EFF to RIAA: sue ‘em all campaign hasn’t worked
p2pnet news view | RIAA News:- The bizarre sue ‘em all marketing scheme launched by Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG and their RIAA against the latter’s own customers suspected of sharing copyrighted music online, is an abject failure.
It hasn’t got artists paid, or reduced P2P file sharing.
Those are the main points in RIAA v The People: Five Years Later, an EFF report named with a perhaps unconscious nod to Ray Beckerman’s Recording Industry vs The People, whom it quotes.
The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) paper usefully encapsulates many, if not most, conclusions which have become obvious to all but the Big 4 since they initiated their anti-P2P, anti-consumer, anti-any-music-but-theirs campaign five years ago last month.
For example, its says judges have repeatedly rejected the RIAA’s “making available” theory which asserts having a music file in a PC “shared” folder constitutes copyright infringement — even if no one ever copies the file.
And, “Just last week, a federal judge ordered a new trial for Jammie Thomas, found liable for more than $220,000 because the jury had been instructed erroneously that liability could be premised on this ‘making available’ theory,” it says.
Downloading continues unabated, “while some people simply choose to share files in ways that are harder to monitor, like burning and exchanging CDs among friends,” says the report.
“More than 30,000 Americans have been targeted for legal action by the recording industry without putting a single penny into the pockets of any artists,” says EFF senior staff attorney Fred von Lohmann.
“At the same time, everyone agrees that P2P file-sharing is more popular than ever. The RIAA’s litigation campaign arbitrarily punishes tens of thousands of people for what tens of millions are doing. It’s futile and unfair. It is high time that the recording industry let fans pay them a reasonable fee for the P2P file sharing that we all know has become a fact of Internet life.”
The report kicks of with »»»
On September 8, 2003, the recording industry sued 261 American music fans for sharing songs on peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing networks, kicking off an unprecedented legal campaign against the people that should be the recording industry`s best customers: music fans. Five years later, the recording industry has filed, settled, or threatened legal actions against at least 30,000 individuals. These individuals have included children, grandparents, unemployed single mothers, college professorsâa random selection from the millions of Americans who have used P2P networks. And there`s no end in sight; new lawsuits are filed monthly, and now they are supplemented by a flood of “pre-litigation” settlement letters designed to extract settlements without any need to enter a courtroom.
But suing music fans has proven to be an ineffective response to unauthorized P2P file-sharing. Downloading from P2P networks is more popular than ever, despite the widespread public awareness of lawsuits. And the lawsuit campaign as not resulted in any royalties to artists. One thing has become clear: suing music fans is no answer to the P2P dilemma.
And that says it all.
Click here for RIAA v The People: Five Years Later in full.
Los Angeles Times – , September , 2008
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.
October 1st, 2008 at 8:24 am
Oh come on Sam. I’m sure you’re gonna find some angle where this extortion racket has been an “incredible success” and will waste lots of p2pnet’s bandwidth telling us all about it.
Come on, don’t disappoint us now.
October 1st, 2008 at 8:27 am
Jon, I think you meant to finish your quote with “And the lawsuit campaign has not resulted in any royalties to artists. One thing has become clear: suing music fans is no answer to the P2P dilemma.”
October 1st, 2008 at 8:35 am
I find it telling that while Ray Beckerman, John Borland, David Kravets, Janko Roettgers, and many others who have written on the subject are quoted, Johnny-come-lately P2PNet does not merit even a single mention.
October 1st, 2008 at 8:49 am
@ Free Thinker & JD
You’re right. Fixed. And thanks for pointing that out.
Cheers!
October 1st, 2008 at 9:00 am
“p2p dilemma”
wtf you some hollywood schill “Free Thinker”,
there is no dilemma other then holly wood being ass backwards.
Ya know if they’d a got “involved with p2p instead of the other way around a cheap affordable way could have been had for all that could have resulted in more profits then less.
October 1st, 2008 at 11:06 am
“if theyâd a got âinvolved with p2p instead of the other way around a cheap affordable way could have been had for all that could have resulted in more profits then less.”
Makes one wonder if it’s really just about profits.
October 1st, 2008 at 11:12 am
@chronoss
I’m no Hollywood shill, dear chronoss. Why don’t you read my post properly, ya muppet?? Try reading my post again and see if you get it this time. Try reading my first post on here too…
October 1st, 2008 at 11:51 am
Actually it worked very well for puting the majors out of business. These guys are litterraly dying.
Apparently they think that this is not enought since they are still helping us propagate the boycott even further. Now buying their shit is wrong, stupid, immoral and unpatriotic while the Indies are coooooollll! This way of thinking is now deeply rooted in the psy of the general public, particularly the young.
