Poor RIAA... RIP


Just ranting a bit about some things that were on my mind lately. Thought I’d put it out there to see what you all thought.

the RIAA isn’t even a single corporation

this will be fun

[should I be glad I haven’t purchased a single physical music cd?]

[that isn’t to say that my music collection is illegal, most of it is recorded from various places]


The mainstream music industry is just a shallow joke anyway…

yeah, i know its not a single corporate entity, but rather an association of all of the recording labels (some good, some bad).

I just get frustrated at the current model and their incessant greediness. I mean greediness to the point of self-destruction over it.

They are crippled in an amazing way by illegal downloads, Steve Jobs brings them a method of recouping some of that loss with iTunes, and the bastards still clamor for more money?! (They want a tiered pricing structure on iTunes).

And for what? doing squat.

all at the cost of the artists whom we want to hear. sad.

Not if you are an entrepreneurial sort who makes music different from the crap available through mainstream channels. It’s an era full of opportunities for creative minds. Support your local bands, they deserve it a lot more than the current flavour-of-the-week pop-tart (ermm… star).

Besides new shit will always rise from old shit so I’m not afraid for them… They’re pretty good at buying each other out or finding somebody new to exploit.

The self-serving zeal of the record industry has created all this problems that now it attemps to stamp down by … growing even more draconian. Way to go. If their business model indeed goes down the drain, serves them well.

They’d be the dog that chases its own tail and bites down on it real hard. But somehow I doubt this will happen anytime soon. The Internet has created new markets, but the old media (newspaper, radio, tv) continues to be tremendously influential.

Still… a man can dream, can’t he?

These are the same people who opposed: playing songs on the radio; having radios in cars; cassette tapes; digital tapes; the iPod. And the list goes on. These morons have been ripping artists off for years, and obstructing the growth of the business since the 1930’s, and they continue to do so today.

You may not realize the extent to which even major artists find themselves in debt to their labels, pinned-down by “expenses” which keep being added to their projects and faced with distribution-reports that quote figures the artists know are way too small, but cannot prove. I think the RIAA hates the Internet most because it is accountable, and because artists can record material themselves and leave the labels only with non-exclusive distribution contracts, which the labels find themselves having no choice but to accept. The money-train has been derailed, and the labels don’t like it. Did you know that every time the Rolling Stones play I Can’t Get No Satisfaction, they don’t get paid one lousy cent? :o

RIAA hates the Internet because, for years and years and years, they told artists that their records were “unmarketable” and took them “out of print” … and here came Napster, moving thousands of copies of damn-near everything. Sure, artists weren’t getting paid like they should be, but dammit, the songs are moving! And the artists asked: “Why? What are these cats doing that you could never do?” Indeed. And here comes iTunes: five million sales on the first weekend?! Some of my friends are songwriters and their checks have gone up tremendously. They’re beginning to wonder for just how many years they’ve been being ripped-off.

Maybe it’s rip-off, and maybe it’s just technology. I think it’s obviously a mixture of both. To me, as to them, it is abundantly clear that the preferred medium of delivery for music is to download it … which has the potential of getting rid of all those pesky CDs and all that warehousing and inventory. In other words, the Apple Music Store is right there, ready to be imitated. But the RIAA insists, stupidly, on calling the whole thing “illegitimate.” They want to stifle success, just like they’ve always done.

Music is fundamentally software, an intangible product, and people are clearly willing to buy it. The most sensible way to distribute “software” is… the Internet. It just so happens that, with this model, you can profitably sell a song for a buck, sell it to anyone anywhere in the world, deliver it instantly, and book nearly all of the revenue that you received as pure profit. The RIAA doesn’t “get it,” but the artists do, and so do the consumers. If the RIAA doesn’t get with the program, they will be replaced. They’re already “obsolete.” The Market Has Spoken. The RIAA isn’t fighting for the artists; it’s fighting well-deserved obsolescence.

here here sundial. spot on!

iTunes is great, but only after I crack the DRM on my legally-purchased songs. Why? Because I want to listen to my music on my:

Portable Audio Player

Not just in iTunes/iPod.

If iTunes removed the DRM, I firmly believe that would be the absolute best way for the recording industry, the music fans, the artists, and Apple to get along nicely.

Right now the only people getting left out in the cold are people like me, I legally purchase all my music and rarely use p2p for anything, I believe in fair use so I crack my songs, rip my DVDs, copy my brother’s CDs (and he copies mine) and I download ROMs from my old genesis games. However I’m the one being treated like a criminal and in the end of the day the guy who’s distributing DVDs and CDs on BitTorrent is still doing it, and getting away with it.

'nuff said sundial, 'nuff said.

untill everyone has an identification, and all devices are online i doubt we will truly see DRM free music.

the thing is i want to buy a song… i don’t want to buy a format.

so i agree with you dittohead. but right now they are “not trusting their consumers” so are inhibiting our rights.

i will never buy any online music untill i know its

A) CD (bit for bit) or better quality

B) DRM free (i can use it on anything)

C) non proprietary format.

D) cheap

till then i only buy second hand cd’s so that the music industry does not get “more” money than they have already earnt.


Note: I don’t support RIAA or DRM or illegal downloads.

While I haven’t really put too much thought into this, I was thinking that if the RIAA had half a brain they would be trying to get a tax put on internet use. If downloading was such a threat I’d have thought they would go after the one unavoidable aspect of it: ie transmitting the files. The whole DRM thing seems kind of pointless especially when linux and mac users and windows users with autorun disabled can ignore most, if not all of the DRM. Sticking a $x tax on bandwidth use over a certain amount and let people download whatever the hell they want seems like a better option than DRM if they’re so keen on “protecting intellectual property”.

No flames please, ^half-arsed thoughts.

By buying lots of 2nd hand cds, you increase the market value and people are more likely to buy 1st hand cds since they know they are going to get a decent return on it if they don’t like it. The whole thing sucks, it’s too damn tricky to support the artists you like. My two favourite bands are under Sony labels. I want to boycott Sony but can’t do it without screwing over the bands.

More half-arsed ideas: bands release music over their own websites. Paypal/direct deposit link. I’d probably hand over more than the price of the cd.

Not a good idea. Then every industry that feels like they are loosing profit because of internet traffic will want a cut.

Great idea. Some artists and indie production companies are already doing this. Support them and let them know this is the only way you will deal with them. Let the majors know as well so they can possibly get a clue (unlikely but WTF).

The problem with the taxation idea is that … telecommunications does not impose any levy based on the “value of” what is being transmitted. The companies which supply bandwidth do not control and are not directly responsible for what is carried along that bandwidth. And, I think that’s the way that it will stay.

There is, I think, a very legitimate issue that has prompted DRM, and a very legitimate reason for it. But these are issues that we’re going to have to figure out and codify into law… no one is going to get anywhere by trying to stuff the genie back into the bottle and calling the electronic distribution of music “illegal.”

What I think will happen is that … artists will begin to proffer materials that do not have DRM-type restrictions, and the consumer will overwhelmingly prefer them, and this will cause DRM to go away. But that may be a few years off yet. Oh well, considerable progress has been made in some areas.

the music industry gets tax paid to them for every Ipod sold in Europe.

this pisses me off as a consumer as i think its illegal to charge tax on somthing you may not do. i would like to be able to prove that all the songs going onto my Ipod are 100% legal, just to waiver the tax.

it was in the hundreds of Euros, their justification was that the Ipod technology was founded on music piracy. IMO its like charge a tax on all VCR’s and giving it to the big studios because the VCR is founded on Movie piracy… WTF

By buying lots of 2nd hand cds, you increase the market value and people are more likely to buy 1st hand cds since they know they are going to get a decent return on it if they don’t like it.

purchase price (in my country) $30-$45 for a cd (with exchangerates that is about 20 USD average cd price rediculous i know)

resale price to a second hand cd store… between $0-6 depending on condition and the band. they then resell it for between $2 and $17.

all the CD’s i buy are between $6 and $8 (about 5 USD) often for 2CD sets.

its absolutly not worth reselling CD’s unless you are selling them directly to someone else. you get about 1/10th the price


There has grown in the minds of certain groups in this country the idea that just because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary to public interest. This strange doctrine is supported by neither statue or common law. Neither corporations or individuals have the right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back.

–Robert Heinlein, Life Line, 1939

Human nature. We’re funny.