PDA

View Full Version : RIAA - Hypocrisy at it's finest!



LouCipherr
12-Jan-2011, 03:23 PM
Source: http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=20632

Text from article:

After infringing on thousands of artists' works, the big four labels agree to collectively pay them $45M USD

Since the 1980s, record companies have taken tracks from musicians who had not signed with them and put them on a "pending list". This left thousands of musicians receiving no royalties as the major labels used, distributed, and even profited off their tracks.

In Canada alone, this situation reached the point where 300,000 tracks, some dated back to the 1980s were listed as "pending". Some musicians were actively working -- to no avail -- to stop the record companies from pirating their tracks.

Now they have a bit of vindication. After a long class action lawsuit dating back to 2008, filed on behalf of angry independent musicians, Warner Music, Sony BMG Music, EMI Music, and Universal Music have in effect acknowledged that they were engaging in copyright infringement. They have agreed to settle to the tune of $45M USD.

The Canadian Recording Industry Association CRIA, the Canadian sister organization of the RIAA, and the organization that represents the major labels claim that the payout is not an admission of guilt. They write, "The settlement is a compromise of disputed claims and is not an admission of liability or wrongdoing by the record labels."

Apparently they believe that they did not pirate tracks or commit copyright infringement because they hoped to pay artists at some point -- although they never did. In essence, their argument also boils down that it was too hard to find and legally purchase the tracks.

Unfortunately, the victory for the small artists is mostly symbolic. In Canada, the U.S., and abroad, major record labels plan to continue to sell music they've essentially pirated from "unknown artists". The lawsuit does nothing to change this situation.

Equally unfortunate is the hypocrisy of these record labels, which have perpetually worked to block the public from experiencing the same joys of piracy that's made record company executives rich and corpulent.

They've been hard at work funneling money to politicians to try to pass new international laws and treaties like ACTA, which could send peer-to-peer engine developers and those who share pirated music and movies to prison for the first time.

This irony is duly noted by the artists in the lawsuit, who write, "The conduct of the defendant record companies is aggravated by their strict and unremitting approach to the enforcement of their copyright interests against consumers."

The wife of Edwyn Collins, a major 90s British alternative star with the band Orange Juice, summed it up nicely, while describing how British record labels had stolen her husband's work and blocked him from posting it himself on online. She stated, "[We are] aware of who the biggest bootleggers are. It's not the filesharers. [A Girl Like You is sold] not by Edwyn, [but] by all sorts of respectable major labels whose licence to sell it ran out years ago and who do not account to him."



While this is a tiny, tiny step in the right direction for artists whose work has been priated by the one entity who supposedly is trying to "fight" piracy with all it's might, it's not enough. I believe this article is a prime example that file sharers are not the majority of the music industry's problem, it's the industry and it's supporters themselves that are mostly responsible for the decline.

Not only that, but these bozos agree to pay the $ for these tracks they have <ahem> "borrowed" and swore to pay back "eventually" and never did - they're going to pay the fine, but apparently continue exactly the same practice they're being fined for now. It makes me wonder why ANYONE would want to try and make it in the music business with one of the big labels supposedly "behind" them. :rolleyes:

I say fuck 'em, let them die and let the system collapse. Musicians are finding out you don't need the support of a major label anymore to make a living at music...thanks to the far-reaching hand of the internet.

MinionZombie
12-Jan-2011, 05:43 PM
Jesus Christ ... it's at times like these I wish I could slap such organisations around the face with a very large, very real, "fuck you Whale Shark" - a smack to their face with such brute force that it expels all the retarded hypocrisy and nonsense from their very beings.

And if they weren't admitting guilt, they wouldn't have written a cheque for $45 million ... sheesh ... they literally are living in their own world. It's incredible that they're going to continue as well. All such examples of stupidity and hypocrisy such as this, in all walks of capitalist life, need to be rammed up the butt with the stick of common sense and decency.

MikePizzoff
12-Jan-2011, 07:59 PM
So the musicians are COLLECTIVELY receiving $45 million? As in splitting the $45m amongst all of them? That's horse shit. In Canada alone, there were 300,000 tracks used. That's only $150 per track. Then just think of how many American tracks were involved. So each musician/group is probably going to see a check most likely ranging anywhere between $3 and $30. Whoopiiieee!!!

blind2d
12-Jan-2011, 08:27 PM
Yeah... hard to stay positive with things like this happening... fuck EMI, too. Just saying...
Um, yeah... anyway, hope this gets better, and people grow brains, all that... Can't be expected to, I suppose, but yeah... The future... not looking so good...
Good thing I'm not going into the industry!

acealive1
12-Jan-2011, 08:38 PM
and they said "pirates" are killing the music industry....hardly.

