Macmaniac said:And to make sure this illegal file sharing is stopped the RIAA announced today that all Legal File purchasing sites will now charge $2 per song, a little thank you from your buddies at the RIAA
musicpyrite said:I've heard the RIAA is charging $2 for every song you downlaod, the way iTunes is starting to look (with up to $2.50 per song) it looks like it's almost cheaper to download music illegaly.
tom.96 said:I actually wrote an essay on this for a Uni degree. Its very interesting - many bands actually like having their music distributed through P2P systems as it spreads the word about them. Many bands also care more about music than money.
I concluded in the essay that the problem would not go away until there was a viable alternative. I reckon iTunes is that alternative, and I will enjoy using it when it comes to Europe.
As for me, well I am an old fashioned record collector and I love vinyl! So I just stick to my old records for now - I don't download any music. I don't even have broadband!
stoid said:It seems like if it is "common knowledge" that artists are getting basically nil from CD sales because of the RIAA, then they really don't take too big of a hit when you illegally download their song. It's just the RIAA that gets hit in the profit. Have you noticed that there are no artists outraged over pirated music? Eminem hasn't done a song about it yet, so obviously he's not too concerned about file traders. I don't see online music tracks having an impact on file traders, and I don't see it having an effect on physical CD sales. I think that the idea of downloading music online is it's own entity that will live or die on the whim of the RIAA's pricing tier. The RIAA is the only corporation I view as inherently more evil than Microsoft. MS just makes crappy products, the RIAA is the most two-faced lie POS I've ever heard of. I hate the RIAA so much that if I were to see an exec, I would spit in his/her face without a second thought.
Calvinatir said:yea, I ran a direct connect Hub on my campus and it was up for 2 years until 3 students went to the Dean and told him about it...totally weak...
themadchemist said:My argument, though, is that the economy is still not great and record sales are one of the first things to go. If you're worried about putting food on the table, then you're probably not going to go out there and buy the latest musical stylings of Britney Spears. That's just a hunch. All these comparisons of record sales to 1998 levels or 2000 levels are just bogus. The RIAA acts as if the only variable there is downloading. I would call a national downturn in the economy a pretty big variable simply to ignore.
Stupidity...You gotta love it.
stoid said:But you can't sue the economy
Sincere said:For all who are disgusted by the RIAA's fear-mongering tactics (that few musicians truly support), check out the great site http://www.downhillbattle.org/ and check out the RIAA radar (http://www.magnetbox.com/riaa/) to check your purchases before you buy them. Every RIAA-member's CD that you buy tells them that you support their lawsuits as each label belonging to the RIAA pays serious dues to be a member of such a horrible organization. Support independant musicians and labels that don't believe in strong-arming the public, artists, and industry collusion. Your purchases make a difference...
--Sincere
if you didn't know, music labels are disgustingly rich...they can cauterize their wounds with cash (similar to the U.S. government, we're losing the war in Iraq? throw cash on it!) they may be losing tons of money per lawsuit, but the mental impact it has on your average computer user is easily worth it. A motivated P2P'r could D/L $500 worth of music in a few hours. Get a couple hundred thousand of them going, and that's big bucks moving around. Now if you could get 50% of them to stop by scaring them with lawsuits, you've saved yourself millions (theoretically) even though u spent several hundred thousand. Unfortunately I don't see their cash well drying up anytime soon.themadchemist said:Fair enough. But at what cost is the RIAA going after 12 year olds? Getting two thousand bucks from some toddler isn't paying the fees for these corporate attorneys.
I'm not questioning that the RIAA is on some sort of symbolic crusade. What I am questioning is the economic justification for it. This endeavor doesn't seem to make sense for the RIAA itself!
stoid said:I hate the RIAA so much that if I were to see an exec, I would spit in his/her face without a second thought.