Sign a petition to help stop the RIAA's war

[Veracohr]

http://www.eff.org/share/petition/ The Electronic Frontier Foundation has a petition to send to Congress regarding the RIAA. They had a goal of 10,000 signatures, and I was #18,690 when I signed it about ten minutes ago. Please sign if you are concerned with the RIAA targeting it's customers. Here's the text of the petition: [quote] To The United States Congress: We are the customers and former customers of the member labels of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). We love music and will gladly pay a fair price for it, but we are outraged by the RIAA's tactics in suing ordinary Americans for filesharing. We condemn the RIAA's choice to force the family of a 12 year-old girl to forfeit $2,000 - money that could have gone to feed, clothe and educate this honor student. We stand with the retirees, parents, children and others who have been caught in the RIAA's line of fire. We respect reasonable copyright law, but we strongly oppose copyright enforcement that comes at the expense of privacy, due process and fair application of the law. We urge you, as our representatives in Congress, to stop this madness. We oppose the recording industry's decision to attack the public, bankrupt its customers and offer false amnesty to those who would impugn themselves. We call instead for a real amnesty: the development of a legal alternative that preserves file-sharing technology while ensuring that artists are fairly compensated. In signing this petition, we formally request that the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), as representatives of the public interest, be included in any upcoming hearings regarding the proper scope of copyright enforcement in the digital age. We sincerely thank you for your time. [/quote]

[doug osborne]

I signed it. I don't know if the EFF is the best choice to represent my views, and I don't believe you can legislate a business plan, but it's a good plank in the platform.

[Shayne White]

I signed the petition! It's probably not strictly necessary at this point because they have over 10,000 signatures, but it's good to let Congress know that we care! :D Shayne

[Dak Lander]

I signed up too & they were landing about a sign up per second average while was there. I refreshed several time to watch it. As to the signatures I noticed there were lots of asterisks in the names so hopefully those who didn't want their names posted actually used a bonified name & not some California Drivers License Totin' Illegal Alien's. :D

[Addix Metzatricity]

Yep. I signed too. Woohoo!

[Brendan Orr]

I signed the petition, but not just that, I joined. Though I would still like to see them go after the MPAA. While more passive, they still are hurting the average person

[Jotown]

I did not sign it. Though I am not crazy about the RIAA's tactics, I believe that they don't have much choice. They have to protect the interests of the artists that they represent. And it's not like they are going after innocent people. Only people who are stealing music.

[eh steve]

mp3/ isn't that like recording the radio?

[Gtoledo3]

I, for one, am GLAD they put away that hardened bitch. ;)

[Jotown]

[quote]Originally posted by StrongBad: [b]mp3/ isn't that like recording the radio?[/b][/quote]Yeah.... It's exactly like that. :rolleyes: Just recording off the radio and then sharing it with a few million of your closest friends. :D

[Philip OKeefe]

[quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b]I did not sign it. Though I am not crazy about the RIAA's tactics, I believe that they don't have much choice. They have to protect the interests of the artists that they represent. And it's not like they are going after innocent people. Only people who are stealing music.[/b][/quote]Just a small correction - the RIAA does not, nor has it ever, "protect the interests of the artists they represent". They do not represent artists. The don't even represent the record industry as a whole. They represent major labels. Which is not the same thing. I am a BMI affiliated and published songwriter. I'm a studio owner and producer. I've never gotten a SINGLE DIME from "taxes" the RIAA pushed through on blank media - even though I (legitimately) use blank media like crazy (back it up or it doesn't exist). So, in a nutshell, I PAY them just so I can use CD-R's in the course of everyday business. If I was an indie label, I'd REALLY be ticked off about stuff like that - they use blank media, and some of the money goes to their competition? I know copyrights are important, and people have a right to get paid for their work. However, I have no love for the RIAA and many of their tactics, and they do not represent me. And *I* am a part of the "recording industry". I'll check out the link tomorrow and decide at that time if I am going to sign the petition or not.

