced.
The major problem with most music lables is that they have become manufacturers of music instead of distributers of music.
The RIAA at al. knows that P2P could become the next radio, and they know that p2p is not the real reason for bad music sales. But the RIAA is not really sueing people beceause of loss of sales, it's sueing beceause of loss of control over what people listen to. The RIAA loves radio for the very reason that they can control it (and actualy own it in some cases).
The RIAA/Lables can't "own" p2p or force it play what they want, so they choose to shut it down. I have always thought that the RIAA/lables have been more worried about loss of promotional/playlist control then profits.
Prior to P2P a label could promote the shit out of an artist/group with out them having to be any good, and still be SURE it was going to make a profit. Now the Major labels have to wait and see if the public actualy LIKES the music before it can make a profit.
This is simply more proof that these models for profiting from media have long outlived their usefulness. Technology has outstripped the marketing, the distribution network they cling to will soon go the way of the 8-track.
There ARE other models... other ways to make a profit from a popular artist. Take for example the sports industry - a popular franchise (and its popular players) makes 1000 times more money through endorsements and sales of authorized merchandise than they do from from actual ticket sales - (We'll have to ignore the massive profit made from broadcasting rights, there really isn't currently an equivalent in the music industry... though, if they got their heads out of their butts, that could work as well) yet the RIAA would have you believe that there is no other way to make sure an artist gets paid for their work than the Pay-For-Play model that has been around since the days of Shakespeare.
You can't download a genuine Starter Steelers Jersey, and bootleggers are a lot easier to bust.
Frelling Dinosaurs.
Mnem
Support Brianna LaHara
Those fileswap results only show that people download and listen to the same crap that you hear on the radio.
So the argument that people use P2P filesharing to "discover" new bands or download "decent" music is a fallacy according to that website.
i am truly surprised i didnt find some decent music to from the artists listed on that page.
People should be looking for indie artists who are bypassing the RIAA completely. It used to be the indie labels that grabbed most of the talent. Now the big labels have bought up all the indie labels that started during the early nineties. Artists have the Internet and can distribute there stuff without the hassle of the Big Boys...
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
Natural--Laws against theft of property and murder. Unnatural--Slavery laws. "Intellectual property".
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
Heck, how do they walk the shared folders and see the queries?
That implies that Sharman has given them some kind of license to FastTrack, which is interesting in itself.
1) Write song
2) Give song away
3) Track where song is popular
4) Tour where you are popular
5) Push merchandise where you are popular
6) Sell tickets
7) Sell merchandise
8) Profit!!!
9) *Flip RIAA the finger
Fields marked with * are optional
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
What I find to be so horrifically obnoxious about this is not that the RIAA is suing end users (i.e., their customer pool.) They certainly have the right to do so if the defendant was downloading copyrighted materials. It is the apparent lack of due process allowed by the DMCA that causes me worry. What if I am a P2P user, who shares and gets only non-infringing materials, and the RIAA selects me for a subpeona? As far as I know, there are no checks on this system; the only thing the RIAA has to do is attest that I am a P2P filesharer. They don't have to prove anything, much less demonstrate a reasonable suspicion that I am trading in material that they actually own. After I have been subpeona'd (spelling Nazis bugroff, I know it's wrong) and the RIAA has gone through every file I own, they will certainly not elect to sue, but my privacy has been irrevocably and severly compromised without any redress. This I find unreasonable. If I had to pick one word to describe the DMCA, it would be "unfair". Copyrighted material has strong legal protections to guard against and provide redress to infringement, which I consider to be a good thing. I think that the notion of a strong personal copyright is necessarily the foundation of any healthy model of intellectual property. However, the DMCA takes the additional step of providing nearly airtight legal protection to technological methods used to control access to copyrighted materials. This means two things. First, I have to pay $25 for a decryption algorithm that can be printed on a T-Shirt to watch a copy of a movie I own. Second, content distributors are able to region-lock media and hence control pricing. I don't consider these to be beneficial effects, and I don't understand why this level of additional legal protection is necessary. I consider the DMCA to be bad, harmful law, and unless it is repealed, I see a future in which we are free to do less and less with media content that we have purchased.
Here's an interesting read on the canadian view of this mess.
Sympatico Globe and Mail
Errm, don't know why I admit knowing this but... there is a song called 'Girl Power' by 'Shampoo'.
I think you can add that to your list, although I wouldn't want to listen too much of their stuff (can't really call them songs) unless you're into using the music to torture other people (i.e. 'Sesame Street' and a certain detention centre in Cuba)...
..."Uh Oh, we're in trouble. Somethings come along and its burst our..." Arghhhhhhhhh!
Are you local? There's nothing for you here!
"I'm using this program to steal your stuff, which gives you valuable marketing information as to what stuff of yours I like!"
So, what your trying to say is.....
File sharing has benefits? And 12 year olds aren't devious criminals for liking music? And record companies are profiting from target marketing all stemmed from file sharing?
Wow, and all this time I thought only Microsoft was trying to screw us for more money when they have enough already.
as i recall they were using Barney and metallica on those unfortunate individuals... not sesame street. don't diss jim henson man,, come on
This post was brought to you by the number 584811 and the characters / and .
What if I am a P2P user, who shares and gets only non-infringing materials, and the RIAA selects me for a subpeona?
Then you have your day in court and defend yourself. The burden of proof is on them in the end. If you're sure you've done nothing wrong, go ahead and hire a lawyer too - because at the end of the day you can countersue for all his legal fees. He'll be more than happy to represent a 100% slam-dunk innocent client when he sees those deep pockets.
BTW, none of this has to do with the DMCA whatsoever. It would have been just as illegal in the 40s if the 'net existed.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
If the labels acknowledge a legitimate use for P2P programs, it would undercut their case as well as their zero-tolerance stance
Why would they acknowledge a legitimate use for P2P programs ?
They want a complete control over prices and P2P has been causing them woes. Not only that, they have some strong backing from some Senators.
