Canadian Record Label Fights RIAA Lawsuits 215
An anonymous reader writes "Nettwerk Music Group, Canada's leading privately owned record label has
joined
the fight against the RIAA's strategy of individual lawsuits.
Nettwerk CEO Terry McBride says 'Suing music fans is not the solution,
it's the problem. Litigation is not "artist development." Litigation is
a deterrent to
creativity and passion and it is hurting the business I love. The
current actions of the RIAA are not in my artists' best
interests.'"
Why'd...... (Score:4, Funny)
OH CANADA (Score:2, Interesting)
OH CANADA!
Skinny Puppy (Score:2)
bloody animal organs at the RIAA (a la the Vivisect tour).
Re:Skinny Puppy (Score:3, Interesting)
The story as it was told to me was that they were mistakenly arrested. I was too young to see them then, but apparently they had some kind of Hollywood creature department-quality dog dummy that they could "vivisect" on stage, as part of their protest against that kind of practice in the real medical/scientific world. Someone thought it was real, and called the police.
Re:OH CANADA (Score:2)
"...[T]his is what gives me back some faith in my country."
Don't get too ahead of yourself. They're only doing this as a way of apologising for giving us Sara McLaughlin.
Re:OH CANADA (Score:3, Funny)
Re:OH CANADA (Score:2)
Celine oh god make her stop, erase all recordings, erase my memories of ever hearing her... Please...
Re:OH CANADA (Score:4, Insightful)
The conservatives are in for hell. They can't really form an alliance with any party, and they don't have the position to protect themselves or to maintain legislation which only the conservatives want to push through.
Impotent? Useless? This to me represents the best of all possible worlds with regards to the Conservative Party of Canada in power, or indeed any party.
Re:OH CANADA (Score:2)
Conservatives will bring lawsuits to Canada. (Score:2, Insightful)
The political parties are all have a different ratio in favoring the individual/corporation. The conservatives are farthest to the right and will favor corporations the most over
Re:Conservatives will bring lawsuits to Canada. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Conservatives will bring lawsuits to Canada. (Score:2)
So the model will be you are all collectively guilty (levy), but some are even more guilty (lawsuits).
Just wait and see...
Re:Conservatives will bring lawsuits to Canada. (Score:2)
In fact, the concept of the state supported 'intellectual property' has more in common with the idea of state owned means of production than it has with a capitalist free market.
Re:Conservatives will bring lawsuits to Canada. (Score:3, Informative)
The NDP is probably the party that cares most about consumer's interests in laws being passed, but as usual, it is c
Re:OH CANADA (Score:2)
It's kinda a lesser-of-two-evils thing. You can hope that you can moderate Hamas's radical policies, or you can put up with the endemic corruption in the PLO.
The level of corruption in Canada was probably a lot less than in Palestine, but a lot of Canadian's kinda held their nose and voted Conservative to teach t
Re:OH CANADA (Score:2, Funny)
Meanwhile, in the UK.... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Meanwhile, in the UK.... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Meanwhile, in the UK.... (Score:2)
Self-promotion (Score:5, Informative)
The link in the Slashdot summary goes to someone's blog (yeah, I wonder who "anonymously" submitted it). Here is the actual news item... err, press release... [marketwire.com] (as linked to from that blog).
But it's nice to see that yet another company is telling off the RIAA.
Re:Self-promotion (Score:5, Informative)
So (as we say in Canada), take off, eh!
Re:Self-promotion (Score:2)
Re:Self-promotion (Score:5, Informative)
I don't know if Michael Geist submitted the link, but he's actually a pretty well known columnist and copyright activist. You should check out michaelgeist.com [michaelgeist.com] for some interesting reading.
Lately there has been a lot about the Canadian election and the brouhaha over the CRIA (the Canadian RIAA) and friends supporting a candidate who was the author of a pro-business copyright bill, but generally it's a pretty interesting blog. And who knows, he may even have contributed to the electoral loss of that candidate, the minister who sponsored the bill, and the government who brought it in.
Re:Self-promotion (Score:2)
There is no point in linking to the blog instead of the article unless the blog offers additional insights, regardless of Geist's expertise.
Re:Self-promotion (Score:2)
Re:Self-promotion (Score:2)
Sarmite Bulte, a Liberal Party Canidate was defeated in her riding in this mondays' election, possibly in part due to the media (i belive) started by Jack Kapica's column in the Globe and Mail (link [theglobeandmail.com]
In short, she was previously the Canadian Heritage minister, and she was being wined and dined and donated to by the media industry, and advocating copyright reform that would allow DMCA style C&Ds. She was replaced with an NDP canidat
Re:Self-promotion (Score:2)
does nto matter, site slashdotted already. (Score:2)
Re:Self-promotion (Score:2)
But it's nice to see that yet another company is telling off the RIAA.
