Groups attack RIAA video
p2pnet.net News:- For years p2pnet has been criticizing spurious entertainment and software cartel pseudo-educational programs which attempt not merely to implant false standards, but also outright lies, into the heads of children around the world.
Now a number of public interest organizations have in a joint statement vigorously attacked Campus Downloading, a Big Four Organized Music video travesty fronted by EDUCAUSE vp Mark Luker and the Big Four’s RIAA.
An appallingly blatant example of pure corporate music industry mis- and disinformation “baloney,” it purports to ‘instruct’ students about copyright law.
Reacting to the huge and continuing storm of criticism it’s attracted, “First, we were told we should not enforce our rights,” said an RIAA spokesman quoted in a CNET News story. “Now we are told education is wrong, too. We won’t accept such a do-nothing approach. We’ll continue to work with respected higher-education groups to engage students to think critically about these issues.”
For “respected higher-education groups” read Joint Committee of the Higher Education and Entertainment Communities (JCHEEC), a wholly vested interest promotional outfit jointly headed by Penn State president Graham Spanier (who features in the video) and RIAA spin doctor Cary Sherman, and dressed up as a genuine ‘educational’ resource.
However, the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA), Home Recording Rights Coalition (HRRC), Public Knowledge and Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) have denounced the RIAA’s back to school propaganda blitz as inaccurate, self-contradictory, and a, “disservice and embarrassment to the respectable institutions that [the] RIAA Recording Industry Association of America) has enlisted”.
In their statement, Gary Shapiro, president and ceo of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) and chairman of the Home Recording Rights Coalition (HRRC); Gigi Sohn, president and co-founder of Public Knowledge and Edward Black, president and ceo of Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) say:
“The RIAA back to school message is ‘Beware of anything free.’ Ironically, it applies most aptly to the free ‘educational’ DVDs that [the] RIAA is peddling to students and to the bogus legal advice on [the] RIAA’s ‘Campus Downloading’ website.
“Those who have cooperated with the RIAA in distributing this information should take a closer look at the inaccuracies, distortions and contradictions in the RIAA message.”
An RIAA FAQ dismisses the copyright law’s Fair Use doctrine, “as applying only to productive or scholarly works,” the joint statement says, continuing that it suggests that, contrary to explicit Supreme Court precedent, Fair Use has no application to the home recording of entire works.
“The RIAA’s free DVD, however, says that it is OK to make a CD copy for yourself, but is criminal to do so for a friend,” say the public interest groups. “If there is no Fair Use for home recording, why is it OK to make the copy for yourself?
Because Mitch Bainwol, RIAA’s president, testified in Congress that he does this, and [the] RIAA’s legal counsel told the Supreme Court in the Grokster case that he thinks it is OK?
Or because the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 (AHRA) prohibits any copyright suit for such “first generation” recordings? But if so -
Why did [the] RIAA and its members sue XM Satellite Radio over devices that make only personal, first generation recordings, and,
Where in the AHRA, or in any court decision, does it say that purely personal recordings are legal, burning or emailing a single song for a friend or family member is criminal?”
Shapiro, Sohn, and Black also emphasised in an August 28 editorial in the Greenville, MS Delta Democrat Times:
If (the RIAA’s interpretation of the law) is correct, the law makes pirates of everyone who has ever recorded onto a cassette any song from a 45 RPM or 331/3 RPM record. If you’ve done this, you’re a pirate, says the RIAA. The only reason you haven’t been sued is the industry can’t trace your practices through a computer. … It apparently hasn’t occurred to the industry that many of the people who download songs do so because they want to sample the music before they buy it. In the past, they had radio for this, but … corporate influence has cut radio playlists to a limited number of songs and has narrowed the types of music that can be played ….
“Shapiro, Sohn and Black also stated that they fully support the idea of copyright education,” says the statement, adding:
“They believe any copyright education campaign that includes information about consumer rights and responsibilities should be factually and legally accurate and should be developed by a neutral party.
“The association and organization heads also noted that large amounts of content are posted free on-line by new artists under ‘Creative Commons’ licenses. They said RIAA’s denigration of anything shared for free is not only inaccurate, but is also dismissive and disparaging of the young artists that the music industry purports to want to nurture and protect. They called on RIAA, and on the respectable institutions that have cooperated with its “education” campaign, to revise the “educational” website — http://www.campusdownloading.com/dvd.htm# — and to recall their free’ DVDs.”
