Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

RIAA Forgets to Make Royalty Payments

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the gentle-reminder dept.

theodp writes "NY Attorney General Eliot Spitzer agreed with the RIAA on one point - artists WERE being deprived of money that was rightfully theirs. But Spitzer managed to find $50 million for performers without shaking down grandmothers. Spitzer's culprits? A Who's Who of the nation's top recording companies - members of the RIAA - who failed to maintain contact with artists and stopped making required royalty payments."

14 of 341 comments (clear)

  1. Motives by Allen+Zadr · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Instead of coming right out and bashing the RIAA, (yes, that needs doing as well), I have a different question...

    From the Article ( bold emphasis added):

    "The companies have also agreed to comply with New York State's Abandoned Property Law, which requires that if an artist or his or her family cannot be found, unclaimed royalties be "escheated" or turned over to the state. The state then holds these monies until a claim is made."

    While this will be great for a lot of artists I question the motive. I doubt that Eliot Spitzer is doing this for artists. I'm sure New York state will benefit from the interest revenue from "hold[ing] these monies. It won't hurt his career to have his name in the paper either.

    Of course, I didn't bother to look up his record. Maybe he really is just doing his job, protecting the citizens of New York State.

    --
    Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
    1. Re:Motives by spaeschke · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Spitzer's been a great watchdog for US citizens. All of those crackdowns on securities violators? Primarily coming out of Spitzer's office. Of course, it also doesn't hurt his political career, but hey, the guy's been doing a bang up job as NY DA.

    2. Re:Motives by davidu · · Score: 5, Interesting


      Spitzer has been doing an AWESOME job.

      I don't think it's any secret that he has political aspirations -- even if you ask him -- but that doesn't change the fact that he has been going after the wall street crooks WAY harder than the feds have. He has been nailing people left and right and sticking them for all he can.

      We need more people like Spitzer around to go after the bullshit without being crazy like Ashcroft.

      -davidu

      --

      # Hack the planet, it's important.
    3. Re:Motives by Belisarivs · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I remember reading an article pondering the next New York governors race. It was decided that Spitzer would be the best Democratic candidate, as his poll numbers were around 60% . . . among Republicans.

      I'm a conservative Republican, and I voted for him last time around.

    4. Re:Motives by Colonel+Angus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Personally, I couldn't give two squirts what his motives are. It's not every day that you actually see someone actively trying to catch crooks. I am sure I am not the only one who is sick of seeing the excessively rich get richer by bending over those who are likely struggling to get by as it is. At current rate we'll soon have two classes... middle class will be relegated to "back in my day" stories.

      So if he's doing this for political gain... great. Go nuts. If he's doing it to get chicks, let'er rip! If he's doing it because the voices in his head said it's the right thing to do then who am I to argue. Let him clean this shit up since no one else who is SUPPOSED to be doing it is.

    5. Re:Motives by Lord_Raptor · · Score: 5, Interesting


      If Kerry wins the Presidential election, I'm thinking that Spitzer has a good chance at being AG for the US.
      Now that would give me a little more confidence in where the country is headed.

    6. Re:Motives by Allen+Zadr · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I highly doubt that these people are hard to find;
      "David Bowie, Dolly Parton, Harry Belafonte, Liza Minnelli, Dave Matthews, Sean Combs and Gloria Estefan"

      Withholding money from Dave Matthews may have been more than an oversight. After-all, he's spoken out more than once about royalty free music for the masses.

      Otherwise I agree that the RIAA is marginally different from the individual publishers it represents.

      --
      Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
  2. Any hope of draconian fines? by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Say, fine the RIAA members $100K per non-paying incident, like they were threatening to charge the kiddie downloaders?

    Friggin' corporate pirates should be MADE to pay their proper dues!

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re:Any hope of draconian fines? by Progman3K · · Score: 5, Interesting

      >Say, fine the RIAA members $100K per non-paying incident, like they were threatening to charge the kiddie downloaders?

      Well, if they're guilty of stealing from artists, like they claim P2P users are, then they should pay the same fines, shouldn't they?

      Oh boy, it would be interesting to watch the RIAA lobby for that!

      --
      I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
  3. Where does the money go? by bigjnsa500 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    If these royalties for artists that they can't find, what happens to the money? Does it go into a general fund or does it go back to RIAA to line their pockets?

    Another question would be WHY the RIAA lost touch with these artists. Was it on purpose or accident?

    --
    This is a test. This is a test of the emergency sig system. This has been only a test.
  4. $50 million in cheated royalties? by Mudcathi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The RIAA has sued what, 3000 people so far? With an average "catch" of $2500 each? If these numbers are correct, that's $7.5 million. Versus $50 million that RIAA cheated their own artists out of!

    --

    "He who throws mud, loses ground." - proverb

  5. Re:Lost track of these artists? by ExistentialFeline · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This assumes that the artists know they are owed money. If the artists were contacted on a semi-regular basis about payments and the companies occasionally "forgot" about some money it may not be obvious for the artists to ask for the money. IE a check for $2500 could be only half of what they owe but the artist don't know any better since the artist hasn't asked exactly what their debt is; they just know they're owed something.

    Of course as things usually are on /. this is wild speculation.

  6. Change in My Tactics by endofoctober · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I love music, and used to spend a lot on buying new CDs before this RIAA shakedown started. Stories like this, however, have made me change my ways, and now I buy exactly $0's worth from any label that supports the RIAA.

    It's appalling to think that this is all done defending artists from file sharers when their watchdog is either this clueless or dishonest...with the RIAA, it's hard to tell which.

    Artists might fare better if they could see an alternative to this corporate mire. Perhaps if they understood that consumers would be more supportive of the music if there was some reasonable guarantee that money would actually get to the artist rather than a conglomerate?

    Granted I have no guarantee of that with my current label selections, but I feel better knowing that my cash isn't feeding the anti-piracy machine.

    --
    - Jack
  7. You can't blame the RIAA -- it's easy to forget. by Ride-My-Rocket · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For example, I've forgotten that I need to be bothered with buying overpriced CDs for the past 8 years. Instead, I've been spending my cash on video games, DVDs, live entertainment and socializing with my friends.

    And sometimes I also forget that I don't need to buy a CD in order to determine whether I like the music. P2P has been gracious enough to keep reminding me of this whenever I feel the urge to go to the nearest Virgin Megastore..........