TO CATCH A MUSIC THIEF

[Cadeho]

Record industry's war on downloading gets draconian against file-



TO CATCH A MUSIC THIEF
Record industry's war on downloading gets draconian against file-sharers
by JOHN GORMAN

www.freetimes.com/issues/1110/columns-gorman.html

You're either with or against the Record Industry Association of
America (RIAA). They're the non-profit lobby controlled by the Big
Five label conglomerates: BMG, AOL-Time Warner, Universal Music Group,
EMI and Sony. Download music from the Internet and you're a thief.

The RIAA has already threatened to pull the cable on independent
Internet radio stations unless they fork over up-front mega-fees to
SoundExchange, the collection arm of the RIAA. It's fair to say that,
excluding commercial stations that also stream, most Internet radio
stations are giving airplay to independent and European music from
smaller labels that aren't members of the RIAA and can't afford to buy
their way onto the conventional radio playlists.

Immediately following 9/11, the RIAA's chief lobbyist, Mitch Glazier
-- considered one of most influential on Capitol Hill -- attempted to
tack a hack-authorization amendment on last year's anti-terrorism
bill. If approved, it would have immunized all copyright holders for
any data destruction caused by computer intrusions. The RIAA would
like you to believe that file sharing is on par with an Al Qaeda
terrorist attack, and is the cyberspace equivalent of North Korea's
nuclear program.

The RIAA also launched its own terrorism campaign. They took Verizon
to court, demanding the identity of a client that used their platform
to download music. They randomly targeted and prosecuted college
students from Princeton, Rensselaer Polytech Institute and Michigan
Tech for running a music file-sharing service. With White House
permission, the RIAA raided a group of renegade U.S. Navy sailors for
downloading music.

That was followed by the RIAA targeting Fortune 1000 companies and
warning their CEOs that employees downloading music on their dime
could cause legal, security and efficiency problems.

The ringleader was former RIAA Chairman and CEO Hillary Rosen. Wrapped
in a bizarre interpretation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act,
she insisted the RIAA had the right to do whatever necessary to
silence Internet radio stations that can't afford pay her fee and hold
downloaders hostage. Rosen resigned earlier this year and landed at
CNBC, where she will, presumably, shill for entertainment industry.

Rosen's campaign has now been taken over by new RIAA head Cary
Sherman. His first order of business is to sue anyone housing a
significant library of downloadable songs, which could be accessed by
a file-sharing program. "Significant" was not clearly defined. The
RIAA claims it will file several hundred lawsuits in the next six to
eight weeks.

Music downloaded from the Internet is highly compressed and not even
remotely close to a perfect digital copy. Music heard on Internet
radio is down a few more notches in audio quality. In most cases,
downloading has replaced radio as a medium for hearing new music. The
majority of those who download music buy "hard copy" CDs of music they
truly like. The percentages haven't changed.

What the RIAA refuses to admit is that downloading music and Internet
radio are replacing commercial radio as the prime exposure of new
music. Current music on U.S. radio is bought and paid for in advance.
Station chains cut deals with third-party promoters peddling wares for
the Big Five. Small indie labels no longer get radio airplay. They
can't afford the pay for play fees, and they're not members of the
RIAA's Big Five club.

It costs at least $1 million to promote one song on hit music
stations. That's the retainer fee. Since all costs of promotion are
liposucked from the artists' hides, many are reluctant to give up cash
with no guarantee of airplay. Heard Liberty X, Atomic Kitten or Sophie
Ellis-Baxter on the radio? These acts had top 5 successes worldwide
but elected not to enter the pricey pay-for-play game. In doing so
they've shut themselves out of radio airplay in the U.S.

Commercial radio listening has dropped significantly and no longer
serves as the soundtrack to American popular culture. Unlike the
payola of old, today's pay-for-play isn't illegal. It's not the cash
under-the-table payments exposed in Fredric Dannen's 1990 book The Hit
Men. In radio new-speak, it's referred to as "non-traditional
revenue." Chains report payoffs as taxable income. Since most station
playlists are dictated by radio's corporate offices, the Big Five no
longer have the need for the expense of their own promotion staff.