Senators Back RIAA; First Suit Is Settled
I was thinking these artists should be appraised of the lawsuit against the little girl, as well as her eventual settlement. We should ask these artists how much of that $2000 they'll actually be seeing, and how it feels to be cracking down (or to support an organization that is cracking down) on 12-year olds. (For those of you who are too dense, yes, I know that the artists are probably getting diddly squat, but ask them anyways, okay?)
s k Joe": http://www.joewalsh.net/ask_joe/index.htmlr a Records: http://www.elektra.com/
p /ask_ludacris.lasl as?site_num=29
Bobby McFerrin
Website: http://www.bobbymcferrin.com/
Direct link to Guest Book: http://www.bobbymcferrin.com/guest.html
Direct link to Message Board: http://www.bobbymcferrin.com/wwwboard/
Direct link to Mail: http://www.bobbymcferrin.com/mail.html
Feedback for Blue Note records (Bobby's label): http://www.bluenote.com/feedback.asp
Thompson Twins
Arista Records Message Board (also message board for Avril Lavigne): http://www.arista.com/bb2/
Mail link: mailto:arista.help@bmg.com
Eagles
Joe Walsh's website: http://www.joewalsh.net/
Direct link to Guestbook: http://www.joewalsh.com/cgi-bin/guestbook.cgi
"A
Elekt
Eagles home page at Elektra: http://www.elektra.com/elektra/eagles/index.jhtml
Eagles Elektra Message Board: http://discussions.elektra.com/wm-eagles
Paula Abdul
Her website? http://www.paulaabdul.com/index.php
Contact link from her website: mailto:info@paulaabdul.com?subject=info
Virgin Records site (mostly useless): http://www.virginrecords.com/paulaabdul/
Green Day
Website: http://www.greenday.com/home.php3
Contact: mailto:greendaymail@aol.com
Snail Mail: Green Day, 137 N. Larchmont Ave #478, Los Angeles, CA 90004, U.S.A.
UB40
Website: http://www.ub40-dep.com/
Bulletin Board: http://www.ub40.co.uk/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi
Ludacris
Ask Ludacris a question: http://www.defjam.com/ludacris/site/external-popu
Message Board: http://www.islandrecords.com/www2/bbs/bbs/signin.
Avril Lavigne
Arista Records Message Board: http://www.arista.com/bb2/
Ripping the contents of a CD and creating an .Ogg, MP3, MP3+, AAC, or WMA file is not stealing, its conversion at the very most. It is only *theft* if people are downloading the songs in their native CD file structures... Somehow, I have a problem with the RIAA being able to sue people for sharing file formats the RIAA members themselves do not commercially distribute to consumers... Its like a movie studio suing someone for actually owning prints of theatrical releases that they use for their own home consumption instead of owning a VHS or DVD copy which is intended for consumer usage... Its too bad none of the judges haven't had the juevos to dismiss the lawsuits for improperly labeling the alledged crime...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
Get it straight. The RIAA doesn't care what plays, what maximizes profits, what changes culture. The RIAA cares about "protecting" the copyright powers of its member labels. Saying RIAA as a shorthand for "the music industry" is not only inaccurate, but misleading.
[
The only problem with this is your analogy is flawed. If I had a car made by ford I can allow somebody to come over and make an exact copy of the ford or int eh case of MP3's a lesser copy of the car. It's perfectly legal at least it used to be. There are some issues with software and I'm sure piles of patent issues. These are all just business protections when you get down to it.
Persoanly it no form of capatilism I know and definatly not free market. Granted there are some things that need some protection for everybody's good it's just question of how long.
No sir I dont like it.
Even better download the plant man.. Plant man knows if the plant man growa . . . the plant man
Yeah this is offtopic, be warned...
Every freaking year we see MOST STOLEN CAR LIST.
And every year, unsurprisingly, the most stolen cars are the most sold cars! Wow, how could that be?
Someday I'd like to see Most Stolen (as a % of sales). Obviously more Honda Accords will be stolen than most other cars, but what cars are the most stolen as a % of their sales?
Duh.
.sigs are for post^Hers.
perhaps he just wanted her to come over to his place so he could have her download/serve music, so when the RIAA tries to sue him, he can say it was a 12 year old girl...
I'm not dissing Sesame Street or Jim Henson, but have a look here.
Are you local? There's nothing for you here!
Jean Luc Piccard is also a thief. He copies all types of things with an nifty device called a replicator.
Something with a very similar effect could be implemented with low tech. A radio station could have a telephone line to accept requests manually, and then such forward looking free thinking radio stations could actually play what people are asking for.
Over here, the morning show on the radio is always logged into Yahoo IM, MSN IM, and AOL IM. They actually accept requests this way as well. Though I'm never in front of a computer when listening to the morning show, but they always talk about it...
In fact this is an interesting point. If RIAA stop being assholes and try to make business out of technology rather than trying to turn the tide, they have a future. Otherwise , they will end up in being thrown in to the garbage of history like whip manufacturers. Regardles of any litigation or anything , people would never stop sharing things they possess. Its an inherent human instinct. And modern technology make it just possible. The only way out for RIAA is to sunchronise their business model with the techonolgical revolution and try to profit out of it.
http://www.nasirudheen.blogspot/
On the radio this morning (KROQ, Los Angeles), there was a lawyer for the RIAA talking about the recent lawsuits being brought...
She specifically stated that "while there are valid and legal uses of p2p file sharing..."
It seems like when it suits them, they are willing to accept the existence of P2P programs...
If I am looking at a new car and I take into consideration the amount I am going to be paying in insurance when making my decision, I may choose a car based on insurance rates.
;-)
Since part of the rate determination is based on where said car ranks on the most stolen list, I could buy a $30k BMW (not in the top 100) instead of a $22k Toyota Camry (ranked #1 for 2002) and end up spending the same amount monthly.
In which case I am going to opt for the BMW.
YMMV. No I haven't done an extensive study on this
I'm starting a petition to replace Captain Obvious with ObviousMan! This is professionally* drawn, timely, and he has a cool logo. If nothing else, ou have to love the logo.
/. for God's sake!
*Of course I didn't ask the author! This is
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
Old school, 1980s software pirates will remember the golden rule: the Feds don't give a fuck about software, they will run your ass through the ground over porn.
Does that still hold true? I think to a large degree it does. Nobody steals software forever and it had a social benefit of educating a large segment of society. Beyond that, nobody cared because it was done largely among small private groups.
Remember download ratios? It's "keeping it expensive" as Nixon referred to his decision for banning biological and chemical weapons. You need nuclear to be in an elite club. 99% of the idiots downloading today would not have a chance if sysop didn't break the unwritten law of download ratios. Industry wouldn't care about piracy. Neither would the Feds.
*Unchecked* and easily accessible piracy is the problem that industry has, not piracy itself.
Hatch's comments are indicative that the government *still* doesn't care about piracy. They don't want people looking at porn. Porn leads to jackasses acting out and committing crimes. This ain't a troll. Anyone with friends in law enforcement has heard stories of punks that clearly got their cues from porn on the net.
Laws are for people with no friends.
...for about six months? I want to see those statistics nose dive.
Then, at the end of the six months we'll take a nice long look at the sales figures from the RIAA member companies. If they still continue to suck then we should send a big letter to Congress saying "WTF?!?!?"
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
What is a better gift then a CD-R burned to your friend/relative/lovers taste?
