Slashdot Mirror


Will the New RIAA Tactic Boost P2P File Sharing?

newtley writes "The RIAA's claim that it'll stop suing people may have serious consequences... for the RIAA. When it dropped its attack on seven University of Michigan students, Recording Industry vs. The People wondered if the move was linked to three investigations, with MediaSentry as the target, before Michigan's Department of Labor and Economic Growth. Now, 'LSA sophomore Erin Breisacher said she stopped downloading music illegally after hearing about the possibility of receiving a lawsuit, but now that the RIAA has stopped pursuing lawsuits she "might start downloading again,"' says the Michigan Daily, going on to quote LSA senior Chad Nihranz as saying, 'I figure, if there aren't as many lawsuits they will come out with more software to allow students to download more.'" What about some of the other potential tactics we've discussed recently, such as the UK's proposed £20 per year film and music tax or the $5 monthly fee suggested in the US? Is there anything the RIAA can do to reduce illegal file-sharing without generating massive amounts of bad publicity?

2 of 309 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Sounds like a good deal by Runaway1956 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Many people would disagree with that assumption. Perhaps you have never listened to the lyrics of songs which celebrate the joys found by a gang of boys raping a young girl? I mean, really LISTEN to the music, huh? There is a LOT of trash out there that NEVER should have been written, sung, recorded, or distributed. And, I haven't even begun to evaluate the truly "pop" drivel listened to by the mindless hordes......

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  2. Re:Sounds like a good deal by Runaway1956 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    How about majority rules? If 100% of women are repulsed by a song about rape, and 45% of men find it to be offensive, then the song shouldn't be made. I think that if more than 10% of people find that a song IS NOT offensive, then it should be allowed. How is that for a pretty liberal standard? You can't possibly claim such a standard to be oppresive. At the same time, we could clean up an awful lot of pure trash. Your only valid objection to that idea would be that polls are easily manipulated. To bad there is no "perfect" solution. Meanwhile - those who don't believe that our songs, movies, games, and other entertainment have no effect on how some people conduct themselves really don't have a clue. Granted, watching and listening to gangbangers celebrating a rape won't motivate MOST people to commit rape, there are those few.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br