Slashdot Mirror
DefectiveByDesign Supporters to Call on RIAA Execs
johnsu01 writes "DefectiveByDesign.org is organizing a call-in campaign for today. People around the country will be calling high-ranking RIAA officials to deliver the message that DRM is an unacceptable restriction on the freedom of consumers and citizens. DefectiveByDesign will provide the numbers to call when you sign up. This action should attract the people who thought that Apple was not a good target because it is the RIAA that requires DRM and those who think that wearing HazMat suits is obnoxious. Everyone can vote with their dollars, but that doesn't tell the RIAA why they aren't getting the dollars. With a few thousand people signed up already, they will undoubtedly know after today."
DefectiveByDesign will provide the numbers to call when you sign up.
..
Why should I have to sign up? Just post the damn numbers and then request I sign up, and explain why it's important. I mean, I know that requiring registration is by no means the equal of DRM, but on some philosophical levels it does present it's ironies
The sea changes color, but the sea does not change.
It sounds more like a bunch of people are going to be calling up and harassing people. If you don't like their policies, DON'T BUY THEIR MUSIC! It's that simple. You don't need to explain why you're not buying it since you're not doing business with them anymore. Go buy from Indie labels. You're acting like a kid who says he's not going to talk to you anymore and then spends the next 2 hours trying to get you to ask him why he's not talking to you anymore. You know what? They don't care!
Call me cynical, but does anyone else find it sad that this is promoted as such a "cause" to fight for? Has consumerism come so far that we are now protesting the things we buy? This isn't really the context that I think of when I think of a 'freedom fighter' (their label, not mine).
Though, I suppose, it's not like there are any wars or civil liberty issues to protest nowadays.....
All that being said, DRM sucks.
And precisely how do these people expect to get past the front switchboard or the secretary to actually talk to Mr. Powerfull RIAA Person?
I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
Something that I do when I'm drinking at 2 or 3 am is drunk dial people. This is pretty much a curse as I proceed to leave indiscernible/garbled phone messages for my victims.
Thanks to this website, I'll now be able to leave those messages on RIAA answering machines. If I get an RIAA representative on the phone, it will be perfect because:
- I've never lost an argument when drunk. At least, nobody's ever not conceded to me.
- I'm twice as opinionated and polarized when I'm drunk compared to when I'm sober.
- I constantly like to give people a "piece of my mind" and/or "settle their hash" when wrecked.
- I love to sing when I'm drunk. This is bad because it usually comes out in an a-melodic fashion.
- Phone conversations with me can last an hour or more. Sometimes taking as much as 10 minutes to figure out who I am, what I'm doing, where I am & (the hardest one) why I'm calling you.
So, as you can see, there are so many good reasons for me to put the RIAA on the top of my drunk dialing list. Not because I want to call them and tell them how much I'm going to miss after everyone graduates and moves awayMy work here is dung.
Imagine if every Wal*Mart in a given city had a swarm of "customers" walk in, fill up a cart with goods and then abandon it. You can bet it would make the local news if it were done right. Even the national news. Look how that guy who recorded his "cancel my account" AOL experience. He managed to get digg and slashdot to cover it, and then it spiralled out onto the cable news networks. That one story could have profound effects on the entire AOL customer service staff.
it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
I'm up for the old-school phone-a-thon, but can't someone just track down the blue frog killers and send the RIAA a message that way? 1000 or so calls just means a $5.15 an hour receptionist has a really bad day.
[an error occurred while processing this sig]
Return to them, via email, all .mp3s you ever obtained without paying.
:)
I know, old hat, but still funny
The grass is always greener on the other side of the light cone.
Looks like a evaluation of the campaign itself.
Chairman Ted Stevens (AK), (202) 224-3004
John McCain (AZ), (202) 224-2235
Conrad Burns (MT), Main: 202-224-2644
Trent Lott (MS), (202) 224-6253
Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX), (202) 224-5922
Gordon H. Smith (OR), (202) 224 3753
John Ensign (NV), (202) 224-6244
George Allen (VA), (202) 224-4024
John E. Sununu (NH), (202) 224-2841
Jim DeMint (SC), (202) 224-6121
David Vitter (LA),(202) 224-4623
Co-Chairman Daniel K. Inouye (HI), (202) 224-3934
John D. Rockefeller (WV), (202) 224-6472
John F. Kerry (MA), (202) 224-2742
Barbara Boxer (CA), (202) 224-3553
Bill Nelson (FL), (202) 224-5274
Maria Cantwell (WA), (202) 224-3441
Frank R. Lautenberg (NJ), (202) 224-3224
E. Benjamin Nelson (NE), (202) 224-6551
Mark Pryor (AR), (202) 224-2353
While I can understand your point on 'some philosophical level', it shows a level of dedication to stand up and be counted. In this day and age, marches and protests are superseded by our ability to bitch and whine on message boards and blogs. Anonymity is something we need to protect on the 'net, but stepping into the limelight makes a much bolder statement. It takes a lot more courage and dedication to a cause to have your name be listed than using a pseudonym. Please take note of my hypocrisy; I do believe this will be posted as an anonymous coward because I can't recall my nick on here. :)
If I sound stupid, it's not me talking....
