Forum Moderators: open
The music industry has won at least 871 federal subpoenas against computer users suspected of illegally sharing music files (search) on the Internet, with roughly 75 new subpoenas being approved each day, U.S. court officials said Friday.
ugghhh... I knew this was going to happen.
8 songs! These evil pirates must be stopped. How is Avril Lavigne gonna survive without the buck she would have made if it wasn't for anon39023...
The RIAA already lost the battle to control music distribution, and now they're just screaming and stamping their feet like a spoilt child.
But do you want to pay the legal fees to find out? If you host MP3s you better have written permission from the artist or label who ever has the copyright for that recording.
Artist really don't make a lot from an albumn unless they are huge. They make money touring. They do get residuals which are nice, but it is the RIAA that is hurt by this the most.
Which is why I call BS on articles where the record industry claims that if "creative artists aren't compensated for their creative works, they'll stop making them."
Yeah, sure, that's why nobody made any music before the recording industry was founded. Right? Sure. I'm sick of it. At least be honest-- their business model doesn't work in the post-Web world, and instead of adapting they're going to make the transition as unpleasant as possible for everyone involved until something breaks.
I think Apple is handling it well-- their music store is pretty good, and their approach is simple: We'll tie the copy-protection into the best mp3 playing software bar none out there. We won't do anything dumb to their computers or the files, and we'll just offer really high-quality files in a convenient format. I know they're building on a lot of really hard work by their less-effective predecessors, but I think it's a really good way to go. Now if only there was something that the majority of computer users could use...
I'd pay money to download songs. I pirate songs, though not lately, and I do enjoy getting gigs upon gigs of music for free, but I feel kind of funny about it and I can't help but think how nice it would be to just buy the stuff so it would be better-organized and guaranteed to be named right. *shrug* Suing anon3028 or whatever over his 8 songs is missing the freaking point. But the record industry has never been known for its... ethics? morals? good business practices? Pick any one you like.
Hehe, I'd rather not. But the RIAA is technologically backward, shortsighted and is attacking the very people who provide it's core income. I think the battle between the RIAA and consumer will be won in internet file exchanges and records stores, not in the courtroom.
There a million ways to distribute copyrighted material without any chance of the RIAA ever knowing or getting involved, and these methods have been going on since music first began being distributed, and merely accelerated when online methods also arose.
The RIAA only sat up and took notice once file sharing became mainstream.
Although I don't want to be on the pointy end of anyone's lawsuit, what the RIAA is doing now is alienating even further the same people they expect to cough up over £16 (in the UK) for identikit CDs of cover versions.
I'm all in favour of supporting musicians. Indeed, I am a musician myself. And I have no problem whasoever with my music being downloaded or exchanged in mp3 format. Exposure and recognition more than pays for the measley cut a record label would put into any contract I had.
