Posted on 09/25/2002 11:48:10 PM PDT by ledzep75
Got unauthorized MP3s? Record labels are launching a multimillion-dollar public interest-style ad campaign to make sure you don't. On Thursday, a coalition of artists and labels will start running print, radio and TV ads featuring dozens of major recording stars who compare file swapping with stealing.
The ads, reminiscent of the American Dairy Association's Got Milk or MTV's Rock the Vote campaigns, are designed to shame people out of illegally swapping music. They feature big-name artists such as Madonna, P. Diddy and Sting.
One of the ads contains quotes from a variety of singers, including Britney Spears.
"Would you go into a CD store and steal a CD?" Spears asks. "It's the same thing--people going into the computers and logging on and stealing our music."
Recording industry executives said they're trying to educate music fans and their parents that file swapping is illegal and is hurting artists and the business. CD sales have been declining in recent years, a trend that's coincided with both the rise of file swapping and a dismal economy.
"Illegally downloading is stealing, and it's against the law plain and simple," Hilary Rosen, CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), said when announcing the campaign.
The record industry, reeling from the effects of Napster and other file-swapping sites--which allowed millions of people to trade music for free--has been fighting furiously to regain control of its songs.
The ad campaign is the latest in an aggressive, multipronged approach by the labels to quash file swapping that's not industry-sanctioned. In addition to launching the ads, the RIAA has sued file-swapping sites out of business, threatened to crack down on companies and individual file-swappers, and pushed legislation that would mandate anti-copying technology in new products.
On Thursday, industry executives will testify before a U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee in support of a bill sponsored by Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., that would allow intellectual-property owners to use technical measures to prevent copyright infringement. But the new ad campaign, which coincides with the hearing and will appear in at least one Washington-based policy-focused newspaper, may send mixed messages to fans. For example, when unveiling the plan Wednesday, Universal Music Group's anti-piracy czar, David Benjamin, said file swapping hurts singers and midlevel music industry employees, whom he described as working people who are just trying to "put a roof over our heads and feed the kids and try to do right." However, it's unclear whether testimony from multimillionaire recording artists will garner much sympathy among fans, many of whom complain that CDs are overpriced or contain just one or two quality songs. What's more, the new campaign comes after a study by consulting firm KPMG that criticizes the recording industry's anti-piracy efforts. The report said the labels need to devote more time to developing new Internet business models instead of trying to lock down their content.
yeah basically
so heres what i got to say about it....one thing is in record stores nowadays all i see is pop BS pop music sucks all it is,is pre-manufactured crap that basically they created themselves britney spears and the rest of them never slugged it out in clubs and tried to make a name for themselves they had EVERYTHING handed to them
for the past 2 years i was in a metal band and a good one but a few problems: first being that record industrys wont back anything except light happy-go-lucky and look at my fake rack crap...they dont want talent they want money thats it and sadly all these people are buying this fake crap whatever happen to like real music like rock,jazz,metal,blues? it didnt go anywhere,record exec's just decided to sell what they considered cool and that wasnt real music just pre-packaged no talent music done completly with computers keyboards and some poor 16 year old who was dumb enough to change there name there looks and bra size...so what about the money aspect? well honestly there is none except the fact that i dont understand how these pop stars can complain when they make a hell of alot more money than most average musicians and working people nationwide yet they sit there and say were stealing there music? how? what exactly are we stealing besides that 3 minute exhibition of computer bleeps and samples with your butt ugly no talent voice on it
(exhales) ok ive said all i need to
I'm not particularly fond of being lectured on morality by lesbians.
In the 90's they created numerous breakdowns of the cost of an album to show why a CD that cost about a buck to make cost consumers $16-$18 in the record store. Of course the record execs were only making a paltry .50 or so per album according to their breakdown. Sony somehow amassed billions in profits from "just scraping by" on costs. They swore that there was just no way they could lower the prices of CDs.
NOW however P2P file sharing is providing the first taste of real competition and the record companies are somehow managing to do what they swore for years they couldn't do, lower the price of a CD to a reasonable cost. Remember buying that album for $18? Notice how new releases are now going for $11-$12? Hmmm, wonder how this miracle came about...
The ethics of file sharing I don't think are really debateable, but its the record companies unshakable assurance of their own untouchability that has created the pent up resentment that has created the demand for this type of behavior. Illegal or not, this IS competition and its long absence has lef the record companies soft in their preparation for it. In a capitalistic system that is a very dangerous condition to be in.
Couple of observations: Britany's "Like, downloading music and stuff... that s like, just like taking a CD from a store and stuff." (Interpretation mine) No Brit, while it may not be ethical, and possibly illegal, making a COPY of the bits of a song is not the same as physically removing from inventory a real world item, thereby depriving the owner of its presence. Its the difference between sitting down with a canvas to make a perfect stroke for stroke copy of the Mona Lisa, and carrying the real thing out on your back. One will get you a pretty painting to enjoy in your home, the other will quite possibly get you shot.
Second: Anyone who seriously thinks this will drive the music business to the point where artist will stop making new music has no sense of history and how changes force evolution of outmoded systems.
As long as they continue to attempt to violate my rights (such technology would interfere with perfectly legal and ethical use of purchased material), I see no reason to respect theirs. If and when they explicitly renounce this corruption, I'll reconsider.
Here's a hint: if the music industry's product is so awful, maybe you shouldn't listen to it at all. I don't get people who justify MP3 swapping by saying that the music is so awful--if you dislike it that intensely, why are you listening to it?
The unauthorized reproduction and distribution of copyrighted music is JUST AS ILLEGAL AS SHOPLIFTING A CD.
So who's distributing it? Not me. And how is Robert Johnson or Jimmy Rodgers or Etta James or Frank Sinatra being affected by me listening to the few songs I'm able to find with Kazaa?
Ever try to find Jimmy Rodgers "Blue Yodel No. 9" in a Strawberries or Tower? How about Mose Allison's "Young Man Blues"?
Not a chance.
Again: if the music is that bad, why do you bother to listen to it in the first place?
Yes.
Yes, it would be.
I don't. I have the entire audio-track from the movie Full Metal Jacket playing, 24 hours a day.
In my head.
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.