Some random corporate pop cd that you wasted money on? Ok sure.
Car companies probably look at the insurance industry's list of the most frequently stolen cars to see what cars are hot. That doesn't make stealing cars legal.
RIAA: "Here's $4,000. We're going to settle for $2,000 and you can keep the rest, but we're going to use your name in the media to make an example."
Brianna: "That's a lot of Barbie dolls. OK!"
I'm a television student.
Broadcast copy is written in a rather unusual format to make it easy for the on-air talent to read, because believe me, the LAST thing you want is to screw up on air. On-air talent frequently has to concentrate on several things at once (why don't YOU try reading from a teleprompter while listening to the producer in your ear while the floor manager is signaling at you), so the read becomes an automatic process that directly connects their eyeballs to their mouth.
It doesn't go to the extreme of "Em-Pee-Three," but typical broadcast copy might look like:
The R-I-A-A is claiming five (b) billion dollars in damages from file sharing on Kazaa (kuh-ZAH). Slashdot T-V brings you this story and more at 11 o'clock.
Only it's typically all uppercase, but I'm not going to tempt the lameness filter.
Make me a friend and I'll mod you up
Now, I'm not in business or anything like that, but it would seem to me that a market research tool like this with 60 Million user participation would be worth much more than if they got rid of p2p and forced everyone to buy their music.
SIGFAULT
Many people go out and buy music based about what they download from p2p networks.
Where's the RIAA information minister when you need him? Come on, this is clearly a lie. It's been well established that file sharers are hardened criminals, who will never again buy anything, and routinely mug the elderly for their pocket change and dentures.
You will be found, and made to pay for spreading your evil lies
And the effect of the DMCA is central to my point: In the 40's, the RIAA would have had to get a judge to approve this violation of my right to privacy; today, thanks to the DMCA, all they have to do is open up a document template and send form letters containing my username to a court clerk and my ISP. It's a subpeona mill and I feel like it is a violation of the due process rights of anyone so targeted.
I'm not saying that filesharing should be legal or that the RIAA is wrong to sue filesharers, or even that they are wrong to issue these subpeonas under the terms of the DMCA. What I am saying is that the DMCA is bad law that allows any corporate entity with enough money and copyrights to become essentially a private, unsupervised enforcement agency. There's no chain of accountability, and no impetus to responsibility in this process. It certainly doesn't help that the RIAA's "fear and awe" (BusinessWeek) strategy doesn't even remotely resemble a rational attempt to fix the societal problem we seem to have regarding respect to copyright.
It might be nice to have the opportunity to teach kids not to steal music because it's wrong to do so, but this whisper will not be heard over the thunder of the RIAA's lesson: Don't steal music because if a big company owns it they will make a good level go at wrecking at least the next ten years of your life.
There is a very basic flaw in this car theft = file trading. I don't see MILLIONS of car theives sitting around trading cars with out each other. I don't see these, generally lower income, car theives being potential cusotmers. I also don't see these car theives showing what the actual public demand for any particular automobile.
I'm betting that filer-sharers are mirroring the ACTUAL demand, since the ratio between honest and dishonest is smaller, or nonexistant. Maybe if cars were easier to steal there would be a simular ratio. Cars happen to be physical though, so I doubt thats going to happen.
If your going to make an analogy and stick with it, please find one that FITS. Or better yet, discuss the actual issue, since all analogies are flawed.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
6- PROFIT!
A common misperception. The RIAA would love for you to believe that they are not making a profit. By talking about how much money they are losing, and how much the public is stealing from them, they like to present the image that they are not making a profit. But I guarantee you that they are making TONS of money. In this weak market, and with their Jurassic business model, they might be making less money than they have in the past, but you can rest assured that they aren't starving. ESPECIALLY since the RIAA doesn't actually DO anything. It is an association that collects money from all its members when they do the work.
If the music industry fails, it certainly won't be because of lack of interest. If anything, people listen to music much more today than they have in the past due to advances in technology.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
BigChampagne?
"Because the current active audience numbers in the tens of millions, and is made up of highly motivated "early adopters," we have been able to observe close correlations between online interest and offline sales. "
or the RIAA?
"Says an RIAA spokesman: "In our view, piracy is the primary reason for the decline in sales."
I know who I'd tend to believe on that. How about you?
Here is the game plan, they will take legal action and make headlines up through Christmas time. Napster will be re-launched as a legal pay P2P service. The record companies will make it clear that this service is legal and has the blessing of the RIAA. If Napster (minus independant label content) is a hit they will back off of the legal action, they may even offer a blanket amensty for Napster customers. This is a guess on my part and I think it is a strategy that may work if the Napster service is viewed as a fair one.
Onward to the Aether Sphere!
i would've thought that the slowdown in downloads might simply be because everyone has got everything at this stage
Visit IrishWan to make the world a better place.
They could always build their own file-sharing network - they way it would work is you choose all the songs you _want_ to download, and then it downloads white noise and sends off the list to the RIAA so they can a) sue you for "attempted" infringement and b) see what music you like so they can play it on the radio.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Translation:
They SPAMMED the users downloading those songs!!!
We gotta be able to turn that against the record labels somehow...
No unauthorized use. Trespassers will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.
hi,
isn't intercepting and monitoring communictions which were not intended to be sent to you illegal under current wiretap / monitoring statutes? i.e. is what big champagne doing illegal (unless, of course, the P2P networks are allowing them access to this information)?
sTc
Most things worth doing are worth doing twice. -- me I think or was that my boss' methodology?
Some time just for grin find the cost of buying parts for your car, and start adding them up. You'll quickly come up to a sum much greater than what you paid for the car.
Then why haven't some of the car thieves gone legit and bought cars to chop up?
Will I retire or break 10K?
Don't forget Media Sentry - another company that provides data to the RIAA:
http://www.mediasentry.com
The key thing here is that the record companies are getting better data through P2P than through other channels about what people would buy. There is value to that data. So at some logical point the value of that data verses the lost sales through trading would be profitable for the record companies. Finding that balance could provide a temporary solution.
Not that I think the RIAA's stance is a good one, but I'll take a questionable RIAA over a bad metaphor any day.
The CB App. What's your 20?
Its a group (the RIAA) calling file trading immoral and criminal, and then paying somebody to use file trading in order to beef up their marketing data.
.. the point is, they are associating with the very people they identify as criminals and aquiring self-professed marketing data. Its hypocricy. That's all. Analogies are flawed but useful. They become less useful the more literally people insist on taking them. If somebody can't pick out what parts of analogies a person is relying on to prove their point, and which parts of analogies a person expects you to ignore, they they probably shouldn't be arguing in the first place.
