IFPI 'First Wave' Sues 247 In Europe & Canada 304
securitas writes "AP and many others report that the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry - IFPI - has sued 247 accused file-sharers in Germany, Denmark, Italy and Canada as part of an unprecedented, coordinated attack. The IFPI represents the global recording industry through its members - national associations like the IFPIG, DRIA, FIMI, CRIA and RIAA - and says it will launch more international lawsuits in the months ahead. You may also want to read the official IFPI 'first wave' press release/related documents and a statement by the IFPI's chairman and CEO. Lots of coverage at AP/AJC, USA Today, the New York Times, Reuters/CNN Money, ZDNet/CNet, Bloomberg , netimperative and the BBC. The timing of the international legal attacks is especially interesting in light of the recent study that indicates file-sharing has a negligible impact on music sales."
Ignoring a Common Cause? (Score:5, Insightful)
I was like, "Oh, no, they're suing people over sharing porn! What are we going to do?!"
All kidding aside, I'd really like to see chart showing the so-called "decline" in CD sales displayed alongside the trends in other aspects of the young person's financial life, such as increases in college tuition and the price of textbooks, the price of gasoline at the pump, and sales of designer clothes, video games, and other luxury items. I bet there are correlations all over the place.
Remember when Bart Simpson encounters the inventor of Spirograph, who glumly points out that there's a direct correlation between the decline in sales of Spirograph toys and the rise in violent crime in our nation's schools?
I think that the RIAA is using the same kind of logic... CD sales went down as P2P usage went up, therefore P2P usage caused CD sales to go down. I have this cool program on my Mac called "Fallacy Tutorial," which was made by some logic professor, and it lists this type of argument as "Ignoring a Common Cause." The RIAA and its buddies are doing what politicians have been doing for centuries. Go back and look at how Prohibition came into being in 1920, and you'll see how spurious arguments can be used over and over again until a tiny group of overly-influential people (often very wealthy to begin with) get their way.
Warez works the same way. (Score:5, Insightful)
I would have never purchased the Adobe Design Collection if I hadn't been able to learn to use Photoshop, InDesign and Acrobat Forms first. I have yet to use Illustrator but Freehand is easier for me, and I'm too busy to pick up that old book I bought.
I have a policy at my company that if you use a piece of software to enhance your productivity and contribute to your job, you will get it. Hell, I've even bought WinRAR, Textpad and VuePrint (which readily have keygen's available).
This is why I think the "stealing music" slant is bullshit. How are you supposed to hear new music when Clear Channel owns 1/2 the radio stations and someone else owns the other 1/2? File Sharing. I buy every CD I have an mp3 for because honestly I make too much money to waste my time trying to decrypt the slang used to name songs. Not to mention my bandwidth, etc. A $11.99 CD is well worth the time savings.
The RIAA, etc need to pull their heads out of their asses and learn that people like to test drive a product before they buy. I cannot imagine buying a car without trying it out. Why should music be any different?
Re:Isn't it unfair... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would they go after third-world pirates? Those guys are just increasing market-share when they would otherwise presumably be buying from local media/software vendors. Why would they want them doing that?
But you can bet your ass they'll go after us -- we don't have any other sources to buy their product from so why not? Whatever other sources we might have had they took away with the product design (DVD region codes) or DCMA.
Re:Someone clue me in here... (Score:3, Insightful)
They have a media tax to fuck people over. All it really does is puts money in the pockets of a corporation.
They don't care if filesharing helps sales (Score:5, Insightful)
fud (Score:5, Insightful)
*sigh* some people never learn...or they knowingly choose to use stronger language to frighten (or terrorize in today's overused parlance) the masses into submission.
And I don't want to fuckin' have to think twice every time I want to listen to the same music in my car, on my computer or on my living room. Is it that difficult to understand?
Idiot (Score:1, Insightful)
Terroristic attacks can take all different forms. And this guy was just making a fucking joke against SCO, not 9/11, and you have to scream 'DUMBASS 9/11 9/11 9/11 9/11'.
"Motherfucking dumbass."
Re:Damn my dirty mind! (Score:3, Insightful)
I think it is really unfair for moderators to moderate the first four or five replies after the first one as "redundant" just because they all make the same observation. The fact is that people posting in
Heck, I made the observation about my own misreading of the name of the organization in question, and then went on to make a point about the arguments used by that organization, and got modded redundant!
