Good ole' RIAA... bringin everyone down with them.

The Record Companies make one master recording and then make millions of copies. I heard that a CD including packaging costs about $0.13 Which means when they sell a CD for $20 they make more than 15000% profit. And I thought the oil companies were greedy.

Do you honestly think it costs 13 cents to produce a cd? Even if that covered the cost of actual cd and case it doesn't account for the studio time, promotion, shipping or the money the artist makes. Get real...

Actually, when you factor the number of copies produced by the big labels (millions and millions in some cases), its more like $.20. Most promotion is done with radio play (where a free copy is given), and on average most artists only make a few cents per copy sold.

Most of the band's that aren't opposed to downloading will tell you that they make their money on tour, and thru merchandising.

I should have listened to my role models and went to law school :(

hahaha.. Its not too late man!

I wish the goverment would let the RIAA die. A new organization would take over, and probably not have a 1920's business model. This is the grossest form of embezzlement I have ever seen.

We need to launch a campaign and march on DC, maybe we could be heard then.

What is really scary is that courts and congress have bowed to the windfalls of money and influence. This is nothing else, but a racketeering attempt.

I am so fricking tired of the RIAA and there bullcrap. They makes billions, and never do there profits take a tumble, even with piracy. They need to stop hammering every fricken thing that comes down the pipe. People have recorded radio shows and songs for decades. HEY REMEMBER TAPES, THEY RECORDED STUFF STUPID'S. Just cause recording nowadays is digital is no reason to get all anal. I know guys who have Hundreds of VHS tapes of tons of crap from decades ago. They will do it regardingless of the qaulity. So the RIAA should have tried this crap back then. And since they didnt they have no reason to complain now. They lost there chance.

Once aqgain we see an RIAA that has to much power but don't forget that the courts are also responsible because they have generally back up this facist organization. Riaa tried this same tactic in the 80's wehn cd's and cassettes were in use and the courts shot them down. The courts ruled that as long as a person made copies and didn't try to sell them it was ok to record.

During the Clinton administration the DMCA was passed. The result is that you have the right to make a copy of a legally owned recording for personal use, but if the recording has some protection scheme or DRM and you defeat it to make a personal archive you become a criminal. So, in effect, the industry slaughtered fair use and used our legislators to get it done. Thats why you hear them ranting about how you must buy a new CD if your old one bites the dust.

Forget the idea that the industry was bragging up how CD's would last decades when they were pushing the tehnology on the public back in the 80's.

Given the track record of the recording industry (payola, shorting royalties, creative accounting, etc.) I find it amazing that congressmen are so quick to jump in the industry bandwagon and pass some of the legislation we have seen.

Coming around the corner is a new initiative that will force devices including TVs and Radios to implement the broadcast flag scheme by 2009. Then you wont even be able to time s*** or digitally record TV programming with the flag enabled by the broadcaster.

Any guesses as to how legislators are being motivated to pass these technology killing measures?

Big money, big payola!

Finally a good post. This is all to preserve a dieing business model for the RIAA. If the government would leave them alone, they could die out and another, more deserving, entity could appear.

I think we should hit congress from all angles and get recordings in libraries, that would be the single greatest thing to stop them!

*The result is that you have the right to make a copy of a legally owned recording for personal use*

Show me the proof of this. Show me a website, where this is true. Because its NOT. The property is OWNED by the manufacturer, if THEY don't give you EXPRESS permission to do so, the goverment isn't going to support you.

If you read the article it states that its legal to copy *IF* the owning party doesn't have STRICT restrictions and copy protection AGAINST it. If they don't specifically say you can copy it, then you can't LEGALLY copy it, READ!

"The result is that you have the right to make a copy of a legally owned recording for personal use, but if the recording has some protection scheme or DRM and you defeat it to make a personal archive you become a criminal."

OK we will start with this web site:

http://www.usg.edu/legal/copyright/#part1

If you still are not convinved here is a link to the RIAA website, where the RIAA openly states that copying CD content for personal use is OK:

http://www.riaa.com/issues/ask/default.asp#stand

If after reading you still have issues with my statement please let me know. I will be happy to provide several resources on personal copying under the fair use doctrine.

So, let me get this straight... if I plug in an XM to my soundcard, and record on my computer, that's legal. If I record onto the hard drive in the unit, that's illegal?

I thought a long time ago we established that taping/recording off the radio was legal. You can't sell it, and that's cool. No selling bootlegs.

Someone with the device, please tell me if I'm wrong, but that audio is effectively trapped on the device, is it not??

Nice point drumcat!
Wonder what the RIAA thinks about that.

ah, you are forgetting, radio is a re broadcast with commercials, you want to record that crap, go ahead.

