Slashdot Mirror


RIAA Wins Worst Company In America 2007

An anonymous reader writes "After 15 punishing rounds of combat involving 32 of America's most hated companies, 100,000 voters have spoken: More hated than Halliburton, more despised than Walmart, the RIAA has defeated all comers to become the Worst Company in America 2007."

8 of 306 comments (clear)

  1. This isn't a win for us by KKlaus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not Sony BMG, Warner, etc at the top of the list, it's their front group the RIAA. People hate the RIAA? Guess what, that's exactly what it was created with in mind. Recording companies get to engage in strong-armed consumer-alienating behavior, but dodge the consequences because the "RIAA" is there to take the flak.

    So don't call this a victory for us! This is a victory for the record companies, because it shows that they have successfully redirected your wrath to a "company" (I don't know why the summary uses that word) that doesn't have a product, and could care less that you don't like them.

    --
    Relax I just want some peanuts.
  2. Trade Group Not Company by aldheorte · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The RIAA is a trade group, not a company, although I have long wondered why they do not run afoul of anti-trust laws since they essentially serve as a vehicle for price fixing, joint litigation, and other forms of collusion between the member companies, which, taken together, represent a de facto monopoly in the music industry.

  3. It's "most hated" not "most evil" by Xenographic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > the riaa is just trying to protect its intellectual property.

    No, they're not "just" trying to do that. They've manipulated the law to their own ends and complain whenever people decry that as unfair. They sue innocent people, attempting to ruin their lives. And if they do find out that someone's innocent, they use discovery to invade the innocent person's life, looking to find the real infringer. Which might well be them, after they have MediaSentry flood the P2P networks with bogus files and bogus search data (including the very searches they use to find "infringers"!) And if you insist upon corruption, just what do you call payola? Are bribes not considered corruption these days, or what?

    Now, don't get me wrong--Halliburton isn't exactly some nice company, either. But this is "most hated" not "most evil" and the RIAA has gotten a lot more press lately.

    But please, don't say they're "just" trying to protect their "property" because there's no way in hell I'll buy that lame excuse.

  4. Re:stolen music vs corruption by Dun+Malg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    if you think about it, the riaa is just trying to protect its intellectual property. See, the problem here is that it isn't their "property". Songs, stories, movies--- once they're publicly released, they belong to all of us. Copyright is an artificial, government created, temporary, limited monopoly on the right to copy these artifacts of our common culture. The fact that the thieving bastards have greased the collective palm of congress to obtain perpetual extensions to the temporary monopoly on copying doesn't change the fact that all that stuff is ours. If you actually educate yourself on the long history of artistic creation and the short history of copyright, you'd understand what an absolute evil is being perpetrated upon us by the bastards claiming ownership of this stuff--- and you'd likely no longer parrot the their "intellectual property" fallacy.
    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  5. Re:Since when is the RIAA a company? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The RIAA isn't a company. It's a trade association. An arbitrary distinction. They are incorporated in New York, so they are as much a corporation as any other. The fact that their entire customer base consists of a small clique of recording industry companies is wholly irrelevant. They are merely the non-profit* collective "beard" of their members, allowing them to pawn off their dirty work on a faceless third party.

    * their lobbying efforts alone make their non-profit status pretty hard to justify under 501(c)(3)
    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  6. Re:stolen music vs corruption by Anthony+Boyd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Dun Malg, I love you. I basically created an entire Web site to say what you just said. People like you are VERY rare. My wife read the site and said, "but you're a writer, how can you want people to copy your stuff?" And I thought, wow, if my own wife totally misses the point -- a wife who is technology-friendly and talks with me about this stuff regularly -- then LOTS of people are out of touch with the ideas behind copyright. Here's to you, Dun Malg.

  7. They won't - the RIAA won by Alioth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The RIAA doesn't care if they are voted the 'worst company' - they have succeeded. Since they don't sell anything to the public, the fact that all the hatred has stuck to the RIAA _instead_ of the companies they represent, they have succeeded entirely in this goal - and I predict most people are too blind to this fact to see that this is anything other than an extremely hollow victory. The RIAA doesn't care if they are unpopular with the general public - because the general public is not their customer. So long as the hate and bile sticks to them, instead of the record companies they represent - they are winning.

  8. Re:stolen music vs corruption by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, according to Thomas Jefferson, all copyright is a loan from the public domain. We do own all published creative works, it's just that the copyright holder is the only one allowed to profit by them for a while. Jefferson actually did not want copyrights (or patents, for that matter) because he felt that such would ultimately damage the public domain. As usual he was right.

    We really should listen the Founders more often.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.