[Brad Blackwood_dup1]

[quote]Originally posted by Philip O'Keefe: [b]I've never gotten a SINGLE DIME from "taxes" the RIAA pushed through on blank media - even though I (legitimately) use blank media like crazy (back it up or it doesn't exist). So, in a nutshell, I PAY them just so I can use CD-R's in the course of everyday business. [/b][/quote]If I'm not mistaken, Phil, that tax is only on media labelled 'audio' for 1X consumer cutters. If you use a professional unit or burner in your computer and buy blank media not specified for audio, the RIAA doesn't see any of it...

[Shayne White]

That's right. If you buy "Data CD-Rs" you're not paying any money to the RIAA. I always buy Data CD-Rs for this reason. And yes, the RIAA is not looking after the interests of the artists -- the artists never see a penny. The RIAA looks after themselves and the big labels, who get rich off of other people's work. Shayne

[Barandine Vondenger]

YOu can sign a MILLION times a million times and it WILL MAKE NO DIFFERENCE no matter who says IT WILL. sorry. THE GUBMENT is allowing this to happen cause they get a chunk of all moneys. NOT enough BIG biz folkes will fuss to change anything. This is an assault on the COMMON MAN(as evidenced by who the BASTARDS, CHOOSE to PROSECUTE.) YOU HAVE TO SAY NO MORE! DRAW A LINE in the SAND and SAY: "NO GODAMN IT" !almost homeless women,TWELVE year old girls and old granpas and DUMBASS spoiled college punkes will GET the MONEY and PLEAD GUILTY, THUS SETTING A PRECEDENT from which ALL FURTHER CASES WILL BE JUDGED FROM. A not so young hip guy such as myself would TELL THEM in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS to come and ATTEMPT to TAKE some money from me. I would fight it till I died and they WOULD NEVER SEE a DIME or I would stay in jail till I was ninety rather than seeing them collect a cent. I would hire ERIN BROKAVICH to help me. I would carry TWO POCKETS of rocks for throwin'. if any of those HIGH PRICED LAWYERs had any balls at all they would TAKE these cases on FOR FREE. A TWELVE YEAR OLD GIRL and old folkes who ARE TERRORIZED by these BASTARDS will pay. STUPIDLY and fearfully. but that will STILL PAY and shake every time they see a cop. THEY would TRY it on me and uh, I would do a little TERRORIZING of my own right back. THEY would SEND PUNKE COPS to arrest me and oh boy the fire works would start then boy'o! oh no they won't, cause they don't wish to GET FOLKES who are able to and WHO WOULD FIGHT THEM TOOTH AND NAIL. fok them bastards. YOU dumbasses are wasting your times signing shit. JUST throw a rock through their windows or flip their cars over or do SOMETHING to make them realize they FOKKED up messin with us. STRINGING up one or two of them bastards in CHARGE of this operation in the PUBLIC SQUARE will give THEM A MESSAGE they won't soon forget. . DON'T PAY A DIME YOU GODDAMN FOOLS! FIGHT INSTEAD! you are fighting for your lives whether you know it or not. they want MONEY and convictions?? give them LEAD or STEEL instead. "JUST SAY NO" TO GOVERNMENT SANCTIONED ANAL RAPE.. .

[Jotown]

[quote]I know copyrights are important, and people have a right to get paid for their work. However, I have no love for the RIAA and many of their tactics, and they do not represent me. And *I* am a part of the "recording industry". [/quote]I have made it clear on every post I have made on this subject that I also: "have no love for the RIAA and many of their tactics". However they do represent the artists on those labels. I have yet to see one of those artists say that they are against what the RIAA is doing. Why do you think that is so?

[george costanza]

Ignoring for the moment any contentions of who's right, how effective could we expect a petition to Congress to counteract the methods of a powerful big business group to be? I'd suggest that the answer is, "Not very".