Whether its cars/tv shows/etc
In my example above, it should be obvious that its not important *what* commodity or copywritten work we're talking about, only that a group is associating with the very community it says is illegal to associate with. Whether or not the people in that illegal community are providing you with useful data/service is completely besides the point; at the extreme end of the point, the RIAA is moronic and is wasting their money anyways.
Its not up to somebody pointing out their hypocricy to credit or discredit the likelihood of the RIAA achieving their intended goal of aquiring solid, representative market research, nor is it a particularly relevant or interesting point to think about. Who cares if the the money the RIAA gives these guys is worth the market research they get back. The point is that its hilarious that the RIAA is paying people to interact in the filesharing community they claim is 100% cancerous to their business.
"Old man yells at systemd"
If you listen to a Clear Channel station (how can you NOT listen to one) you notice they play the same 20 songs all day and all night.
I don't know about you, but if I hear the same songs every time I turn on the radio, I have NO need to by the CD. I get burned out on it for free.
If they start using this info and get more artists on the air it can only help. This could increase their ratio of "listeners due to lack of choice" to "willing listeners" and help their advertisement revenue.
It will also help RIAA and non-RIAA affiliated labels sell more records by getting more airplay for lesser known artists. Less total air time for the current top artists would help them not to give away the need to buy while also not making people think of them as annoying.
IMHO, quite a bit of the RIAA's low sales can be traced back to the Clear Channel monopoly.
How can using these P2P statisics be a bad thing?
If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
There is no real limit to the number of songs that can be written
Most emphatically false.
Music theory sets a combinatoric limit on the number of possible sequences of discrete notes. Copyright case law sets a limit on how much can be copied before the copying warrants a finding of infringement. Therefore, it's possible to infringe by chance. Please read my white paper about this issue.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Rulers may be mistaken about their own interest in what they command. In this case it is not just to obey the ruler. Is he who is mistaken about the sick a physician in that he is mistaken? or is he who errs in arithmetic or grammar is an arithmetician or grammarian at the time when he is making the mistake, in respect of the mistake? True, we say that the physician or arithmetician or grammarian has made a mistake, but this is only a way of speaking; for the fact is that neither the grammarian nor any other person of skill ever makes a mistake in so far as he is what his name implies; none of them err unless their skill fails them, and then they cease to be skilled artists. No artist or sage or ruler errs at the time when he is what his name implies; though he is commonly said to err, and I adopted the common mode of speaking. But to be perfectly accurate, we should say that the ruler, insofar as he is a ruler, is unerring, and, being unerring, always commands that which is for everyone's interest; and the subject is required to execute his commands.
I admire their tactics teh same way i admire the tactics of the guys who took out the world trade center.
OTOH, why don't more people listen to local bands? I would much rather support a local band I've met and talked with than any mainstream band.
(-:Stephonovich:-)
"Who needs reincarnation when we've got parallel universes?" -Me
the way i see it using P2P is no different the getting out a blank tape and recording it off the radio station.
"Jenna Jameson mp3"?
;-)
Or, since I use DC++ and wouldn't touch Kazaa, I'd just set it to search audio files. Now, your band better be good after I waste my bandwidth on you.
The RIAA doesn't care what plays
The RIAA is concerned not only with sound recording copyrights but also with "gold" and "platinum" certifications of albums and singles.
Will I retire or break 10K?
How can people think that sharing someone's intellectual property, without thier permission or control, is legal?
If for instance, someone put Microsoft Office 2003 on Kazaa, and people downloaded and installed it as often as people download music, Microsoft would be doing the same thing, JUST AS ANY OTHER COMPANY THAT HAS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THAT IS BEING VIOLATED BY ILLEGAL USE.
Sorry for the caps, but I want to make my point clear that this isn't a "Microsoft" debate, but just using them as an example.
Youve got to clarify this a little.
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
You know, it's about time somebody figured out a way to use PGP with all these P2P networks. The idea I have is simple: Use a one-way hash to encrypt every search keyword, and include the hash key in the search packet. Each client would then have to encrypt each keyword in their filename table with the hash key to be able to compare with the hashed keywords. This means that all of these "spy" companies would have to encrypt trillions upon trilliions of keyword / hash pairs in order to hit upon just one search... not a feasible task for these low-budget companies.
Does this just sound like fantasy land, or should I get cracking on the code? I'm really sick of all this legal bs... let's put the RIAA and these f'ing lawyers out to pasture once and for all, eh?
wait a minute... who said that they are hiring people to do that, anyways?
1) Write song
2) Give song away
3) Get sued by a half dozen music publishers who claim you plagiarized their songs.
4) Be forced to settle because you don't have enough cash to hire an attorney to defend you in court.
5) LOSS!
Will I retire or break 10K?
They chosen by the lables to represent the lables you dumbass! The lables give them permission
,and using what ever reasoning you can to justify not paying for and stealing copy-righted works.
and pay them to take care of issues like piracy.
Now you can go back to shouting about how evil they are
RTFA?
This same post comes up every single time there's a p2p article, and it's never any less wrong (no matter how many Slashbots fall over themselves trying to mod it up fast enough).
I don't know why people always try to liken music sharing to property theft. It's just not the same thing.
Yes, it absolutely 100% is. It's intellectual property theft. You are stealing music, because you didn't pay for that music. The object in question doesn't matter. You're decreasing its value by not paying. You owe money, but you aren't giving it. You stole their owed profits by obtaining their product without paying for it. Why is this simple concept so hard for downloaders to understand? Oh, that's right, they're just so used to the convenience of downloading that they've justified it in their minds to alleviate the guilt.
I would say half of my music downloads (and I don't download very much) lead to CD purchases.
The other classic argument people make, as if that justifies the copyright infringement going on. You're in the minority, and it doesn't matter anyway, it's still illegal.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Negativland tried this and had to settle.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The RIAA Gets Out Of File Sharing!?
For a second I thought hell froze over!
We all can dream, cant we?
"Doing that would be, in part, sanctioning theft by associating with those that commit it."
The RIAA isn't going to the thieves. They're simply gleaming publicly accessible information. It's as idiotic as claiming that reading a book written by a criminal is sactioning their criminal act(s). Law enforcement agencies "associate" with criminals all the time to bring down groups from the inside.
As long as YOU don't commit a crime or aid in the committing of a crime, you can associate with whomever you want.
The RIAA isn't helping anyone steal anything. They're simply taking data while they work to take them down.
I'm sure there's at least a couple more straws that havn't been grasped at yet. Keep looking.
Ben
Work Safe Porn
Almost perfect, now change "but my privacy has been irrevocably and severly compromised without any redress" to "but my time, reputation, and property (i.e. computer) has been irrevocably and severly compromised without any redress". Wait a minute wouldn't it be slander...