(Cheers, Daniel)
Also See:
outright lies – Canada’s Captain Copyright, June 1, 2006
joint statement – Back to School with Baloney; RIAA ”Education” Campaign Peddles Fiction, August 30, 2006
Campus Downloading – RIAA video debacle, August 24, 2006
CNET News – RIAA copyright education contradictory, critics say, August 30, 2006
wholly vested interest – GAO p2p ‘file sharing’ controversy, July 26, 2006
p2pnet newsfeeds for your site.
rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss
Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
August 31st, 2006 at 7:51 pm
As for the beware od ‘free’ comment from the media cartel, well it’s nit entirly inaccurate:
beware ‘free’ advise from corporations or their front organizations;
beware ‘free’ press releases from corporations or their front organizations; (news reporting by press release anyone?)
beware of ‘free’ content players from corporations or their front organizations; (sony’s new motto: got rootkit?)
bassically beware of anything comming from corporations or their front organizations, whether written, pressed (cd/dvd), verbally ejected or otherwise;
August 31st, 2006 at 7:52 pm
sigh,
regarding the spelling ,istakes in the above post:
I can spell, I can’t type!!!
August 31st, 2006 at 9:26 pm
Good work, Jon. Can’t wait until EFF gets a hold of that video.
August 31st, 2006 at 11:09 pm
In all fairness, Jake Roth’s comments on technical issues, and Dr. Graham Spanier’s (Ph.D. in sociology) comments on the impact on school administration, are worth watching, despite the context.
Beware their hidden little legal assumptions, however, which they are not qualified to make. For instance, Roth says ‘illegal’ instead of ‘unlicensed’ downloading– a legal conclusion. Later, Spanier implies schools, as ISPs, are ‘obligated’ to comply, as though by statute, with John Doe subpoenas. More likely, ISPs enter into secret agreements to avoid frivolous but costly indirect infringement lawsuits, or at the very least, are coerced by the lingering threat of such lawsuits.
Also, hey, the first 1:17 of the video is pretty darn good.
> Can’t wait until EFF gets a hold of that video.
I, too, snickedly anticipate the “scholarly and productive” parody… or two… or twenty… that will come of this.
I imagine a simple response: Perhaps someone will take a video camera to a law school, and ask real students and knowledgeable faculty the same questions about unlicensed downloading. It’s stand in start contrast to this video, in which no speaker is qualified to address the legal controversy, or even admits a controversy exists!
(A controversy, by definition, has more than one side.)
September 1st, 2006 at 4:55 am
There is so much baloney in these “messages” one could open a delicatessen. The cartels are doing everything possible to lay to the grave the idea of fair use. Fair Use gets in the way of profit.
The courts have long ago ruled that Fair Use has legal standing. That’s why copies for backup can be burned, it has nothing to do with whether the approval is there by the cartels. The whole copyright infringement by p2p is a very grey area because this has not been addressed. Instead, the cartels made an end run around it by getting the DMCA passed. A law that may well be illegal once Fair Use comes into the picture. What DMCA allows is criminality for breaking digital locks. Locks that were put in place to prevent Fair Use without having to go get legal authorization for support. In otherwords, an end run around the law. Fair Use also allows you to record from the broadcasted air waves, regardless of whether the cartels approve or not.
Still it is the public stance of the cartels and their lapdog the RIAA that this should be illegal and that making copies for Fair Use is proclaimed infringement without getting into mentioning the Fair Use in their “Educational Messages”. You can trust this bunch about as much as you can trust a cobra at your feet.
September 1st, 2006 at 8:49 am
> The courts have long ago ruled that Fair Use has legal standing.
Not that the courts even need to make such a ruling. The fair use exception to copyright infringement is EXPLICITLY set forth in the federal statute on copyright. In other words, fair use is built directly into United States copyright law.
Better yet, the fair use statute sets forth a highly flexible four-pronged test to distinguish infringing uses from fair uses. So, fair use is not necessarily limited to either “scholarly,” “productive,” or other foreseeable uses, and can potentially extend to many uses that have not yet been truly tested at trial. (Uses like, duh, file sharing.)
September 3rd, 2006 at 3:23 am
LOL
Good one.