| p2p and the RIAA |
| It is my opinion, after much study on the subject, that p2p is neither “piracy” nor are the modern copyright laws protecting the general publics interests.
P2P is NON-COMMERCIAL sharing of files, this is very different than COMMERCIAL selling of files. (it simply put is the difference between selling and sharing) Also copyright laws need to allow creative works and intellectual property to become “public domain” after a REASONABLE duration of time, (think 20 years after the decease of the creator), and that no copyright be extended beyond that time: which is more than enough time for the creator and his immediate successors to benefit from their work before the public can enjoy the non-monopolized use of the authors work. Regarding the analysis entitled: “the Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales: An Empirical Analysis” By Felix Oberholzer and Koleman Strumpf. This study confirms to me what I have felt (and many a person on the street has felt) since "piracy" and "p2p" first were linked: That Major Record labels have "lob-bullied" the government into killing p2p solely to protect their monopolistic bottom line. If anyone ever imagined that the artists were endangered by p2p this is a wake-up call- The artist is expendable to the RIAA but the 0.2% loss of sales every year is not (caused by 8.6 BILLION downloads a year). Think about that, it takes 8,600,000 music file downloads to equal 2/10ths of a percent loss for the record companies and they dare bring a lawsuit against someone who has a few thousand music files? Record artists (and I am one of them) need to learn that they (the artists) don't make money on album sales and they also don't lose money on free downloads. We all need to open our eyes and see the stranglehold that RIAA (et al) has on an emergent technology that, for better or worse, will change culture as we know it. Also: Bands, stop waiting for handouts from record labels and get out on tour. Merchandise has been the key to survival in the modern age (even before the p2p and Internet age). Musicians: ever since printed sheet music went out of style you have been the victims of rape. An economic rape by the major record labels and the RIAA who extort from you over 90% of your potential profits through creative accounting and mafia techniques. The only advantages that major record labels have ever had were these: 1) fancy, expensive recording studios and Über-producers to man them; 2) national and international distribution; and 3) a propaganda machine that could saturate the relevant media with hype. The advent of the computer age and Internet age have dramatically shifted this balance of power in the favor of the individual and small business through: 1) computer and digital home recording that costs less to own than a single 8 hour day at a major recording studio; 2) internet based p2p sharing is global distribution at virtually no cost and virtually no geographic limit (people in Podunk Kansas can get your song as quickly as a snobbish audiophile in New York); 3) The internet is the worlds message board and advertising space. Why waste time and money by advertising through a big record company when you can start blogging and buying ad space yourself for little or no cost? The advantages held by major record labels and their monopoly (thus their profits) are threatened by the Internet and p2p sharing. This is the real reason that the RIAA has attacked p2p as "piracy" instead of sticking to the real "piracy" which is commercial selling of copyrighted material. We live in a new age, the old paradigm of copyright control and intellectual property needs serious revision but the RIAA is stopping at nothing to keep the status quo. The RIAA ask us, “Why do you want to ruin these poor starving artists?” but their sole motive is to preserve their corporate bottom line, which is contrary to their claims of preserving the livelihood of the artists. If they really were concerned for their artists they would not only pay them better but would cease binding them into such debilitating and humiliating contracts over the ownership and rights to the artists work. There is no nobility in the complaints and arguments of the RIAA. There is no future for the monopolizing dinosaur of the big media corporations unless we passively let them commercialize our culture and charge us to enjoy art. Do something: Let people know that p2p is not a crime and that “piracy” is misused by the RIAA when applied to non-commercial file sharing. Please don't let America slip into the copyright monopoly that England suffered through in the 18th cent when copies of Shakespeare were kept at inordinately high prices (equal to $1000's of dollars of today) because the copyright was "owned forever" by a special interest group that strangled public domain of such masterpieces. Visit these links to know more: http://free-culture.org/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3578851.stm http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/about/cases/kahle_v_ashcroft.shtml http://www.house.gov/writerep/ |
| by mason ian bundschuh 3/31/04 |