Onward to the Aether Sphere!
And shouldn't 20+ years be sufficient to recoup those costs?
Those who bore the costs of R&D for the Compact Disc Digital Audio have recouped those costs. However, the price of labor has gone up. Such labor includes clearing the rights to the songs, recording the songs, promoting the songs to Clear Channel through a so-called "independent" agency, and renting shelf space inside Wal-Mart and Best Buy. When converted to multiples of the Consumer Price Index to correct for the shrinking value of the dollar with respect to labor, CDs cost now about as much as LPs cost when CDs first came out.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Are the Marines in Cuba paying ASCAP their public performance royalties? Pirates! Pirates!
The "mute" button.
Once you hit that, their videos were pretty groovy... I felt a little like Bob Dole in that Britney Spears Pepsi commercial.
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
Why should you care? Unless you're illegally sharing and downloading music.
But we're against illegal things at Slashdot...right? I guess I couldn't tell from all the pro-piracy cheerleading going on here.
"Sufferin' succotash."
If the Major Lables start reacting to what the public is actualy listening to...
...instead of trying to convince people to buy a product thaey have produced.
Um, guess what people are buying? Why do you think certain artists appear in top 10 spots? Because people buy that shit. Regardless of whether or not the geek clique at Slashdot approves of it or not.
It's called advertising and distribution. You did realize that's what record labels are for, right?
"Sufferin' succotash."
Seems to me that this article is saying the labels themselves (Warner, Interscope, Atlantic, et al) do in fact see the value in letting P2P run wild. It seems only the RIAA, which is supposed to be representing the interests of the labels, has decided on a different course!
Is this a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand (and both feet, internal organs, skin...) is doing? (Like congresscritters doing something contrary to what the people they represent want?) Or is it a case of good cop(s)/bad cop? ("Let the RIAA get all the ugly publicity doing our dirty work for us while we go about our business?")
Anyway, I'm rather interested to find out if the RIAA finally changes its tune when Hillary Rosen steps down at year's end. Maybe she's just a dragon lady who needs to go away and quit bothering everyone.
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
Blank tapes have a tariff on them to cover music copying. CD's do too, but the RIAA gets no money untill you burn your songs to CD.
So P2P is diffrent, untill the point when you burn a CD, then the RIAA gets some money back.
I just hope that once the RIAA kicks the bucket in the end, someone remembers to take thoses tariffs off of recording media.
"Anyone with friends in law enforcement has heard stories of punks that clearly got their cues from porn on the net."
And anybody who trusts LEOs for understanding criminal psychology deserves all derision they get. Its like asking an auto mechanic which is the best designed car engine. It seems reasonable until you understand that fixing an engine has very little to do with designing or understanding an engine.
But I suspect most of you idiots won't see the difference. Most of you, I suspect, are in law enforcement or fixing cars.
Laws are for people with no friends.
in the first place.
The RIAA started acting like assholes when you assholes started stealing their product on a massive scale.
but networks like waste are coming with possibilities of saturating your inbound and outbound lines
And getting users kicked off their ISPs for violating the "excessive use" provisions of the typical residential acceptable use policy. Remember that in many areas of the United States, there is one ISP with a monopoly guaranteed by a municipal utility franchise; thus, switching ISPs costs $200,000 to move the whole family to an area served by a different ISP.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Been there, read that. Any suggested solutions?
Will I retire or break 10K?
I think the fact that record labels are making use of data harvested from p2p networks is a clear sign that the RIAA has given up whatever tenuous claim to moral high ground they may have had. If they are prosecuting downloaders while simultaneously profiting off of downloader data, that indicates that the lawsuits are just one more way for them to bring in extra cash. When you consider the poll in this month's Wired asking what it would take for users to stop downloading mp3's, only 11% said that a lawsuit from the RIAA would make them stop.
Contrary to popular belief, the RIAA has adopted a new business model: profiting off of downloaders while at the same time suing them for "lost sales". This is a business model that will scale, since only 11% of downloaders will stop downloading, no matter how many lawsuits the RIAA files. The DMCA plus a perpetual supply of defendants guarantee a study stream of supplmental income.
D!cks.
Yes, my only tool is a hammer. And you're starting to look like a nail.
Not to defend the RIAA; much of what they are doing makes me sick (my wife and I are boycotting), but this story seems a little rabid to me. Quoted:
... does that imply that they condone the theft (thus "undercutting their case?")
... RIAA is saying that ALL file swapping is evil ... so I ask, if the American auto manufacturers analyze theft statistics, or sales statistics, of foreign cars (or ALL cars, foreign and domestic), in order to design marketing/product to better serve the market, does that undercut their case for, say, higher import barriers/tarriffs?
(RIAA wants you to listen to music; it just wants you to obtain it from their sources; so that they get paid, just as, say, GM wants you to drive, they just want to you drive a GM product)
... I think that it would be foolish to NOT take advantage of any useful marketing information, even if you believe that the activity it represents is harmful to you.
"If the labels acknowledge a legitimate use for P2P programs, it would undercut their case as well as their zero-tolerance stance."
So let me ask you this: If auto manufacturers analyzed theft patterns to determine which of their cars are most popular
Ah, you say, your analogy is flawed
I fail to see how RIAA making use of these statistics affects, in any way, their position that downloading music "illegally" is bad
They would then void warranties of cars using these grey market parts.
In the United States, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Improvement Act states that a manufacturer can void a warranty for using off-brand parts only if it can prove that the repair was made necessary because of those parts.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Okay, I'm sick and tired of people saying "pop sucks and no one wants it." What people want is peace on earth, $100 million each, and a self cleaning home with a sound proof sex-rumpus room. In the meantime, they'll settle for some other level of comfort.
The problem with the music industry is exactly that, they ARE giving people what they want. You have to look at the demographics.
First of all, people aged 25+ have a huge variety of music tastes. I've yet to meet two people who have exactly the same taste in music. In fact, of the people in this age group I know who download music the most, I see them liking just about everything they download! Now in truth, the most common thing they don't download are the cookie cutter pop idols.
So, who's paying for the pop idols? Simple, 12-18 year olds. Human beings who are still developing the logical front lobes of their brains. Human beings who tend to make decisions based on emotions rather than higher reasoning.
My appreciation of art comes from learning about art, absorbing information, and using that information to process the art in front of me. An adolescents appreciation of art starts and stops at "oh me likey, want to buy!" and its based strictly on emotional directives: identifying with the group, identifying with others who like the band, simple lyrics and songs which are easy to identify, and image. Teens, as a group, also have the largest amount of disposable income. They get money from their parents, and from their own jobs, and yet do not have to support themselves because, except in very sad instances, their parents paying the their expenses not related to clothing and entertainment.
