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

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.

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

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

Smashing Pumpkins to Fans, Indie Stores: Fuck You

A little over dramatic, but hey - it's a Pitchfork article.

In a world where NIN and Trent Reznor are GIVING their music away, this move by Billy Corgan is just odd.

Seems major retailers Target, Wal-Mart, and iTunes get a slightly different version of the album Zeitgeist with a different bonus track.

EVERYONE ELSE GETS THE STANDARD ALBUM WITH NO BONUS TRACK!

To legitimately get the whole thing you'd have to buy the album twice, and then download a track off iTunes (if they even let you buy it separately that is).
If you have to go through all that trouble, I'm sure a lot of people would have no problem downloading the whole thing for free from a torrent, and get all the bonus tracks.

Stealing wins when it's THAT much easier than buying legit...

And apparently Corgan hates indie stores...
someaudioguy some audio guy recording record labels voice over demo production distribution p2p albums voice acting adr dubbing
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

RIAA to Blame for Music Stores Closing?

Wouldn't it be great if the RIAA started getting sued by record store owners?

-Sigh-

Great op-ed at the NYTimes recounting the story of a local record store's owners having to close their store.

"It’s tempting for us to gloat. By worrying more about quarterly profits than the bigger picture, by protecting their short-term interests without thinking about how to survive and prosper in the long run, record-industry bigwigs have got what was coming to them. It’s a disaster they brought upon themselves."

Emotional and bittersweet, it's so weird to think that having a local shop down the street will be something my kids will probably never know. I was never a fan of Tower, but thinking Amoeba could go away some day kinda hurts...

Read the rest here.
someaudioguy some audio guy music voice over recording voice acting auditions demo production audiobooks

U of Illinois Caves to RIAA

Well looks like UofI is thinking it's too expensive to continue holding the RIAA/MPAA at bay.

"As you may have read in the popular press, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) among others are increasing their copyright enforcement activities. As part of this increased effort, the RIAA has begun to target college students specifically, which means that students who engage in unlawful peer-to-peer file sharing are more likely than ever to be identified and sued by the RIAA."

...

"The University does not condone the use of peer-to-peer software for illegal file sharing. Those who engage in it violate U.S. Copyright laws as well as the campus's own policies, including the Student Code and Policy on the Appropriate Use of the Computer Network. Additionally the University bears significant costs associated with responding to DMCA violation notices and the network capacity absorbed by file sharing reduces its availability for general research, teaching, and administrative purposes."


Fair 'nuff, I 'spose. Sharing copyrighted materials IS illegal.
Though, I find it troubling that courts are still allowing lawsuits from the XXAA's. There seems like there's so little info to go off of for a convincing lawsuit, to show without doubt that damage has been done. Going after Universities doesnt seem kosher to me either. That they can't actually find who it is that is violating the DMCA, and when they do issue a lawsuit, often it seems spurious (like this computer less family).
But then there's this...

"Further, some file sharing programs, even when used for legitimate purposes, will use your computer to transfer illegally obtained material between other users. I strongly encourage you to remove software used for file sharing as well as to immediately remove any illegally obtained material such as music or movies."

Now that's just FUD. Plain and simple. Next you'll be telling me that file sharing will cause me to have my kidneys cut out of me, and sold on the black market. I'll wake up in a bathtub full of ice in a cheap motel room in Juarez...
"DAMN YOU FILE SHARING!!!!"


I very much believe that the XXAA's think if they repeat enough legal un-truth's often enough, that it will just become true (and "the law"). While at the same time media markets just fall completely apart, and organizations that should be concerned with maintaining the careers of artists plunge into the toilet.

Sure, keep hiring lawyers.

That'll help...

Piracy NOT Illegal?

Man, this guy is hardcore.

I read every bit of information I could find, including case law. I studied the DMCA. Since then I have studied the NET Act. I have studied everything I could find. Guess what? I could not find a single line in any act that said that downloading anything was illegal, or even anything that could be construed to mean it.

Ok, I get that the technical terms for delivery of content might not be included in the articles of the DMCA, but somehow I'm still pretty sure that the sharing of content (regardless of method of receipt) is still against the law.

Though I totally agree with him about how annoying the "file sharing is stealing" commercials are.

Here, I've bought this DVD. I've had my bag checked as I left the store. I've removed plastic wrap. Struggled with those damned adhesive strips, and almost broken the tabs off of the case just to open the DVD. With great satisfaction I place the DVD in my player, turn on the TV, and ... have to watch ... a GAHD DAMED COMERCIAL ABOUT HOW STEALING IS WRONG?!?! THAT I CAN'T SKIP OVER!!! WHAT?!? REALLY!?!?!

So my reward for purchasing this movie is to get treated like a criminal! GEEZUS! Next time I'll just download it...




...



I mean, I love movies!

Finish this guy's article here:
Downloading Pirated Anything Is NOT Illegal @ Untwisted Vortex

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