The RIAA needs to be clear about its manifest. The consumers who pay for music to enjoy them and the Artists who made music (composed or played or sang...) must be those benefiting from any action. What the RIAA does by imposing tall fines is to create a deterrent to unlicensed-online-copyrighted-music-file-sharing which it is unable to achieve by other means. There are enough bands who can't reach the public and need to create an audience. The RIAA often claims to protect interest of the artists but I don't see them help upcoming artists who seldom get their albums published. The RIAA is fine with (and does not fine) you if you don't buy music and listen only over radio or live performances. While they have every right in discouraging "theft" of intellectual property, they need to get back to the drawing board and understand how best it can be done. If there is a smart way to reach the music lovers (Apple/iTunes) online and make money, then they should encourage that and pay attention to that. This approach of imposing huge fines just discourages both artists and music lovers. How about shelving the lawyers and actually sending sales guys to the people who are enjoying music after downloading them illegally? How about educating your "customers" and helping them make the right choice? Truth is a lot of this is being done (eg. MoserBaer movie CDs and DVDs.) and is not being given due attention. There are bands who reach out without going through record labels when they haven't yet done a number that is popular. Some of these fines and their amounts are beyond reason. The members of the RIAA have to really work on their customers and increase that base. There's either win-win or lose-lose, the win-lose is lose-lose in camouflage. Just my $0.02.
Quite right. I tried the break-away from pure consumerism by prefixing with 'potential' intending that it applied to anyone. I tried to point out that opinion was free specific to business models. In terms of free speech and therefore the right to influence lawmaking; avoiding rights being withheld for the "consumerism" nature, I agree with you. We should avoid the shift in perspective. Thanks for bringing my thoughts in line.
The potential Buyer being the customer or the consumer has every right to comment on a product or a business model or a concept in any manner of choosing. The potential Seller being the Service Provider has an obligation to listen to these comments.
Those who pay heed to their potential customers serve them better. You can say this of any business. The more comments you have against your offering or positioning or model of selling tells you how you can change to reach a larger customer base.
Most Sales People know that the Customer is always right. It really doesn't work the other away. Almost all products and solutions are market driven. If the market reduces consumption, you lose.
You could apply this to the Music industry or the Movie industry or probably any commercial institution.
How about Drugs, Drunk Driving while browsing the Internet, that'd be really dangerous.
I think parents see how much the Internet costs particularly if you're browsing from home and they think spending all the time (therefore money) on it is a bad idea. IMO, it could keep you away from Drunk Driving and Drugs as much as anything else.
Drugs and Alcohol costs are funneled differently and parents get paranoid only when they learn about it. It's just protectionist fear.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Elrond.
RIAA Penalty, Deterrent, Encouraging Fair use!
The RIAA needs to be clear about its manifest. The consumers who pay for music to enjoy them and the Artists who made music (composed or played or sang...) must be those benefiting from any action. What the RIAA does by imposing tall fines is to create a deterrent to unlicensed-online-copyrighted-music-file-sharing which it is unable to achieve by other means.
There are enough bands who can't reach the public and need to create an audience. The RIAA often claims to protect interest of the artists but I don't see them help upcoming artists who seldom get their albums published. The RIAA is fine with (and does not fine) you if you don't buy music and listen only over radio or live performances.
While they have every right in discouraging "theft" of intellectual property, they need to get back to the drawing board and understand how best it can be done. If there is a smart way to reach the music lovers (Apple/iTunes) online and make money, then they should encourage that and pay attention to that. This approach of imposing huge fines just discourages both artists and music lovers.
How about shelving the lawyers and actually sending sales guys to the people who are enjoying music after downloading them illegally? How about educating your "customers" and helping them make the right choice? Truth is a lot of this is being done (eg. MoserBaer movie CDs and DVDs.) and is not being given due attention. There are bands who reach out without going through record labels when they haven't yet done a number that is popular. Some of these fines and their amounts are beyond reason. The members of the RIAA have to really work on their customers and increase that base. There's either win-win or lose-lose, the win-lose is lose-lose in camouflage. Just my $0.02.
Re: @Claes
Quite right. I tried the break-away from pure consumerism by prefixing with 'potential' intending that it applied to anyone. I tried to point out that opinion was free specific to business models. In terms of free speech and therefore the right to influence lawmaking; avoiding rights being withheld for the "consumerism" nature, I agree with you. We should avoid the shift in perspective. Thanks for bringing my thoughts in line.
Customer and Seller: Customer's always King.
The potential Buyer being the customer or the consumer has every right to comment on a product or a business model or a concept in any manner of choosing. The potential Seller being the Service Provider has an obligation to listen to these comments.
Those who pay heed to their potential customers serve them better. You can say this of any business. The more comments you have against your offering or positioning or model of selling tells you how you can change to reach a larger customer base.
Most Sales People know that the Customer is always right. It really doesn't work the other away. Almost all products and solutions are market driven. If the market reduces consumption, you lose.
You could apply this to the Music industry or the Movie industry or probably any commercial institution.
How about all of these together?
How about Drugs, Drunk Driving while browsing the Internet, that'd be really dangerous.
I think parents see how much the Internet costs particularly if you're browsing from home and they think spending all the time (therefore money) on it is a bad idea. IMO, it could keep you away from Drunk Driving and Drugs as much as anything else.
Drugs and Alcohol costs are funneled differently and parents get paranoid only when they learn about it. It's just protectionist fear.