You can see this in how Justin Timberlake and Christine Aguillera are starting to grow up and try to do something different than what they did before. They are at least making an attempt at being serious artists (I didn't say they were, just that they are making an attempt), something that their teenage brains didn't understand until now.
And the recording industry targets this, because its what teens want and its where the money is! Teens want to be different from their parents, but they want to be like other teens, and it doesn't make sense to most of us with more logical brains because we are either developing mentally more quickly (a minority in teens) or we are already grown out of this. If you want to solve this problem, have your own kid, and try to get them to appreciate your kind of music or some other kind of music and try to get them to not want to listen to Brittany or Backstreet boys. Believe me its not easy.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
"Basically, it means listeners can't get that tune out of their heads - they probably downloaded it after hearing it only once - and radio stations ought to put the track in heavy rotation."
and
' "I threw it into my call-outs, and it was reactive, so we made it a subpower," a song that plays 40 to 50 times a week. '
And the labels just can't figure out why fewer and fewer people listen to radio? For every "Hit" there are 5-10 independents out there with mucic that is just as good. Where is this music? Well the inde's can't cough up $10K-1M to pay the radio stations to play thier songs. (Yea, songs really are not commercials for the album!)
"Allison built a program that sent anyone sharing a Toad song an invitation to join Phillips' mailing list, and they decided that if it looked promising they would start a business. "The opt-in rate was 20 percent!" says Zack's father, Tom. "A good opt-in rate is usually 2 or 3 percent." "
Humm, artists connecting directly with their fans? That means they could get rid of us! How am I going to pay for my new SL500? We must crush P2P! It's about control people, not piracy. The real pirates are stamping cd's and selling them around the world.
"File-sharing is notoriously difficult to monitor, especially since the IP addresses used to track it don't always map to individuals. Jay Samit, former digital media chief of EMI (he recently announced he was leaving to take a position at Sony), says he's skeptical of any reresearch based on IP addresses."
Well, is that an major label executive saying tracking a user by IP doesn't always work? Malfunction - Please report to the RIAA HQ for reprogramming.
"Because AOL works with dynamic IP addresses, Samit notes, the location of its users can't be determined. (The company says that AOL subscribers account for only 15 percent of its information and that it includes them in its national, but not local, data.)"
Humm, so the labels know that AOL customers are sharing lots of music, yet I'm not aware of a single AOL user hit with a subpena. Also, ISP's should switch to some kind of nationwide DHCP service. That combined witht the Boston rulings could keep the RIAA from filling its subpena in the right court. The ISP doesn't have to tell them where the subscriber is under current law. They could just keep saying, nope, wrong district court, try again. nope, not there, try again. Considering they are targeting users in the NE, that could be why AOL was left out. Somebody get this idea to Verizon!
BigChampagne - You don't track me.
Copyprotected CDs - One more reason for me to find a perfectly functional copy on the Internet.
The RIAA doesn't care [..] what maximizes profits
You are incorrect. The RIAA only cares about what maximizes profits for the RIAA.
What do you think all these lawsuits are about? I'll give you a hint: it's not about whether people should be able to file share or not. The RIAA knows that they are becoming redundant. They can either throw in the towel and make little money, or they can go kicking and screaming with lawsuits and guarantee themselves another billion dollars or so over the next ten years.
It's not about what is "right" (tm), but what makes them the most money. Fighting file sharing extends their multimillion dollar income for years to come.
When corporations go to court, it is always about money. Never forget that.
"If the labels acknowledge a legitimate use for P2P programs..."
A typical search on Gnutella "teen" "mpg" "fucking" "britney" "kournakova" "pussy". Now if we can convince the law makers that we're looking for a teenage tennis playing pop idol who fucking hates cats then we're onto something...
I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born - Ronald Reagan
The "Most Stolen" statistics you see in the paper are almost always in terms of total number stolen rather than percentage stolen. Which means, of course, that the most common cars will almost always top the list of most stolen cars. Unless they REALLY suck, or are REALLY secure.
I looked and looked and looked, and couldn't find anything on the web using numbers that weren't from the same yearly NICB study that deals with total numbers.
If you're bored, you could take the NICB study and dig up the sales statistics from somewhere else, and do the math yourself, but I'm far to lazy today. It would be interesting, though, to know if there are any "popular but never stolen" cars, or any "rare but frequently stolen" ones.
If lawyers would read slashdot, so many of our worlds technology disputes would be solved. Oh well, heres to hope.
lose != loose
Defendant: Your Honor, I wasn't illegally distributing music. I was participating in a valuable market research project to help the RIAA member companies and Clear Channel radio networks increase their profits by providing this essential information.
Judge: Case dismissed. Plaintiff will pay all court costs.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
see sig
-------
Support Indy Music. Buy
There is a very basic flaw in this car theft = file trading.
Yeah, the flaw is that car theft != file trading.
QED
"...Why do you think certain artists appear in top 10 spots?..."
Same way certain google searches show an ad for a company in the results -- it's paid for. Someone pays radio stations to play certain songs and some songs more than others.
People will buy what's sitting in front of them: the DoubleMint gum on the Circle-K display rack, the 2 for $3.00 20 oz Budweiser cans next to it, and Britney CDs and posters in a display rack at Sam Goody's as you enter the store.
It's more likely that will be bought by the generic consumer than the Robert Cray CD in the back in the Heritage section.
You're right about the advertising that labels can do that artists can't afford to do. As far as distribution, now....
www.dedserius.com
VB != VisualBasic
-1 Redundant
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
When you download a song, you ARE taking something from someone - you're unlawfully acquiring the VALUE assigned to the song you've downloaded, as has been determined by the offer made by the entity that owns it. No, a song is not a physical entity like a chair. But it doesn't preclude the notion of value. You want the value it provides, but you're taking it without due compensation. That *is* theft.
Heavy rotation on the radio stations is apparently directed by recording industry marketing people, armed with statistics. BigChampagne gives these marketing people credibility, so the marketing people can apply more pressure on the radio stations to play what the marketing people want. This isn't about surveying P2P to find out what the radio stations should play, this is about harvesting P2P statistics to get more leverage over radio station play lists.
Sometimes I worry that I'll develop Alzheimer's disease, but no one will notice.
A filesharing program is not only for music files! (Although, I would personally doubt it's used for anything else,heh, heh) But a couple of friends could easily use a file-sharing program to share a report that one of them wrote, and then they share the file with something like WinMX or something and then modify it to make many different reports for the same class. Another example. Guns. A gun could save somebody's life. But, one could also take someone's life. But guns are legal to own. Maybe they'll make it illegal to buy or use guns, too...
http://btc.bolloxcomics.co.uk/index.php?comic=276
Why does everyone on /. keep picking on this guy Joe Blow and his two relatives, Joe Schmo and Joe Six-Pack? Man, they must be some dumb motherf2ckers.