I thought Nettwerk was a member of the RIAA. Check it out on RIAA Radar [magnetbox.com].
But this action raises their Karma to where I will not rule out CDs from Nettwerk. This is just in time for the next CD from Delerium!
SueTunes downloads (Score:4, Funny)
Hmmm....$9000 / 600 = $15 per song! and $4500 / 60 = $7.50 per song if you act now!
I see how this new price model works.
Re:SueTunes downloads (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree that illegally copied music is, well, illegal. Shouldn't there be a warning, though, so that the individual being sued has the opportunity to legally purchase the songs in question? 600 songs = $600US on iTunes, more or less.
Re:SueTunes downloads (Score:2)
Re:SueTunes downloads (Score:3, Funny)
Yes, but they can be publically shamed (with pointing and laughter) for stealing such a crappy car.
Re:SueTunes downloads (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: What I don't understand is (Score:2)
Possibly there are other people who don't make that claim on Slashdot.
Re:What I don't understand is (Score:2)
There is a very well hidden non sequitur on your argument. The fact that piracy is increasing doesn't mean that more people are listenning to music. Piracy was almost nonexistent a few years ago, it can (proportionaly) increase a lot and not reach the same amount of people that used to buy CDs.
Re:What I don't understand is (Score:2)
You're kidding, right? About claiming that piracy didn't exist a few years ago?
You think people were't sharing music a few years ago? Recording songs from radio broadcasts? Ripping music from CDs? I would guess you are probably about 13 years old. This kind of thing has been going on at leastsince I was a small child, and that was over 20 years ago in the age of magnetic tape and "push-play-and-record". The fact is in this day and age, the RIAA has successfully demonized the sharing of music without their
Re:What I don't understand is (Score:2)
I'm not downloading music off of p2p networks, but I'm not buying m
Re:What I don't understand is (Score:3, Insightful)
What record companies and RIAA don't get, is the quality of the service together with the available selection. Want yesterdays good music? Don't waste your time going to a music store, s
Re:What I don't understand is (Score:3, Insightful)
Quite a lot of it, they don't. Say I download 100 albums and buy 3 of them. That's still a net gain for the record industry, because had I not been able to download anything, that money would have gone on a graphics card instead.
Look, I despise the RIAA as much as the next guy, but if you're downloading the music of a small band, you're not supporting them. No one will not
Re:What I don't understand is (Score:2)
Re:What I don't understand is (Score:2)
Yes, but is Lacuna Coil's gain of a customer at the expense of another band? You said earlier in your post that you'd put off buying a graphics card to buy music, but you've only got a finite amount of money to make purchases with, and eventually it's going to come down to another CD that you would have purchased, but won't because you can't justify spending more.
So what you get is an indie band that bene
Re:What I don't understand is (Score:2)
Music sales are not all that down. There was an article about a year ago in the LA Weekly about how total CD sales were up, but sales of the Top 10 or so CDs were down. This indicates a lot more depth to sales than the major labels want--people are buying CDs, but they're exposed to a lot more variety (possibly through filesharing) and so it's getting harder and harder to push a model where you sell enormous numbers of a small number of releases. I still buy CDs, but I usually g
Re:What I don't understand is (Score:3, Insightful)
OK, I'll bite. First, I will point out that downloading music via P2P for personal use does not contravene the Canadian Copyright Act or any other Canadian law, so there is no issue of infringing on anyone's proprietary rights. Since the record companies are intent on asserting their rights to the fullest extent of the law (and beyond) I see absolutely no reason to grant the
Re:What I don't understand is (Score:2)
People have been making music since the dawn of time. Paying for it in little bite sized disks is a fairly new invention. If you dont want people to hear your music, then don't release it. The point of releasing music is to get other people to hear it. It is not to make money. especially in the internet age where you dont even have to go out and buy little plastic disks, which do have a real world cost.
What about the artists! they say... how will they get paid?
my answer would be,
Re:What I don't understand is (Score:2)
Most of today's music is shitty, so I don't listen to it. That translates directly into not buying it either. I have yet to hear shitty music as an excuse for downloading it, though. I have heard it used extensively as reason for not listening to it.
Modern "music" is so loaded with complete crap that I haven't listened to the radio regularly for about 5 years now. I may have spent as muc
Re:What I don't understand is (Score:2)
An evil but alternative way to fight the RIAA (Score:4, Interesting)
Evil Twin? (Score:5, Funny)
Has Slashdot found Darl's good twin???
