Second Way To Get RIAA To Drop Case: Die And Get Your Story Told Widely
from the start-making-a-list dept
Last month we pointed to a few examples of the RIAA dropping file sharing lawsuits once it became clear that they couldn't prove who was actually using the internet connection (since they only have IP address info to base their lawsuits on). Trying that is probably a more reasonable method than dying, especially after yesterday's story wondering why the RIAA would keep going after a family after the person named in the suit had died. As we explained, even if it was within the RIAA's legal right to go after the estate (as it is), it seemed like a ridiculously bad move from a PR standpoint, for almost no real gain for the RIAA. It appears that, in fact, no one at the RIAA actually thought through the consequences of pushing on with the case (following a 60 day break to allow the family to "grieve"). However, once the issue started getting a bunch of attention over the weekend on various blogs, the RIAA has now decided to drop the case. They explain that the man who passed away had admitted that his stepson had actually done the file sharing, so they were simply trying to finalize the details of a settlement. However, out of their "abundance of sensitivity" (yes, they used that phrase), they have decided to drop the case. Seems a bit funny that said abundance of sensitivity didn't show up until the equally abundant "bad PR" hit the internet.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can and should
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can and should
Can and should by dorpus on Aug 15th, 2006 @ 1:55am
What's to prevent future pirates from taking advantage of dead relatives to steal music?
Spoken in your typical classy fashion, Dorpo.
A man dies and you would demand to press on the search for a couple grand. Who wouldn't rat out their step son, after all, it isn't like it is real flesh-and-blood, is it? And yet they back off based on the political PR issues. Sounds like Republican flip-flopping to me. (MP3s of mass-destruction?)
They have the keys to the candy store and their fingers are getting messy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Can and should
I know plenty of people from all parties who are stupid, greedy, and pigheaded. (Note that I said "all", not "both". I'm registered independent, and all the little parties under that flag have them too.)
Some of them are so pigheaded that they use "Republican" or "Democrat" as a derogatory term. There are intelligent, caring, good people in all parties, too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Can and should
There are intelligent, caring, good people in all parties, too.
Show me one —just one— and I'll believe you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Can and should
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can and should
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1) download a bunch of songs
2) rack up huge credit debt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
English Lesson
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's called a typo.
:)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeehaw!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yeehaw!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yarghhh matey
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Their reversal of position doesn't change a damn thing as far as I'm concerned. The fact is they were going to pursue it in the first place.
To the one person who made the decision to grant the 60 day extension instead of just dropping it...well done. Your keen skills may be thorough, but they're far from people-friendly. Since the RIAA's actions are being watched more now than before, perhaps a better location for you is running the mail room.
I hope they pay you well, fricking scavenger.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
*gasp*
*snort*
hehe
*wheeze*
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Seriously guys...who's gonna by that?
Did they manage to choke that out with a straight face? If so, I hope I never get to play poker with these people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HaHa
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perfect solution
iTunes and the like has saved the music industry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Perfect solution
Don't download it illegally either though..
Just listen to the radio, lol.
I won't buy from any artist that's associated with the RIAA, period. Ever.
Anyone know of a list out there of artists who are NOT members of the RIAA?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Perfect solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Perfect solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Perfect solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Perfect solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Take Squatting one step further....
(Just joking, I would not suggest doing that to anyone unless the worked directly for the RIAA... Hmmmmmmm....)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Take Squatting one step further....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
re: Perfect Solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
LOL, LOL, LOL - that's the funniest thing I've heard for a long time.
The RIAA having an "abundance of sensitivity" - reminds me of all the snow in the sahara desert..
Oh wait.. there's no snow in a desert!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
to buy or not to buy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: to buy or not to buy
You want samples? Turn the friggin' radio on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Probably not original
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ha Ha Ha
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe we should all stop and ask...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Good Things?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re Ha Ha Ha
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re Ha Ha Ha
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why don't you enlighten the world and tell us all about the good thing the RIAA have done for us?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Freemusic
Non-RIAA music. You can chose to pay as much or as little as you think the artist deserves. Give it a run!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bad Rap
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
find the RIAA
There are so many unsecure Wifi's out there that certainly members of RIAA have them too.
Camp on some RIAA WiFi's, download lots of stuff and see how they like going after themselves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
On principle alone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ironically I thought about doing this myself but figured there was already a site that had that information.