About 10% of my reply was devoted to my misreading of the name of the organization, and I even prefaced it by saying, "that happened to me too," yet my entire reply is redundant? How about reading my entire post before moderating it, okay?
no science (Score:3, Insightful)
I share music with wild abandon, and think the lawsuits are BS, but you're basing this on one NON peer reviewed study that, if you read the PDF file linked from yesterday's story, makes some rather dubious assumptions.
Re:File stealing? (Score:3, Insightful)
It's the same reason Fox News and the Israelis call Palestinian bombers "homicide bombers" instead of the more accepted term "suicide bomber". It's the same reason SCO releases all of their crap. FUD. It's all about the FUD and the marketing with these people. If they can change the mind of John Q. Public they've won -- it doesn't really matter what us geeks think.
Of course I don't know how you win over the hearts and minds of John Q. Public by suing 12 year old schoolgirls either -- but I'm sure RIAA has people working on ways to spin that in a positive way.
(Disclaimer: I'm not trolling or trying to start an offtopic discussion about Middle Eastern politics -- just the first example that popped into my head)
How much compensation? (Score:4, Insightful)
I wonder if the IFPI will be asking equally ludicrous amounts as the RIAA has.
The chairman's quote seems rather funny in this context though:
"People are at real risk of being sued or prosecuted if they continue to rip off those who make music."
Pot. Kettle. Black. I guess he's got a good lawyer...
Cooper
--
This truth probably doesn't come as shocking news to any of you,
and if it does then you're stupid and I hate you.
- Everything Can Be Beaten -
a bit off-topic (Score:4, Insightful)
Not ever record label in the states is an RIAA member, and to be honest, since I started downloading mp3s, I've bought more cds but nearly all of them were from non-RIAA members (not as protest, but because that's the music I like!)
I don't think the RIAA could even come after me for trading these files, since it's not even their intellectual property
Re:Warez works the same way. (Score:4, Insightful)
Expect you have permission from the car dealer to take the car for a test drive first. If not I'm sure you'll be hearing from the police in short order.
Point being there is nothing that says they have to let you test drive a car. Of course they wouldn't sell many cars if they didn't but there is no law on the books that says they have to.
I'd like to see iTunes let me hear the full version of the song before I buy it -- not just a random 30 second clip. Do you know how many songs I've bought only to find out it was a different friggen version then the one I know and like? If they are worried about piracy they could broadcast these demos in really low-quality (mono-only perhaps?). If someone really likes it he is going to pay the $0.99 anyway -- why waste your time stealing a lower quality copy?
Ditto for the little Kisoks at Barnes and Noble. WTF is the reason to limit them to 30 seconds? Do they think people are going to tape record them with a hidden microphone or something?
For crying out loud (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok - I'll get off my soapbox now. Sorry for the rant.
Re:Ignoring a Common Cause? (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, of course not all the wealthy people wanted Prohibition, just the ones who were convinced that alcohol was the cause of (and not the solution to, as Homer points out) all of life's problems. I think Henry Ford is a good example.
The late self-help author Peter McWilliams wrote a wonderful book called Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do, and it has a great chapter on the Prohibition movement [mcwilliams.com], which the author posted online in its entirety before he died, along with all of his other books. Check it out... it's a cautionary tale whose lessons we would do well to review in our present age.
Re:Ignoring a Common Cause? (Score:2, Insightful)
And the RIAA members would make a lot of money if they embraced the Internet and P2P. Oil companies would make a lot of money if they embraced alternative energy sources. It doesn't mean they want to. Eventually they will be forced to (as the CEOs of the liquor companies were) but it doesn't mean they won't be dragged kicking and screaming into doing it.
Nobody likes a worn out old paradigm more then big business. Nobody changes direction slower.
Re:Effect of lawsuits on sales. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not like the RIAA is even trying to hide that it's just sue-happy right now. Even people who haven't heard about the whole downloading bruhaha are starting to notice and think the RIAA is a bunch of idiots. That has to be effecting the industry, but does the RIAA even seem to consider the possibility? If they have, they sure don't act like it.
Re:Ignoring a Common Cause? (Score:2, Insightful)
And they probably will embrace it, right after they have made all the money they can in court. And, while they are dragging everyone through court, it gives them the time to develope their own business plan for the internet and P2P world
Re:Ignoring a Common Cause? (Score:3, Insightful)
Not _needed_, but it's convenient to have someone to do distribution, marketing, etc. for you. Also, it's practically impossible for artists to detect, not to mention prosecute, every case where their music is illegally performed, distributed, etc. This is why the RIAA and its ilk exist.