Re:Evil Twin? (Score:2)
A real change of pace... (Score:3, Funny)
To see someone named McBride do something good.
Maybe Darl could learn from this... well probably not.
I LOVE Nettwerk! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I LOVE Nettwerk! (Score:2)
Re:you're going to be disappointed (Score:2)
In Canada, they're released on the Nettwerk label, itself, and carry no copy protection. This, I can verify, as I have both releases.
Try ordering from Amazon.ca, eh. And while you're at it, drop a note to Arista, letting them know that you've done so.
Why RIAA? (Score:3, Interesting)
All I ever hear about RIAA involves lawsuits and similar activities. Do they actually provide anything to the individual record companies besides being a common lobby organization?
Re:Why RIAA? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
This is great news.... (Score:2)
I'll belive it when I see it.
At least this label is a hero (at least at face value):
Nettwerk Music Group has agreed to pay the total expense of all legal fees as well as any fines should the family lose the case against the RIAA.
Given that these guys are the label for BareNaked Ladies, Avril Lavig
Finally!!! (Score:2)
Recently on Slashdot an article said the P2P sharing was still going strong. I'm not really all that surprised because when a group of people finds themselves underseige for some reason it doesn't usually make them stop what they are doing. Just ask the people who live in the Isreali West Bank!
Anyway, suing individual mu
Re:Finally!!! (Score:2)
I've got some answers for him. (Score:4, Interesting)
The pigopolists have been loud, but the rest of us are quietly not using our wallets. Perpetual copyrights and DRM are out of bounds and no one is going to support them.
It's very simple, really, people want their freedom. If you don't want me to share the music you publish, I don't want to buy it. I won't go for technological restrictions either. I'm not giving my money to people who would make sharing a crime. Music is supposed to be shared and it's supposed to be unifying.
It makes me feel good... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It makes me feel good... (Score:2)
I always liked Nettwerk. (Score:4, Interesting)
Nettwerk (Score:2, Insightful)
Someone named McBride AGAINST suing? (Score:2)
I almost fell out of my chair. Good for him!
A Real Fight? (Score:2)
If they can make the RIAA actually prove their case in court then this is worthwhile. If they just plan to cheaply exit by paying the extortion, then we all know which artist we should be downloading and sharing next.
They also sell their music online, free of DRM (Score:2, Informative)
Sticking it to themselves (Score:2, Funny)
Generic Lackey: But, you are [riaa.com] The Man. So does this mean you're sticking it to yourself?
Nettwerk:
Go Nettwerk! (Score:3, Insightful)
Visit their site: http://www.nettwerk.com/ [nettwerk.com]
Guess what they sell. MP3s!
I for one, am going to be writing them a letter thanking them for understanding that not all their customers are crooks and that they shouldn't be punishing everyone because of a few bad apples.
Nettwerk++
Alright Nettwerk (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:5, Insightful)
Even one person winning against the RIAA would be a good thing.
IANAL but I believe that falls under legal precedence, so once a legal decision is made regarding one case, it is applied to all subsequent cases like it.
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:2)
This is incorrect. Until a decision is rendered by an appellate court for whatever district the trial (lower) court is in, other judges within that district are free to ignore, modify, adopt etc. the others ruling. Even then a decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (CA) isn't bind on the 2nd Circuit. Only a Supreme Court decision is binding a
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:2)
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:5, Insightful)
This sets a precedent. Not to mention endears me to that company in particular. I may well go get a list of artists under that label and go buy something just to support them. Or send in a donation saying "Thank you."
Perhaps Nettwerk Music Group will make the same offer to anybody accused of downloading their music. Perhaps others will join in.
Also, paying the legal expenses is HUGE. Now they can get a big time lawyer, and not have to worry about how they can afford it. Lawyers are not cheap. This is why most people settle. Are you really going to pay $6000 to a lawyer to maybe win, or $5000 to the RIAA to make them go away?
But now the money is not theirs, they will fight, and I pray they will win. But either way, this was a Really Good Thing.
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:2)
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:2)
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:2)
Considering what Nettwerk's espousing, I have a lot more respect for them now. I'll see if I can find another way of supporting them that doesn't involve their Web-based marketing/sales efforts, like going and buying a CD or two, or using iTunes... As Sarah McLachl
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:5, Insightful)
They could very well be testing the water, you know. Not many of the families being sued (sorry, extorted) by the RIAA have the resources backing them to even make it possible to stand up to them without going bankrupt in the process, even if they win. Make the RIAA start losing, you start setting precedent. Start setting precedent, the cases start getting thrown out before there is a trial because there's not anything left to back them up. If you can make them start losing, then it doesn't take a lot to end the whole thing; but it takes someone willing and able to stand up and fight back. Publicity stunt? Certainly. Exactly what's needed? Definately.
