?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

A blurb on Slashdot caught my sweetie's attention, and she passed it along to me. It is very interesting:

What Various Studies Really Reveal About File-Sharing

In this case, they're talking about file-sharing as it pertains to the distribution of music through peer-to-peer sites. While the RIAA claims that it costs millions of dollars every year in lost sales, the studies cited seem to paint a different picture.

If you're a recording artist, you probably already hate the RIAA, but this is just more reason to do so.

Comments

( 8 comments — Leave a comment )
niall_shapero
May. 7th, 2012 09:26 pm (UTC)
A question
Not being a music person, I don't know these things, but what precisely irritates you about the RIAA? (I'm serious - I don't know, and the only way I can find out is ask "stupid" questions...)
ebenbrooks
May. 7th, 2012 10:27 pm (UTC)
Re: A question
The RIAA is behind the anti-piracy movement and is mainly responsible for all the anti-piracy legislation which led to the demise of some of the more popular file-sharing sites, like Napster (which eventually came back in another form).

The problem I have with them is that, while they claim to be "protecting the interests of recording artists", what they are really doing is preventing those same recording artists from pursuing independent or creative ways of distributing their material. Basically, they want to hang on to "the system" that has worked so well for them so far, and they're trying to use legislation to prevent inevitable change.
cerrberus
May. 7th, 2012 10:28 pm (UTC)
Isn't it, like, the Republican party of the music industry?
ebenbrooks
May. 7th, 2012 10:35 pm (UTC)
It certainly acts like it.
whswhs
May. 7th, 2012 10:56 pm (UTC)
I've been wondering lately why no one has challenged the huge fines on constitutional grounds. It's right there in the 8th amendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Fines up to $150,000 per song sound excessive to me. Who knows, the Supreme Court might even go for it.
cerrberus
May. 7th, 2012 11:11 pm (UTC)
I dunno- 'corporations are people.'
whswhs
May. 8th, 2012 01:36 am (UTC)
I actually consider that one of their best decisions in a long time, for reasons that would take too much bandwidth to explain here. The common meme about it strikes me as oversimplified at best.
esprix
May. 8th, 2012 11:13 am (UTC)
Indeed, file sharing has caused me to buy *more* music over the years, not less. RIAA is stupid.
( 8 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

April 2017
S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Paulina Bozek