Music Industry to Abandon Mass Suits (will enlist help of ISP's instead)

The Wall Street Journal ^ | December 19, 2008 | SARAH MCBRIDE and ETHAN SMITH

[Owen]

I’ve never quite understood the difference between acquiring a free mp3 and acquiring a CD free from the public library. Chances are both will be listened to for the same period of time before deletion/return.

[ConservativeWarrior]

The ISPs don’t get paid by the record companies,they get paid by the users. The smart ISPs aren’t going to punish their customers to help the record companies (unless they want to lose customers to their competiton.)

That's why Satan created lawyers. Nothing turns capitalism on its head like a slimey legal team. (sorry for the redudancy)

Unions are a close second.

[ShadowAce]

[JerseyHighlander]

I have a feeling the Justice Dept, the FBI CIA and NSA and MI6 and Interpol is going to stop this dead in it’s tracks.

The I2P network encapsulation technologies are in stillborn infancy at the moment. HOWEVER if 100,000 warez and p2p coders tackle the I2P problems simultaneously and create a truly anonymous high level encryption software package that becomes popular with MAINSTREAM internet users, the intelligence agencies will be completely disarmed in the ongoing cat and mouse games against actual criminal networks, such as money, weapons, drug, and human traffickers and foreign counter intelligence.

If Tor/I2P/Freenet/GNUnet have another few million nodes because p2p users migrate to those I2P networks, the whole world changes and no digital content will be traceable to it’s source or destination.

Tor/I2P/Freenet/GNUnet nodes in Europe are legal even if the node has child porn move through it. If another 2,000,000 early adopters set up nodes, it’s all over, the law enforcement of the world will have to force coup d’etats in order to nationalize the telecommunications infrastructure, or they can start mass arresting millions of users who set up nodes.

[JerseyHighlander]

You are incorrect in almost all of your talking points rudman.

You pay a private entity that provides you access and in return gives you a traceable number, - correct

where they record all your activity. These private corporations are possibly liable for your activities. -incorrect.

You frequent sites that generally have a terms of use that says your activity will be monitored.  - correct.

Every file you touch is associated with your ip address - and is thus traceable back to you - both on the website’s logs, and on your isp’s logs. - incorrect.

Cookies are planted on your computer to track what sites you frequent - third parties provide weather, desktop searching, screensavers and other tools that covertly analyze your computer use and directs advertisers to your likes and dislikes so that they can more accurately target you with ads.  - incorrect.

High level packet encryption onion routing software can be downloaded, configured and installed by total morons in under 15 minutes. All it takes is a few million morons to join I2P and the RIAA, Chinese Communists and Iranian Mullahacracy's thought police are out of business.

The best way to help underground Christians in China and to support the resistance in Iran and Russia is to install I2P or TOR. The only way Chinese dissidents can safely communicate over digital networks at the moment is through high level I2P networks.

[rhombus]

ISPs will always be the point of enforcement. Whether it’s hunting down media free-loaders, terrorist plots, illegal drug deals or kiddie porn. The ISPs should try and seek some sort of immunity from future litigation immediately. ‘Course we could all go on Big Brother’s free internet - coming soon to a city near you. ;-)

[Gondring]

How would the ISP even know it was a copyrighted mp3 file. It could be an mp3 of my kid singing at a recital, for all they’d know.

By the file characteristics. They cam set up a database of what tracks would rip to...plus release their own honeypots.

[Gondring]

ping

[supercat]

Recording costs have dropped through the floor. Computers have brought the ability to record and edit music to the basement level.

A professional studio will have advantages not available to a typical basement artist. The electronic parts of the path from performer to recording have gotten quite cheap, but except when using all-electronic instruments there's still an acoustic part that isn't so cheap. A performer in a recording studio generally isn't going to have takes ruined by unwanted outside sounds. Someone recording in his basement, on the other hand, often will. Of course, given a choice between having to do a few extra takes to get a good one, versus having to spend thousands of dollars for a studio, many people will opt for the former.

