New RIAA anti-p2p campaign

I just posted the article New RIAA anti-p2p campaign.

are, if your downloading music online and not paying for it, your taking food
out of the mouths of the musicians who wrote the songs. At least that’s the
claims of the RIAA and 4…

Read the full article here:  [](

Feel free to add your comments below. 

Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

Given a choice, I would rather prefer giving out burgers to that poor musician’s hands, rather than thro. those greedy grubbing hands on the limousine wheel. :wink:

:(:rThat’s really **** up that they say people take food out of the mouths of the musicians. First of all they musicians get more the enough money for there work. There the ones that over price cds and it’s the RIAA that makes most of the moneys off the musicians. They get more then half the profits off of every sale so who’s really taking the food out of the musician’s mouth. With the money they make they should be the ones that are helping feed the poor and stuff like that not sue people for ass much money as they can.:r

hmmm… seems like the money the RIAA is spending on this campaign could easily just be given to the artists… Then maybe those thugs on MTV cribs can take one of their 5 lamborghini’s out to the 7-11 and scrounge the dumpster for a half eaten bag of cheezy poofs.

the record companies are going to be a dying breed with the advent of the internet and the increase in hispeed once musicians are able to get decentralized to the point where one single musicican doesnt have to be discovered to make money and start performing and making the news but can do so through sales of their songs online hopefully all music distrobution will be online with noone getting a single cent but the musicians if people like it they will buy it the public has spoken and almost no one in the world doesnt have an mp3 player or a cd burner

This link may be of some intrest: click here Maybe these idiots are starting to learn a couple of things… :d editing reason: very long url, inserted tag because of page layout resasons
[edited by H3rB3i on 04.07.2005 23:32]

Buzz, you must really like long sentences.
[edited by kahn on 04.07.2005 23:29]

From the NY Times article: “Wow. We won big. Unanimous. That doesn’t happen very often,” she wrote. “I was right. Winning is a big psychological lift.” Yeah, sure, you “won”. Just keep telling yourself that, bitch.

Why is she just now spouting this forth? If anything, maybe she regrets the decisions she made as head of the RIAA because ultimately, it may be the root cause of the music industry’s downfall. Rather than embrace the tech, she took the easy route with litigation and here we are. If the industry crashes or continues to slump, the current people in charge can thank their representative during the late 90 s/2000’s, Hillary Rosen. She alone may be responsible for taking the food out of artists mouths by failing to make the correct decision for the artists she so intelligently represented. F*ck them. I’ve no pity for such a lumbering, un-agile behemoth of an industry. Their failure to recognize societal trends as embodied by their own customers will be their end. I’ve not bought a CD in 7 years.
[edited by slacker6 on 05.07.2005 00:53]

Whoops! Sorry for the super-long url, I didn’t think about that causing a problem… :B

why don’t they just lower the price of “download legally”? did they convicted for price fixing? though i am not a big fan of music, but i don’t think there are NOT many musics worth the price…i just don’t listen & don’t buy them. :wink:

Here’s my 2 cents worth, the big reason (in my opinion) that the RIAA hasn’t been effective in ‘stopping’ mp3/music downloads (uploads?) is the sheer number of people doing this stuff, A lot of people out there that probably used to buy whatever music cd they wanted stopped doing that when the so-called ‘copy protections’ started coming out, making extremely difficult for the average end-user to be-able to play a given track on multiple playback devices, and the pricing has gotten out of hand (I haven’t bought a music cd in years because of this c***). I’m NOT paying a bunch of idiots actual money just to be told after my purchase what I can/can’t do with what I bought legally. If they were to drop the copy protection stuff & bring the pricing down to reasonable levels, I would gladly buy music cds again, although there isn’t as much ‘good’ music out there like there used to be. Also, when you hear stories like the following: 1. They actually tried to sue a dead person. 2. They tried to sue a lady that was running a mac, not a pc. (macs can’t do this stuff as far as I know) 3. They actually did sue a 12-year old girl for downloading mp3’s from a service she PAID for. I can’t verify any of this stuff, these are just some of the fairly recent horror stories I’ve head/read about in the last year or so. If the above trash is true, it makes me seriously doubt the methods that they are using to try and track people down. But even if they could get every single person in this country to stop uploading/downloading mp3’s, the problem would still be there, because internet is a global network, and any laws passed in this country don’t hold water anywhere else, so between the number of people doing this stuff (millions?) and the fact our laws don’t apply outside this country, I’d say they are definatly wasting their time. The total number of people sued/settled out of court is what? about 6000 people, that’s a bare fraction of 1% of the total number of people involved in this stuff, they could sue forever and not make dent in the problem… (I know, long 2 cents worth)… :slight_smile:

One in 6000, eh? Someone should start a file-sharing insurance business. :d For $10 a year you can download all you like, and if the RIAA sues you, your settlement is covered for up to $10,000. (Aren’t the average settlements something like $3,000?) If in one year, 6000 people sign up for your service, and one gets sued, you make $50,000. :stuck_out_tongue:

If the RIAA and MPAA cut their spending on stupid and crappy copy protections they would be able to drop the retail price of music and movies. I know I would rather Buy a CD or DVD than download it free, but as it is now, you are being charged extremley unfair prices (compared to what its truly worth) just to be told when, where and how you can use it. Maybe their banners should read " Feed a Musician because the RIAA scumbags are ripping them off" or even better…“FOR EVERY ALBUM YOU BUY WE WILL KILL AN RIAA FATCAT”… Hell id even buy the crappy Cd’s if that was the case

No problem, this was quickly corrected. :).

If you are a record company it has likely been proven time and time again that you are sandbagging money that should have gone to musicians for years and years…so clean up your own house…hee hee

I see they’ve managed to whitewash Courtney Love’s past comments on the record companies. Look 'em up.

I wonder what would happen if the labels just dropped their antipiracy legal teams, used the RIAA only as a tool to fight mass piracy (i.e., people making and selling fake copies of albums in quantity) and passed their savings on to us by offering lower album prices. Or even keep prices similar, but go back to doing real talent scouting for bands rather than hiring clones of whatever was most recently popular. I mean, it worked for things like Fair-Trade coffee products and organically grown high-quality foods, didn’t it? Naah. The thought of ethical business on a good quality product sparking sales compared to ultimate control over a still profitable business operated by political lobbying, sharecropping out artists, and limiting distribution to two great songs to every album (collect all four albums) is just too tempting.