About the "boycott" of the RIAA over at The Register

[sonaboy]

I can see where these guys are coming from - since i'm convinced that the RIAA and the big 6 recording labels have been price fixing the CD digital medium since the early 90s - but "boycotting" music labels because you disagree with them could basically play into their claims about lost profits.

All it takes is a high profile marketing campaign with some selective statistical analyzation, and voila, instant "truth" to their profit loss claims.

I think it's good that the Register is trying to consolidate people that feel this way about the monopolistic practices of the big 6 labels, but there's better ways to spend your energy.

i mean..why not find a high ranking law practitioner with a sympathetic view, and try starting a class action lawsuit against unfair business practices, or some such thing?

just a thought..

[Sazar]

Originally posted by sonaboy
I can see where these guys are coming from - since i'm convinced that the RIAA and the big 6 recording labels have been price fixing the CD digital medium since the early 90s - but "boycotting" music labels because you disagree with them could basically play into their claims about lost profits.

All it takes is a high profile marketing campaign with some selective statistical analyzation, and voila, instant "truth" to their profit loss claims.

I think it's good that the Register is trying to consolidate people that feel this way about the monopolistic practices of the big 6 labels, but there's better ways to spend your energy.

i mean..why not find a high ranking law practitioner with a sympathetic view, and try starting a class action lawsuit against unfair business practices, or some such thing?

just a thought..

didn't they just settle a lawsuit concerning said high prices for cd's like a month or two ago ?

[druga runda]

RIAA will implode, sooner is better of course...

[serialdave]

They are not as profitable as they were a few yars back becaues a few years back everywhere you looked you saw people with walkmans playing cd's everywhere now you see people with cell phones instead.

[DaveW]

The RIAA 's actions are not legal...


Date: June 25, 2003 @ 5:33 PM
From a comment posted on Slashdot:

Contrary to what the RIAA wants you to believe, it appears that making a copy of an audio recording may be perfectly legal in the US, even if you don't own the original recording, as long as it is for noncommercial purposes. The reason for this is the Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA).

Since 1992, the U.S. Government has collected a tax on all digital audio recorders and blank digital audio media manufactured in or imported into the US, and gives the money directly to the RIAA companies, which is distributed as royalties to recording artists, copyright owners, music publishers, and music writers:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ch10.html
[cornell.edu]

In exchange for those royalties, a special exemption to the copyright law was made for the specific case of audio recordings, and as a result *ALL* noncommercial copying of musical recordings by consumers is now legal in the US, regardless of media:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/1008.html
[cornell.edu]

"No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings."

The intent of Congress was clear when this law was passed

http://www.cni.org/Hforums/cni-copyright/1993 -01/0018.html
[cni.org]

From House Report No. 102-873(I), September 17, 1992:

"In the case of home taping, the [Section 1008] exemption protects all noncommercial copying by consumers of digital and analog musical recordings."

From House Report No. 102-780(I), August 4, 1992:

"In short, the reported legislation [Section 1008] would clearly establish that consumers cannot be sued for making analog or digital audio copies for private noncommercial use."

Therefore, when you copy an MP3 the royalties have already been paid for with tax dollars in accordance with the law. If you are a musician whose recordings are publicly distributed, then you are entitled to your share of these royalties by filing a claim under Section 1006

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/1006.html


Our best hope is that the RIAA sue some kid with a really rich daddy who can afford a big legal case.

[DaveW]

The RIAA's timing couldn't be better. P2P usage will drop with this legal threat. At the same time the economy is now recovering and people will have more money to spend on luxury items like CDs. So the RIAA can claim "look, we reduced P2P usage and now CD sales are up, we told you so".

[Kandoko]

I can see where these guys are coming from - since i'm convinced that the RIAA and the big 6 recording labels have been price fixing the CD digital medium since the early 90s - but "boycotting" music labels because you disagree with them could basically play into their claims about lost profits


Thats sort of the point of a boycott. You WANT a company profits to suffer. Since the RIAA's profits have been in a decline, and they refuse to change their business practices to take advatage of the internet to distribute music they need to be replaced. (ie... unristrected/unencrypted downloadable music at a REASONABLE price. Which iMUSIC comes closest to. )

Which in this case means bankrupting the recording industry by refuseing to buy any of there products! As for trying to get laws passed they own a lot more senators than we do. :rolleyes:

They settled the lawsuits on price fixing by paying the states off but they havn't changed prices a bit. So the lawsuit did nothing for the consumer.

I personally decided not to purchase several CD's because of the new law suits. I refuse to buy anything that will give them more money. Regardles of rather you download music or not you can't really belive that the RIAA isn't a monopoly who have totally lost touch with reality.


"Eagles may soar but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines."

[DaveW]

A boycott won't work since the RIAA will just blame any reduction on sales on more file sharing.

[Kandoko]

There going to blame anybody other than themselves. Even when there profits were rising they were complaining about napster. With the laws that have been passed really the only way to deal with them is a complete boycott. Or want 20-30 years for people who grew up with the internet to take over congress and pass some halfway descent laws.

[sonaboy]

Originally posted by DaveW
A boycott won't work since the RIAA will just blame any reduction on sales on more file sharing.


This was exactly my point.

don't you guys see how this can play in their favor?

i mean..it's not like i care..i'm going to keep doing the filesharing, and burning CDs from my friends (my good friend works in a used record shop, and the employees can bring home any CDs they want for a day) and it's just business as usual for me..

but i can see a political side to this that the RIAA might play, would the "boycott" become more widespread..

just my $.02