Obama Sides With RIAA, Supports $150,000 Fine per Music Track

[Jason]

The Obama administration for the first time is weighing in on a Recording Industry Association of America file sharing lawsuit and is supporting hefty awards of as much as $150,000 per purloined music track. (http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/03/obama-sides-wit.html)

Thoughts?

[Ancalagon]

Misleading title - Obama himself says nothing, but his administration sides with the RIAA. (Potentially) Important difference.

Nonetheless.... I hate to say it but I'm getting the feeling that the new boss is much like the old boss. I suppose I expect too much too soon, but I was kinda hoping he could have already done more stuff.

[Stoke]

Every politician is in the pocket of at least one organization, considering how cozy he has been with former RIAA people this is no surprise.

[ShivaX]

I see no way that it could stand up in court myself. $150k for a single track is insane, its more than a fucking car or several fucking cars.

Also this:
The government said the damages range of $750 to $150,000 per violation of the Copyright Act was warranted.

So the range is $750 to $150,000? In what fucking world is that a reasonable range? The range is a single paycheck for an average person to 4 or more years of paychecks for a single person. Yeah totally reasonable.

[Sandman]

What I find interesting is what's on one of the links (http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/09/proving-file-sh.html) in that article.

Today, the RIAA -- the lobbying group for the world's big four music companies, Sony BMG, Universal Music, EMI and Warner Music -- admits that the lawsuits are largely a public relations effort, aimed at striking fear into the hearts of would-be downloaders. Spokeswoman Cara Duckworth of the RIAA says the lawsuits have spawned a "general sense of awareness" that file sharing copyrighted music without authorization is "illegal."

That's from September....Obama is supporting extortion basically.

[Jason]

Misleading title - Obama himself says nothing, but his administration sides with the RIAA. (Potentially) Important difference.

Nonetheless.... I hate to say it but I'm getting the feeling that the new boss is much like the old boss. I suppose I expect too much too soon, but I was kinda hoping he could have already done more stuff.

True all the way around. I ripped the title straight from the Wired article if you hadn't noticed. Gotta admit, it grabs attention like they wanted. As for old boss, new boss. That other old saying, "The more things change, the more they stay the same" fits.

That's from September....Obama is supporting extortion basically.

Him, and the rest of the fed government. Perhaps the future that Robocop presented isn't too far off. The part about the corporations ruling all, not the cyborg cop.

[Aggort]

At least the RIAA was supposed to stop Mass Lawsuit's (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122966038836021137.html?mod=rss_whats_news_techn ology) though and only target repeat and obscene offenders. Or do I have that wrong?

[Sandman]

There is little reason to steal music these days anyway. Legal drm free mp3s have become affordable through places like Amazon and iTunes and places like MySpace and artists websites give you previews of albums before they release often. Back when I stole music it was during the early days of iTunes when quality was crap and buying an actual cd meant spending $15 - $20 for just the disc alone. Now you can get the mp3s for less than $10 in most cases and the discs are more reasonable. If they do cost more it's usually because of something extra thrown in. I would reckon I actually own ~75% of what is in my 120GB iPod now.

[TheEpicOfTyler]

Don't buy from the RIAA.

http://www.riaaradar.com/

[Sandman]

Don't buy from the RIAA.

http://www.riaaradar.com/

I wouldn't say that; I do however support buying from them at the cheapest price possible.

[BlackPete]

Don't buy from the RIAA.

http://www.riaaradar.com/

This.

Not to use a tired internet meme, but if it fits...

[pronounconnoun]

So did Obama just lose his college fan base?

[Shadowstorm]

I wouldn't say that; I do however support buying from them at the cheapest price possible.

No, do say that. Regardless of the price, if you buy an album of an artist who is signed to one of the major labels, you are supporting these greedy motherfuckers. Tyler is correct 100%: riaaradar.com is the way to go.

