Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

BPI Threaten Uploaders With Legal Action

Posted by timothy on from the and-this-was-unexpected-in-what-way dept.

rizole writes "Following the RIAA, ARIA and more recently the CRIA, the BPI (British Phonographic Industry) intend warning 'serial uploaders' that they risk court action if they continue their activities. The BPI has announced a new 'instant messaging' campaign to warn offenders and quotes research that indicates that downloaders spending on albums was down 32%, and spending on singles was down 59% over the previous year. All the best U.S. trends get exported to the UK."

29 comments

  1. I hate to admit this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    When I first read the headline I thought it said British Pornographic Industry. And I was wondering what albums had to do with page 3.

    1. Re:I hate to admit this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here. Everytime I see the name of this 'organization'. I wonder why. It's probably the 'r' in British that does the trick. BritishPorno flows more easily than BritishPhono.

  2. UK singles down...because they're lousy value by rklrkl · · Score: 2, Informative

    Let me see - 2 or 3 tracks for 3.99 pounds ($7) on a UK CD single. Oh, sorry, 2 or 3 discs per single, so that's anything up to 12 pounds ($20) for a UK CD single ! Any wonder why UK CD singles sales are down ? In the early 90's, you could get an 8 track UK CD single for 99p ($1.80) - 10 years later and the price has multiplied by a factor of 12 !

  3. British Pornographic Industry? by crstophr · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else misread that the first time?

    1. Re:British Pornographic Industry? by jo42 · · Score: 1

      I had to read it like, 4 or 5 times, before it registered as Phono and not Porno...

      - Porno for the Peeps

    2. Re:British Pornographic Industry? by paramecio · · Score: 1

      I did also ;) They should change their name inmediately to "British Pr0nographic Industry" just to just avoid embarrasing mistakes

  4. May I be frank. by rkz · · Score: 1

    I download music, I know i am riping off the artists, the labels, the stores and my ISP (bandwidth).

    And do you know why I do it, because if I can save a few pounds, with no chance of getting caught. Not because CDs are expensive; not because its more convenient.

    I just don't give a fuck.

    --
    There is no god
    1. Re:May I be frank. by a+whoabot · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Cool. The model has raised a mass that cares only about consumption: totally immoral, so that they can just spend more and more money. Then, they expect people to not share music because "stealing is bad"? That's ridiculous. They raised consumption-happy people, now they have to deal with the implosion.

    2. Re:May I be frank. by BoomerSooner · · Score: 1

      Stealing is bad, copying bits isn't stealing, it's copying. Big difference.

      Copyright infringement isn't theft. Can you steal an idea? No the person that had it still has the full right and ability to use it. You can however copy an idea. Same idea just the propaganda from your sources of information have warped your brain.

      Copying a page in a magazine is no more theft than copying a music track. It's about fucking time the music industry changes. $18 for a CD that costs $0.05 to manufacture?

      Fuck'em. BTW Morals are just made up bullshit (kind of like religion).

    3. Re:May I be frank. by a+whoabot · · Score: 1

      Oh, I know it's not stealing. That's just in my quote: that's what they say.

    4. Re:May I be frank. by a+whoabot · · Score: 1

      Further response, now that I think about it more.

      "Same idea just the propaganda from your sources of information have warped your brain."

      What warping? What progaghanda, and what sources? How does this comment make any sense? Read what I wrote very carefully, perhaps?

    5. Re:May I be frank. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I admire your honesty and frankness. However, I think you're in the worng place. The correct argument here is to claim that the record companies are evil, and downloading is fair use.

  5. Reap what you sow by DrSkwid · · Score: 3, Informative

    A few snippets from the archives

    Lest we forget

    http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,38103, 00 .html
    Aug. 08, 2000

    Twenty-eight states filed suit Tuesday against the five biggest record companies and two music retailing giants, accusing them of conspiring to fix CD prices.

    "This illegal action by record companies and retailers has not been music to the ears of the public," New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said in a statement. "Because of these conspiracies, tens of millions of consumers paid inflated prices to buy CDs of artists including Santana, Whitney Houston, Madonna, and Eric Clapton."