Common sense and your personal practices, the two most unreliable measures to ever exist. Common sense is what told people the world was flat, metal cannon balls fall faster than wooden ones, and leaving wheat under a damp sack in a corner would produce mice through spontaneous generation. Thousands of years of civilization, and people still ignore proven scientific analyses in favor of their "common sense".
If you dumbasses actually went to bestbuy instead of downloading your shit all the time, you'd realize BestBuy has software for 10 bucks a month where you can download as much music as you want legally. Much better than iTunes imo
According to MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.com/news/963684.asp?cp1=1), part of the RIAA's toolkit is matching hashes against files taken from Napster. Maybe someone needs to write a small program that adds (or subtracts) some dead air at the front or back of each song (a tenth of a second is enough to throw off the hash) ??
I remember reading the book All the Rave on the rise and fall of Napster. Shawn Fanning's whole point of coding Napster, according to the book, is to get people sharing and promoting music freely, and the RIAA coming in to use the Napster network to promote their music and to use this new medium like they do the radio. It was basically Napster deep-sea fishing and capsizing because the RIAA didn't agree with their point of view. Now this company is starting to do something similar to Napster's original idea and hopefully the RIAA will ease up on their subpoena campaign, which is rather similar to someone punching random people in a dark room.
No TiVo and no caffeine make me something something...
So I and millions of other people have been unwitting focus group members? Well the research firm in my city pays about $15 an hour or more depending on the topic or product.
So let's multiply the amount of songs I've listened to that i've downloaded or cancelled after previewing because I thought it was crap by ohhh a reasonable amount of money say...$15. My math says that works out to a tidy sum of "one million dollars".
i remember emmanuel on Off the Hook wondering if the CIA paid coolio for their sadaam parody of gangsta's paradise... either way i dunno.
This post was brought to you by the number 584811 and the characters / and .
All Kazaa, et.al has to do is subpoena the customer lists from Big Champagne and its competitor to prove the RIAA labels use P2P networks themselves for marketing info.
Tech Public Policy stuff
One day, in an imaginary world, less than 50% of people will attempt to discuss something by immediately comparing it to something totally unrelated. In this imaginary utopian world, 50-reply threads will not be created as people hammer out exactly how something is like and unlike something else, instead devoting their time to understanding and discussing concepts using arguments that stand on their own.
Analogies can be useful in explaining abstract concepts, but I'm rather tired of seeing them used to compare $crime_1 to $crime_2. We don't need to liken stealing to murder to outlaw it; we don't need to liken speeding to something in the Ten Commandments or Hammurabi's Code of Laws to argue it should be illegal. Comments about what should and should not be illegal are much weaker for using analogies.
It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
I'm pretty sure that legally they could download Kazaa and pay a few people to run it on their computers with correctly sized files & ID3 tags that just feature loops of "do not steal" in the tracks? Then they're not doing a DoS or anything, but if people want to download files, they probably will get a bunch of the RIAAs versions.
If a person leaves there car unlocked, they are not breaking a law if someone steals the stuff inside. Just because you provided access for someone to commit a crime does not make you a criminal yourself.
The fact that you have mp3s or divx movies or anything of the sort on your computer in a folder that is accessible does not make you a criminal.
The NY Times just sued (Read Article) Adrian Lamo for entering a basically insecure network. He did nothing but look to see what was there. Hmm, sound like RIAA?
I don't know about anybody else, but what the RIAA is doing seems very similar. I own many cds, many of which I convert to various formats on my computer to create playlists. Apparently, I can be sued if that file is accessible to people who might want to take them from me.
The question is, if I have a broadband connection without a firewall, am I liable to the RIAA because some hacker might want a couple of songs? They are in fact accessible to some people.
Music should be free, or at least a heck of a lot cheaper than $17 for a cd.
Blockquoth the poster: "Think of it this way. What if I take and spend my own money and gave out 10,000 copies to people standing on the street? Do you know what that is called? It's called MARKETING and it didn't even happen at the expense of the artist or the recording label"
Nope that's called ILLEGALLY DISTRIBUTING FILES and that DID cost them 10,000 cd's they MIGHT have sold. It's kinda like showing a movie publicly. Can't do it without permission from the owner(s) of the movie. People you see handing out promo cd's and things of that nature are supposed to have permission from the copyright holder to distribute that item. It's usually the copyright holder's marketing department that decides to just randomly give out promo items. In that case they know they are protentially losing some sales but they can write it off on taxes. If you do it without thier permission you have potentially done financial harm.
That'll be $150,000 per cd you handed out but if you swear to never do it again and sign this admission of guilt we'll let it go for $8000, unless of course you are a 12 year old girl living in the ghetto, then it's $2000.
Yeah, thats why there are no indie bands out there.
Just because unsigned bands haven't been sued out of existence yet doesn't mean that they aren't breaking the law nor that they won't be sued out of existence tomorrow.
Thats why Lessings Creative Commons licenses are in use by nobody whatsoever.
Just as free software licenses are in wide use for computer programs, Dr. Lessig's Creative Commons licenses are in wide use for prose literary works. Prose isn't as close to the situation described in "Melancholy Elephants" by Spider Robinson as musical works are. The differences between prose and music are that 1. chance substantial similarities in a prose passage are less likely than chance substantial similarities in a melody, and 2. access to copyrighted prose isn't rammed down our throats every day by Clear Channel.
Unsigned bands exist, therefore unsigned bands are clearly capable of releasing music and profiting off it. Therefore, your argument must be wrong.
"Unsigned bands haven't got caught yet, therefore what unsigned bands do is not illegal." What is the difference between your observation and "it's not illegal if you don't get caught"? If you have something constructive to say, I'll update my model of music theory and law accordingly.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Isn't the United States bound under international treaties such as the Berne Convention to keep a copyright term of at least life plus 50 years? Isn't anybody who ducks out of the Berne Convention automatically dropped from the World Trade Organization and subject to embargoes from WTO members?
I'm all for the kind of "copyresponsibility" you speak of, but practically, how would one go about getting such a worldwide copyright reform passed?
Will I retire or break 10K?
who thinks he gets it, but doesn't.
Nobody ever said anything about whether the owner of the song was hurt by the theft or not - whether or not the owner is hurt IS NOT RELEVANT, especially since the owner of a stolen car isn't hurt either - his insurance replaces the car. The analogy holds up pretty well there.