XM is digital 5.1 high quality recordings, on a PRIVATE network (you have to subscribe to get it).

This is what the lawyers will say, I am not disagreeing with you, I am just saying that they will argue there IS a difference.

So, let me get this straight... if I plug in an XM to my soundcard, and record on my computer, that's legal. If I record onto the hard drive in the unit, that's illegal?

XM's terms of Service:

You may not reproduce, rebroadcast, or otherwise transmit the programming, create unauthorized recordings of the programming, charge admission specifically for the purpose of listening to the programming, or distribute play lists of the Services.

With that said the music that you are copying from xm is protected under its own terms and its being broadcast on xm or any radio station has no bearing on those terms. Hence, this lawsuit...

I think that if it goes much further out of control the RIAA will seek to hospitalize anyone found humming one of their tunes and the MPAA will hospitalize anyone claiming to have invisioned a scene from their movie in order to preform a lobotomy. Lets not inform them that the human mind is capable of storing data. Humans are on the verge of becoming an illegal device.

XM satellite radio can be used with somebody else's recording devices; so the RIAA accomplishes nothing. I was happy to see that the ALLMAN BROTHERS and other artists have filed a lawsuit against a crooked RIAA member company.

SONY is one of the biggest pushers of blank media and devices to make pirated music and movies. Throw those hypocrites in jail for ripping off their own artists and add ad extra time for the computers destroyed by their damned root kits...

"Fair use" shot in the a** again...

The RIAA has been given entirely too much power. What's next, suing anyone who manufactures a stereo that has a tuner and tape deck? After all, that would allow you to record what's on the radio. That won't happen (yet) and here's my opinion on why.

The issue is that you can get a recording at cd quality, supposedly (I'm not an XM subscriber, so I can't comment on the audio quality). The RIAA didn't give much of a rat's a** about making copies of tapes or recording radio, until there was a way to do the same things digitally, without loss of quality over generations of recording. Now that we, the consumer, have the ability to protect our investments, they're up in arms.

the quality isnt even FM quality. far below what a Cd would sound like. its total BS.

This is how the RIAA makes money, right?

If the RIAA were to persue and win this case based on the per violation provisions there would be no more XM Radio. If XM has sold 1000 recording devices and each user records only 100 songs (and at 400 bucks per player you got to know they have) that is 100,000 x 150,000 = $15,000,000,000.00 (15 Billion Dollars).

This is the kind of power our legislators have been handing the RIAA members and this is exactly why people have got to get involved in this war against buying our government. The idea that any recording from radio is worth more than a few cents is just incredible. Under present law the industry has been handed the power to coerce many corporations into bankruptcy. Future legislation may well prevent the development of technologies that could be vital to our future and security. We passed the point of legislated copyright absurdity years ago, yet the industry is still whining for more laws to punish citizens and eliminate fair use.

It is past time for people to get up and start communicating with their senators and congressmen. There is very little time left.

I have NEVER heard a song worth 150,000.. WOWW must have been a great song..

Can some ask for FULL discloser of ALL RIAA company books. So the artists can get paid???

Artists need to file a class-action against their labels and the RIAA.

The labels for royalties, and RIAA for recovered funds from lawsuits, etc.

The only way to fix this is to tear it down to the bones and rebuild it.

Besides that, its impossible to know who actually downloaded the song.. I may be an XM subscriber, which I am not, but I were I could have downloaded it to my player, they would never know. Its satellite, its not by-directional, so there is no way they can determine who had the song, and who didn't.

I know 150k still seems rediculous even for 1 song, but its not about the song, its the principle and they want to make it clear that you are not to do it again, that's how serious it is.. at least to them.

If you were late from curfew, and your parents told you to be home by midnight, you were 1 minute late, maybe they take away allowance, phone and force you to stay home for a week. That would suck, and you would probably protest, and you would be highly upset that the cost was so high.. But you wouldn't be late again, now would you?

But you wouldn't be late again, now would you?

Hell yeah!

But then again, I *was* kind of a problem child....

You? A problem child? Wow imagine that..

That is surprising.. :) I can't imagine you don't conform to rules, huh.. Well I'll be..

So how are they going to charge 150000k for each song downloaded when the RIAA has absolutily no proof of downloads.

That's one of the problems. It seems like they don't NEED proof that anything was actually downloaded, they only need to show that the POTENTIAL was there! The laws have gone crazy.

This cracks me up (copied from http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/092702_2.asp)...

Myth: The IRFA is designed to help small businesses.

Fact: The overwhelming majority of artists are themselves small businesses, who struggle to earn a living through making music. The IFRA will directly harm these artists – by denying them royalty payments – in order to subsidize webcasters that earn revenues of $6 million.