If they can be convinced not to make too much fuss about everything on this earth, maybe things will be OK.
my 2 cents
hilarious
Spread the word about this call-in by asking your friends to register today! When you log in on Friday we'll give you a special number to call. After you've made your call, you can let us know how it went.
I think the email would go something like this:
Dear defectivebydesign Team
I called that fantastic number you supplied me with. I was confronted with a recorded message stating "Welcome to RIAA, DRM department, the person you are looking for is not available at the moment. Please leave a message and he'll/she'll get back to you as soon as possible. Your call is important to us. Have nice day"
How to get a lot of people to sing up to your page:
1) Find a lot of people on the internet
2) Find a cause they all hate
3) Give them a little hope by signing up to your page
4) Sell thier details to the highest bidder for spam production
5) Profit profit profit
"Everyone can vote with their dollars, but that doesn't tell the RIAA why they aren't getting the dollars."
I do love this idea. Has any one else noticed that if we reduce ourselves to voting with our dollars, then ordinary people get about 37,000 votes a year if they are lucky, while Corporations and the super rich get millions or billions of votes?
Boycotts may or may not work, but they should not be the primary means of collective bargaining for the people. The collective bargaining agency supposed to stand up for the rights of the people is called the government. Or at least, that was the impression I got.
My guess would be that they want to balance the number of calls to each phone number, and they want to know how many people participated. Sounds pretty reasonable to me.
"I can't recall my nick on here"
It's "Kaitiff".
Maybe
I blogged about why I won't purchase any "Plays for sure" music. The DRM is practically guaranteed to make your music collection disappear.
Any system that restricts copying the music you paid for will eventually lock out the paying customer. I refuse to spend real money on a disappearing product.
Why should I have to sign up? Just post the damn numbers and then request I sign up,
simple.
Trolls. They are trying to limit the number of trolls. for every one moron spewing profanity and "1 0wn J00!" at them that destroys the credibility of 20 honest and professional calls.
So limiting the idiots and morons that screw things up helps make the ration of intilligent to idiot much higher.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
My guess is they want people to register for the same reason that internet petitions aren't worth crap -- anonymity is ultimately a form of obfuscation, and when you're trying to tell someone something they don't want to hear, they'll jump on any excuse to devalue the legitimacy of your position.
But yes, it's a perfectly valid point, there is certainly some irony there.
[command INSERTWITTYQUIP failed: insufficient wit]
You're confusing a private citizen with their position as a leading figure in the RIAA. Yes, phoning them at home would be objectionable, but I don't see how ringing the office is an affront to freedom. They're not compelled to be in that job, and can always hang up.
Well when the industry itself resorts to dirty tricks (e.g., Sony rootkit), what do you expect?
The RIAA is just like labor unions, they were a decent idea, but they have gotten too big and too powerful and have grown themselves into a counterproductive entity that is hurting those that they profess to help and profit from them a great deal, which is also the exact reason they will never go away.
dB Masters
If you want to hurt them, we need to convince record labels that they don't need to employ what is basically a "task force posse" to protect their interests. Striking at the heart of the beast would be most productive. What we need to do as good, strong minded, mostly intelligent people is start some new record labels that are specifically designed with low profit margins and realistic salaries, and start campaigning to get major artists moved over to our labels that pass on more profit to them. We need to rob the RIAA supporting labels in the good old fasioned american way, which is build a better alternative.
Windows has more viruses because linux has more virus coders.
A telephone harrasment campaign will be viewed by executives as coming from a bunch of crack pots who want something for nothing. They can easily plug in the numbers into their arguments about piracy. The reality is they do have the right and responsibility to protect the products they represent. The problems exist because current copy right laws apparently do not adequately address digital content. The vacum that exists is allowing the RIAA to abuse consumers under the banner of anti-piracy. Whether or not we agree that Apple's 'FairPlay' is a good thing, it is an example of a very resonable implementation of DRM. What is really needed is educating the multitudes of consumers about the issues. All too often consumers just accept things as they exist. I wonder how many consumers have computers that are hobbled by Sony's rootkit fiasco without a clue. These are people who would blame 'pirates' and 'hackers' for problems they might experience with their computers rather than the true villans, because they just don't know.
