RIAA Campaign Against Students Hits Stormier Seas 296
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "It's been astutely observed that the RIAA's "ex parte" campaign against "John Doe" college students seems to have run into much stormier waters than its campaign against regular folks. Discovery motions were thrown out by the judges in cases involving the University of New Mexico and the College of William and Mary, and motions to quash have been made by students at Boston University, Oklahoma State University, and the University of South Florida. The RIAA might find it particularly troubling that the students are coming in armed with substantial expert witness declarations attacking the entire underpinning of the RIAA's case, that the students are finding each other and banding together, and that the Chairman of Boston University's Computer Science Department went to bat — as an expert witness — for the BU students."
Perhaps a bad move (Score:5, Interesting)
Ents (Score:5, Interesting)
At some point, decent people get riled up over injustice and finally do something about it. These RIAA lawyers have been bullying pre-schoolers long enough. "I'm telling my big brother" is coming home to them.
Use the market RIAA. Learn to compete. Give up on old technology and old ways of distributing music. Nobody wants to buy your 5 cent disk with 9 bad songs for highway robbery prices just to listen to one song you should allow to be downloaded at a cheap enough rate so that folks will stop bothering to pirate (not steal; remember, pirates are simply a form of entrepeneurs).
Does this have broader implications? (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm going to get crucified, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
Now, I'm sure most people have music that isn't theirs on their computer. But I really hope that most peoples attitudes isn't "why would we buy music when we can pirate it" these days. If it is, maybe the RIAA should be suing people. I think that people shouldn't be crucified for having some songs that aren't theirs on their systems, if they also buy plenty of music. But if you never or almost never buy music, and your entire collection is pirated, then by all means, the RIAA should go after you.
I oppose the RIAA on privacy grounds, and because the logic used (downloading is NOT piracy, if you own it, I believe), but if peoples attitudes really now is that they should pirate rather than buy, then I think the RIAA is between a rock and a hard place, and they can't simply ignore that.
And please, keep the arguments about RIAA music being not worth the money out of this - if you don't think it's worth the money, then you don't have a right to have it. You've made that choice.
Re:From a link in the article... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Does this have broader implications? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Perhaps a bad move (Score:5, Interesting)
From a technological evidence stand point, the RIAA doesn't have a leg to stand on. Us techies have known that for a while. But, I think it's the first group to really have the confidence to stand up, the know how to contradict and the desire to stick it to them.
If this group can keep banding together, I think the RIAA's legal tactics may hit a sudden and disastrous roadblock.
The Internet Changes Everything (Score:5, Interesting)
In the SCO versus IBM + The Entire Linux Community, Groklaw provided a full-time forum for commentary and suggestions, and Slashdot covered the subject often. Among all the First Posts and other chaff must have been more than a few nuggets of wisdom.
In the fight of The RIAA versus The Entire Civilized World, this is taken yet another step further. While IBM was as technically savvy as its opponent, lawyers (apologies to Ray), Judges (no apologies to too many of them still, but some are getting it finally), and most users aren't very knowledgeable about computers, software, the Internet, the law, and what it all means. Neither is the RIAA knowledgeable in these areas, as they are too often making very evident.
Because of widespread interest in the subject, along with a general dislike of big business in general, there is a collaboration here the likes of which couldn't have ever happened even a few short years ago. The RIAA has thousands more enemies than they've yet sued, all of whom are willing to contribute what bit of knowledge they have to bring that lying (we're only doing this for the poor starving artists) colossus down. And because of their identical, boilerplate cases, they only have to lose on one point to lose them all! And its the Internet that's making all this possible. People communicate in ways they never could before.
Students, among other things, also have a lot of time on their hands, and a great ire when they think they've been wronged. That's a volatile mix that the RIAA may soon wish they'd left alone. Suing grandmothers (unless it happens to be Neville Longbottom's Gram) is safer than motivated students just looking for the next cause celeb.
All in all, I'd say the RIAA has made yet another major misstep. Maybe this will be their last one, since if successful, the students will provide the roadmap to kill all of these cases where they should be killed -- at the illegal, unethical, ex parte stage. If so, the world will be a better place for you and me (lyric used under Fair Use provisions).
Re:From a link in the article... (Score:5, Interesting)
Now, it's songs again that rule. The ease of obtaining (legally or illegally) single songs means the death of the album as a major profit center. The fact is that Phil Spector was right when he called the album "two hits and ten pieces of junk". The vast majority of long play vinyl and CDs are populated by junk. Is there some reason that people like Britney Spears or Madonna have to release twelve song collections? Let's face it, in the vast jungle of albums out there since the LP took off in the late 1950s, there are perhaps a few dozen genuine masterpieces in any given genre of music.
I think the smart artists and studios will realize that there is a golden opportunity here to shed the 800 lb. gorilla of the record company and its distribution networks. For decades, these guys have been robbing artists blind, while they made untold millions. That's okay for the upper echelon of artists like U2 or the Beach Boys, whose volume of sales is such that even a fraction means big bucks. But there's all those middle tier and Indie guys who don't sell that number, and for them, being able to direct sell, or hell, even just give away the music and make their money off of the gigs and the merchandising that this new era could mean prosperity.
