Posted on 09/12/2003 6:43:29 AM PDT by neutrino
Take a Stand Against the Madness; Stop the RIAA!
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is on a rampage, launching legal attacks against average Americans from coast to coast. Rather than working to create a rational, legal means by which its customers can take advantage of file-sharing technology and pay a fair price for the music they love, it has chosen to sue people like Brianna LaHara, a 12 year-old girl living in New York City public housing.
Brianna, and hundreds of other music fans like her, are being forced to pay thousands of dollars they do not have to settle RIAA-member lawsuits -- supporting a business model that is anything but rational. This crusade is generating thousands of subpoenas and hundreds of lawsuits, but not a single penny for the artists that the RIAA claims to protect.
Copyright law shouldn't make criminals out of 60 million Americans, and it's time for a change. Congress is going to hold hearings; we need your help to make sure that the public's voice is heard. Tell Congress that it's time to stop the madness!
We have 3704 signatures so far. Help us get to 10,000!
Click HERE to sign.
When you download a CD online you're not paying for all the BS that record labels pile on to the price of a CD.
I say that's where the problem really is. Yes, I think music should be paid for... but, at least right now, I will never by another manufactured CD again...
The thieves don't want to heard that. I have used this argument on them more than once. Many try to say, "But many times, if I like what I download, I go out and buy it". Yeh, that's like walking into a record store, stealing a CD, and coming back and paying for it if you like it.
Copying for personal use is another story. I also am not sure where I stand on the issue that people want to listen to songs in Mp3 format, own a real copy, but have to download an illegal copy so that they can listen to it in Mp3 or whatever format that is not available out there.
There is also the possibility that the download will encourage the purchase of the material; the balance between lost sales and sales due to the promotional value of the download is indeterminate.
Interesting point!
Again, if you are downloading songs that you already own a copy of, in a different format, then I am not sure where I stand. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people downloading songs aren't doing it for that reason.
Oh, come on. The law is simple. You purchase a copy, you can make a backup for personal use. If the RIAA is arguing that my copy has to be in the same format as what I purchased, then they are wrong.
Oh really? You know what the RIAA says about that?
For the Record: The RIAA Position on Home Copying
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) represents the interests of record companies, and indirectly, the interests of the artists, backup musicians and vocalists, and songwriters whose music they produce. The RIAA cannot speak for all record copyright owners, let alone the songwriters and music publishers who own the copyright in the musical works embodied in every recording. Each copyright holder individually has the right to interpret--and enforce--his or her own copyright rights as he or she deems appropriate. So what follows is merely the RIAA's view on home taping generally.
Any unauthorized reproduction of a sound recording is technically a copyright infringement. It does not matter whether the reproduction is from a CD to a cassette tape, from a CD to a hard drive, or from a CD to a CD-Recordable disc. In reality, however, no record company has ever sued a consumer for copying music for noncommercial purposes. Moreover, since 1992, with the passage of the Audio Home Recording Act, consumers have been allowed immunity from lawsuits for copyright infringement for all analog and some digital recording. Importantly, however, that immunity does not extend to recording by means of general-purpose digital recording devices, including almost all of the CD-R and CD-RW devices on the market today.
The problem record companies have with home copying is its aggregate impact. One individual making one copy is not going to cause significant harm. But millions of individuals doing the same thing can, and do, cause extraordinary harm. And with the advent of the Internet, a single individual can do incalculable damage all by himself.
It's important to understand that record companies make their money virtually exclusively from the sale of records. If records aren't sold, but are copied instead, the business of making music suffers. Artists and songwriters don't collect royalties, and at some point, can no longer make a living in the music business; record companies don't recoup their investment, and at some point, are no longer able to invest in new artists and new music. In the end, the losers will be those who love music--because the breadth and depth of the musical talent supported by the U.S. music industry cannot exist without financial support. The winners are the companies that make copying machines and blank media; they profit from selling their devices to consumers who want music without having to pay for it.
What record companies want and need is a technical means of preventing unauthorized transmissions and preventing or limiting copying. It happens that such a technical solution is already available with respect to CD copying. Every CD has a copy protection bit encoded in it. If the software used to copy CDs on CD-R machines would simply read for that bit and disable the record function when the bit is found, the aggregate damage caused by unlimited CD copying could be avoided.
Steve Fabrizzio is vice president for anti-piracy and civil litigation at the Recording Industry Association of America.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.