Some more reasons why the RIAA is evil:
Jul. 16th, 2003 12:38 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
akujunkanThe RIAA, as some of you may already know, is now tracking file-sharing individuals, and in some cases, suing them. They claim that since this past June, when they announced their decision to target individuals, the total volume of downloaded copyrighted material has decreased by 15%. Therefore, they say, their brand of corporate terrorism targeting indivdual file-swappers is an appropriate measure.
After all, it's resulted in a 15% decrease in the total number of files downloaded since June. But gee, idiots (or liars, or maybe it's both), what else could have happened since June to cause a 15% decrease in file-sharing.
Oh, I don't know... Maybe something like legions of college kids moving out of their dorms and thus losing their access to high speed connections? Think about it, you corporate assholes.
Meanwhile, another study has shown that when people download songs/albums and like what they hear, they are far more likely (I'll have to go and get the actual statistic) to go and buy the album than if they had merely heard it on the radio or mtv.
The RIAA is also chasing after Y-fi (wireless network) providers, claiming that file-swappers are fleeing to Y-fi providers because those providers do not log or otherwise provide fixed IP addresses (which are necessary to track individual users on a network, which is a necessary prerequisite to suing them).
Uh-huh. I'll bet you your average wireless user (whether or not s/he downloads files) doesn't even know what an IP address is, let alone considers it a diabolical method by which to escape detection by the RIAA.
I think the things that bother me most about the RIAA is that they first:
-consider every Internet user to be a criminal
-consider themselves to be so. Damn. Important
that they believe every Internet user is using
the net to purposefully spite and steal from the
RIAA
-willingly distort statistics to make it seem as
though their anti-file-swapping measures are
both effective and even necessary
-and finally, their willingness to blindly ignore
any data that is contrary to their opinions.
That will be all.
After all, it's resulted in a 15% decrease in the total number of files downloaded since June. But gee, idiots (or liars, or maybe it's both), what else could have happened since June to cause a 15% decrease in file-sharing.
Oh, I don't know... Maybe something like legions of college kids moving out of their dorms and thus losing their access to high speed connections? Think about it, you corporate assholes.
Meanwhile, another study has shown that when people download songs/albums and like what they hear, they are far more likely (I'll have to go and get the actual statistic) to go and buy the album than if they had merely heard it on the radio or mtv.
The RIAA is also chasing after Y-fi (wireless network) providers, claiming that file-swappers are fleeing to Y-fi providers because those providers do not log or otherwise provide fixed IP addresses (which are necessary to track individual users on a network, which is a necessary prerequisite to suing them).
Uh-huh. I'll bet you your average wireless user (whether or not s/he downloads files) doesn't even know what an IP address is, let alone considers it a diabolical method by which to escape detection by the RIAA.
I think the things that bother me most about the RIAA is that they first:
-consider every Internet user to be a criminal
-consider themselves to be so. Damn. Important
that they believe every Internet user is using
the net to purposefully spite and steal from the
RIAA
-willingly distort statistics to make it seem as
though their anti-file-swapping measures are
both effective and even necessary
-and finally, their willingness to blindly ignore
any data that is contrary to their opinions.
That will be all.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
on 2003-07-16 07:00 pm (UTC)Actually...
on 2003-07-17 11:00 pm (UTC)There was also an article in my school newspaper, probably around 1-2 months ago, concerning four college students who wrote file-sharing software, whom the RIAA decided to sue. I think at least one of the guys went to Princeton, and another to UCLA.
no subject
on 2003-07-16 10:26 pm (UTC)Too true. I rarely listen to the radio or watch MTV and if I couldn't download songs then I wouldn't know what I liked because when I do hear something I like, I go out and buy the CD.
And about the IP addresses, you are so right. I've only met a handful of people who know what it is and even less know what it's for.
The main reason the RIAA is causing all this mess is money. Which is ridiculous because they've got more than most people could ever dream of. They are so evil.
Btw, awhile ago I found this site. Have you seen it?
no subject
on 2003-07-17 11:09 pm (UTC)Americans are conditioned to be such perfect little capitalists - what the record companies fail to recognise is that if their product is good, we want a physical item in our sweaty little hands.
If their product is good...
The main reason the RIAA is causing all this mess is money. Which is ridiculous because they've got more than most people could ever dream of. They are so evil.
Even more ridiculous when one considers that Eric Clapton only gets $5.00 every time someone buys one of his CDs, and he has the highest royalty rates of any major label musician. It costs under a buck to make a single CD, so where is the rest of the money going? Mostly, to the record companies.
And what they don't pocket is absorbed by the major music outlets, which were convicted of price fixing (http://www.musiccdsettlement.com/english/default.htm), although I have yet to notice CD prices doing anything but increasing since that ruling was handed down.
Considering the fact that I bought over 1,000 CDS between 1994 and 2000, I think I have a right to bitch.
no subject
on 2003-07-18 11:44 pm (UTC)Exactly! That's what it's all about. For me, anyways. Heh.
Considering the fact that I bought over 1,000 CDS between 1994 and 2000, I think I have a right to bitch.
Whoa, that must be some collection you've got there. And yes, that definitely qualifies you for the right to bitch. ;o)
It's just ridiculous how they complain, and whine, and bitch about how we're stealing from them, when in reality, I think they're stealing from us with the unfair prices.
no subject
on 2003-07-17 10:55 pm (UTC);-)
Poor Nick...
on 2003-07-17 11:37 pm (UTC)::grin::