Re:Students are the biggest activist demographic (Score:5, Interesting)
They're going after the wrong crowd... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Reading Your Blog (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:From a link in the article... (Score:2, Interesting)
And radio stations and critics would rather deal with an album at a time instead of a single every few weeks. It could be that albums turn into delivery vehicles to critics, stations, and DJs, and no longer become something that the public gets hold of, but I wonder if the economics would support that model.
Anyway, classical music and soundtracks will always be delivered in album form.
Re:I'm going to get crucified, but... (Score:2, Interesting)
Moreover, there are so many wonderful low cost sources of unusual hard-to-find music these days that I really no longer buy into the it's-too-hard-to-find-so-I-must-pirate argument. Certainly, the music by the garage band formed by your best friend in kindergarden who you then lost touch with may not be available on iTunes.... but he's also not going to sue you. He's also probably not trying to make a living off his music.
One thing that gets me is the argument that a musician isn't being harmed by music piracy. This is simply false. You can argue about the degree of harm, but so what?* Every song that's sold results at the very least in more publicity and bargaining power for the artist -- even in the rare case they don't receive any actual $ for their music. Stealing music from an independent struggling musician is just unconscionable. I'm certainly not going to lose sleep over Brittany Spears losing out on a few sales; but where do you draw the line? These days, artists have a choice whether or not to sign a big label deal -- this is not 20 years ago where it's play ball with the big boys or go home.
Finally, just to add something of value to this post -- I recently came across a website called http://amiestreet.com/ [amiestreet.com]. This is an amazing example of what indie music can be. Looking around on this site, I came across obscure little bands that I swore I would never hear from again, and yet here they are, trying to make a few bucks. What possible excuse do I have of stealing from these folks? Look at the prices -- I think I paid as much as 75 cents for one song and as little as $1.12 for an album.
Really folks, don't you think piracy is so 1999?
* My favorite story is from Jill Sobule, who is a truly gifted singer/song-writer. http://www.jillsobule.com/home.html [jillsobule.com] She had one breakthrough hit many moons ago -- you may remember "I Kissed A Girl". That was hers. She's on record as not having made a penny from that song because of a bad record deal. Sure, they exist. But because of that one silly little song I found someone who's become one of my favorite artists and I've supported directly for years. The studio system is icky at its worst, but it also plays a role.
Re:Students are the biggest activist demographic (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:From a link in the article... (Score:3, Interesting)
However, imagine a scenario where an established band dumps the traditional publishers and elects to publish exclusively through iTunes. Instead of getting a tiny fraction of that 99c, the band would get 79c for each track sold. How much does a band net from a CD sale? It is still quite small, so the number of tracks sold on iTunes would probably be less than the number of full CDs sold for the band to make more money.
Why has no-one done this? Risk? Laziness?
Re:From a link in the article... (Score:4, Interesting)
LPs are probably one of the biggest rip-offs in recording history. There's some argument for them as far as classical pieces or extended jazz pieces and the like. But come on, for every Dark Side of the Moon out there, there are hundreds of piles of crap with maybe one or two redeeming songs to be found.
Many universities won't fight very hard (Score:3, Interesting)
To those of you who think our university should provide free and unfettered access so students can do anything they want might want to consider how that activity infringes on other educational and business activities of the institution. Those who want to collect and or otherwise make available MP3s are welcome to do so at their personal expense on their home networks. To date, nobody has come forward attempting to justify a bona fide educational need for collecting or sharing MP3s, et al.
Re:Students are the biggest activist demographic (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, the supreme law in the US is the Constitution, which says:
Congress shall have power
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.
So if they vote for copyright or patent laws that interfere with scientific or artistic progress, they are clearly doing something illegal, and they should be prosecuted for it. Taking bribes^Wcampaign contributions to violate the Constitution isn't exactly legal, as far as I can tell.
Re:From a link in the article... (Score:3, Interesting)
Ah, a fellow musician! Greetings from an old bluesman! My band is going somewhat the same route. What we've decided to do is take advantage of the offer of assistance (for about $1500 for a mastered CD..about half what he normally charges due to his and my bass players' friendship) of an acquaintance of our bass player, (who works as artist relations for a major string company) who is a professional producer/engineer who contracts regularly with UMG (Universal Music Group) to do "Live Album" type recordings and soundtracks, that also does independent projects. He travels the country with a recording truck, recording national and regional acts. He has well over $500,000USD in recording and editing equipment in said vehicle, which is way above what we poor blues players would be able to afford, as well as 30+ years experience recording, editing, mastering, and producing.
Going this route, we'll end up with a professional-level CD, and total ownership of all the material, including the masters, with all our options open. He's even willing to help us shop it around to various major and indie labels. Any deal we make will be on our terms, as we already have the product ready to distribute, and all we'll need is basic marketing and distribution. Meanwhile, we can do our own online sales via the usual outlets, as well as sales at shows (and the more unit sales you can show a prospective label, the better position you're in negotiation-wise). Even if you had to pay the full $3K or so for similar services, it's still very worth it, IMHO.
Cheers!
Strat