Is The RIAA Suing For Uploading Or Downloading?

from the does-it-matter? dept

An interesting sleight of mouth from the RIAA’s Cary Sherman. All of the various file sharing lawsuits they’ve filed so far (to my knowledge) have been about people who were sharing files for others to download. That’s what they’re able to get them on, and they make the case that those individuals are illegally distributing copyrighted files – not that they were taking unauthorized files. Those who simply download and make sure whatever program they’re using doesn’t upload have been safe. However, in answering questions about the legal attacks, Sherman repeatedly says that these lawsuits are targeting “downloaders”. From a publicity standpoint, this makes sense. Most file sharers identify with the downloading part – and not the uploading part. However, it’s not being very honest – but this is the entertainment industry we’re talking about. Also interesting is his note that the “average” number of songs for those sued in the latest round was 837 (they say downloads, but I’m sure they mean songs). That number seems to be getting lower and lower. Meanwhile, the article also quotes someone saying that they still download just as much – they’re just much more careful about how they do it. Apparently, the RIAA’s legal education campaign has succeeded in teaching people about how to cover their tracks and find better ways to download the music they want. In the meantime, since I still refuse to use any file sharing applications, I find myself still buying less music. Just last night I was going through a catalog from a small (one man) indie distributor of CDs, and I was looking up the bands he recommended on the web. Many of them did offer free MP3s – which helped me decide if I wanted to buy their CDs or not. A few didn’t, and they simply were crossed off the list. It seems pretty clear in this case that free MP3s work pretty well as promotional material to me, but the RIAA still refuses to see that.

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 “Is The RIAA Suing For Uploading Or Downloading?”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
1 Comment
Anonymous Coward says:

No Subject Given

Only problem with groups offering free downloads is that it may or may not be symbolic of the rest of the material on the disc/collection. I have a few CDs collecting dust that I bought after hearing a groups one or two ‘hits’ that were getting play time only to find out that the ‘hits’ in no way reflected their normal range of music.

I still like the itunes model where you can get a 30 second sample of each song. Wind up with a lot less ‘one hit wonders’ that way. And if I like the one hit, I can download it singly.

As for the RIAA persuing uploaders versus downloaders versus number of songs, etc. I would love to see one of these cases go to court and take a hard look at the evidence they are presenting.

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...