The music industry won't care about some users protesting about DRM, since their only goal is to turn the whole market into a standardless pay per view system, and they will succeed sooner or later when people get used to the idea of using only specific software and hardware for managing music. With comments like these (original story in finnish mirrored here), it's pretty clear that not only the 'merican music industry seriously wants to assure those responsible for various judicial systems that increasing incompability is the only way to go in the digital age.
The RIAA thinks exactly the same thing...
These numbers have nothing to do with the RIAA.... They are all Senators, some on the Senate Appropriations Committee and some are on the Commerce Committee and others.
No, "vigilanteism" would be stopping one of the execs in their Benz limo, dragging him out of the car, beating him to death in the street and setting his mutilated body on fire as an example to the others. A phone campaign is a legitimate form of protest, and the right of every American.
BugMeNot has basically destroyed that mold. I wonder if the "sign-up" thing is like, a DefectiveByDesign is actually an RIAA shill that's trying to collect the names of people who call in who are likely pirates...
Sorry, what with the NSA and State Secrets and such, these days, anything that requires me to give personal information has me second-guessing motives (as implausable as this one probably is.)
Excuse my speling.
Making The Bar Project
I just don't understand whatsoever how "registration" is supposed to make anything more credible by making people use "real" information.
Name: Joe Blow
Email Address: joeblow123456@yahoo.com
Postal Code: 12345
It's a ilttle silly to assume or even expect people to give real information on "registration" forms these days.
BTW, my real name isn't Asphalt.
It seems to me that the poor secretary will be the one having to handle these 1000 calls.
Wouldn't it be much better to write a letter, put it in a manila envelope and send it directly to the RIAA exec. The key is to pay the extra dollar or so and get the Signature Confirmation service that the USPS offers. I think when an executive gets 1000 letters on his/her desk that ALL need signatures you tend to notice.
Oh come on. Your name, address and telephone number are not private information. In fact, rumor has it that there is a book somewhere that has the name, address and number of every person in the entire city. Imagine if someone with nefarious purposes were to get ahold of that -- we would all be in trouble!
Yeah, but the phone book doesn't contain a correlation with "likely to be a pirate".
According to the RIAA numbers on the losses due to pirating, I would have to disagree with your assumption. Based on their numbers, if you're listed in the phone book, you're likely a pirate.Simply stating [Citation Needed] does not automatically make you insightful or brilliant.
It's an inclusion by exclusion. The RIAA is in cahoots with the NSA and the FBI and any other TLA I can think of. According to this government, since you are not in the phone book, you must have something to hide (besides your phone number). Pirate... Terrorist... What is it?!?
Actually, I just got the strangest mental image. Let's work on that analogy a little. (Slightly OT)
If McDonalds fell under the DMCA, you can choose to buy a Big Mac or not (see exceptions below). Regardless, you still have the option of finding food elsewhere. However, if you purchase the Big Mac, you will be bound by a very specific set of rules found on the inside of the wrapper: You are the only person authorized to consume the Big Mac, you may not sell it or offer it to others. You may not examine, disassemble or modify the Big Mac (e.g. you cannot take the pickles off, or add more mustard, cut the burger in half). You may not tell others how to perform these actions, or possess or traffic in tools to assist with these actions (e.g. a knife). You must consume the Big Mac from the original wrapper; it may not be placed on a plate, in a lunchbox, or in a fridge. The Big Mac must be purchased and consumed within the US, and the right to consume may be revoked at any time without warning. Violation of any of these conditions will make you subject to civil fines (upwards of $150,000US per instance) and possibly criminal penalties.
I think the theft argument is tired. People have been using it for decades now, and when it comes to media usage, it really, honestly doesn't apply. If I buy a car from a car dealership, and then turn it around and give it away to a friend, does the car company sue me? But! they didn't get a profit from my giving that car away! Perhaps, they should sue me! I know, your saying to yourself right now "but that's not the same because if you give the car away you don't have it anymore for yourself." Exactly. We've been applying the term "theft" to something that can't be stolen. Sure, it can be traded. It can be given to sombody without charging them. You might eeevvvven be able to stretch it into "unfair trading", but to call it theft is lunacy. It's a word thats applied simply to generate sensationalism. "But! They're stealing my music!" sounds alot more we-need-protection-ish than "But! They're trading my music!"
Right now, in the US, there are alot of states that make it legal to shoot sombody who comes into your house who you beleive might be there to steal something.