[djwayne]

I was told back when I bought my pro recording equipment, a fee was added onto the equipment to cover any royalties of recordings I would make, and because I was buying pro equipment, I wouldn't have to worry about a thing concerning royalties. The fees were paid at the time of the sale, and now they want more. There was never any clear explanation of the fees or the rights, and I think that maybe a re-fund is due, if the fees do not get paid to the artists for royalties. I think this really needs to be cleared up.

[Jotown]

I don't understand why we are muddling this whole thing up with all of these ancillary issues. This is supposed to be about file sharing, and what is a reasonable response to it. If you buy a 50 disc spindle of blank CD's at Best Buy for 20 dollars, do you really think that there is room in that price to pay the artists a royalty for the potential of over 10.000 .mp3's you could download and burn to that media? In light of this; what does anyone think a reasonable response by the record industry should be against the damage that unabated file sharing is doing to their business?

[Tedly Nightshade]

An honorable response would be hari kari. Too much to hope for, I know. Not like the record industry never ripped anybody off.

[Jotown]

Of course they do. But that doesn't make it right for us to screw the artists' also. In the end it is about our own accountability or lack thereof. Blaming someone else's bad behavior for our own indiscretions is a very irresponsible reaction.

[Tedly Nightshade]

I've always been tempted to steal a record and then pay the artist cash. We need to differentiate between the rights of individual humans and the rights of corporations. then, there may be hope.

[Jotown]

For the record: I have been screwed out of money by; BMI, ASCAP, a couple of Major Labels as well as a few independents. I have also been ripped off by artists and clients whom I have produced. Yet I still don't feel that I now have the right to rip off somebody else; Whether a coropration or an individual.

[djwayne]

[quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b]I don't understand why we are muddling this whole thing up with all of these ancillary issues. This is supposed to be about file sharing, and what is a reasonable response to it. If you buy a 50 disc spindle of blank CD's at Best Buy for 20 dollars, do you really think that there is room in that price to pay the artists a royalty for the potential of over 10.000 .mp3's you could download and burn to that media? In light of this; what does anyone think a reasonable response by the record industry should be against the damage that unabated file sharing is doing to their business?[/b][/quote]Why muddle it up ?? Because this issue was supposed to be resolved with tacking on fees to blank media and recording equipment years ago. Too bad they're now trying to charge double for the same right. It's not the consumer's fault the royalty system didn't pay out like it was supposed.

[Philip OKeefe]

Jotown, I did see that comment in your post, and I know where you're coming from. STEALING IS WRONG. Period. I totally agree. My comment got a bit heavy handed - not intended towards you though. I just think the RIAA is a different entity than "artists". They are interested in the interests of the labels, which is definitely NOT the same thing as the interests of the artists signed to those labels. I know some people who are signed to major label contracts who have been treated very well and quite fairly, but I also know of people (far more) who have been screwed by said labels. Look at a typical major label contract sometime. Artists get paid only on a percentage of units sold, there's holdbacks for "returns" and "breakage" and all sorts of other things. Labels typically take a percentage of the publishing, even if they don't act in the typical "publisher" role. Accounting is oftentimes a slight of hand shell game, and if an artist directly requests an audit they risk repercussions (hint - go through Harry Fox). In short many / most contracts are heavily weighted in favor of the labels... and considering that they take the majority of the finiancial risks, that is justified... although not nearly in terms of how hevily weighted the contracts are in the label's favor... but there's nothing that artists can really do to change things, since some dumb schmucks are always willing to sign nearly anything. Anyway, whatever the RIAA does doesn't justify illegal file sharing activity. But the blame is part theirs for the current fiasco. They have gouged consumers for years on CD prices. We were told it was due to the initial start up / developemtn costs when CD's were first introduced, but the prices never dropped. The labels loved cashing in when everyone converted their vinyl collections to CD's back in the 80's and 90's, and they didn't really spend any of the windfall on artist development, investment in new technology (they could easily have developed legal online file purchasing methods a long time ago) or anything else that would have really mattered in terms of their long term survival. And along comes other competition for the consumer's entertainment dollar (DVD's, game systems, etc.) which further takes a bite out of their business... And if you ask the majority of the consumers, they'll tell you that little of what's out there appeals to them. Yet labels still are looking for the megastar homerun hits, while 9/10ths of the products they sell fail to recoup budgets. Do you think any other industry would long survive if they lost money on the majority of their projects? Maybe it's time to look into offering a wider variety of stuff, with lower, realistic budgets, that is target marketed specifically to the individual markets. But no... the labels want to keep marketing to the 12-25 year olds exclusively. Okay, I'm sorry - enough ranting. It just amazes me how an industry can be so inept, so locked into yesterday's paradigms. Yes, stealing is very wrong. But if we could wave a magic wand and stop all file sharing right now, we'd still be left with an industry in crisis. I find it very hard to be sympathetic. Over file sharing, sure... over their current problems, far less so, since they are not all due to file sharing. At least from my POV. YMMV.