Get ready for more cavity searching. The Intellectual Property Protection Act of 2006, sponsored by R/TX Lamar Alexander will bolster RIAA and MPAA efforts, while punishing consumers to near death. Read about it here:
http://www.publicknowledge.org/issues/hr2391 Say goodbye to your MP3, TiVo and DVR toys also.

Already got 'em.

I'm keeping them.

Ain't no-one coming into my house to take 'em away without getting up close and personal with my shotgun.

And yes, I realize that makes me look like some hick from Alabama. Maybe they've got the right idea (About property rights, not sleeping with cousins/siblings)

*grin*

They don't need to get physical. They can simply control our abilities remotely. DVR's can be sent code updates over the wire. Satellites will control our cars and our dogs. Black helicopters will follow every one of us everywhere we go. Hee hee hee... Ok, putting down the crackpipe now..

Take the record button of all electronic appliances! Sue all the maker of electronic devices that can record!!! Remove all blank tapes/cd/dvds from the stores!!!

Remove all blank tapes/cd/dvds from the stores!!!

But....How will I back up my, uh... Adult Cinematogrophy library?

yah, lol. What about my videos i want to back up that i um.... made myself?

As a sirius subsciber, I can only say one thing..

-ahem-

Hahahahahahahaha.. AAAAA hahahaahaha..

Thank you.

Ahhh rijp, I was wondering where you were.

As a Sirius subsciber(?), is this why your company doesn't have a portable player yet? Or are they going going to bow to the RIAA and not include one?

Another one! What is this Lawyer heaven or something? MS had it right when they spawned the 'Right to Innovate'. I guess American companies no longer can. Something has to give here, either stagnate via Court actions, else change the system to a more logical one. The R!AA is just taking it for granted that IT is god. They want ALL the money from music. Screw them.

**** the damn RIAA. theres nothing wrong with the device at all. The myfi can do the same thing as the inno. the biggest diference is you can put mp3's on the inno. This has already been delt with back in the 80's. Its just technology making it better. The sound quality from xm is aqutaly worse than if you were to record from an FM station. The RIAA and FCC have no right to butt in, Damn greedy basdards. so now everytime i record a song xm gets sued. well ive recorded well over 500 songs with the inno, so thats $75,000,000. yea that makes sence?
where are they getting this number,for $150,000 for one song. The RIAA have lost there minds.

If this was a radio that recorded to a cassette, would anyone care? No. Yet somehow this is a huge infringment. It hasn't been for 30 years, but now that the device is a magnetic disc and not a magnetic tape, their panties are in a bunch.

I really wish the FCC, FTC, or whomever wants to gain political favor would throw these boneheads under the bus...

Agreed completely. I wish judges will just throw out their case, and any cases in the futures. When was the last good thing that come out of RIAA? Every time they made headline, they are SUING.

would throw these boneheads under the bus...

...and film it.

Imagine the Box-Office totals on *that* baby. That alone would fund the film industry for generations.

Something like that would even get the pirates in the theater...

...or sending attack dogs after pirates... :)

...but pirated copies of it would be on the Web in no time! 8^)

I like the term Pigopolist as coined referring to the music labels. They are arrogant and greedy. There is nothing wrong with seeking to profit from your work, but they go to far by trying to criminalize legal behaviors because it could conceivably allow or influence a user to not have to buy 3 copies of the same product just so they can listen to it in diffent places.

The RIAA is not interested in helping its members compete in the market using innovation or competition. There appears to be no limit on how low they will stoop to make that extra penny.

I love capitalism but it does require that we all play by the same rules. The RIAA and their ilk have their own rulebook and it includes a lot of dirty behavior.

you forget, its not even their work, all they do is press albums and transport them to stores, i mean they do a bit more than that, but all the real work comes from the artists who get assraped by the riaa on royalties.

If this isn't the RIAA just making themselves look like greedier idiots I don't know what it is.

Suing a dead grandma for using it?

Ah stuff falls through the cracks, I don't think it was intentional. Grandma alledgedly downloads song, the justice system takes 2 or 3 years for the case to come to trial, they didnt bother to check (especially when they have 50,000 cases pending) each and every defendent, by the time it went to trial, she died.

If they can give a credit card to a dog, I think grandma should be given some lee way too. At first it seems rediculous, but its not so crazy when you think companies get information that is out of date, and they rely on call centers .. that is another story.

...and my above comment was a simple joke...

Thanks for the short novella, though. ;P

Well maybe I am oversenstive today.. People keep going off on weird things..

Sorry here let me amend my comment..

Hahaha.. that was funny, grandma got run over by a RIAAdeer.

hahahahahahaha
thats possibly the funniest thing ive read in months...