Ever hear the term "One "awe-shit" ruins all the "atta-boys" you had"? In this case the RIAA can't seem to stop their trend of "awe-shits"...or just don't care to.
Honestly, what type of person tells a kid he should drop out of school because he downloaded music files?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RIAA
Although their techniques aren't that palatable, this case of overkill is greatly blown out of proportion. Everyone is siezing on this one instance to rationalize and justify what is basically an illegal activity. I've read on this and the previous post, comparisons to Hitler, Little Big Horn, etc, ad-nauseum, so that people can say this. RIAA is wrong so I can do wrong.
It reminds me rearing my kids. One of the boys comes home crying because the neighbor kid hit him. I go to check things out and come to find out my kid started the whole thing by taunting and hitting the neighbor kid himself. The moral is this. When you look at things only on the surface they appear alot more damning that if you start peeling back the onion to get the whole picture. Same goes for the MIT student. Look at the whole picture. Ask the hard questions. How much music did the guy ILLEGALLY download. Was it one song? I doubt it. The guy obviously had the whole Motown collection, the Classic Rock library '64-'69, etc, and made no bones about sharing his booty.
No matter what anyone says, your momma's taught you this. Don't mess with it if it doesn't belong to you
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is the UPLOADING that gets you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RIAA
And I just love how you call me a criminal for downloading a song...but yet you fail to see the true criminal. Oh, you went to their bullshit website and that made you feel good about their business, right? You actually believed all their BS progaganda and that the RIAA is "there for the artist." You are so friggen BLIND. The RIAA steals more from the artists than any downloader ever could.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: RIAA
A - downloading and distributing files is illegal
B - If you download and distribute files, someone will come after you.
That, my exciteable friend, is the point.
The other statements you've made are rationalizations. Oh, and I didn't call you a criminal. It's an "if the shoe fits" situation. So, you incriminated yourself. Also, I cut to the chase and gave a down and dirty assessment of their overall purpose. Again, you called them "there for the artist."
Yes, I wear corrective lenses. They obviously help me see the bottom line on the issue. More than I can say for you. You're dealing with fluff, buddy, and your view is clouded with a child-like rage due to the fact that someone is out to make people responsible for their actions. I can see why you're angry. People don't like to "Man up" and say, you know, I fucked up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: RIAA
Funny then that you seem to totally miss the bottom line. The point is that the RIAA's actions have continued to hurt their business by pissing off their biggest fans. The "bottom line" is coming up with a new business model that embraces what the fans want, rather than pissing them off at every turn and calling out the lawyers.
I have said repeatedly that I do not condone the distribution of unauthorized files. I don't download or share songs myself. It is illegal.
However, the "bottom line" is that it's a bad business policy for the RIAA to go down this route rather than looking for ways to deliver what people want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: RIAA
"the RIAA's actions have continued to hurt their business by pissing off their biggest fans" This is a result of the RIAA's actions. Besides, if I recall, the RIAA has no fans. It's a trade organization comprised of record companies. When's the last time you, as a fan, went to an RIAA concert?
"...coming up with a new business model that embraces what the fans want, rather than pissing them off at every turn." What these "fans" want is free music. If you had a box of cookies and your friends kept taking them from you without asking, would you come up with a new business model that embraces your friends so that you wouldn't piss them off..... for stealing your cookies?
"the "bottom line" is that it's a bad business policy for the RIAA to go down this route." It's actually good business policy for the RIAA to not only go down this route but to also take up all 4 lanes on this road. They're recovering money lost from file sharing. And, don't YOU go down the "route" of saying the artists/record labels/etc make too much as it is. That's called free enterprise, and, again, it's a side issue. If you were The Beastie Boys, you'd want to be able to make money off of your record "sales" as well as anyone else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why has...
The RIAA has demonstrated in this case that they really weren't harmed by the activity that the decesaed was acused of. They say they were in settlement talks, but have now decided to abandon any claims and essentially accept a settlement of zero dollars.
If the RIAA was truly damaged by this activity then they wouldn't have settled for $0...
If I ever got sued by the RIAA (interesting, since I don't download music...) I would point directly to this case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Its the UPLOADING that gets you.
The RIAA has yet to sue anyone for downloading. Each and every case has been brought against someone for distributing (uploading/sharing).
That may not seem like a big difference on the surface, but it is a HUGE difference legally.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]