Court rejects RIAA's 'making available' piracy argument

In Atlantic v. Howell, Judge Neil V. Wake denied the labels' motion for summary judgment in a 17-page decision (PDF), allowing the suit to proceed to trial. The argument--that merely the act of making music files available for download constituted copyright infringement--has been the basis for the Recording Industry Association of America's legal battle against online music piracy.

read more | digg story

Competition for Divshare? esnips gives Div a run!

So here's the dilemma.

I'm cheap.

There it is.

I need free file storage until this whole digital life of mine starts paying for itself (those of you clicking on ads and donating GAWD BLESS YOU). For the run of this blog, I've been trying to find easy and free ways to link or embed media. Most of what I produce for this site is audio (go figure), and all of the video is handled by other sites. I personally use Revver for the few vids I've made, but Youtube, 5Min, Funny or Die, MetaCafe, all have me covered for video content.

Audio, however, has been tricky. I haven't found a good solution, and sites that look like the holy-grail-youtube-for-audio (like Odeo) end up being to slow, or having odd limitations (like only linking to audio not storing it). For a while I considered just making everything a vid and uploading to the video sites, but those files get big, and I don't want to do yet another round of editing once I've already trimmed and cleaned a recording.

Enter the world of online file storage.
I started with sites like YouSendIt and MediaFire, to send files larger than 10MB to clients. As they evolved, it allowed me to add links to posts so people could download my stuff. Later I stumbled onto DivShare, which allowed me to embed a player. Now people could listen to the audio right from the blog, without having to download anything or navigate to another page to hear stuff.
The problem with DivShare is it can have odd periods of down time. It can be really slow to upload, and sometimes the player can get locked up. It's good for free, but I have a hard time relying on it as this blog gets bigger.

In this continuing search for free file storage, I've just stumbled onto a service called esnips. It's a lot like DivShare, allowing for file storage and embedded players, but it also has a community aspect. You tag your info, and people with similar interests and media can be exposed to your stuff.

I'm trying it out now. So far I don't love the players you can embed, but it seems pretty quick. Over the next couple weeks, I might start moving content over to esnips.

Both services offer 5GB of storage for free, and you can pay for more. That's a lot of space for audio, even uncompressed.
If you need free hosting for your demos, or to send audio to clients, I would seriously check out both Divshare and esnips.

Here's the esnips player:

Get this widget | Track details | eSnips Social DNA

And the Divshare player:

Piracy hurts Box Office? ... Even During Record Setting Summer?

There is a fantastic article up over at Ars Technica that pretty much sums up how I've felt about the MPAA/RIAA's war on "Piracy".

Despite concerns about the extent of piracy, the movie business has
pulled in record revenues this summer, earning more than $4 billion in
box revenues in the US alone.

Media by Numbers, which tracks such things, estimates that the industry will rake in $4.15 billion
(PDF) by the end of Labor Day. That's despite record-high average
ticket prices of $6.85, up $0.30 from a year ago. That's even despite
claims that piracy is on the rise, and it's harming the industry.

It couldn't be that the movies were just a lot better this year?

It goes on to talk about the lack of forward thinking for technologies. Pretty much the same trap that the Music industry fell into around Napster. If anyone had embraced mp3 back then , I don't think music would be as de-valued as it is today (at least in album form).

Watching the Movie industry scramble to come up with newer and more confusing copy protections (which are usually cracked within weeks
09-F9-11-02-9D-74-E3-5B-D8-41-56-C5-63-56-88-C0), is pretty self destructive. These measures only serve to stop average consumers from using the content in a legitimate manner. Trust me, anyone who really wants to get around these copy protection schemes will be able to, but those just looking for the convenience of popping in a cassette tape will be sorely disappointed. Something tells me it'll most likely get worse before it gets better.

It's all wrapped up in this "consumers are pirates" mentality (read here for my take on "piracy"). Just because suits can't understand what this technology means, it perpetuates this idea of everyone trying to steal from them. If they would just consider this from a consumers point of view, for just a second, they could stand to make SO much more money. I'll give you two options:

1. Drive to store. Browse limited selection. Pick best of what they have. Wait in line at cash register. Pay, and then be asked for your receipt as you leave by big burly rent-a-cop that saw you pay. Drive home. Spend about 5 minutes or so dealing with plastic wrap, stickers, tabs. Pop DVD in player. Sit through trailers. Sit through commercials. Sit through FBI Warning. Sit through commercial telling you Piracy is wrong. Get to Disc Menu. Play movie.

