Music industry floats off
Michael Mayday
Issue date: 10/22/09 Section: Opinion
The Recording Industry Association of America fears technology. When radio first jumped on the airwaves, the music industry fought against it. They lost, but found artists could actually make money with the radio promoting them. But when the walkman and blank tape came out, the music industry forgot its lesson, and fought against the new technology. They lost again, but profited from music sales. Today we have the Internet and .MP3s, and it's same situation: new technology, and the stubborn refusal to adapt to its popularity.
Now, however, there's the nasty tinge of litigation. For example, a typical pack of gum costs roughly $1.30 and bug spray, about $3. If someone is caught shoplifting either of these items, it would cost them either a few hundred dollars or a few hours doing community service. If you're lucky, you might even get to attend a state-funded class to teach you stealing is wrong. However, if you decide to illegally download songs, going from 99 cents to $1.26, and the RIAA catches you, it can fine you a maximum of $150,000-a penalty the music industry isn't shy of using.
The RIAA's legal team bore down on Gertrude Walton of West Virginia one day, only to find out that she was not the alias "smittenedkitten" they had tracked, nor had she even downloaded music (she refused to have a computer in her house), but actually had died a month ago. She was 83 years old and a great-grandmother. The RIAA confessed to the mistake, and dismissed the case.
Their mistake highlights the problem of anonymity online and lawsuits directed at users. It's hard to determine who has done what and where online and to throw a dart in the online fog runs the risk of hitting the wrong target.
One Boston University graduate student, Joel Tenenbaum, received the legal beating stick from the RIAA. He had to pay $22,500 for each of the 30 songs he admitted to illegally downloading, rewarding the RIAA with $675,000 for $30 worth of songs. This lawsuit only encouraged the RIAA to continue its no-sharing-even-if-it's-a-blank-CD policy; which, ironically, is ruining the music industry.
By putting limits and fines on terrestrial and digital broadcasting, the music industry has put a cost on experimenting with new music and new artists. Broadcasters must limit music choices to what is well-known and well-liked to keep listeners, lessening the chance for newer artists to capture listeners and grow the industry.
It doesn't matter if you're a college student, a 12-year-old girl, or a dead grandmother, the RIAA fights its own consumers. It doesn't matter if it harms their reputation or interests in the long run, the music industry want to keep the music industry pond stagnant instead of making waves.
Now, however, there's the nasty tinge of litigation. For example, a typical pack of gum costs roughly $1.30 and bug spray, about $3. If someone is caught shoplifting either of these items, it would cost them either a few hundred dollars or a few hours doing community service. If you're lucky, you might even get to attend a state-funded class to teach you stealing is wrong. However, if you decide to illegally download songs, going from 99 cents to $1.26, and the RIAA catches you, it can fine you a maximum of $150,000-a penalty the music industry isn't shy of using.
The RIAA's legal team bore down on Gertrude Walton of West Virginia one day, only to find out that she was not the alias "smittenedkitten" they had tracked, nor had she even downloaded music (she refused to have a computer in her house), but actually had died a month ago. She was 83 years old and a great-grandmother. The RIAA confessed to the mistake, and dismissed the case.
Their mistake highlights the problem of anonymity online and lawsuits directed at users. It's hard to determine who has done what and where online and to throw a dart in the online fog runs the risk of hitting the wrong target.
One Boston University graduate student, Joel Tenenbaum, received the legal beating stick from the RIAA. He had to pay $22,500 for each of the 30 songs he admitted to illegally downloading, rewarding the RIAA with $675,000 for $30 worth of songs. This lawsuit only encouraged the RIAA to continue its no-sharing-even-if-it's-a-blank-CD policy; which, ironically, is ruining the music industry.
By putting limits and fines on terrestrial and digital broadcasting, the music industry has put a cost on experimenting with new music and new artists. Broadcasters must limit music choices to what is well-known and well-liked to keep listeners, lessening the chance for newer artists to capture listeners and grow the industry.
It doesn't matter if you're a college student, a 12-year-old girl, or a dead grandmother, the RIAA fights its own consumers. It doesn't matter if it harms their reputation or interests in the long run, the music industry want to keep the music industry pond stagnant instead of making waves.
Be the first to comment on this story