Spiking the RIAA’s guns
p2pnet news | RIAA News:- InformationWeek’s Alexander Wolfe has a neat idea on how to spike the RIAA’s guns.
The Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG attack dog is currently savaging innocent consumers, "via more lawsuits and anti-copying threats," he says, citing the Jeffrey Howell case.
According to the RIAA, Howell’s PC music library compiled from CDs he’d bought and paid for is illegal.
"Just like self-help fanatics who peg everyone who’s ever taken a drink as an alcoholic, the RIAA would put every 10-year-old who’s played the Bob The Builder theme song on their PC in the dock as a music pirate," says Wolfe, going on:
"This situation can’t be allowed to stand. It’s time to pull the rug out from under the RIAA’s legal strategy of intimidating lots of ‘little people’ for whom several thousand dollars to settle is a cheaper way out than a lawyer they can’t afford. (Here’s an unusual case where the RIAA seems to have made the mistake of picking on somebody its own size.)
So, ‘do what we do to children who misbehave? – asks Wolfe. "Take away their privileges."
But before we get to that, "Pity the poor record companies," the InformationWeek piece says, going on:
For years, they were given a license to print money, via the generous copyright laws which grant rights, in corporate-authorship situations, for 75 years. In 1998, just as Disney’s key Mickey Mouse copyrights were about to expire, this was unbelievably extended to up to 125 years (in certain cases) in legislation introduced by former singer Sonny Bono.
Now that times are tough, though, the record companies have shown they’re clueless. Rather than forge a new business model to make money in the age of the Internet, they’re fighting a losing battle to hold on to an era that’s already passed. Okay, if they’re unable to handle the copyright benefits they’ve been like generously awarded, we should do what we do when a child shows they can’t handle a privilege they’ve been granted. We should take it away.
Now to the means:
Cut the copyright terms down to five years. Retroactively.
So, "now ‘Stairway to Heaven’ is in the public domain," , says Wolfe, and, "Hey, the ongoing RIAA lawsuit problem is gone in one fell swoop."
Adds the post:
"The only ones who’ll get hurt by cutbacks in copyright protections are the record labels and big book publishers. But the music industry has shown by its behavior that it has lost all claims to such rights. Indeed, I suspect that we’d be doing the RIAA something of a favor, by putting it, and ourselves, out of its misery."
Also see:
InformationWeek – RIAA Behaving Badly; Let’s Cut Their Copyright Privileges, January 2, 2008
compiled from CDs – Rip your legal CD? You’re a thief: RIAA, December 31, 2007
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
January 2nd, 2008 at 12:36 pm
They are not children they are old pieces of crap and a bunch of criminals.
What do we do to a bunch of criminals?
We shop off their heads.
January 2nd, 2008 at 2:35 pm
I would have had a lot more sympathy for the industry in the copyright extension issue, if it wasn’t insanely rich artists like Cliff Richard campaigning for it.
The guy doesn’t need any more money.
January 3rd, 2008 at 4:22 am
From the article:
Cut the copyright terms down to five years. Retroactively.
So, “now ‘Stairway to Heaven’ is in the public domain,” , says Wolfe, and, “Hey, the ongoing RIAA lawsuit problem is gone in one fell swoop.”
Adds the post:
“The only ones who’ll get hurt by cutbacks in copyright protections are the record labels and big book publishers. But the music industry has shown by its behavior that it has lost all claims to such rights. Indeed, I suspect that we’d be doing the RIAA something of a favor, by putting it, and ourselves, out of its misery.”
ChurchillsCigar:
YES!!!!!!
This part of the article is the money shot!
These punks have abused the copyright for FAR too long. Now it’s time to take it away from them. Let’s see how they like it now.
January 3rd, 2008 at 4:29 am
so you all say, “Let’s do it.”
who is this “Let’s”? what are YOU going to do to make it happen? there are too many politicos in too many corporate pockets and that will never change no matter how many new people are voted into public office.
so how do you propose to “do it”?
January 3rd, 2008 at 4:46 am
“who is this “Let’s”? what are YOU going to do to make it happen?”
Well, to begin with we (meaning ALL of us who download) have to start spreading the word all over. Not just on the internet, but in daily conversation with or friends, family, and co-workers.
“there are too many politicos in too many corporate pockets and that will never change no matter how many new people are voted into public office.”
You want to give up before we even start? What’s the matter with you? Do you think this was how civil rights for blacks were won? Do you think Martin Luther King should just have given up? Do you think we should have surrendered at the beginning of WWII?
Come on, buck up! We can take these morons. There are MILLIONS of downloaders. There are only a couple of hundred RIAAhole and HELLywood lawyers to contend with. We could vote them all out if we really want to.
Don’t give up before we start.
March 12th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Now, this is some real forward thnking…
Books are so quickly diffused through the Internet nowadays that copyrights are really moe and more meaningless. Not that you shouldn’t have them, but the greatest ideas can be found in the older books – which are waaay beyond any copyright protection.
Practically, it’s possible to make a decent living repackaging older books and providing superior service.
I don’t see why the RIAA should be allowed to continue strong-arming people when places like BitTorrent have developed a completely new model and archive.org is enabling people access to all sorts of songs.