A couple of radio chains claim they're revisiting their current legal
payola deals, but none have said they're giving them up.

The RIAA blames downloading, not radio, as the reason for their
flaccid music sales. They ask you not to confuse them with the facts
that some of the best music being released is neither seen nor heard,
due to the combination of legal payola and labels buying up every
square inch of music retailer stores and even controlling what's heard
on the store's speakers.

How about the reality that with broadband, it's just as easy to
download full-length feature films. That technology hasn't hurt
Hollywood. Every year's box office tally breaks the previous year's
record, and that's not even counting the record number of DVDs rented
or sold.

Here's another one. The Big Five? Next year at this time it will
probably be down to the Big Three. Both AOL-Time Warner and EMI have
their label divisions on the block.

[sukkafu]

if you rob a thief or a rich man is it stealing? yes!
if you want to lose your integrity or your soul then steal.
whether or not the riaa is bad or good as an organization and have bad practices as an industry- this is a different point altogether. justification of wrong doing does not wash. 2 wrongs = 0 right.

when i was in the promotion business i went to little and big radio stations on the east coast and got 30 stations one by one to play our records- but that was when there were less conglomerates of nationwide chains- for example we have a syndicate out here called clear channel that owns 75% of the san diego market. you go to a radio station now you won't get airplay unless it's a hick town or college station with low wattage.

everything is syndicated or conglomerated. time/warner/aol type stuff.

[Cadeho]

Is it stealing to record from a radio station? It is free music to the general public floating around in the air. Someone else paid for it and sent it out. Mp3's are free music floating around in wires. Someone else paid for it and sent it out. It just doesn't have a blessing. Let's ask the Pope.

[sukkafu]

pretzel logic cadeho! stick with donuts- they're safer!

if i invite you to my party and put out a spread on the table for everybody's consumption, you are welcome to it asa a guest but don't be overstepping your welcome as my guest and going into my cabinets looking for more! that's kind of what's going on here,ya dig?

radio is a 2 way venue for the benefit of both the artist and the listener- the listener gets to hear for free at the expense of the advertiser trying to get your attention- then you are exposed to the music of the artist- and then you can decide if you like them enough that you'd want to buy their product. radio was more of an exposure of a sample of their songs- to get them all you would buy their cd.

mp3's are thievery plain and simple. people file sharing
may not have ever traced their source to a paid product. insiders at companies and cheaters steal stuff all the time- and many non criminals end up unwittingly extend the crime way out.

[davidseafan]

So I’m stealing from whom if I down load out of print music that if I could find, I’d have to buy from either a used record vendor, or some person selling their personal collection on either e-bay or Half.com. Neither the record company nor the artist is making a dime off these sales.

I paid ridiculous prices for all of Ruffin’s solo albums, and all the albums that Ali did solo songs on. Not one dime of this money went to either Ruff’s family or to MY Ali. I own every thing David Sea has ever recorded, and except for one CD they are all out of print. Are you saying it’s ok for me to copy these for my friends, but not share then with any outsiders

Help me understand.

[SoulStirrer]

Good point...

[Aba21]

Where was all the screaming when people were making 8-tracks and cds for friends and family. I have been making recordings since there was a medium to do so. There was no bitching when I did it back in the day. If I bought an album I could record it as many times as I wanted and give it to whomever I wanted and nothing was said. Don't tell me they didn't know it was being done back then or else why make blank tapes and 8-tracks in the first place? I don't understand it. I haven't downloaded anything off the net but how much different is it to get it there as opposed to doing it from those other avenues? The person on the recieving end still isn't paying for his or her copy.

