Slashdot Mirror
EFF Calls RIAA Tactics 'Reign of Terror'
nanday writes "What happens when the RIAA prosecutes people for alleged illegal music downloads? In an article on Newsforge (also owned by OSTG), lawyer Ray Beckerman of the Electronic Frontier Foundation explains the RIAA's favorite tactics, and why they play fast and loose with the law. Beckerman also explains why two of these cases may stop the RIAA in its tracks - and what you can do for help." From the article: "In UMG vs. Lindor, the defendant 'is a home house-aid who's never even used a computer,' according to Beckerman. 'She's never operated a computer, she's never even turned on a computer. The only connection she has ever had to a computer is that she has on occasion dusted near the parts that she believes are a computer. And yet she is being pursued as an online distributor in peer-to-peer file sharing.' Since Beckerman became involved in the case after it had gone to federal court, he has tried to learn the details of the charges -- so far with little success. 'The RIAA is trying to conceal the information about how it conducts its investigation,' he says. 'They have stalled every discovery request we've made' -- presumably because to reveal this information would also reveal the weakness of all the similar cases."
The RIAA is engaging in these tactics for a simple reason: they're fighting a losing battle. They want control of any and all media and will do whatever it takes to keep their decades-old model propped up.
Podcasting, Internet radio, and independent music are the new Davids fighting this Goliath and as each one becomes more and more popular in mainstream culture you can guarantee that the RIAA will look for ways to shut it all down (they're already trying with podcasts and streaming radio under the guise of royalties) or infilitrate these new forms of media with their commercial garbage. And yet again, they'll be unsuccessful just as they have been with cassette tapes and recordable CDs.
In the end, they'll be as irrelevant as an 8-track player.
As opposed to where? Many countries pay taxes on all CD-R's purchased regardless of purpose. Face it, government everywhere is for sale, and the RIAA clones in most countries exploit the fact.
Songs suck now a days. No need to buy CDs, nor even test them out.
Oh come on man! You just...(strike up the chords)
had a bad day
You're taking one down
You sing a sad song just to turn it around
You say you don't know
You tell me don't lie
You work up a smile and you go for a ride
You had a bad day
The camera don't lie
You're coming back down and you really don't mind
You had a bad day
You had a bad day
Sorry, I just wanted to remind you of how bad music is these days.
You're beautiful-it's true.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
If you were living in Canada at the time and you did the copying, not your friend, then you're perfectly fine, nothing against the law there.
"I expect high quality free music might also be a bit unusual, but that's no reason not to try and start a new social trend." This has been around for years. It's called Electronic Music. I know most people don't like it, but it IS a working copyright-free model. This is how it works: 1) Producer makes killer track, publishes it to vinyl without copyright. 2) DJ hears killer track at record store. 3) DJ purchases said track, thus providing the producer with his money. 4) DJ spins said track at their next club gig/ party (paid for the performance, despite what many people think, being a good DJ is NOT easy! It takes work just like any other instrument.) 5) DJ puts said track on his mix cd, and sells that for more cash, giving credit (and nothing else) to the producer. 6) Producer sees increased demand for his tracks based on popularity of previous tracks.
The future isn't here until I can type "car keys" into Google and have it say "You left them in your pants last night."
What's happening in the Middle East as I type is a reign of terror. The RIAA are simply abusing their power. There's a pretty big difference between the two and overexagerting the problem can have the effect of making otherwise fair minded people stop listening to what you're saying.
They do. In the UK there's the Association of Independent Music, and in Australia there's AIR. In Canada there's CIRPA, and in the US there's the A2IM. I found these by taking a few seconds to goodle on "independent record labels."
Many, if not most of them, do issue press releases, as you suggest.
I suspect that while the indie labels aren't suing people left and right, they may not be as pro-piracy as you expect. I knew a fellow once who ran an indie record label. He had ten employees and paid himself the princely sum of $20K per year. When x% of the population opted to pirate rather than buy a CD from a major label, all it meant was that somebody you never heard of got laid off or didn't get a raise that year. When his artists' works started showing up on the P2P services, it meant that he had to lay off his friends. Although it's the major labels (through their mouthpiece, the RIAA) make the most noise about piracy, the large RIAA-affiliated labels are actually more resilient to piracy, while the indie labels often run on razor-thin budgets. We can talk about how piracy actually helps the artist because it gets their music out there, we might buy a shirt or go to a concert, etc. but the reality for the tiny 10-person labels (who put up the cash to fund the CDS and who rely on sales to stay in business) is that they must pay the rent and pay their employees each month -- no exceptions, no excuses. If income isn't meeting expenses, it's simply not enough that some 17-year-old in Minnesota loves the copy of your CD that he got via BitTorrent.
Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
"Ok, maybe she hasn't used a computer before.. Thats fine, but unless this person is uncontrollably stupid "dusted near the parts that she believes are a computer." How many people in a normal society would even be able to recongnize a computer! I think this person is playing extra stupid as part of her defense."
What TFA article doesn't mention is that Beckermen is her lawyer. And yeah, he's exagerating the hell out of the situation for sympathy. Which is what he's expected to do as a lawyer, so I have no problem with that.
Beckerman has a blog on the case. The equally valid explanation (but not nearly as glamorous as her lawyer paints it) is that somebody else in her house is the P2P fiend, and the ISP bill just happens to be in the defendant's name. That's an extremely common scenario; the RIAA often sues parents on behalf of their kids.
Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
Just want to clarify something. The post suggests I was speaking for the EFF. I love the EFF, I'm a member, I got into defending RIAA defendants through the EFF, I applaud their efforts in everything I've seen them do... but I'm not an employee or leader of the organization and I am certainly not an authorized spokesman for it. I'm just an ordinary "country" lawyer (in Manhattan) trying to fight for my clients.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful