The RIAA Took My Baby Away

Yup, a Ramones reference. I'm sure old!

Found this blog today. It provides updates on current file-sharing lawsuits the Recording Industry Associaton of America (RIAA) has launched against private citizens who uploaded music onto peer-to-peer (P2P) networks, allegedlly infringing on the copyrights of the RIAA. As you might have guessed from the title, Recording Industry vs The People (RITP) is very anti RIAA.

Most people who know me know that I'm not a big fan of P2P downloading. Yes, I make CDs for friends, and I receive CDs from friends too. Word of mouth has always been a necessary component of the industry, one that the record companies can't eveer seem to get their heads around (remember the attempted levy on blank cassettes in the mid-90s?).

Now, had somebody gone ahead and created 4,000 tapes and distributed them to anyone he or she could find, I would have had a problem with that. And we all know that there are at least a couple of more than 4,000 people downloading not only entire albums but entire discographies every day, with not a whit of money going to the companies that, as much as it sucks to say it, deserve the money.

Believe it or not, that's not what I wanted to discuss today. I'm actually pretty tired of arguing the ethics of downloading (SUPER SECRET HIDDEN MESSAGE: NOT INTERESTED IN THAT TODAY, SO LET'S MOVE FORWARD, MMMMMMMMMKAY?). What I WANT to talk about, and have hopefully provided adequete background for, is what I think of the RIAA's lawsuits.

Would you believe me if I said I thought they were a bad idea?

Please note that I didn't say I thought they were unjustified or even illegal (although some of their tactics are pretty frightening, according to RITP). What the lawsuits are, however, is a bellow and a swipe from a dinosaur going down into a tar pit: a scary and potentially damaging threat, but one you know can't last too long. (Oh, and the dinosaur part shows that the RIAA is behind the times. Wanted to make sure that's obvious.)

For one, let's look at general perception. Even before the lawsuits, record execs were considered to be evil parasites digging their claws into the backs of the artists, altering records to attract more sales and signing and dropping artists on a whim. You never, EVER heard someone outside speak well of execs: opinions from the general public were either neutral or negative. And it wasn't even the public they were screwing (much; when average CD prices climbed above the $20 mark in the early 2000's, the protest was so great that one company marked all their new product back to $15, and the rest followed suit. Only know that 'cause I was working at a record store at the time).

So now, already holding (at best) a -25% rating with the people, the RIAA is going after the people. Yep, that's going to encourage a LOT of people to stay on their side and keep paying them for music. My favourite was this case , where the RIAA accused a private citizens of file sharing a few songs. Not many, just a couple. Turns out the person was a disabled single mother who, through the untraceable wonder that is an IP Address, was registered as downloading/uploading such family friendly tunes as "Hoes In My Room" despite the fact that nothing was on her PC indicated she had EVER shared ANYTHING. So of course, the RIAA pressed forward, of course, the case got thrown out, and OF COURSE, the mother is countersuing and the RIAA looks like a demon. An incompetent, foolish, somewhat amusing demon. The RIAA looks like a demon played by Curly of the Three Stooges.

Wow, maybe I should get back to the dinosaur simile from before before going to a demon metaphor. OK, so why a dinosaur? The RIAA is acting just like the recording industry always does when faced with something it can't control immediately; grinding its heels an calling foul. It did it in the 90s with blank tapes, too. And as long as it keeps this up, it's going to be behind the 8-ball.

Think about it: the first MP3 encoding program came out in 1994, creating a fourth media family for audio (vinyl, tape, disc and digital). Difference is, the industry does not control the device needed to play the medium: everyone already has a computer. Seven years later came a file sharing program, Napster, that took control of the MP3s right out of the industry's hands. Where was the industry in those seven years? Why were they not the ones developing and testing this BRAND NEW MEDIUM, making it work for them, creating a SALES system that they could control? Searched the interwebs, couldn't find an answer. I guess they were boosting CD prices, signing boy bands and girl singers, and thinking that everyone was going to have CDs forever.

What I would really like the RIAA to do is stop trying to scare us. RIAA, you can't get it back. You just can't. It's like holding sand: yes, some is going to slide through your fingers, but the harder you squeeze, the more you lose. So what do you do?

I'll tell you on Tuesday.