Lawyers to sue RIAA for everything they took (stole)

[styckx]

Very interesting read.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/lawyers-plan-class-action-to-reclaim-100m-riaa-stole.ars

Two of the main arguments against the RIAA it points out.

First up was the evidence from hired investigator MediaSentry, which tracked down IP addresses of file-sharers and provided the only evidence of observed copyright infringement. Camara has argued that MediaSentry was not licensed as a private investigator in Minnesota, that it ran an illegal "pen register," and that its evidence should be barred. Such a move would essentially destroy the RIAA's main evidence of copyright infringement, and it's no surprise that the trade group has pushed back hard.

But Camara goes even further back in the evidence chain. To prove copyright infringement, the RIAA needs evidence of that infringement, of course, but it also needs to prove it owns the copyrights in question. If it can't establish that fact, the case also falls apart.

This sounds like a long shot—surely the record labels did something as basic as register their copyrights?—but Camara tells us that it's not so simple.

"They basically committed a technical screw-up," he says of the RIAA. That's because lawyers provided the court with "true and correct" copies of their copyright registrations (perhaps accurate but not "official), but these are not the "certified copies" required under federal rules of evidence.

[paulisded]

There's a trial coming up this summer in (I believe) the Boston area where Radiohead are going to testify in support of the downloader.

[topless_mike]

its a tough call.

as a musician, i am all in favor of p2p and what not. i really dont care who gets it, as long as it gets out there and helps build fan base.

the record companies, which shell out millions of $, care.

then again, the money from record sales all (except for a minute %) goes back to the record label. its no wonder that this has become such a big deal.

i always download the album first. if i like it, then i buy it. if i dont, i delete it.

[paulisded]

its a tough call.

as a musician, i am all in favor of p2p and what not. i really dont care who gets it, as long as it gets out there and helps build fan base.

the record companies, which shell out millions of $, care.

then again, the money from record sales all (except for a minute %) goes back to the record label. its no wonder that this has become such a big deal.

i always download the album first. if i like it, then i buy it. if i dont, i delete it.

The problem is that the record company firmly believes that EVERY download is a lost sale. This is clearly not the case. Giant hard drives are the modern day version of a closet full of cassette tapes, and the vast majority of people fill it simply because they can.

I'm not saying that downloading isn't hurting the biz, as that's clearly true (truthfully, I think it's close to a wash as downloading also helps sell copies). But there are so many other factors. People forget that home video in the 80's was primarily a rental business, wheras now people are collecting entire seasons of even the worst television shows. Video games were a small percentage of what they are now. I could go on and on, but there's just much more competition for that always declining discretionary income.

Also, as discussed on the show recently, there are no crossover acts anymore. The reason there aren't 10 million selling albums any more is that everything has become a niche. This demographic loves this artist who is completely unknown to this other demographic. Michael Jackson sold 20 million because he did things like conning a couple million rockers by having Eddie Van Halen on a song. Today there's no act that EVERYBODY owns.

Radio has to take their share of the blame by shrinking playlists and overusing consultants that program national playlists. There are no surprises popping up in small markets that end up becoming national stars. The same songs that are played on NY stations are played in my hick city.

[topless_mike]

The problem is that the record company firmly believes that EVERY download is a lost sale. This is clearly not the case. Giant hard drives are the modern day version of a closet full of cassette tapes, and the vast majority of people fill it simply because they can.

I'm not saying that downloading isn't hurting the biz, as that's clearly true (truthfully, I think it's close to a wash as downloading also helps sell copies). But there are so many other factors. People forget that home video in the 80's was primarily a rental business, wheras now people are collecting entire seasons of even the worst television shows. Video games were a small percentage of what they are now. I could go on and on, but there's just much more competition for that always declining discretionary income.

Also, as discussed on the show recently, there are no crossover acts anymore. The reason there aren't 10 million selling albums any more is that everything has become a niche. This demographic loves this artist who is completely unknown to this other demographic. Michael Jackson sold 20 million because he did things like conning a couple million rockers by having Eddie Van Halen on a song. Today there's no act that EVERYBODY owns.

Radio has to take their share of the blame by shrinking playlists and overusing consultants that program national playlists. There are no surprises popping up in small markets that end up becoming national stars. The same songs that are played on NY stations are played in my hick city.

so you agree with what i said?

[paulisded]

so you agree with what i said?

yes

[TripleSkeet]

I would so love to see this happen.

[boosterp]

Finally someone punches back.

[styckx]

So when will the RIAA stop spending all their money on going after people who steal music and dump all that time, money and energy into building value back into their product to make people want to actually purchase it? I think that's the main problem. Nothing except easy bake oven bands and pop artists get any sort of push anymore. Meanwhile that new [insert your favorite artist here] album has zilch behind it. Knock MTV all you want, but back in the days of 120 minutes, head bangers ball, yo MTV raps, was a great way to stumble upon new artists. Some made it, some didn't, but at least you had a menu to choose from.

This way before all 3 programs went purely commercial of course.

[paulisded]

So when will the RIAA stop spending all their money on going after people who steal music and dump all that time, money and energy into building value back into their product to make people want to actually purchase it? I think that's the main problem. Nothing except easy bake oven bands and pop artists get any sort of push anymore. Meanwhile that new [insert your favorite artist here] album has zilch behind it. Knock MTV all you want, but back in the days of 120 minutes, head bangers ball, yo MTV raps, was a great way to stumble upon new artists. Some made it, some didn't, but at least you had a menu to choose from.

This way before all 3 programs went purely commercial of course.

MTV will never go back to playing videos. Even if they had that desire, the money isn't there for the labels to fork over to have them produced (except for the awful disposable artists you mention).

You're completely right about the label's priorities. It's well known that after grunge came and went, the labels wanted control once again. They scored with teen pop, and that is still the model being used for pop, country, and r&b. Money is lavished on these acts with no return on their investment. Flying the Black Eyed Peas from coast to coast to appear on every single television show is not going to make any difference in how many copies they sell this week. Pushing these karaoke contest winners (or runnerups) on the cover of formerly great "rock" magazines isn't going to buy credibility. Meanwhile, anybody who doesn't regularly appear on Entertainment Tonight gets zero publicity bucks to promote their new albums.