Could the RIAA Just Disappear? 114
BlueMerle writes "Ars Technica is running a story about how EMI is disappointed with RIAA and ultimately they (RIAA) may disappear. 'Is the RIAA as we know it about to disappear? As rumors continue to swirl that EMI will pull its funding from music trade groups like the RIAA and IFPI, an IFPI spokesman tells Ars that the group is in the middle of a major internal review of its operations.'" I wouldn't bet the farm just yet.
is it possible? (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:is it possible? And I was going to say... (Score:2)
But, as for what gets posted, damn it seems awfully cliquish. As in someone can be first submitting, but someone else gets the goods just by posting a different URL and coming up with a slash-baiting jingle.
Maybe to combat this, Slash should rotate submitters and limit them to x-number per month or quarter and put of a "compliance" graph showing that the same, tired old names are sidelined for a while. Well, unless worse submissions run for a while...
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it the RIAA who actually represents the labels in court? That's the impression I've gotten.
Re:is it possible? (Score:5, Funny)
I believe the RIAA represents them collectively in major things, while on the little things its the individual members.
Examples:
RIAA vs XM / Sirius / MP3.com / Random MP3 Player maker
Sony vs 90 Year Old Woman
Warner vs Mountain Hermit
EMI vs 10 year old girl
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:is it possible? (Score:5, Funny)
Huh, and here I was thinking the RIAA was supposed to be a standards body promulgating a common equalization curve for grooved recordings. Will wonders never cease.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They are. They are also the ones who forgot to tell the labels that the Compact Disc is a standard format used to sell music. Now we have incompatible and dangerous shiny plastic round things that no longer follow the standard that works and is safe. Visit any CD section and look for the Compact Disc logo on any of them. The RIAA fell down on this one.
Re: (Score:1)
The purpose of RIAA lobbying is to create a legislative environment in which a body of pro-DRM case law can develop, therefore removing that lobbying is a meaningful act within the context in whic
Re:is it possible? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is not about the RIAA disappearing as in "going away". This is about the RIAA and IFPI merging operations. This would probably actually make things worse, because the combined agency would be larger, would have jurisdiction over more than just the United States, and would continue doing its current work.
It's about finding ways of consolidating operations. And like a company that does this successfully, the resulting agency could actually end up stronger than the RIAA as it currently exists.
Re:is it possible? (Score:5, Funny)
You must be new here...
It had to be said, I'm so sorry...
Re:is it possible? (Score:5, Insightful)
The RIAA is effectively an (effective) oligopoly and in that sense it is disappearing. EMI, having new owners, being the first of these labels to sell their tracks without DRM, and now questioning the value of the RIAA and IFPI clearly seems to realize that this oligopoly as it stands is no longer of benefit to them.
That's not to say that a restructured RIAA/IFPI won't become an effective oligopoly as well or that this is what the submitter was addressing, but this very well could mean the RIAA is 'going away' and it is a clear indication that the RIAA in its current (i.e. anti-consumer) form is going away.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, now that Big Media has pretty much got the developed world's governments in their pocket. The real story here is that soon the Big Media/Big Pharma candidate will be replacing our Big Oil president, so the
Re: Great Idea (Score:2)
We could power a Car Analogy off the engine of First Post angry replies to other comments.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, from the Record Industry's point of view "disappearing" or "renaming" RIAA to something else or merging it with any other org so their name gets changed but mission is basically the same would be
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Neither the RIAA nor the IFPI has any jurisdiction anywhere, since they are not parts of the justice system (police and courts).
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Hope I'm wrong, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Hey, can you copy it and post a torrent for us?
No! Don't go RIAA! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Then they came for the grandmas, and I laughed because they're all technophobic
Then they came for the people without computers, and I laughed because they couldn't possibly be guilty
Then they came for me, and no-one was left to laugh at me.
Sweet. I got the last laugh.
Re: (Score:2)
What important purpose? Helping them buy politicians more efficiently? That may be an important purpose for them, but I'm not going to cry overmuch if it collapses.
Well.... (Score:1)
Hint: NO!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Disappearing is not nearly painful enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, (Score:2)
Bill Hicks' God (Score:1, Flamebait)
RIAA ? (Score:5, Interesting)
So is this really that big a story? or are they just reallocating their resources?
Answer: Yes (Score:5, Insightful)
RIAA days are numbered.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
then we need the push for selling music and other audio in ogg and flac formats! lets not loose the momentum on this one.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
RIAA says... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm okay with that.
YES (Score:2)
That's pretty much what I was going to write!
If the RIAA disappeared... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The RIAA isn't filing lawsuits, their members are. If EMI sues you, then you countersue EMI.
But countersuing Sony would be lots more fun.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Here's Proof: (Score:3, Informative)
With Sony BMG deal, Amazon will offer unlocked MP3s from all major labels. RIAA days are numbered...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Not betting farm but will put up the cows (Score:5, Insightful)
I think what is really important is that their is an internal review going on, maybe a large shakeup will ensue and we can hope to get everything back to the way it should be. Protecting users from fake copies of albums, and protecting musicians from mass pirating. Your always going to have an underground community, you're just going to have to make sure your product is superior and stop the major counterfeiters.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, and lord knows capitalism is the only way one can make a living and besides it's your god-given right.
Oy vey - deprogrammers needed!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Music doesn't need an industry to survive, or even thrive. Distribution is no longer an issue, except to those who wish to control it. Production will always be profitable, if enough people like what you produce.
Re: (Score:2)
It is obvious that the RIAA has caused a considerable amount of harm to the image of the recording industry, as well as affiliated organisations like the MPAA and the motion picture industry.
The most damaging thing of all, it has brought a new 'public' focus on the whole principle of copyright, on ho
Re: (Score:1)
Ask yourself. Should we be basing an industry on culture and expression? Shouldn't free access to culture and society be the right of every living being?
Dentists (Score:1, Offtopic)
Sorry, I RTFA (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Same ___ Different Name (Score:2)
"The customers took down the Central Lawsuit Server, so they went distributed. Now you have no idea how many fragments of the former RIAA there are, and you can never be sure you've got them all."
No... (Score:3, Funny)
What's the replacement? (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a few things that still have to change:
1) Copyright should be reduced in duration.
2) The penalties must be adjusted to be reasonable.
3) People must come to respect the rights of property holders, not violate them blindly. Copyright has lots of negative impliciations when well beyond the term of commercial viability, but I believe that copyright can be adjusted to accomodate both that and the property rights of the creator.
4) Slashdot-crowd must abandon the notion that "not-for-profit" redistribution of someone else's work should be permitted without permission of the rights holder.
--
Our microcontroller kit. Your code. Instructional guide and free videos. [nerdkits.com]
Re:What's the replacement? (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Copyright should be reduced in duration.
Copyright in the digital age is dead and quite useless. As laborers realize that their real income comes from billing for labor to-be-done, rather than billing for labor already-done, copyright will quickly dissolve to being useless. Artists are laborers, and those who realize that their future incomes will be derived from that which can't be easily duplicated by others will be the ones who profit and stay in business. Performing live is something that others can't easily mimic. Supply and demand, friends. There's a near limitless supply of digital content, so the price falls to near zero. There's a VERY finite supply of the time a specific artist can perform, so their income will come from selling that time to fans (i.e., live concerts or performances). Yes, this creates a real dilemma for writers, but I believe that MOST readers will prefer the artist's accepted printed book rather than the knock-off.
2) The penalties must be adjusted to be reasonable.
The penalties for being caught violating copyright are the least important factor in the situation. The time, and money, spent fighting a legal battle against an organization with a scale of income many MANY times higher than the defendant are the real costs. If you are found guilty of a civil violation, you declare bankruptcy and the judgment goes away. You don't get back the years, and tens of thousands of dollars, that you lost fighting to save your name. Reducing penalties will likely not fix this problem.
3) People must come to respect the rights of property holders, not violate them blindly.
OK, I won't steal the physical CD you have. The minute that I use my labor to duplicate something else, that product is mine. If I see you made a neat toilet, and I spend my hours buying porcelain, laying it into a form, and making my own toilet, you should have little control over how I move my arms, and use my mind, to duplicate the product that I want. Copyright, and other intellectual property restrictions, do little to promote new content or creations. The biggest wall for content creators is distribution, not creation. Millions, even billions of people create content, but only a few are able to distribute it.
I respect the rights of PHYSICAL property holders, but I see no reason why they should control how I think or use my body and tools.
4) Slashdot-crowd must abandon the notion that "not-for-profit" redistribution of someone else's work should be permitted without permission of the rights holder.
Actually, the "not-for-profit" redistribution and re-creation of another person's original thoughts is a positive for the original creator, as it is a free form of marketing and advertising for them. Artists who tour regularly should LOVE people duplicating their digital works to friends and family and co-workers. Studio time is akin to the time (and money) one spends going to college or getting another education. It is what you DO with that education (i.e. studio time) as a long term labor that dictates how you get paid for your education.
Just because a guy spent 4 years in college doesn't mean I should pay him $50,000 a year. Just because a band spent 4 years working on an album doesn't mean that their recorded work is worth a single penny to me. The laws of supply and demand, while restricted by ridiculous IP laws, will still win out in the long run.
The RIAA is worthless, and many bands that I work with and am friends with realize that already. The only bands who care are the ones who sold their souls to their management companies in exchange for access to the monopolized distribution sectors (radio, TV, large distro magazines) which are already going the way of the do-do. Radio, TV and large distro mags will soon be worthless in the next digital era.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The cost for most works today is not in the duplication but in the production. What you describe essentially dooms any artform that can't be performed live, which is a huge number versus the handful that can. It affects more than just writers, it affects anyone whose works can be or are digital in nature.
And no, most people will go for the cheapest version available which will always be the knockoff, be it physical or digital, because they have only the cost of duplication (which is trivial or non-existent
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
"Supply and demand, friends. There's a near limitless supply of digital content, so the price falls to near zero."
This does not mean that music should be free, it means that today's "a la carte" method of selling music is obsolete.
A rough comparision would be to the cable industry. When you subscribe to cable, you are not forced to pay for each television show that you watch, you simply pay a flat rate and watch as much as you want. This is how recorded music must now be "sold."
Musicians and labels should license their recordings to cell phone companies and ISPs for a flat rate and allow people to download as much as
Re: (Score:1)
OK, I won't steal the physical CD you have. The minute that I use my labor to duplicate something else, that product is mine. If I see you made a neat toilet, and I spend my hours buying porcelain, laying it into a form, and making my own toilet, you should have little control over how I move my arms, and use my mind, to duplicate the product that I want. Copyright, and other intellectual property restrictions, do little to promote new content or creations. The biggest wall for content creators is distribution, not creation. Millions, even billions of people create content, but only a few are able to distribute it.
And you're welcome to write your own songs, books, or even produce your own movies.
Look, if you build your own toilet, you're replicating a template. If you digitally copy a song, film, novel, whatever, you're not copying a design, you're appropriating a unique expression of it. It's not like hand-crafting your own version of an existing product at all, which is why I wish people participating in this sort of debate would give up trying to draw analogies to physical products.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, sometimes it's too finite. Some music (certain electronic music, for example) can't be produced live. Prints of a painting can be easily and professionally reproduced. Writers, as you said
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, live performances will always make money for certain kinds of artists. However, the amount of money that can be spent on production will be greatly limited.
How would you handle movies? Anything that takes more than a camcorder and maybe 100 hours on a PC editing to produce would never recoup its costs under your proposed system. You might argue that $100M movies aren't worth th
Re: (Score:1)
That's still an excellent development (Score:2)
So EMI will no longer farm out its enforcement duties to the RIAA.
So if you countersue, your suit will actually be applied to the person who brought the suit in the first place and not their disposable puppet.
This is why mob bosses contract hits out - makes it harder for the law to find them. What we have here is a mob boss who is unhappy with his hitman and is going to do his own hits. Should make it easier for the law to reach the responsible party.
It would be a layer off the onion at least, whic
Re: (Score:1)
Yes (Score:2, Insightful)
My only real hope is that they decide to be less evil in their new incarnation.
And Just Like That (Score:1, Offtopic)
They're gone...
In twenty years, the RIAA is going to be a spook story that criminals tell their kids at night. "Rat on your pop, and the RIAA is going to come and serve you with a lawsuit!"
they will disappear regardless (Score:2)
so the only question about their disappearance is will it be gradual, as those who fund them slowly wither away themselves, or will it be quick and dramatic, as those who fund th
Record labels could disappear, too (Score:5, Insightful)
Except for the very top tier, artists make very little from record sales. Why bother? Just give the music away for free and make money the way artists have for a long time: from live performances and merchandising. Consumers will be happy, artists will do as well as or better than they ever have, and all of this foolishness will go away. A bunch of greedy record execs will be looking for work, but will anyone care?
Too bad the RIAA won't have a grave... (Score:2, Funny)
Too fricking much making my brain hurt! (Score:4, Interesting)
So, how does this add up? Does EMI pulling away from RIAA defang SoundExchange thereby seriously reducing the threat to internet radio? Or in the ironic comedy of the new century, does the RIAA, with sounds of a death rattle (added for drama, I'm shameless), turn around and unleash SoundExchange on EMI and bring suit under the same grounds as the attack on internet radio?
Don't Give Me Wet Dreams (Score:3, Insightful)
Not holding breath. (Score:1)
RIAA=roll back the clock (Score:2)
And yet... (Score:3, Insightful)
And yet... EMI is still the only label offering content in iTunes+. That's the DRM free side of iTunes, btw.
So it doesn't look like RIAA is going to go away, its just likely to lose 25% of its membership body. Well, even less than that, since EMI doesn't actually possess 25% market share.
EMI has been going against its brethren for a while now. Let us hope they don't fail...
No surprise (Score:1)
At least, that's my theory.
Gravy Train Runs Out Of Steam . . . (Score:1)
no, you'd have to douse RIAA with buckets of water (Score:2)
and their little dog, too.
Whoo hoo! (Score:2)
AARI (Score:3, Funny)
AARI (with a new logo and everything)...
Old news (Score:2)
No new music for me.
don't tease (Score:1)
You know what they say... (Score:1)
RIAA go away? : when bandits eschew cash maybe (Score:1)
now you clones all think ya gonna rip them guys off?
not without a fight and guess what: they got the law on their side
if ya pirating music on a p2p net my advice is quit and hope you ain't already on their list
With apologies to Douglas Adams (Score:2)
There is another that states that this has already happened.
Now we have to act (Score:1)
http://geekandpoke.typepad.com/geekandpoke/2008/01/bloggers-manife.html [typepad.com]
Bye,
Oliver