This case isn't the point! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:5, Informative)
Although they have some GREAT artists signed (Delirium, Guster, BT, Paul van Dyk, and of course their "superstars" BNL and Sarah McLachlan), most of whom have a good understanding of technology and its role in music in the modern world... Nettwerk really doesn't have that much sway in the industry overall.
You can almost think of it more as an artist collective than a real "label".
As for helping just one out of thousands of victims of the RIAA's SLAPP tactics.. Yes, I agree this counts as little more than a PR stunt. But not a self-promoting PR stunt; rather, it attempts to show that "the music industry" doesn't exist as a uniformly-evil and luddite monolithic entity. It shouts the message "go ahead and boycott Sony, but you can still buy new music without selling your soul to Rosen (Somehow, "Mitch Bainwol" doesn't have the same love-to-hate-him feel as Hilary Rosen...).
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:2, Insightful)
You can almost think of it as what a real "label" will become as more artists break away from the coporate megaliths that form the RIAA and embrace distribution networks that let them retain some control over their music, not seem like part of an "evil empire", and make more money while charging their fans less.
This snowball has barely left the top of the hill.
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a major broadside to the spin and misdirection campaign they have going (i.e. We sue sharers because they hurt the artists! We act for the artists! We're being the good guy fighting evil!). Now, one of "the fold" has stood out, and actually declared "You are stating you represent us, but in fact, you're acting way out of line and going contrary to our real wishes.".
The crux being, this record label is an agent for an artist mentioned in a case by the RIAA, and yet both the label and the artist are explicit in not wanting the RIAA to go ahead with the action. The RIAA are doing so. Thus they lose the moral high ground they've been claiming so long to the general public, and showing themselves blatantly to NOT be following the wishes of the artists AND their own members. Which really cuts out a fair portion of their reason for being.
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:2)
If someone like Sarah McLauglan gets up on the stand and says "File sharing actually helps my sales," it will also blow a big hole in the RIAA's legal case. Even if Nettwork only send the signal implicitly by helping to pay the legal fees and filing an amicus curae brief with the court, it'll help.
Of course, the implicit threat that they could do it a second (and third and....) time will also put a big crimp in the RIAA's style.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:2)
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:3, Insightful)
> stunt. If they want to join the fight, then they should use their clout and cash to take a more
> substantive swipe at the RIAA than just a tiny, ineffective gesture.
It is a very big step. RIAA suing a kid is not newsworthy. A Canadian company standing up against
an American organisation to protect an American kid *is* news. Copyright law will not be fixed until
the masses realise how bad the situation i
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:5, Insightful)
The RIAA is suing person X because person X downloaded songs owned by the RIAA AND by company Y. So, the RIAA is taking unauthorized legal action on behalf of company Y, without the permission of company Y. Company Y feels this is NOT the direction it wants to take with unauthorized downloading and is thus suing the RIAA and also agreeing to pay for person X's legal defenses in the fight against the RIAA.
The court system can only make decisions in existing disputes.. so until there's a proper existing dispute, company Y cannot really get involved.
So yes, company Y is definitely now involved in the 'fight' against the RIAA's heavy-handed legal tactics... Tactics which company Y (and most likely many other smaller labels) do NOT approve.
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud - Quick exit (Score:2)
So can't the RIAA just make this go away by dropping their claim of infringement against that one song? Seems such a quick exit for them that I'm surprised they haven't done it already.
terrorists? (Score:2)
I remember when
Re:Oh, fer cryin' out loud (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually, it would smash their entire "doing it for the artist" excuse to bits. And the artists are the real owners of the rights. It would really hurt if all their artists did this to them.
Re: Satan? (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, but only because he needs to make a winter trip to Canada to straighten these people out.
Re:Oh, look. Reporting Companies of the RIAA... (Score:2)
Re:Oh, look. Reporting Companies of the RIAA... (Score:2)
"So, what are the ramifications of a portion of the RIAA suing itself?"
It's not the RIAA suing itself. The RIAA is a trade group, of which many record companies are members.
Think of it more like a doctor suing the AMA.
Anyway, this isn't too uncommon. I knew a guy who ran a guy who ran an indie record company. He said on more than one occasion that although he was a member of the RIAA (for all the benefits that joining provided), the RIAA did not speak for him.
For what it's worth, this guy was y