The problem is that stealing, EVEN if it doesn't hurt the owner of the product, *DOES* hurt the *PAYING CONSUMERS* who actually *BUY* the product - songs cost money to produce, so when you STEAL them by COPYING, you're just forcing the HONEST people to pay for what you're getting for free.
With cars, it's the same deal, except that the HONEST people pay for your THEIVERY through higher insurance rates.
Copying songs is forcing honest people to pay for what you're taking for free. That's stealing. Just because stealing is really easy, or the incrimental costs of creating another product are small, doesn't mean it's not stealing any more.
Intellectual property is just property with an extremely low per-unit production cost.
paintball
http://funkbunny.com/datatype/archives/000076.html
...How are companies like BigChampagne and BayTSP getting this information? Have they written "stub" programs to act as kazaa (or whatever) clients/servers? Most of these programs don't have open API's against which these people can code (except for gnutella). Are they reverse engineering them? Are they sniffing traffic (in the network protocol sense)? If these guys have fake clients/servers watching all of these transactions, why then haven't we seen Mac and Linux versions of the Kazaa clients from the OSS community?
Well let me then suggest that you have the same problem as a lot of /. readers, which is Boolean thinking.
From the content of your post, I believe you have trouble with the concept of thinking, Boolean or otherwise.
So what if they could survive if they make heavy changes to their business model. Do you think bare survival is all they care about?
To make a business run, you market where the customers are and sell products the customer wants, including packaging in whatever form the customers want. An increasing number of people are getting their new music off the Internet the record companies can't control instead of FM radio that the record companies do control. The RIAA response is to try to make it impossible to use the Internet to distribute content by attacking the companies that promote new technology and individual users using their 0wn3d politicians. If the RIAA labels insist on losing money by not adapting to the present, why should taxpayer money go into shoring up their old business model? If the buggy whip manufacturers had organized RIAA-style lobbying in the 1900s, would there be an auto industry today?
You don't have to go to the Stanford School of Business to know that if you have a business and you want it to do better than survive, you change with the times and adapt to what your markets are doing. An industry that refuses to do this doesn't deserve to survive
You say that file sharing can be made to work for the record industry. Fine. That's your opinion (and a pretty common opinion around here).
The most prominent example I know of with respect to file sharing working for the record industry is the prerelease via P2P of Eminem's latest record a month before the official release date. It went straight to #1 as soon as it hit the stores. While other artists are doing quite well with P2P promotion, they generally are not part of the record industry.
However, I can't think of any good reason to care about the record industry. I care about good music. I care about the people who make it. I don't care about a bunch of suits whose contribution to music is parasitic and who subsidize an organization that attacks new technology and its users. If you support the enemies of new technology, what the hell are you doing here?.
But keep in mind that 5 years ago there were a lot of business cases that were pretty commonly espoused on /. that all turned to shit.
Perhaps you can get IBM to listen to your case as to why Open Source is a failure. Other than that, the worst business models of the 90s by and large were NOT promoted here. Is there anyone on slashdot who did anything but laugh about the $300M put into boo.com , a high-end cosmetics retail sales site? How about the $50M put into Dr. Koop's medical portal? Slashdot =! the vulture capital community. By and large, the dot.com failures can be traced to VCs buying into their own hype. I'm a bit surprised that anyone can confuse the two, but I guess an RIAA apologist is going to have funny ideas about how high tech works.
Why should the RIAA listen to you.
What makes you think I want them to? I believe that the artists and the public are best served if every major label goes from deep shit where they are now into bankruptcy and their assets are sold at fire sale prices to investors who have new business models in mind that don't depend on platinum records to support them and can profit from artists selling 10K albums a year.
In the last couple of years, there is a quote that I see in a lot of people's sigs:
Tech Public Policy stuff
The real question is, is the recording industry losing more money from lost sales than they are gaining through use of statistics gained from file sharing. The answer is probably yes, and the losses will continue to mount as cd burners become ubiquitous.
The RIAA at al. knows that P2P could become the next radio
Part of the problem with this is that people mostly download stuff they already know about.
If someone could combine collaborative filtering, such as iRate Radio, and some kind of p2p network then the recording industry really would have something to fear.
Where did the people who are searching for music hear it first? The radio, right? Since most stations are owned by conglomerates, the people who are searching for music must be hearing the same 40 songs the stations play all the time. How does BigChampagne keep from giving the major record labels a list of songs already in the top 40?
but if i paid for it as a 512/256 from the telco that the telco advertises as flat fee, use as much as you want
But the ad now says 512/256 kbps*, where * indicates burst rate.
Many telcos are starting to change their residential plan offerings to "burstable" service, such as offers that translate to 50/10 kbps burstable to 512/256 kbps, to clarify how oversold their services are. For example, ISPs in New Zealand and its bigger neighbour to the west-northwest will often offer a given burst rate with a 3 GB monthly cap (which is equivalent to 9.2 kbps down), primarily because pulling cable across the Pacific Ocean floor is highly expensive.
Will I retire or break 10K?
the GM came around his desk and hugged him
queers...
I can say with total confidence that they would forfeit all of this free market research for the billions of dollars these people owe them.
If it's not one thing it's your mother.
But most of the people crying here refuse to pay for music no matter what.
Point to all the legal services you want, they will just ignore them and continue to use some form of logic to support their stealing.
I really like how you wrote out Kazaa as (kuh-ZAH), because that's how you actually say it. In Toronto, which is not where I'm from, the majority of people stealing music over Kazaa say it like (cah-zuh). I wish words like this were in the dictionary -- the non-greppable dead trees version that is -- so that people wouldn't mispronounce it.
And don't give me that crap about local dialect. There are TWO (2) letter A's at the end of Kazaa. 'zaa' != (zuh) and that's all I've got to say about that.
It won't do them any good. Subpoenaing the customer list of BigChampagne and calling witnesses from that company and their RIAA label contacts will be enough to tell the judge what is really going on.
Tech Public Policy stuff
their futures department found out that the people cracking the Playstation 1 games where actaully helping out spreading the word of Sonys playstation. Call it viral marketing, none the less it have already been assimilated by corporate business strategies. Explicit lyrics is another one of those that the corporations use at their advantage. What teenager would not buy such music. Even opensource have been "contaminated" This is our very own George Orwell theory in disguise.
Don Francisco, a christian singer, is putting out mp3 versions of his most popular songs plus all his new ones, downloadable for free.
I lost his CD which I had bought, so this way I can download two of the tracks.
Other artists should follow this example.
SCIREV.NET - fanfics,reviews & more
When the labels know what people are downloading, they know what to put on the radio, and sales in the area increase
except, if you look around at what most people are sharing, it's the same small set of pop crap that the radio stations are already playing.