Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Music Media The Almighty Buck

RIAA Calls Settlements Proof that Education is Working 425

MattW writes "AP reports that the RIAA has filed the next 80 lawsuits. The article contains a dumbfounding quote from Cary Sherman, President of the RIAA: 'The fact that the overwhelming majority of those who received the notification letter contacted us and were eager to resolve the claims is another clear signal that the music community's education and enforcement campaign is getting the message out.' Just for clarification, Cary, all it proves is that monopolistic giants can, in fact, afford to pay lawyers more than average people, and so said people are easily bullied. But nice try." It warms my heart to know that artists will be getting all the money that's due to them. Musicians always look so poor when I see them on television. Finally, they can afford the lifestyle they deserve.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

RIAA Calls Settlements Proof that Education is Working

Comments Filter:
  • by mauddib~ ( 126018 ) on Friday October 31, 2003 @09:12AM (#7356922) Homepage
    "Musicians look so poor when I see them on television"

    As an amateur musician I'm sad to read that. Actually most musicians have a hard time getting the ends together. Unfortunately, the 'selection' process of the record companies doesn't really help that problem, since they select more on sex appeal and neutralness than on musical abilities or originality.

    For those musicians who are original and are making what I like to call "real music", it would be nice to have a little extra money to get their music out to the public.
  • by GrenDel Fuego ( 2558 ) on Friday October 31, 2003 @09:14AM (#7356930)
    Isn't it just as obvious that 20 corporate lawyers against a single public defender simply ISN'T fair?

    Public Defender?

    I believe these are civil cases, not criminal, so I'm not certain that public defenders are even provided. If you don't have the money for a lawyer, good luck.
  • Re:South Park (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 31, 2003 @09:28AM (#7357015)
    I believe the horros were as followed.

    Lars Ulrich couldn't buy his gold encrusted shark pool bar. He would have to wait one more week until he could get it.

    Brittney Spears had to downgrade from GolfStream 4 to the golfStream 3. This one doesn't even have a remote control for the integrated dvd surround sound system. Can you believe that.

    Master P can't buy his some his own island. The FBI sees the future and that island will not have an owner.
  • by lennart78 ( 515598 ) on Friday October 31, 2003 @09:32AM (#7357043)
    Making your music available on P2P will not give you any coverage at all. In order for people to start listening to your music, you must first confront them with it.

    You could do that by sending demos to local or independent radiostations, by advertising yourself in musical magazines or by performing live.

    However, if you want something in return for the hours and hours you spent at your computer or mixing console, and for the money you've invested in equipment, you could be happy if anyone buys your CD at a live gig for a crappy cheap amount, cause if it's out in the open on P2P, you can kiss any profit from 'sales of music' goodbye.

    As a musician, I don't need to make a profit, because I allready have a job. If I would have to live off it however, it'd be a different story.
    P2P could be well used to spread (low quality) demo-tracks, bootlegged live recordings and such, but unlimited freeloading will defenitely kill any kind of professionalism in music, and since there's a small market for amateur music...

    The RIAA and MPAA's knee-jerk reactions to technological innovations will do more harm than good. They need to start looking to the future, and not the past. The same goes for the Internet P2P crowd however.
  • Re:South Park (Score:3, Informative)

    by da3dAlus ( 20553 ) <dustin.grau@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Friday October 31, 2003 @09:36AM (#7357067) Homepage Journal
    God that episode was funny. Here's a link to the episode synopsis, and some downloads [southparkstudios.com].

    It's ep 709: "...When the other boys kick Cartman out of their band, Cartman pulls his own group together to make music for Jesus. Meanwhile, Stan, Kyle and Kenny are arrested for downloading music from the Internet."
  • Re:South Park (Score:2, Informative)

    by Ramze ( 640788 ) on Friday October 31, 2003 @09:42AM (#7357108)

    It was a metaphor -- a "ghost of Christmas present" of sorts -- which is why he put it in quotes and used the term "of sorts". Metaphors often involve stating one thing as a fact when implying it is merely like something else.

    It's somewhat similar to a simile only without the term "like" or "as". Though, some might argue that it was a simile since he used "of sorts" which could be an alternative to "like" or "as."

    Southpark uses metaphors constantly & The FBI Agent was playing the part of the ghost of MUSIC present. It was a page right out of Dicken's "A Christmas Carol." You can go watch the movie "Scrooged" to see a more modern version of the idea, or watch the older movies based on the book, or go read the book itself. It's quite good.

  • by cyber0ne ( 640846 ) on Friday October 31, 2003 @10:20AM (#7357450) Homepage
    Same goes for the folks who paid the SCO invoices for Linux

    An SCO invoice is _alot_ more affordable than any legal battle, short of perhaps an episode of Judge Judy or something. There's a difference between being sheep and having the economic sense to go with the cheaper/easier solution so you can just get on with your life/business.

    The article says some of the settlements were as low as $2500. Again, not terribly expensive when compared to attorney fees (remember, these are civil cases and so the defendant is not entitled to free representation like with criminal cases) coupled with the time and effort (missed work, time away from family, etc.) required to battle the RIAA in court.

    You'll notice also, in the article, that the settlements "do not include any admission of wrongdoing." Loosely translated, the court case as a whole basically resulted with, "Ok, you didn't necessarily do anything wrong. but the rich guys think you did and want some money from you. You hereby agree to give them money if for no other reason than to make them leave you alone."

    The moral of the story: It's often easier to just pay the extortionist than to have him break your knees.
  • Defense Fund (Score:2, Informative)

    by chatooya ( 718043 ) on Friday October 31, 2003 @02:12PM (#7360455)
    You can still help people that were sued in the last round by making a contribution directly to them using the Peer-to-Peer Legal Defense Fund [downhillbattle.org] at downhillbattle.org . Defendents from this round of suits are going to be added soon also.

    It should also be noted that before filing this round of 80 suits, the RIAA sent letters to 200 people demanding settlements or else. While they portray this as a compromise, it actually just lets the RIAA avoid media scrutiny of those 200 people, keeping the next Brianna Lahara out of the spotlight. These extra-judicial fines are now happening in secret.

"Floggings will continue until morale improves." -- anonymous flyer being distributed at Exxon USA

Working...