Slashdot Mirror


RIAA Co-Opts More Universities

southpolesammy writes "The Register reports that six more US Universities and colleges have agreed to enter into protection schemes with the RIAA. In short, several institutions have signed deals with the RIAA's lapdog, the Napster music service, to 'goad these schools toward becoming music brokers'. The underlying threat of being sued by the RIAA if they don't pay them off is almost certainly the driving force behind their acceptance of this scheme. And of course, there's the ever-present gag order they'll probably enforce on these new universities as well. Great business model guys. Way to engender yourselves to your biggest customer base."

4 of 305 comments (clear)

  1. *Yawn* yes, the RIAA is bad. BUT, come on... by Bold+Marauder · · Score: 5, Interesting

    First off, let me make something crystal clear up-front. I in no way condone the way that the RIAA
    has tried to unethically shape our legal landscape, much less the shadier tactics they've employed.

    They're scum, no question about it.

    However, the other side of the equation is almost pathological. While you have many honest people who simply want to defend their Fair Use rights, you also have a loud, vocal "I want I want I want" community who simply believes that it is eeeee-vil that they should ever have to pay for goods (cds) or services.

    there has to be some sort of compromise between the two, and I honestly think this is a first, halting step in the right direction. I don't think much of napster, but I believe that if a university sponsored the use of a service such as Real's Rhapsody service which allowed unlimited streaming (as opposed to a mandatory $X a song) of music, it would be a good compromise between the two posistions. People would have access to a large library of music, and the artists would be recieving compensation.

    Hell, if nothing else, the sponsorship of such a program may well help to diminish any credible claims that the RIAA has to push through bizarre and draconian laws.

    1. Re:*Yawn* yes, the RIAA is bad. BUT, come on... by EvilStein · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "It sort of pisses me off to see all these people going around saying how they have all of Artist X's CDs, when really they just have a bunch of MP3s burnt onto CD. You can hardly call yourself a fan if that's what you do."

      I agree with that to a point, but do want to bring up the fact that when a CD goes out of print, sometimes it is *VERY* hard to ever find an original copy. I know of quite a few artists that have released CDs that weren't chart-burners and wound up dropping out of print. I'd love to have the CDs, but they are friggin *IMPOSSIBLE* to find. NO record stores in the entire area have the CD. ("Ambition" by Tommy Shaw from Styx is a perfect example) - I was on the "watch list" at no less than 15 records here in the SF Bay Area. The CD was *NEVER* found. Nearly 8 years later, I found a copy on eBay - and paid $90 for it.

      I would LOVE to own more and more CDs but I just don't listen to a lot of the crap that's out these days. The CDs that I do want, I cannot find. (Example: the brand new Marillion CD - neither Borders, nor Best Buy, nor Circuit City has the CD. Tower Records said they could order it - 2 weeks shipping.)

      Finding music can really be a pain in the ass sometimes.
      In the second example, I'm going to order the CD directly from www.marillion.com instead. They're a very smart band..

  2. Re:As if college prices weren't bad enough... by riptide_dot · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Oh no! Another $30 per year (if you read the article) in order to download all the free music you want for four years?

    Acutally, I did read the entire article:

    "This is a nice service if holding onto to your tunes is not important. Once their four years at school are over, the students are cut off from Napster and lose all the music they've download. That is unless they pay 99 cents per song or $10 per album to own a permanent download that can be burned onto CDs or MP3 players.

    Keep in mind too, that this charge applies to ALL students, not just those that want to download music. And what about those from other countries/cultures that won't find their particular tastes in music on Napster?

    The total cost of this is yet to be determined. That's just the price these colleges agreed to for now - who knows what the RIAA will start charging them in a few years, or what will happen if their students find a way to circumvent the Napster, etc, etc, etc...

    "Napster offers a unique blend of a name students recognize, a broad music library that appeals to every taste and community features that let you discover new music and share your favorites with friends...."

    Ah, but you can only share them with friends that are also currently enrolled at another one of these universities...:)

    --
    I was in the park the other day wondering why frisbees get bigger and bigger the closer they get - and then it hit me.
  3. Bye bye alumni donation by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 5, Interesting


    I'm an alumnus of one of the universities mentioned, and I'm writing up a letter to be sent to the President and Board of Trustees. It will express my disappointment in their capitulation to RIAA pressure and negligent misuse of funds, and let them know that as long as this deal is in place, the university will no longer be getting any alumni support from myself, and I will encourage my fellow alumni to do the same.

    Napster has no legitimate educational purpose. They can go ahead and waste someone else's money (read: the current student body's) on this worthless and unjustifiable service, but I can make sure they will not be wasting my money on it.