The flaw in the system is that, at least in some countries, the RIAA-equivalent is the _only_ entity allowed to enforce copyrights. This allows them to charge ridiculous fees; they know the artists can't go somewhere else.
Re:How You Can Fight Back (Score:1, Insightful)
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"
Re:Ignoring a Common Cause? (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is that most /.'ers probably won't know enough about history to know what National Socialism is -- until you pointed out Godwins law anyway. Then they'll go "Oh yeah! Nazis!"
I admire both the way you avoided Godwin's Law and the way you used it to convey your point ;)
No, really it's not a Constitutional right (Score:3, Insightful)
The first copyright act wasn't passed for some time after the constitution was ratified, it was very limited in scope, and the term was only fourteen years.
Re:File stealing? (Score:2, Insightful)
You might be right that the industry is changing and that the record companies will be going by the wayside. If that makes you happy, fine. But that does not give anyone the right to steal IP from people who own it.
Since I am a software engineer I like to draw examples from the Open Source movement. Some of the same people that act like stealing music is justified because of the "evil" record company's behavior would probably vehmently argue for the defense of the GPL were it to be violated. The GPL is strong because copyright law is strong, any errosion of the copyright law in the music industry will affect the GPL as well.
We can't have it both ways, either IP is protected or it is not.
Remove the tin foil hats please (Score:5, Insightful)
Um no... (Score:3, Insightful)
If the goal was to cut off supply, then perhaps. But it is in fact quite silly when CDs and DVDs are publicly sold. While the release groups may have ways to be earlier and thus get their "name" on the release, thousands of people could do it once it is in normal retail. Read a doom9.org guide and you'll be making them like the "pros".
Instead, the goal is to act as a deterrent. To scare and intimidate people using P2P, sending the message "You can be caught too". Including kids. Yes, they don't want to seem harsh on kids, but at the same time they don't want to send the message that it's okay either. They want them scared off P2P, not alienated from buying the music.
Btw, is it just me that noticed the 247 = 24/7 figure? [tin foil hat]I wonder if that was on purpose to trigger a subconcious "we're watching you 24/7" thought...[/tin foil hat]
Kjella
Re:Ignoring a Common Cause? (Score:2, Insightful)
And the RIAA members would make a lot of money if they embraced the Internet and P2P.
And, I suppose you have plenty of market research in your dresser drawer to back that statement up, right? Oh, wait. Of course not. This is Slashdot. What a stupid thing to say. I forgot that we're full of marketing/investment/legal geniuses who all happen to know just what would be best for all these companies that don't know those things themselves.
You know, call me crazy, but I'd say that the statement above is just as intelligent as the statements from the RIAA saying p2p is the cause of their woes. Hmmm.... Slashdotter presents a wild postulate with no rhyme or reason? +5 Insightful (though, I note that at this very moment you, in particular, haven't been modded up thankfully). RIAA spokesman presents some wild postulate with no rhyme or reason, Slashdot screams about how illogical and fallacious it is.
In other news, did I happen to mention that I could run this country better than anybody else anywhere just because I said so on Slashdot just now?
Re:Warez works the same way. (Score:3, Insightful)
In that case... (Score:1, Insightful)
Is it okay to call the RIAA members "organized crime"? After all, they've been found guilty of price collusion, and ways to jack up prices for consumers by illegally consorting on pricing and squeezing margins on retailers.
But I suspect they'd object. A fine organization like the RIAA doesn't want to be "Organized Crime".
So which is it? If copying files is "stealing", then the RIAA is the "Mafia".
Re:Ignoring a Common Cause? (Score:2, Insightful)
"I think what the RIAA is really scared of is the fact that P2P distribution might allow an artist to gain fame and make money without going through the "major label system""
Being a musician (blues guitarist here) myself, I can see the logic to this argument. I've known a couple of bands/artists that had high hopes when they got "signed", only to have their work "deep-sixed" because the label saw their work as possibly taking away from one or more of their "cash-cow", heavily-promoted and marketed artists. I think the real way out here is independent online marketing and sales by the artists themselves, marketing through P2P, and sales through an online service like Taxi or mp3.com. After several decades (I'm 46) of watching the labels screw artists, they couldn't pay me enough to sign with them. Granted, I might not ever get a grammy or a gold/platinum record, but at least I'll have more control of what gets released and when, and a larger chunk of whatever money is made. Plus, it might get a few more butts filling seats at gigs, which is what I live for anyway (there just isn't _anything_ like the feeling of connecting with a live audience, and riding that energy!).