RIAA Believes The Silent Majority Support Them

from the this-sounds-familiar... dept

There are increasing similarities between SCO and the RIAA these days. Despite the amount of loud backlash to SCO attempt to take down Linux, SCO insisted that it was all orchestrated by a thieving IBM and that “the silent majority” supported them. Now, the RIAA is saying almost exactly the same thing. They’ve come up with their own study, which they say proves the public supports them in their quest to sue their customers. Of course, since the RIAA created the survey themselves, you can imagine how the question was phrased. I’ll take a stab at it: “Do you think the music industry should sue thieves and pirates who are stealing their music, in order to make sure that they can continue to make the music you love?” For someone who doesn’t understand the issues, it’s pretty obvious what they’re going to answer. However, someone else could just as easily turn it around and change around a few loaded words to the other side and ask: “Do you think the music industry is being heavy handed in suing children for millions of dollars, when they just want to be able to listen to a song they love?” I imagine the results would be a bit different. Clearly, these are two extremes, but even a subtler set of questions would yield very different results. When even musicians are saying that the RIAA has gone too far “in their name” you have to wonder if the “silent majority” is really limited to “people related to music industry execs”.

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “RIAA Believes The Silent Majority Support Them”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

No Subject Given

Here’s the big difference between the two. FILE SHARING OFF COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL IS ILLEGAL, AGAINST THE LAW, ETC. Whether you like it or not, the RIAA has the right to sue those people (not the software developers) and they will win (Ignorance is never an excuse of breaking the law).
Whether you agree with what the RIAA is doing, it’s permissable/legal and well within their rights. And don’t agree with it but I don’t agree with a lot of the laws that I’m REQUIRED BY LAW IN THE UNITED STATES to honor.

SCO on the other hand has yet to provide proof that their copyright has been infringed upon.

AMetamorphosis (user link) says:

Re: No Subject Given

A subpoena is not proof.
Especially ones that have been filed improperly.
Do you think it is acceptable for the RIAA to trespass onto your hard drive on mere suspicion of having a copyrighted piece of material ?
Show me some printed proof that using the technology of file sharing or P2P of copyrighted material is illegal.
Every day I send copyrighted material to others through email and this too is a data transmission method.
The RIAA certainly does have the right to attempt to sue … as the American people have the right to disagree and do what is necessary to make changes to the current draconian situation.
Thats the beauty of this country, if I don’t like it, I can work to change it …

Mike (profile) says:

Re: No Subject Given

The issue isn’t one of “right”. Of course they have the right to sue. The issue is one of sound business strategy.

Just because you can do something legally doesn’t mean it’s smart, and doesn’t mean it won’t harm your business. It’s a situation where lawyers are taking over for business people.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: No Subject Given

Thank you Mike for recognizing the difference. I wish some of the other posters would.

A lot of posters/writers are very passionate about the whole file sharing thing but in the end, at least as far as the law goes (currently), it is illegal to duplicate copyrighted material beyond whatever terms the author/owner has permitted.

The RIAA and there approach to putting their head in the sand isn’t a sound approach to business but as a monopoly, they can currently take this tact and get away with it. Until another competitive business pops up in their place they can continue this indefinitely.

Right now no one has that alternative. I’ve watch a number of people talk about how the companies should exploit this file sharing capability ‘somehow’ but no one has come up with a viable method for doing this. I mean any of the music companies or anyone on these many boards bemoaning the file sharing thing. Until someone show the companies (or artists) how they can make as much (no actually more) money than they do now, it’s not in the companies or the artists best interest to change anything.

Downloads appear to becoming more acceptable to the companies but I suspect the DRM they are applying to the files will make them too much of pain to work with and result in a continued downward spiral of sales.

Between the lack of new artists that I enjoy and the copy protection schemes that are being attempted on CDs these days, I’ve pretty much relagated myself to buying older used CDs … which again is costing the music companies business.

Your right Mike, they aren’t getting it but other than apple’s Itunes, I haven’t seen anyone close to getting it right … and even itunes has an issue or two.


Anonymous Coward says:

Sharing Illegal? Time to move on...

The idotic concept that Sharing is illegal has caused me to move on. I now rip exclusivly from shoutcast/peercast streams. There are plenty of viable alternatives to P2P and since the analog hole can not be plugged, their business model needs to change. If they’re smart, they’ll change so that sharing is an integral part of the entertainment experience.

Here’s a thought for those arguing the copying is illegal party line:

Why can I rent and copy movies but not music CDs?

There are plenty of other countries where CD rentals are legal. I sincerely believe that if CD rentals were wide spread, the whole P2P sharing thing wouldn’t have had the ride it’s enjoying now…. and all you have to do to understand why this is true is look at other countries where CD rentals are legal (and affordable).

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Sharing Illegal? Time to move on...

yo, legally you CAN’T copy movies. Read the copyright they play in front of the movie. THOU SHALL NOT COPY.

VCRs are such a common place in our life that we think because they exist, that copying must be legal. It is as long as the material copyright permits it. Virtually none do.

This is another good analogy. A VCR’s function allows you to break the law and copy movies. However, it serves a legit purpose and therefore is available to the consumer. P2P software needs to establish they same beachhead in order to avoid being sued out of existance. Right now, there isn’t an overwhelming LEGAL use of the software.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...