HideTechdirt is off for the long weekend! We'll be back with our regular posts tomorrow.
HideTechdirt is off for the long weekend! We'll be back with our regular posts tomorrow.

Recording Industry Freaks Out That XM Users Can Record Music

from the oh-no! dept

The recording industry's lawyers never stop looking to squeeze more money out of everyone, do they? The latest, submitted by Petréa Mitchell, is that they're quite upset about XM launching a mobile device that will let subscribers (yes, the people who already pay) actually record music. So (surprise, surprise) the recording industry is suing XM for not paying them another license on top of the licenses they already pay. They're now asking for $150,000 for every song that a user recorded. All this because XM has helped more people listen to the recording industry's music. If some of this sounds familiar, it's because it's related to what's being discussed in Congress to force satellite radio providers to pay more just because the content can now be recorded to devices. Once again, this is about the recording industry looking to squeeze more money out of a dying business model rather than recognizing these new services help make the recording industry's product much more valuable. XM is positioning this as a new Betamax-style case, with them simply providing the VCR -- which clearly has legal uses. The RIAA's best response, it appears, is "well, we convinced other suckers to pay up, so XM should too." Not particularly convincing.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    MrScott, 16 May 2006 @ 8:08pm

    Times are changing!

    I, for one, can fully agree with Manedible, saying that the artist should be compensated for their work. I agree with that whole-heartedly. BUT...since times (and technology) has changed, maybe...looking to other resources to distribute your music, art, movies..whatever the case may be, instead of going through the major labels, is the way to go.

    Think back when the big labels were born. They were born to help distribute the artist's work. There was no other option to get this done back then. Most of us didn't have the internet to distribute our work, let alone know what that was, or have the means to get our work out to the public. It's funny how people won't take the time to research how to find other means of getting it out to the public, so they just rely of the big labels to do the work for them.

    Here's an old business cliche'...if you want to make money, you gotta *spend* money. Think about that for a minute. Think about making a web site (or something similar) where you have to pay to download. I know there's plenty of sites like that making a good profit AND the artists are still making money at the same time. Problem solved? I don't think so! Seems that the *AA's want to get their greedy little grubby hands on ALL music and ALL video content and make MORE money off it. That's the bottom line. Times have changed and they *refuse* to adapt to it, and end up suing the people that have supported them for years. Kinda like something my father told me as a child...NEVER bite the hand that feeds you!

    Until the labels adapt to the changing times and technology, this battle will never end!

Add Your Comment

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



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown for basic formatting. (HTML is not supported.)
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Techdirt Logo Gear
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.