[sukkafu]

if you don't like the laws then write your elected officials! if you don't like the way the music is being distributed then unite a coalition of people that feel the way that you do and be a cause for change! until the laws change we have an obligation to ourselves, our children if applicable and to our form of government
to obey.sometimes the laws suck.sometimes the system sucks. but the thing is have you noticed the price of concerts have gone up over the years? maybe this is how bands are compensating for lost revenues- by touring and charging up the ying yang for a live show.
the tempts tickets aren't horrendous but they are only giving 75 min. shows. i am used to 3 hour concerts with encores with other bands or concerts i've seen.

just because someone has been doing something for a long time doesn't make it change from wrong to right! it just makes you more entrenched in your ways that's all.

i have recorded off my albums for my mom and my brothers. i have no problem with that.

i don't like file sharing where maybe 1 person bought an album and 5000 people have a copy of it!

last week i went to see the hulk movie- i got in on a newspaper coupon for $4.50 per ticket with james my son.
he went home that night and a friend of his wife gaveher a cd and said check this out- it was an illegally dubbed copy of the hulk movie from the internet! my daughter in law said it was inaudible and she wasn't interested in stealing anyway.
now you know that the hulk isn't available on dvd or vhs- it's still in the theaters! is this right to copy this movie like that?

[Ivory Fair]

So can we assume that you've either destroyed those copies of the IN-PRINT albums that a certain benevolent poster recently sent you, or you've sent a check to Otis to compensate him for lost revenue?

[iratherlikeme]

Well, I guess I'm a thief. I have mp3s and I make CDs with them. I own more copies of burned albums than I do ones I've bought from the stores. And I'll keep doing it until somebody bursts in through the door either here at home or in my dorm room and arrests me. Folks like to trip about this stuff, this "stealing" mess, but they don't like to give you what you want. I can't find any David Ruffin albums for a reasonable price anywhere. And I'm TRYING to do it the right way and pay for them!

[Aba21]

In my past I may have copied more lps than I do today. But most of my work usually are mixes from all the stuff I have. it's rare when I want or someone wants an entire cd or lp from me. I have made more copies of stuff I have, which I bought, for members of this board than I made for people I know. So I have not used the music I have for profit.That's the whole thing though. I see your point Ivory in that if the cd is in print we should encourage folks to buy them. However, that ain't never gon' happen! People just as IRLM says will continue to get their music that way. I don't believe for a second that IRLM is supplying America with bootleg copies of music she downloaded. It's a tough call either way but I will say I don't want to deprive an artist of his earnings. But once again I paid for all of mine and what I do with them after I buy them is my choice I would think.

[MikeNYC]

Next you want us to plant NEW HAIR for Otis! What about the people who REALLY sang on those songs,or their estates? Send Otis a check? Send him some hair dye first.Why should Otis get money off someone else's hard work? When will Otis compensate us for false advertisment?

[ZetaLady6]

Mike, me and you are gonna get along just fine!

[Ivory Fair]

Mike, I fail to see why Nedra Ruffin, Davette English or Paul Kendrick (for example) are owed any money for proffits made off of Phoenix Rising or Awesome. Those are the albums I was referring to in my above post.

Now I kid Aba about it. My thing is I feel like we should make every effort to buy and encourange others to buy Tempts music that is available for retail sale. But it's not like I'm championing the cause of the record industry. My reason is purely selfish, if they see there IS a demand for Tempts music, then maybe they'll release even more. But if we're all going around making copies for one another, that's different. Ten of us may have a copy "Lost and Found" but only one of us actually bought it. So Motown sees that no one is interested in previously unreleased Tempts' stuff and they don't give us any more.

But when it comes to out of print stuff, Ruffin's solo stuff, "Wings of Love" which we all know will NEVER be re-released or, yes, even Surface Thrills then sure, go for it! I think we should copy and file swap to our hearts content. That's the only way we're gonna get it.

[Aba21]

And where did you get copies of Wings of Love and Surface Thrills, young lady. Not from that benevolent poster on this board I hope. Cause I WILL speak to that poster and find out why I don't have those copies.

Seriously though, anything that comes out new, I buy. I guess I feel that if in my little circle of people I deal with, if one of us has it, then all of us do. I can see where that could be a problem. I would say that by now if somebody wanted a copy of EOS, I would give it to them. Hell you can find it for $20 in some places and I paid almost $100 when it was new. All of the old lps should have been released on cds but they weren't and I don't want to wait forever to get them. I want them all right now. That is the only music I would download anyway cause I all ready bought them once as lps.