Now, imagine for a second, if trading a couple of music files could really be bundled into "theft", then, should it be legal for a performer to open fire on sombody in the crowd he sees with a microphone? How about bursting into your house and shooting you dead?
You are absolutely right my friend, the problem does look alot different in their shoes. It looks alot like this: How, oh how do we convince the legislature and governing bodies that something that is less of a crime than "copyright infringment without monetary gain" can be publicised, and then treated as if its grand larceny?
Windows has more viruses because linux has more virus coders.
I just phoned one of the execs (no answer after 12 rings) and will keep trying. I will post the phone numbers here, but I do encourage people to stand up and be counted by still signing up at the DefectiveByDesign.org website.
We need to take actions like this as a community, because it's our best (and possibly only) tool. We don't have lobbyists cozying up to government officials, and we don't have the money to pay to Learjet the politicians to a nice dinner on a private island. But we do have strength in numbers, and if only we have the backbone to stand up and make our views known, we can make a difference. Because I'm not sure the MAFIAA has backbone; their backs are stiff just because they're so stuffed with money.
By the way, the DefectiveByDesign.org web site only shows ten call reports from people having made phone calls. When I tried to submit my report, I got an error message. So maybe the site isn't working properly. I hope in the end we do get a tally of how many people responded.
Brad Buckles RIAA USA (202) 857-9607
Mitch Bainwol RIAA USA (202) 857-9651
Cary Sherman RIAA USA (202) 857-9632
Mitch Glazier USA RIAA (202) 857-9673
Neil Turkowitz RIAA USA (202) 857-9647
Steve Redmond BPI UK +44 (0)20 7803 1324
Peter Jamieson BPI UK +44 (0) 20 7803 1311
Matt Phillips BPI UK 44 (0) 77 3951 4963
Michael Haentjes IFPI Germany +49 (30) 59 00 38-0
Peter Zombik IFPI Germany +49 (30) 59 00 38-0
Jean never Foitzik IFPI Germany +49 (30) 59 00 38-23
Herve Rony SNEP France +33 (1) 44 13 66 66
Graham Henderson CRIA Canada 1 (416) 967-7272 ext. 102
404555974007725459910684486621289147856453481154 in hex is "You sank my Battleship?"
[GPG key in journal]
That doesn't seem to be true. There are businesses selling DRM-free music. They have been mentioned in the "Alternatives" thread, and elsewhere. As an example, eMusic is listed as the #2 retailer of downloadable music. There are many artists giving away their music or selling it directly to fans in order to get people to come to their shows. It is only a small conglomerate of labels that feels they need DRM in order to stay alive. They might be right, but do not equate the continued profits of those few businesses with the success of music and culture in general. I would be interested to see any articles or statements from non-RIAA labels in support of DRM. I honestly haven't heard any. Isn't competition also an essential concept in free market economics?
You mean, how will you get paid more than 7 cents per song for your efforts? Eliminating the massive overhead that goes into distributing music via the current monopoly model will likely enable artists to be better off. Plus, it's not like all artists made a living before. Your question should actually be, "How will our few multimillion-dollar pop stars continue to get paid for their efforts?" Because an incredible number of talented musicians are already making no money under the current model. Artists will get paid because people like their music. People will pay to be the first to receive the new music, even if it can be freely distributed after that. People will pay for shows, for signed editions, and to encourage the production of more stuff they like.
I'm unfortunately not much of a kid anymore, but let's not forget that DRM applies to a lot more than music. It's being used by libraries on their audio books. It is applied to eBooks, including literature and educational materials. It's applied to the software that runs, well, just about everything these days. We are letting the companies who own this DRM technology dictate under what terms we can educate ourselves (and our kids) in ways that we have never allowed before. What are the ramifications of this?
Even if it's true that we need to provide a greater incentive to people to create useful works, that would only point to a need to find a better way to do it than restricting access to those works, since such restrictions have wide-ranging impacts (like bringing down entire incredibly useful infrastructures like P2P). Copyright was conceived to be exactly such a device; something artificial to promote useful works. So we have room to come up with other such devices if need be.
No, but the benefit of exclusive ownership of copyrighted works to the rights-holder does need to be balanced against the benefit to society. That's what it says in the Constitution, anyway. Copyright has a limited term of ownership (even though that keeps getting longer) and is not like physical property in ways that others around here have already explained. Creation should be rewarded, but the kind of exclusive control required to justify DRM is an attempt to turn this into a kind of property it was never intended to be.
I agree that we need to have a society that supports artists and musicians. It's a littl