Self-promoting your band and selling your music without a major label with the advent of social networking and the Internet in general is entirely feasible now. Several years ago and up until recently, as an artist, to gain any sort of commercial success, you had to sign to a major label or you would be like a fart in the wind. Not so now. In fact, I just wrote a paper on this subject.

Fuck the RIAA and fuck the labels it represents.

In any case, $150,000 dollars a song is fucking ridiculous and obscene.

[Shadowstorm]

There is little reason to steal music these days anyway. Legal drm free mp3s have become affordable through places like Amazon and iTunes and places like MySpace and artists websites give you previews of albums before they release often. Back when I stole music it was during the early days of iTunes when quality was crap and buying an actual cd meant spending $15 - $20 for just the disc alone. Now you can get the mp3s for less than $10 in most cases and the discs are more reasonable. If they do cost more it's usually because of something extra thrown in. I would reckon I actually own ~75% of what is in my 120GB iPod now.

The industry standard for one song sold digitally is $1. For people who own iPods and other mp3 players that have a massive amounts of storage, this is expensive. You figure that with a 120 GB player, and at $1 a song, and the average three and a half minute song at 4MB at 128 bit rate, that equals to or about 30,000 songs. So at a dollar a song, that's $30,000 bucks. That's way too much.

[Superman's Dead]

So did Obama just lose his college fan base?

God that would be priceless and hilarious.

[LongStepMantis]

The industry standard for one song sold digitally is $1. For people who own iPods and other mp3 players that have a massive amounts of storage, this is expensive. You figure that with a 120 GB player, and at $1 a song, and the average three and a half minute song at 4MB at 128 bit rate, that equals to or about 30,000 songs. So at a dollar a song, that's $30,000 bucks. That's way too much.


Most of my life, I bought records, tapes, and CDs of music where I almost always paid more for an album than the number of songs it contained. $1 a song is pretty low.

Also, 30,000 songs is a shit-ton of songs. If someone was to cram that much music into an iPod, they need to cool it on the music purchases for a while regardless of price. If your average CD has 15 tracks let's say, that's the equivalent of buying 2000 CDs.

I'm just saying. I've been buying music for three decades and haven't come close to buying 2000 albums. I don't speak for everyone, but most people I know fall into the same boat. I see what you're saying, but I think it's way too soon to call a $1 a song "too much".

That being said, the RIAA can burn in the hottest parts of the blackest precincts of hell for all eternity. And the fine amount is fucking retarded.

[Sandman]

128 bit rate is low for my collection....my iPod is 93GB full at 12,000 songs. Yeah, I've put alot of money into music over the last er...13 years or so.

[Shadowstorm]

Most of my life, I bought records, tapes, and CDs of music where I almost always paid more for an album than the number of songs it contained. $1 a song is pretty low.

Also, 30,000 songs is a shit-ton of songs. If someone was to cram that much music into an iPod, they need to cool it on the music purchases for a while regardless of price. If your average CD has 15 tracks let's say, that's the equivalent of buying 2000 CDs.

I'm just saying. I've been buying music for three decades and haven't come close to buying 2000 albums. I don't speak for everyone, but most people I know fall into the same boat. I see what you're saying, but I think it's way too soon to call a $1 a song "too much".

That being said, the RIAA can burn in the hottest parts of the blackest precincts of hell for all eternity. And the fine amount is fucking retarded.

I agree with everyone you've said. There is something to be said of mp3 players that have that much storage and the people who buy them. 120 GB is extreme if we're talking about the average Joe walking in and picking up an iPod.

[LongStepMantis]

128 bit rate is low for my collection....my iPod is 93GB full at 12,000 songs. Yeah, I've put alot of money into music over the last er...13 years or so.

I'm sure many here are the same. I can't stress enough that I do not speak for those of you who do so. All I'm trying to say is that I remember dropping cash on cassettes that would have a few songs per side, in much shittier quality, for more than the $1 per song standard used now.

I'm happy to see $1 a song, I see that as being pretty damn low looking back over my past music purchases. To each their own. I'm sure we'll see even lower prices before long.