    Tuesday, 12 June, 2001, 12:33 GMT 13:33 UK

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1384638.stm

    EU opens online music probe

    Mario Monti: 'A number of issues merit close attention'
    The European Competition Commission has decided to investigate two online music ventures, set up by leading players in the music industry.

    The two ventures being probed are MusicNet - to be launched later this year by AOL Time Warner, Bertelsmann and EMI - and a service formerly known as Duet.

    Duet is a collaboration between 0Vivendi Universal and Sony, and was renamed Pressplay on Monday.

    Monday, 23 July, 2001
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1452686. stm

    Vivendi profits surge 53%

    Tuesday, 31 July, 2001,

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1467198.stm

    Music giants face price-fix charge

    AOL Time Warner and Vivendi Universal have been charged by the US Federal Trade Commission with conspiring to fix prices of audio and video recordings of concerts by the Three Tenors.

    AOL has reached a settlement with the FTC, while the case against Vivendi will be the subject of a hearing, the US regulator said.

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  6. Downloader's spending?!? by El · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How exactly did the statisticians determine which of the people not buying albums were downloaders? Or which of the downloaders were not buying albums? If there are 32% fewer downloaders, then could that result in downloaders spending 32% less? Apparently there are lies, damn lies, statistics... and then there are BPI claims.

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

  7. hmm where to start by real_smiff · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "All the best U.S. trends get exported to the UK."

    and so does the best FUD

    "seven million people in Britain steal music..." (it's not.. you know the argument. + if so many are doing it, maybe the law needs some reworking)

    "downloading music from illegal sites" (no they're downloading from networks, peers, and the networks are legal. just makes the geek in me cringe when journalists do this)

    "There is no clearer evidence of the damage that illegal downloading is doing to British music and the British music industry" (has this been proven yet? Is it just bad for for the BPI or is it bad for British Music - there's a huge difference in scope there!)

    "The illegal downloaders tend to go for the most popular artists, but in the long term unknown artists will lose out because record companies will not have the money to invest in new artists." (very very unproven - i've found lots of new music that i couldn't buy, because i wouldn't know about it, if it weren't for free file trading).

    and remember the final FUD point (assuming this is the same as in America) they don't get you for downloading! it's uploading. this is the big one to try to scare people off. though of course, not sharing ruins the network ultimately.

    "They are more likely to live in London and the South-East where internet broadband connections have taken off more quickly than in other regions." (so they are more likely to be rich.. so they are not cheap, they are more likely to buy your music if you sort your act out).

    Now a few questions I want to ask:

      1. Which networks are they monitoring? How are they deciding who to go after and who to ignore?
    (this is the part where i want to save my own ass getting sued).

    finally: "allows tracks to be bought over the internet for less than 1 pound each." That's nearly TWO dollars at the current exchange. get the h*ll outta here! a dollar is already too much and too little for artists; rip-off Britain strikes again!

    wow my largest post ever. yeah, i love music.

    --

    This is my Sig, this is my Gun. One is for Slashdot and one is for Fun.

    1. Re:hmm where to start by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      A few comments of my own

      "seven million people in Britain steal music..." (it's not.. you know the argument

      All the articles I've seen look like they're based on a press release from the BPI. Sadly, downloaders don't have a unified voice.

      "downloading music from illegal sites" (no they're downloading from networks, peers, and the networks are legal.

      I get the feeling that most journalists don't quite get the internet. Web and Internet seem to be used interchangably.

      but in the long term unknown artists will lose out because record companies will not have the money to invest in new artists."

      This is the stupidest argument they come up with. "Invest" is the key word here. Investments aren't something companies do for fun. It's not a cost that can be reduced, or a luxury item that they can do without if their profits go down. It's a core part of the business. It's the last thing they can afford to do without.

      rip-off Britain strikes again!

      I've heard this country referred to as "Treasure Island" because they can get away with such huge prices.

    2. Re:hmm where to start by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      and remember the final FUD point (assuming this is the same as in America) they don't get you for downloading! it's uploading. this is the big one to try to scare people off. though of course, not sharing ruins the network ultimately.