2. Browse for exactly the movie you want online. Wait about 3-4 hours for it to download (over broadband of course). Burn it to disc. Pop it in DVD player. DVD menu pops up. Watch Movie.

Now, obviously today option 1 is legit Best Buy style, and option 2 is file-sharing, but what if some forward thinking exec saw option 2 and said "Wow, the consumers have already created a business model for us. All we have to do is slap a price tag on it".

Let's say option one is $14.99, and option 2 were $9.99 (no packaging, no shipping, no stocking, no paying snotty employees - just pure profit after data costs) which one would you rather patron?

Check out the Ars Technica article it is a great summary of whats going on, and where we could be.

TRUE Piracy

I get a little frustrated when I hear RIAA and MPAA and lawyers talking about "piracy".

They seem to equate filesharing with being a pirate.

I disagree with this.

I believe the filesharing of copyrighted material is "stealing".

I believe for a person to commit an act of piracy, there must be an intent to profit off of someone else's copyrighted material.


This guy is a Pirate:



read more | digg story

Television Studios Embrace BitTorrent

I've been saying for a while, file sharing is not evil. File sharing is JUST a delivery method. It only matters what files are being shared.
P2P, Youtube, etc, there may be copyright violations, but I still can't believe that they don't actually serve to drive more awareness and higher sales. Album sales were never higher than the peak of Napster, and didn't start to dry up until fans were sued.

It's nice to see a few savvy execs realize that these aren't thieves, they're fans "spreading the word". It's free advertising...

"From loathing and resisting BitTorrent and the illegal distribution of their shows to encouraging downloading and leaking pilots, TV studios have a come a long way. The creator of ‘Weeds’ is stoked that someone pirated her show."

read more | digg story

Facebook Audio Nuked

"Like Napster, you knew it couldn’t last. Facebook has killed off the Audio application for copyright violations, making it one of the first 3rd party apps to get the chop. We’d previously heard that audio was no longer showing up in the App directory, but now it has gone entirely from the site."

read more | digg story

RIAA backtracks after embarrassing P2P defendant

When the RIAA filed a file-sharing lawsuit against a sergeant in the US Army earlier this year, it included thousands of files containing pornography that had nothing to do with the case. The Sgt. decided to fight back, by filing a counterclaim accusing the RIAA of violating his privacy.

read more | digg story

RIAA's final tab for Capitol vs. Foster: $68,685.23

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE!!!
The book is closed on one of the most closely-followed file-sharing cases, as a judge tallies up the ledger for Debbie Foster's legal bills. $68,685.23 was awarded in HER favor.

My Favorite part:

"This past February, Judge West awarded Foster attorneys' fees, citing the RIAA's insistence on pressing the secondary infringement case and saying that he could find no case "holding the mere owner of an Internet account contributorily or vicariously liable for the infringing activities of third persons."
He also rejected the RIAA's argument that Foster was not entitled to fees incurred after "some point when she allegedly 'could have avoided [fees] altogether but chose not to do so,'" reiterating that she was fully entitled to fight the RIAA's charges and as a result, eligible for an award of attorneys' fees."

SWEET!

read more | digg story

Judge deals blow to RIAA, says students can respond to John Doe lawsuit, GO ALBUQUERQUE!!!

Can't help it. Every now and then my home town does right...

"The RIAA will not be able to use a John Doe lawsuit to obtain the identities of 16 people accused of using the University of New Mexico's network for copyright infringement—at least not until the targets are notified of the legal action."



read more | digg story

Don't Torrent that Music From iTunes

Well don't Torrent music from anywhere really, because it's prolly not legal...

Just a friendly reminder from TUAW.com, the new higher quality, DRM- free tunes on iTunes will be watermarked with your user info. That means if this music is traded/torrented/ shared/ whatever, Apple will have a much easier time finding out who gave it up.

This, IMHO is a MUCH better plan than locking content down. Are you really concerned with stopping "piracy" (hell yes I put it in quotes), then stop treating the paying customers like criminals, AND FIND THE ACTUAL "PIRATES"!

Read the article here.
someaudioguy some audio guy music voice over demo production audio books voice acting auditions

Music is becoming DRM free, but what video?