LouCipherr
12-Jan-2011, 08:45 PM
So the musicians are COLLECTIVELY receiving $45 million? As in splitting the $45m amongst all of them? That's horse shit. In Canada alone, there were 300,000 tracks used. That's only $150 per track. Then just think of how many American tracks were involved. So each musician/group is probably going to see a check most likely ranging anywhere between $3 and $30. Whoopiiieee!!!

Yeah, meanwhile, the RIAA is probably suing some of those musicians (and other average joe's) for downloading music and charging them anywhere from $3,000-$30,000 PER SONG! - AND - they are not discontinuing this practice, just paying off what they supposedly (and I say that extremely sarcastically) owe the musicians they've been ripping off since the 80's. I think 45mil is nowhere NEAR enough.

This is why I said this is hypocrisy at it's finest. The gall of these fuckers at the RIAA.. it knows no bounds, man.

As usual, the 'labels' make out, while the people who give those labels the music that makes them rich get fucked and remain poor.

My view is pretty much like this: If you're in an Indie band, and are against "filesharing" - I'll buy your cd's if I like your music. If you're a band on a major label? I'm not buying jack of yours. Why? Because doing so puts money into the pockets of these idiot major labels who A) price-fixed CD's in the 90's and continue to do so, and B) they accuse pretty much every one of their patrons of being "pirates" while they, themselves, are guilty of exactly the same fucking thing. :mad:

Publius
13-Jan-2011, 11:09 AM
And if they weren't admitting guilt, they wouldn't have written a cheque for $45 million ... sheesh ... they literally are living in their own world. It's incredible that they're going to continue as well.

I don't think they disagreed that royalties were owed. That's why they're paying up. They just deny that they were intentionally withholding the royalties. And as far as continuing, I don't think the lawsuit even requested that the court order them to stop. They're just expected to continue paying royalties in the future.


So the musicians are COLLECTIVELY receiving $45 million? As in splitting the $45m amongst all of them? That's horse shit. In Canada alone, there were 300,000 tracks used. That's only $150 per track. Then just think of how many American tracks were involved. So each musician/group is probably going to see a check most likely ranging anywhere between $3 and $30. Whoopiiieee!!!

It's a Canadian case that only covers the 300,000 tracks on the Canadian "pending lists." So all copyright-holders will be receiving at least $150, and most probably much more (multiple tracks).

MinionZombie
13-Jan-2011, 11:45 AM
I don't get this 3k-30k per song nonsense. A person downloads one copy of, say, Enter Sandman ... one copy ... not 30,000 copies. :rolleyes:

A big old hypocrisy turd sandwich is this, and further nonsense from the big bully boys. If they were properly concerned about piracy:

1) They wouldn't be fucking over artists themselves.
2) They'd go after the source, not some random soccer mom.

You don't deal with heroin transport by going after some skaghead down an alleyway, you go after the gangs and groups organising that shit.

LouCipherr
14-Jan-2011, 02:15 PM
I don't get this 3k-30k per song nonsense. A person downloads one copy of, say, Enter Sandman ... one copy ... not 30,000 copies. :rolleyes:

Neither do I, but I've seen cases with the RIAA (Jammie Thomas anyone?) where the fine per-song was more than what someone would be charged for being caught with a 1/2 ounce of cocaine in their pocket (ie: a felony offense). Makes no sense.

MinionZombie
14-Jan-2011, 06:30 PM
Neither do I, but I've seen cases with the RIAA (Jammie Thomas anyone?) where the fine per-song was more than what someone would be charged for being caught with a 1/2 ounce of cocaine in their pocket (ie: a felony offense). Makes no sense.

Such bullshit in itself should be illegal.

It would be called the "don't be a twat" law.

LouCipherr
14-Jan-2011, 07:28 PM
Such bullshit in itself should be illegal.

It would be called the "don't be a twat" law.

Yes it should, but right now it stands as the "do as I say, not as I do" law. :rolleyes:

darth los
14-Jan-2011, 08:14 PM
Well Lou, As the old saying goes, "Behind every fortune there is a CRIME."

And if crime is too strong a word there was without a doubt some underhanded shit going on."

:cool: