RIAA Talks About Network Filters

Motley Fool Trolls for Music Pirate Traffic With Hack Business Sense

Cayocosta

Want easy traffic? Publish some pro-piracy dreck.

(Of course, no media outfit online is going to defend artists and the industry against piracy because that would result in the loss of the free-music advocate portion of their readership via boycott.)

"RIAA Blasts Its Customers, Again"

Let's get this straight once and for all, music pirates aren't customers.

Common sense dictates that should the RIAA cease going after people for piracy, the result would be that music would be considered free to download - greatly accelerating the decline in CD sales - and the industry would face imminent bankruptcy.

Representing the fight against piracy as resistance to technological innovation is ridiculous.

Motley Fool publishes this populist anti-RIAA nonsense for one reason - to lure traffic. However, it comes at the expense of their reputation for sound business and investment advice.

Washington Post Corrects Marc Fisher's RIAA Hit Piece

From Washington Post:

A Dec. 30 Style & Arts column incorrectly said that the recording industry "maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer." In a copyright-infringement lawsuit, the industry's lawyer argued that the actions of an Arizona man, the defendant, were illegal because the songs were located in a "shared folder" on his computer for distribution on a peer-to-peer network.

Link

RIAA Brief: Washington Post Gets It Wrong

From La Shawn Barber:

According to the brief, the authorized copies Howell made became unauthorized copies once Howell put them in a shared folder, presumably the Kazaa shared folder. I mentioned in the previous post that a “consummated transfer” wasn’t necessary for a violation to have occurred, according to the RIAA. If you rip a CD and place the MP3s into a folder to which only you have access, the copies are authorized. If the files are in a shared folder, they’re “available” to third parties, which is a copyright violation.

Link

RIAA Brief Misinterpreted

From Nick Mokey, Digital Trends News:

A widely misinterpreted RIAA brief has caused a major stir, but does not say that making copies of CDs for private use is illegal.

A brief filed by the Recording Industry Association of American in the case of Capitol v. Howell set blogs alight this week with cries of unfairness, by those who believed the RIAA was claiming that even private copies of paid-for CDs were illegal. As it turns out, that’s not the full story. A careful examination of the brief shows that the RIAA is taking the same stance it has always taken: sharing music is illegal.

Link

Why Music-Piracy and DRM Ultimately Don't Matter

Cayocosta

With all the conjecture regarding the new-music model lately, it struck me as strange that no one appears to be considering where we’re really headed, and what the implications for the industry might be once we get there. The following is nothing new, yet appears to have been largely misplaced due to the recent resurgence of free-music myopia:

I won't venture to guess when, but it's probably safe to assume that within the next several years, increased wireless bandwidth, reach, and the propagation of wireless Internet devices will facilitate the inexpensive, real-time, high bit-rate, streaming of music just about anywhere; consequently rendering the digital download obsolete, and along with it, any impetus for piracy.

Beyond the iPod:

Rather than downloading and storing files on an iPod or similar device, all that will be necessary for a user to access his or her personal library of music will be the creation of Internet-based play-lists that are universally read by any connected device capable of reproducing sound.

Want to play your music selections at a party? Just access your library URL from the stereo, and from there select one of your play-lists or singles. While driving? Same thing with the radio. While jogging? Same thing with your cell-phone or personal player.

What will these scenarios all have in common? An Internet connection (wireless or land-line) and a subscription to a music streaming service.

Streaming Service:

Containing virtually the entire history of popular music, and paid for by way of monthly plans offered to the consumer by any number of providers, a music streaming service might, for example, charge twenty-dollars per month for unlimited access; and even less under tiered-pricing designed for less frequent users.

ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and Harry Fox:

Under such a system, all royalties generated by personal use (as well as for both terrestrial and Internet radio, potentially) would be accounted for automatically; which raises the ancillary questions of whether or not performance rights organizations will be relevant, and mechanical royalties applicable.

Piracy and DRM:

It follows that due to the convenience, prevalence and anticipated nominal cost of music subscription services, the use of P2P file sharing would drop significantly; if not (for all practical purposes) cease entirely. At such a point, piracy would literally be not worth the while, and likewise the point of DRM, moot.

Furthermore, with parents paying the subscription for the benefit of their households, those who most frequently engage in P2P file-sharing (teens and adolescents) will find themselves having no remaining musical purpose for it; and in essence, they will have been granted their wish - music will be free. Additionally, educational institutions might be offered steep discounts to subscribe their entire campuses, thus finally putting an end to RIAA lawsuits.

Summary:

None of this technology is new, it’s all been around for years. The only barrier to the above scenario becoming reality, is that streaming is not yet convenient enough - for high-speed Internet connectivity is not ubiquitous across all potential listening devices and environments.

Of course, land-line DSL and broadband systems already facilitate streaming - YouTube is a good example, whereby with a reasonably fast connection, playback is both instantaneous and contiguous. However, as land-line access means being physically connected, the application of high bit-rate music streaming is currently limited to (for the most part) these connections. As such, for music streaming to emerge as the new standard of distribution, it must also be viable in everyday mobile situations; therefore broadband wireless Internet access must become prevalent to the point that it becomes commonplace, and the new hardware necessary (wireless car radios, personal players and phones, as well as Internet appliance home stereo and entertainment systems) readily available in the marketplace.

Twisted Logic

Cayocosta

Just read a terribly long-winded, self-indulgent, and extremely half-baked screed lamenting the shutdown of OiNK and blasting the music industry.

Heretofore, I had always considered any free-music argument as worthy of consideration, however; it's not just the sheer inanity of this particular post, but more so what appears after it that will make me think twice going forward.

Link: demonbaby.com/blog/ (objectionable content)

Future Giants

Cayocosta

I writing here to make clear that in my defense of artists and record companies against piracy, I’m not shilling for the RIAA or corporate interests; I’m just a musician and music-fan that tends to get pretty upset when I read so much careless rhetoric espousing piracy; or speculation regarding the future of the music-industry, written by individuals that obviously don’t know what they’re talking about.

Personally, if the music industry were to disappear tomorrow, my world would not be affected in the least; for I haven’t bought a record released after 1980 in more than 10 years. That’s not to say that I don’t buy records - I own over six-hundred - it’s just been a very long time since I’ve felt compelled to purchase new music.

I grew up listening to a wide variety of music (that appeared to be in a constant state of evolution); great music, from truly great artists. (The period from the mid 60’s to mid 70’s was a time of amazing musical diversity and creativity.) Unfortunately, in my opinion (and I’ve thought quite a bit about this) that all came to an end sometime in the late 70’s. (Although I’m not a fan of Elvis; it always seems to me to have coincided with his death.)

As such, my hope is that we’ll eventually experience a renaissance of sorts within popular-music - a new period of musical creativity, diversity and quality that rivals or possibly even exceeds that which came before. However, in my opinion this cannot take place without record companies in the classic sense; because, if for no other reason, music’s future visionaries in the style of Berry Gordy, John Hammond, George Martin, Ahmet Etrtegun, Jerry Wexler, Herb Alpert and Jerry Moss – “behind the scenes” giants responsible for discovering and developing wonderful talent that otherwise may have never surfaced – will have no place.

Therefore, if I’m shilling for anything, it’s the return of great music.