Shelly Palmer asks this question in an opinion write up at Yahoo News.
Now that companies like Amazon and iTunes seem to be in a rush to abandon DRM on music, a lot of people are asking "what about movies?

Shelly writes up some interesting points, but ultimately boils the whole issue down to one of use. She says (and MAN am I paraphrasing here) is that because we listen to music with only partial focus (which I disagree with) and movies take our full attention, that the two formats will continue to be treated differently. Music files equal small and easy to transfer, movies equal big and harder to transfer.

I know she's just bringing up discussion points, but I really don't like it when DRM discussions are over simplified.

Because of simplistic "point boiling" I have a really hard time talking to actors about their work. Quite a few truly believe that 15 year olds downloading files are why there are fewer sales, and they keep calling that "piracy" (thats a whole other nuther post though). No one seems willing to consider that over charging for physical media (and there aren't a lot of options for getting this entertainment) might be one culprit. I would say that paying as much as $20 for a CD is probably what sparked the original Napster, and yet still, immediately following the creation of the original Napster we saw an increase in music sales (before Metallic started suing fans at least). No one seems to think that continual increases in entertainment costs (for the same level of entertainment "quality") might cause someone to consider alternative avenues for acquiring entertainment (both legal and illegal). Lastly I for one am completely fed up with being treated like a criminal for purchasing content, and because I know my way around a computer (you can't imagine the arguments I've had over file sharing, p2p is a distribution method not guaranteed theft, and saying otherwise is just trying to stifle technological advance).

It doesn't matter what the file is.
It doesn't matter how big the file is.
It doesn't matter what format the file is.

The movie industry is making the same mistake the music industry made. It will cost studios, productions, actors, and consumers a lot of money to realize that they are making the same mistakes the music industry made.

I think as soon as companies stop trying to lock consumers out of content (and consider something really smart like watermarking to find exactly WHO is spreading stuff), the sooner we all start making A LOT MORE MONEY!

Read Shelly's article here...
someaudioguy some audio guy movies music tv voice over radio production voice acting demo auditions

Welcome to the Social indeed

This post from Zunerama is about the Zune specifically, but it should work for any MP3 player with a built in FM receiver.

If one MP3 player has an FM Transmitter and a group of MP3 players have FM receivers, then why couldn't share any music they'd want to?

Things that make you go Hmmmm...
someaudioguy some audio guy music voice over mp3 players technology diy hack mod voice acting

WHOA! RIAA OVERLOAD!

Holy CRAP! What's going on?
NYTimes, Digg, Gizmodo, Consumerist, Blogs, University News sites, They're all going crazy with stories on the RIAA, on a variety of sources, and all (oddly) seem universally against the RIAA.

So weird...

For those of you to lazy to source your own news on the future of how you listen, control, use, and own your media, here's today's rundown.

I don't like Consumerist. I don't at all. I think they get too antagonistic when it comes to apathetic employees working McJobs, instead of fighting where the problems actually come from, but one thing they are really good at is tracking down corporate contact info. Ever want to know who actually heads up the RIAA, and how to contact said individuals. Click on the link below.
Faces of the RIAA @ Consumerist


David Byrne (of the talking heads) was at SXSW, and "making sense" according to the NYTimes. Uhh neat ... I guess ... But seriously, I totally disagree with some of his assessments on artists needing labels (I think they'll be totally broken and vestigial in my lifetime at least), but on the whole it's a pretty good read.
Rocker David Byrne Making Sense at SXSW Fest

This one I don't even have a write up for. Here the RIAA just tries to explain why attacking college students with extortion tactics is good for business, and why they are upset that colleges aren't selling their (customers) students out. A fascinating look at ... well ... the main enemy to media property rights and fair use.
From insidehighered.com:
Explaining the Crackdown on Student Downloading

Ok, not directly about the RIAA, but a great blog posting on an actual Pirate (sure capital 'P'). According to the RIAA if you download music from teh intarwebs then you are a "pirate". However, I prefer a more traditional definition of pirate, where one tries to profit from their plundering, and wouldn't you know it, p2p/file sharing is really starting to hurt the people who sell bootlegs. Score a victory point for p2p!
From Torrentfreak:
P2P File-Sharing Ruins Physical Piracy Business


Man that was a lot! And really that's just the tip of the iceberg. There just seems to be a lot discontent with the media market right now. I wonder when people will start doing something about it...
someaudioguy some audio guy music voice over albums copyright riaa piracy p2p record labels