p2pnet - rss feed: RIAA boss ‘earned’ $1,472,944 in 2006
p2pnet news | RIAA News | MPAA News:- Want to know how much RIAA spin doctor in chief Mitch Bainwol pulled down as principal front man for Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG in their grim and relentless pursuit of their own customers, whom they call criminals and thieves?
Are you sitting down?
Bainwol raked in $1,472,944 in 2006.
But for 2008, the figure need to be adjusted —- upwards —- says The Patry Copyright Blog, quoting DC political magazine National Journal.
It doesn’t say what RIAA president Sherman ‘earned,’ but it’s probably significantly more than Bainwol.
After all. chairpersons come and go but …………….
In 2005, he got “$1.13 million, but his boss, Bainwol, received a trifling $908,848,” said p2pnet, and in 2003, Sherman took home $1 million, says ZDNet.
So what about the MPAA?
Dan Glickman pulled in $1,280,000 plus another $32,800 in other benefits and allowances, says the story .
Money well earned. Right?
Also See:
The Patry Copyright Blog - The National Journal’s Biennial Salary Survey, February 21, 2008
p2pnet - Millions spent on p2p battles, October 17, 2005ZDNet -Where the lobbying power lies, March 29, 2006
ZDNet - Where the lobbying power lies, March 29, 2006
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.phpNet access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
February 22nd, 2008 at 10:28 am
One word: Disgusting.
February 22nd, 2008 at 1:53 pm
This is how much these parasites and traitors has been costing the US society in 2006.
Once the time come wi will make sure that they return any penny of these plus interests after we throw them into a prison.
February 22nd, 2008 at 3:14 pm
“One word: Disgusting.”
+1
February 23rd, 2008 at 12:47 am
But they’re doing it for the artists! Right???? Right??!?!?!?!?
February 23rd, 2008 at 7:07 am
No… no.
‘Disgusting’ is being kind to them. These people must be sub-human because no human could possibly have the arrogance, false care for artists, and general distrust for the people who make them rich, that these ‘people are displaying.
I still laugh when I watch that talk by Cary Sherman - the mere notion that ripping a CD for personal use is anything but crystal clear legal, but that no one asked him why they are not embracing P2P and making 10 times their revenue fairly, rather than their absolutely pathetic attempts to quash it and keep control.
February 23rd, 2008 at 12:29 pm
a normal person could live his whole life using only a fraction of that money… a good life it would have been too..
February 23rd, 2008 at 3:42 pm
One word… EARNED????
February 24th, 2008 at 12:55 am
Mitch Bainwol’s $1,472,944 paycheck might seem like a lot of money, but it only takes about 400 P2P “settlements” (extortion demands averaging about $3700 per victim) squeezed out of hapless music fans to make up that amount. Let us not forget that the RIAA’s lawsuits against its customers should reach the milestone of 40 thousand sometime this year.
Notwithstanding legal costs, the RIAA is hauling in enough money from lawsuits alone to pay Mitch Bainwol a hundred times over!
February 24th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Blood money is by no means earned. They got it through
exploiting artists and extorting money from college students
and others they are suing.
February 26th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
All big names in the music industry - including many artists - live in lalaland due to the millions they rake in and they go about suing and using scare tactics to manipulate kids, increasing their revenue in the process!! This is crazy! And the governments support of this terrorizing behavior by the RIAA raises huge concerns. These people are so far removed from the real world its no surprise they can be so disconnected to their customers. The industry needs to adapt with the changing wants and needs of the consumers, not dig there heals in and attempt to force or sue the customer into buying from them - after all the customer is always right yeah? Or is that just a myth thrown out there that just makes us believe that we are a free customer with choices and rights. The only way we can stop the continuity of behavior like this is by big consumer groups is to refuse to be bullied and accept legislation and policies that goes against our own interests and indeed interests of the majority, yet defend the interests of a few.