      And they can't even get that right. No one is uploading. Really, no one. They are passively serving to those who download from them. To cast them as uploaders is to make them look like they're actively sharing music when many don't even realize that their P2P software automatically offers to serve to others everything they download. (It doesn't help that the software also claims the users are uploading.)

      Displaying what you have is not an invitation for others to take.

      The linked article is one of the few that gets this right, even to the point of using scare quotes around "serial uploaders" which calls attention the misuse of the term.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  8. IYKWIMAITTYD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've got a stream of something I want to upload to Jordan's boxen via a new peer to peer application I like to call "Donkey Punch."

  9. Clearly you don't read the same econ texts. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    People need entertainment. And since they know they're a monopoly they should be able to raise prices with impunity while having only a modest effect on sales. It's not like they're competing with other companies for entertainment dollars, they're the only ones allowed to sell music.

    Oh wait. You might be reading the same econ texts. You're just not subscribing to the same fallacious set of assumptions. Clever rabbit, Brits are for Tricks.

    Also, over ten years, given the rate of inflation, prices shouldn't have quite doubled yet. So that tells us something too.

  10. BPI? by alonsoac · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Did anyone read that as British Pornographic Industry?

  11. Uploaders? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

    Threatening who? Uploaders? Who is uploading? There are downloaders and people who serve files to downloaders, but hardly anyone uploads.

    Downloading is pulling. Uploading is pushing. One does not imply the other; they exist separately.

    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    1. Re:Uploaders? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah right.. You don't download, your computer asks your peer to upload to you. Or the other way around - you don't upload, another machine just asks for the right to download from you.

      As such, depending on your point of view, uploading and downloading are mutually exclusive!!!11

    2. Re:Uploaders? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      That's like saying your phone called the caller by being ready to ring.

      The point of view is properly placed on the human that triggers the transfer, whenever feasible, and is not transferable. Only when it is not feasible it is on the anthropomorphized machine that established the connection, such as a TiVo uploading viewer information and downloading guide data. And even then, the anthropomorphized machine is really just symbolic of the programmer that told it to do that.

      In FTP, "get" is downloading and "put" is uploading, no matter where the machines are in relation to you or each other, nor the size of the machines. You can't flip the POV.

      It's understandable that people don't get this. Even writers for 60 Minutes can't keep straight who calls whom on the telephone when computers are involved. They think TiVo calls your home.

      It upsets me that people won't get this and would rather misuse these technical terms that were given specific scientific meaning. Especially those who work in the field and should know better.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  12. Illegal IM Campaign by DrPepper · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I do hope that they got all those people to opt-in to receiving message from them. Under the new Electronic Privacy and Communcations Act (2003) I believe what they are proposing would count as unsolicited electronic communications. Anyone who receives one of these might want to try making a complaint to the Information Comissioner.

  13. The usual lies... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Informative
    "The illegal downloaders tend to go for the most popular artists, but in the long term unknown artists will lose out because record companies will not have the money to invest in new artists."


    Actually, new artists are required to take out a loan, so there isn't really much of an "investment" anyway.


    Most unsigned bands that give away MP3s seem to think it works out in their favor anyway.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:The usual lies... by Pr0found · · Score: 1

      I drum in un-signed Australian band Way Back When and you're right - The only way we're going to be noticed is to get our product out there ourselves (Making our songs freely available on our website). No one's out there to help un-signed bands - We, like many thousands of other bands, are doing it tough trying to be discovered and supported. It's a fight to survive - Even big name bands are being cheated by the Industry - it's messed up and needs to be revolutionised (How much longer will this take?).

    2. Re:The usual lies... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Nice web site. I'm downloading a few tracks now. I love finding bands this way.

      There didn't seem to be a link to donate or buy CDs on your site. Did I just miss it?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:The usual lies... by Pr0found · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I do the site myself too. No you didn't miss it - I should knock up an order form. How would you suggest we have a donate link? All the services I've checked out charge a % which make it hardly worth while (because the majority of any small donation is taken by the service). Until I've published order details, please email us and we can arrange payment/a CD to get out to you. :) Cheers.