Big Music extortion money …
p2pnet news view P2P | RIAA:- The Guardian has the answer to a question everyone already knew the answer to anyway.
But first, another question:
Q: Is there one group of people — the only group of people — who’ve benefited from the Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music sue ‘em all lawsuits launched against their own customers?
A: Yes.
Q: Well then, who are they.
A: You already know who they are. And the picture kind of gives it away. 
So Yup. The only group of people to get anything positive out of the bizarre Big 4 sue ‘em all marketing campaign are members of the international legal profession, most of them working for Dark Side elements.
The Guardian has an intriguing article wondering where all the money from the various Big 4 extortion operations finally ended up, and it brings Sharman Networks’ Kazaa into the story not because the P2P file sharing application is implicated in the majority of cases, but because before it successfully made the transition from Badie to Goodie, it was sued in Australia, Sharman’s home country.
And it was sued by Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music.
But before it ’settled’ for a reported $115 million, not at all incidentally giving its owners and associates direct entry in the seamy world of the corporate music industry, it’d claimed it was a dedicated supporter of the ‘P2P Revolution’.
What happened to the ’settlement’ money?
Kicking off with the statement it’s important to know who’s filing a given lawsuit, and reminding people “the copyrights of most records belong to the record companies, not the artist,” and who the defendant is, “The case against Kazaa is an interesting example,” says The Guardian, pointing out initially, the Big 4’s IFPI (International Federation of the Phonographic Industry) was behind it.
It also notes the IFPI represents the recording industry, “not the music industry as a whole” and has a membership of 1,400 record companies in 72 countries.
“Every country has its own local body,” says the story. “In the US it’s the RIAA and in the UK it’s the BPI.”
It goes on »»»
The contentious issue here is that the IFPI who filed the suit and my source says they cannot recall any independent label member being present at the board meeting when it decided to hand the case over to the majors. To confuse the matter even more, the IFPI put out a press release when it won the case, saying it had taken the action “on behalf of the record industry”, not solely the majors.
Three years on, the independent label umbrella organisations Aim, Win and Impala are still in dispute with the IFPI over compensation for the independent label artists whose tracks were downloaded illegally from Kazaa’s site. Aim say they can’t comment on the matter as they’re still in talks with the IFPI.
A source who has worked closely with the BPI says that they initially decided to sue individuals to set an example. The idea was that most people would settle. But, even if an individual paid £3,000 in settlement, it would have cost the BPI at least £3,000 to bring the charge in the first place. If the individual refused to settle, the legal costs would spiral, with little hope for the record industry to recoup the costs since defendants would claim they didn’t have the means to pay. So the BPI found this strategy costly and counterproductive and a source of bad press.
Not only but also, in the current Joel Tenenbaum vs the RIAA case, “If Tenenbaum loses in court, he could be required to pay only minimum damages, which come to $22,500 (£13,600),” says The Guardian, adding:
“The judge in the case, Nancy Gertner, is an activist liberal judge who is openly hostile to record company infringement lawsuits, so I doubt Tenenbaum would be sent to jail. Whatever he can pay wouldn’t even cover the legal costs incurred by the RIAA.
“In other words, the answer to the question of where the money awarded goes is – in the case of lawsuits against individuals – to the lawyers.”
The Guardian – Behind the music: Mystery of the filesharing windfalls, July 30, 2009
implicated in the majority of cases – Kazaa, the RIAA and Jammie Thomas, October 17, 2008
dedicated supporter – Kazaa Krew vs The Pirates, October 28, 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.
July 30th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
You know… there were a couple of artists speaking out at the jammie trial saying how wrong it was (artists of the songs she downloaded).
I don’t see them in the news suing for a piece of those millions she has to pay the lawyers and RIAA.
It’s not like they’ll see it.
Yet the lawyers and RIAA say it’s money belonging to the artists.
These artists only put on a media show. All talk.
if they were the least bit serious they would want that money and go to court and force it.
July 30th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
” if they were the least bit serious they would want that money and go to court and force it. ”
Their contracts are such that they are lucky they can even talk about it.
So, give some of them a break. Just talking about it is a very real risk depending
on their contract. Those contracts are ridiculous, very nearly indentured servitude.
July 30th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Dreddsnik –
I agree with your comment about practically being an indentured servant.
I can’t help but wonder: Who the hell would sign up for that? Only 2 types of people come to mind. Idiots who don’t understand their contract and sign anyway, and (more likely) people who are selling everything but their soul for the chance to make it big and make millions.
Either way, screw ‘em. Not only do I refuse to buy anything under a big label, I refuse to LISTEN to music made under those labels by people who are basically ’selling out’ for the chance to make it big. There are more than enough local and independent artists out there to keep me busy.
July 30th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
Besides the lawyers, there is another obvious group who will benefit. The CEOs are running the music industry into the ground. If they are kicked out or quit voluntarily, they’ll pocket millions in severance packages. What do they care about their own customers?
July 31st, 2009 at 4:58 am
Since now we know were is the money we just have to raid the house of the recording parasites lawers and take all their stuff we can take and destroy what is left. Then we can hire them back to attack to corporate parasites with their own money. Let’s start with the dentist’s home!
“-Always attack the worst bullies first” say my mother.
“-OK! We can do the CEO next!”