p2pnet.net:- Following the p2pnet story on the RIAA’s latest effort to bludgeon people into buying ‘product,’ I had several emails wondering why I publish p2pnet.

A couple of them questioned my motifs (to put it politely ; ) and suggested I’m doing this for the money, among other things.

I’d laugh if my lips weren’t so chapped.

heh

Anyway - I posted What p2pnet is about and a couple of the resultant comments were virtual examples of why I put the item up in the first place.

One in particular really lit into me personally and at the same time, tried to paint a picture of the RIAA as a noble institution existing to help all those helpless artists out there.

That is, of course, a load of old bollocks. The RIAA exists to make sure its owners and masters - the members of the Big Four record label cartel - can continue to milk the cash-cow (that’s YOU) for all it’s worth, as they’ve done for decades.

Performers are simply a means to that end and are exploited as much as, if not more than, the ‘consumer’.

Another post pointed out the RIAA ain’t no knight in shining armour.

Jon

Now read on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

To the troll
By Anne Seville

Know what bothers me? Trolls who post asinine comments such as yours.

Your completely missing the point. Artists get paid when they create an album - any money made after that is from being played on the air, on the net, by playing concerts - those are called royalties. You talk about how the RIAA is some knight in shining armour for the artist. Lets look at royalties shall we?

Sound Exchange is the organisation that collects royalties from music broadcast via web, satellite, cable music. Recently sound exchange announced if artists dont come forward and register with sound exchange they will lose anywhere between $10 and $6,000 (depending on the artist). Normally when collecting royalties and subsequently being unable to find the artist the monies are held in trust (refering to a USA law) not with this new american law (passed in the mid 90’s) nooo the RIAA gets to keep millions of dollars in revenue collected as royalties for the artists. I have a real problem with that. How can they know who to give the royalties to but can’t be bothered to find them and pay them?

lets go back a little further in history regarding royalties. Recently the New York state attorney ordered the record companies to pay $50 million dollars in royalties owed to artists after a two year investigation found that the record companies were failing to keep contact with their artists. “Sorry but we just can’t seem to find David Bowie and Willie Nelson is nowhere to be found” what bullshit.

lets go back to the beginning. When radio first appeared about 90 years ago radio stations aired records they had purchased for listeners. At the time you couldn’t record what was aired - you could only LISTEN to it. The RIAA (this was in its infancy) didn’t like the idea that money wasn’t being made from the broadcast of the album. Record companies started to stamp on the labels “not for radio broadcast” to try and stop this new technology from airing its product. Come on how dare anyone air something for free - there HAS to be a way to make money off of this. RIAA lobbied and eventually got their way. Radio stations now had to pay a royalty and they still do. So where was the harm, they were getting free advertising after all. Was this about protecting the artist? No - it was about protecting their bottom line and its been a downward spiral ever since.

For me this isn’t about “theft” of a song. This is about a CORPORATION that is actively lobbying governments around the world to create or modify copyright laws to suit their business INTERESTS. They want you to think it is about creativity and the artist and how concerned they are but the bottom line - truth is this is about MONEY.

If all goes as the RIAA plans in the USA the INDUCE Act will be marshalled in and that iPod you so dearly love? Gone. Streaming radio? Gone. Portable hard drives? Gone. Flickr. Jane magazine. Peer to Peer development kits. XM radio. All gone.

If the RIAA gets its way soon file sharers will go to jail and/or face fines for infringing on intellectual property.

If the RIAA gets its way soon broadcast flag will make it will be illegal to sell devices that can tune in digital television without imposing copy protection on the signal.

Where is the artist in all of this? From where I am standing it is a clear case of a bunch of corporations protecting their self interests. Plain as nose on face. Copyright law isn’t just for recording artists - have you forgotten that? It is also for painters, photographers, writers and anyone else who has created “intellectual property”.

To me this is tantamount to the idea that McDonalds would throw a hissy fit because the world isn’t purchasing 100% Real Beef as their source of ground beef and lobbying governments to force consumers to ONLY buy their product and throwing in a bunch of conditions which prevented the sale of any other ground beef product.

As for what Jon does - hats off to him. It takes time and energy to keep a site going day after day - finding news items worthy of mention. I know i run a blog myself. Most of the time it is a thankless job and trolls like you don’t help one bit. This site reports from the “left” if you don’t like the perspective find a site that reports from the “right” and happy trolling.

==================

See:-

bludgeon people - RIAA sues another 762, p2pnet, September 1, 2004

lit into me - What p2pnet is about, p2pnet, October 1, 2004

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 6th, 2004 at 3:26 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

HOME

Viewed 1561 times