[Matt.Hepworth]

Hmmmm... well, I won't be signing either. On a good note, CD prices are taking a good drop October 1st.

[MattC]

I did not sign. The wording of that petition seems so painfully "knee-jerk" that I doubt that even with a quorum of the country signing it, anyone could take it seriously. (could clothe and feed the honor student? I always look away when a petition tries to make me feel bad.) [quote] I don't understand why we are muddling this whole thing up with all of these ancillary issues [/quote]My suggestion for the new forum name!

[Jotown]

[quote]Yet labels still are looking for the megastar homerun hits, while 9/10ths of the products they sell fail to recoup budgets. Do you think any other industry would long survive if they lost money on the majority of their projects?[/quote]I first was given the statistic that 9 out of 10 records lose money way back in 1977. The president of ABC records revealed to me that if he threw 9 out of 10 demo's into the trash it wouldn't hurt his chances of success at all. My point being that this whole "the majors suck man!" is not a new concept. As I stated in my previous post; I am one of those folks who has gotten screwed by labels more than once. I understand why all of those stars wind up on "Where are they now?" I know the in's and out's of a major record contract and how it is geared to take as much as possible from the artist. Still, muddling up the waters only make a fuzzy picture that much more blurry. We should stick to the main issue; even if it is certain that we will still probably disagree around here. Until the majority of people get that infringing on an artists ability to earn an income ulitimately hurts the artist the most. Even if he is signed to an "Evil" :evil: record label.

[Dan South]

[quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b] [quote]Originally posted by StrongBad: [b]mp3/ isn't that like recording the radio?[/b][/quote]Yeah.... It's exactly like that. :rolleyes: Just recording off the radio and then sharing it with a few million of your closest friends. :D [/b][/quote]What's wrong with THAT? Your million friends don't have access to radios? What's wrong with sharing something that's free to begin with?

[Jotown]

[quote]Originally posted by Dan South: [b] [quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b] [quote]Originally posted by StrongBad: [b]mp3/ isn't that like recording the radio?[/b][/quote]Yeah.... It's exactly like that. :rolleyes: Just recording off the radio and then sharing it with a few million of your closest friends. :D [/b][/quote]What's wrong with THAT? Your million friends don't have access to radios? What's wrong with sharing something that's free to begin with?[/b][/quote]Stolen isn't free. Someone had to pay to create it, distribute it, and even buy the original CD to rip. Your response hits the crux of the whole issue. Music is not free unless the artist decides to give it away. If the artist hasn't done that you are stealing his work. I know that you know this and are just being argumentative. Right? :confused: :D

[Veracohr]

I didn't intend to start a political thread, so I hope the arguments don't go so far the thread gets deleted for being "political". Unless "political" means "Iraq" for the purposes of the ban. I just wanted to let y'all know about the opportunity to sign the petition. :)