But there is also us and we will go also after the legal parasites who participated in this ignominy.
We have the will and the mean to do so. Targets aquisition is in progress, petitions are circulating. . . . We will depossess and expel them unless they end up in jail.
RIAA lawers! Shiver now because we are comming for you too!
October 1st, 2008 at 12:54 pm
I’ll say it again:
The RIAA is getting EXACTLY what they deserve. These scumbags were able to successfully cover up the real purpose of copyright and inflate it into damn near perpetuity. They gutted the “Public domain”, and they got away with it for a long time.
P2p is merely an outgrowth of mixtapes and other such phenomena. the RIAA doesn’t understand that if the laws become too oppressive, people WILL reassert the public domain by force: THAT’S the real lesson of p2p, remix-culture, mashups, etc.
Not only that, but the more p2p implimentations they kill, the faster they spur technological development. It’s the so-called “pirates” fueling the advance of technology here, folks, and the “honest content providers” — multi-billion dollar corporate behemoths — comparing the vcr to the Boston strangler, and trying to get whole technologies banned.
I actually kinda agree with “Sam” on this one: they RIAA have done a great job: completely alienating their customer base and confirming every negative stereotype about corporate America.
October 1st, 2008 at 6:18 pm
“Oh come on Sam. Iâm sure youâre gonna find some angle where this extortion racket has been an âincredible successâ and will waste lots of p2pnetâs bandwidth telling us all about it.
Come on, donât disappoint us now.”
Don’t encourage the guy, Freethinker. He won’t actually respond to any questions you ask, and will instead engage in lengthy, nonsequitur screeds claiming he’s doesn’t like the RIAA — just supports everything they stand for.
You know, like those guys who say they’re not a member of the KKK because “some of their best friends are black people”.
I personally enjoy giving “Sam” a good troll-smashing from time to time, mainly because everything he says is RIAA-style doublespeak, misinformation, and complete — willful — ignorance of the actual issues.
He dodges every question put to him, attempts to smear p2pers/free culture advocates/IP skeptics as just motivated by “selfish lawlessness” or whatever he called it, and defends all-but-perpetual monopolies as a “fundamental human right”.
LOL.
Also, it doesn’t help that the dishonest little weasel got all precious over my use of terms like “two liquidy shits” and references to Mitch Bainwol’s seminal fluids etc.
Evidently he’s never heard the phrase “sucking cock”.
Sorry, Jon: I know you told me to lay off him because his shit was getting repetitive and boring, but I just can’t seem to help myself. I’ve utterly shattered his arguments so many times now that he’s reduced to taking inane little potshots at me again like the cowardly little shit he really is.
I’d probably give the guy at least SOME grudging respect if he’d at least answer the questions put to him, but since he doesn’t, I’ll just continue to use him to get some good old-fashioned “Lulz”.
October 1st, 2008 at 11:07 pm
it could be interesting to see riaalawyer entering student café or other popular place and introduce himself..
October 1st, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Riaa, get use to digital millennium. If I design product I don’t ask you to pay me every time you turn power switch on. I never understand, why is ok to listen radio and recording songs including converting into mp3 file is ok too, but putting these files on my computer drives you crazy. I donât have enough time to sleep and to eat properly, – why do you think I need to steal anything from you? If I like music I buy CD, but before I buy I need to listen at least couple of songs to make sure I will not get something I donât like. Why I can not hear songs in CD store anymore?
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:15 am
“If I design product I donât ask you to pay me every time you turn power switch on.”
The original idea behind patents was to prevent competition “for a limited time”, supposedly to give inventors/designers a head-start — prevent competition while the patent was enforced.
Odd how this sort of thing is defended by advocates of “capitalism”/”the free market”. Either that means that “capitalists” are dishonest, patents are evil, or both.
“I never understand, why is ok to listen radio and recording songs including converting into mp3 file is ok too, but putting these files on my computer drives you crazy.”
Read Lawrence Lessig’s book “Free culture”. The RIAA vermin tried to prevent music radio, and when they failed to do that, they settled for getting the highest possible royalties they could manage. This has pretty much driven competition out of terrestrial radio, leaving big megaliths like “Clear Channel” because they can afford the royalties.
As for home taping and backups? Jack Valenti compared the VCR to “The Boston Strangler” — right before they figured out how to make a killing on video rentals.
They bitch and bitch about making digital backups as well, and, so far, we’re only “permitted” to do so because the courts have seen through the RIAA bullshit.
The only “temporary moral aberration” is any defense of the RIAA/MPAA: they’ve said too many stupid things, and managed to get way too long of monopolies.
That’s over.