Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

1. 

   Tony Lawrence, 8 Sep 2003 @ 10:59am

   
   

   One possible future

   There is, of course, music than can be freely downloaded, and it isn't all junk. If the RIAA pushes this hard enough, they just may drive themselves right out of busines as more artists turn to a model of making money from actual appearances rather than from their recorded songs.
   
   
   
   
   
   

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

2. 

   Donald Jessop, 8 Sep 2003 @ 11:44am

   
   

   The RIAA's disservice to it's clients

   I agree wholeheartedly that the RIAA is doing a disservice to both the clients they are suppose to be representing and to the consumers of the musice. The problem is that opposition to the RIAA is too fragmented and not at all organized. To be effective you need to demonstrate the "power" that you posses. The consumer, in this case, has the most power.
   What is required is an organized boycott of music stores for a single day, just to make a point. Drop music sales through the floor. Imagine what would happen if millions of people stopped buying music, for just one day. Make those statistics public knowledge and you'd have a sharp edged sword to use against the RIAA. Make the RIAA sit up and listen to the consumer.
   Yes, sharing music online is probably illegal. Yes, the artists should be compensated for their work. Yes, the exisitng business model is out of date. No, suing people won't work.
   Adopt the Microsoft approach: embrace, extend, eliminate. Embrace digital technology. Extend it with features beneficial to the consumer. Eliminate the competition. You can't just run off to the third point, it just doesn't work.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

3. 

   LittleW0lf, 8 Sep 2003 @ 1:20pm

   
   

   Re: The RIAA's disservice to it's clients

   What disservice? The RIAA isn't performing a disservice to its clients. Its clients are the Recording Industry Majors, not the consumer, and not the artists. They are doing what they do because the Record Companies want it done, and because the Record Companies fear open competition from the internet, which does not fit into their plan. The fact that the Record Companies' customers are injured, and ultimately so will the artists, means absolutely nothing, as this is motivated solely by short term greed. Of course, in the long term, they're slitting their own wrists, but someone committing suicide in this fashion rarely thinks about the damage they are about ready to inflict on their loved ones.
   
   Imagine what would happen if millions of people stopped buying music, for just one day.
   
   Artists would be injured, the record companies would feel the bump and ask "what was that?" Other that that...nothing. Because Joe Sixpack would have nothing to do with this, because he isn't affected by it. What is the sound of 100,000 techies screaming on the internet?
   
   Sadly, nothing... because most of those who support the RIAA, the record industry, and the artists don't have the internet, or don't care about these lawsuits, as it doesn't affect them.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

4. 

   Cory, 8 Sep 2003 @ 1:22pm

   
   

   The trouble

   The trouble with the fines levied against copyright infringing is too severe as well. So if I share one song and get busted, I could pay upwards of $150,000 and I am sure the RIAA believes they are entitled to that much if they can get it. Whereas I highly doubt they believe that just one song is only worth 1/15th (providing the CD has 15 songs) the current cost of the CD.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

5. 

   Anonymous Coward, 8 Sep 2003 @ 2:55pm

   
   

   No Subject Given

   Direct TV is being RICO'd. When will we RICO the RIAA? Same tactics.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

6. 

   JD, 8 Sep 2003 @ 5:17pm

   
   

   No...

   However, these lawsuits will do much more to harm the music industry than to help it.

   While I agree that downloading is stealing (not probably... is) I think that you're entertaining a lot of wishful thinking. The RIAA will win. People will continue to pay too much for music. This will all be over with soon and the consumer will continue to be fleeced by anyone and everyone (i.e. back to normal).

   I am not an RIAA fan, but I am fairly realistic.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

7. 

   Mike (profile), 8 Sep 2003 @ 6:23pm

   
   

   Re: No...

   I disagree. The rapid decline in music sales suggests that consumers are voting (slowly, but surely) with their wallets. The industry will be forced to change. The end result is inevitable - unless draconian legislation gets passed.

   [ link to this | view in thread ]

8. 

   JD, 9 Sep 2003 @ 6:38pm

   
   

   No Subject Given

   I dunno.... I'm thinking the real reason for the decline is that the music really, really sucks.
   

   [ link to this | view in thread ]