Also, I wonder what fraction of the people who listen to music these days really care what it sounds like? Someone listening to music under ideal conditions could easily tell the difference between a recording produced on $750 worth of equipment in someone's basement and one produced on $750,000 worth of equipment in a studio. Someone listening to a 128kbps MP3 with cheap headphones on a noisy subway, however, probably couldn't. Which type of person represents more of the market share?

[Brookhaven]

The quality of musical recordings has been going down for several decades.

I listened to an old Paul McCartney/Wings album (on CD) a while back. The quality of the recording was shocking compared to the recording quality going out today (and I’m talking about mainstream commercial albums of today.) In other words, even commercial recording companies are scrimping on quality.

I can remember having a discussion with someone years ago who swore that the mp3 format would never catch on, because the quality was soo much poorer than a CD. Boy, was he wrong.

Look at the equipment people are using to listen to music with today. An ipod with earplugs. Even the BEST earplugs are sub-standard compared to full blown headphones (which pale compared to a full blown stereo system.)

Most people don’t buy music because of its recording quality, they buy it because they like the music. A basement recording artists today can put out a recording that is “good enough” quality wise to satisfy 90%+ of most people.

Also consider the musical style. If you like the symphony and opera, recording quality will be higher on your scale. How important is recording quality to the typical death-metal fan? Good enough is about all that is required.

To make a long story short, I’ve heard people argue “quality, quality” for a couple of decades, but I just don’t see a huge market for quality. Heck, you don’t even see the record companies pushing the fact that the sound off a CD is better than the sound of an mp3 (which they would be if they thought it would make any difference.)

Who buys music? I don’t know about today, but in the ‘70s and ‘80s the typical record buyer was a male between 14 and 21 (young men bought way more records than women.)

[doug from upland]

I’m not a fan of Oprah either, which is why I created this song just for her - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge7Jyxq3sPo

[PapaBear3625]

Hardcore uploaders/downloaders will start using software which blocks their IP address.

Teens will take advantage of the massive sizes of todays laptop drives, and large USB drives, and simply exchange music collections in person, bypassing the Internet entirely.

[PapaBear3625]

Who buys music? I don’t know about today, but in the ‘70s and ‘80s the typical record buyer was a male between 14 and 21 (young men bought way more records than women.)

I am not an audiophile. Back in my youth in the 70's and 80's, I generally would record songs off FM radio or my turntable onto cassette tape and play it on my walkman. Sound quality mattered less than liking the music.

[Centurion2000]

It’s way worse. This strategy will turn your ISP into a private police force for the RIAA.

That will just force them to go with Tor Browsers, and onion routing filesharing clients.

Freenetproject.org.

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

There is a growing movement in the music business for bands to totally bypass the record companies. They are producing the songs themselves, and putting the songs up on file sharing sites. This is the real target of this move, as it will eventually put an end to record companies....

However, that right extends to everyone that produces music. If I form an independent band, record songs on my own, and want to give away copies of my songs via file sharing to promote my band, that is also my right.

The fact that someone is sharing an mp3 file DOES NOT mean they are sharing it illegally. The record companies are trying to shut down their biggest future competitor: independent artists that CHOOSE to give away their music via mp3 & file sharing.

Visions of antitrust lawsuits against the RIAA dancing in lawyer's heads...stay tuned.

[Still Thinking]

Oh....my....God! That’s hilarious! Definitely a keeper.

[llmc1]

That was pretty good! A little mean with the whale thing, but still funny.

[Psycho_Bunny]

I actually distribute free versions of my music using the bit torrent tracker, PirateBay.org and then sell them via Tunecore.com.

I'm in the position of wondering how I'd prove that my music is my music, to my ISP.

[seatrout]

—Teens will take advantage of the massive sizes of todays laptop drives, and large USB drives, and simply exchange music collections in person, bypassing the Internet entirely—

Yup. An 8GB thumb drive holds as much music as many ipods. You can stash alot of music (or other files) on one of those things.

[zeugma]

If the customers continue the file-sharing, they will get one or two more emails, perhaps accompanied by slower service from the provider. Finally, the ISP may cut off their access altogether.

Yet, they will do nothing about the millions of windows-based botnets out there spewing spam into my inbox.