[LongStepMantis]

I agree with everyone you've said. There is something to be said of mp3 players that have that much storage and the people who buy them. 120 GB is extreme if we're talking about the average Joe walking in and picking up an iPod.

And that's where I come in. I still buy a fair amount of music, but I'm definitely on the "average consumer" side of the fence nowadays.

[Whunpo]

What a fucking joke. $150,000 a song? How the fuck would anyone pay for that? A single album would be over 2 million dollars.
I'm with Shadowstorm. Before my generation is dead, all music will be freely distributed by the artist. The RIAA claims that piracy is killing the music industry, when it may really be its savior.
I'm doing my senior paper on internet piracy. Should be pretty tight.

[KamaItachi]

I agree with everyone you've said. There is something to be said of mp3 players that have that much storage and the people who buy them. 120 GB is extreme if we're talking about the average Joe walking in and picking up an iPod.

I got a new iPod for Christmas and filled up about 6/7 odd gigs. It comes in at about 5-6 days of non-stop music. It's a fraction of what I used to have, back in the day, but it's still a lot of music for a lot of people.

[Savok]

You're basing this on Obama actually having any idea what's going on, he doesn't which is why Congress is running the country while Obama does endless TV interviews talking about how great he is.

This is what you asked for, America, now you get to live with it.

[Sandman]

You know what's funny? Metallica; the band that started all this essentially is now considering going without major label support.

Metallica's 2008 release "Death Magnetic" was the last the group contractually owed to Warner, and Ulrich said he's ready to consult with another famously anti-corporate artist, Nine Inch Nails' Trent Reznor, about surviving outside the major-label system.



When asked if the band needed a major label, Ulrich, despite being surrounded by Warner reps, didn't mince words. "Without offending any of the good people from the record company in the room, no," Ulrich said. "Let's cut to the chase. . . . The primary -- not the only, but the primary -- function of a record label is to act as a bank. When you're fortunate enough to be successful and so on, you don't need to rely on record companies as the banks. . . .



"We're doing a bunch of shows with Trent this summer in Europe. I look forward to sitting down and talking to him about what's on his radar."


source (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/music_blog/2009/03/metallicas-lars.html)

Is this what they call irony?

[bryan]

You guys are not putting this into context. Obama has a lot more on his plate to worry about it than copyright issues. I know we all hold this issue close to our heart but with the world economy teetering on collapse, I'd rather Obama concentrate on fixing Bush's poor handling of the American economy for the last 8 years.

[mister slim]

I wouldn't say that; I do however support buying from them at the cheapest price possible.

Not really. If you took half of the "cheapest price" for a typical RIAA band and paypaled it to them directly the band would be make at least ten times the money they would if you bought the album normally.

[Shadowstorm]

You guys are not putting this into context. Obama has a lot more on his plate to worry about it than copyright issues. I know we all hold this issue close to our heart but with the world economy teetering on collapse, I'd rather Obama concentrate on fixing Bush's poor handling of the American economy for the last 8 years.

I agree, but this issue has always gotten shoved to the side lines and whenever it is brought up, these bastards are always right there advocating precisely this type of shit that this thread was created to discuss. $150,000 per song is an insane amount of money to pay just for illegally downloading some music off of the Internet. And let's be honest: in my generation, I'll go on a limb and say that the majority of people have tried it. I personally don't know anyone who has not tried some method of downloading music illegally.

This is just scare tactics plain and simple. You can't put everyone in jail, now can you? In a democracy, when the majority of people do something that is illegal, you change the law to reflect the changing needs of society at large. See: Prohibition in the 1920's.

I got a new iPod for Christmas and filled up about 6/7 odd gigs. It comes in at about 5-6 days of non-stop music. It's a fraction of what I used to have, back in the day, but it's still a lot of music for a lot of people.

I'm sure many here are the same. I can't stress enough that I do not speak for those of you who do so. All I'm trying to say is that I remember dropping cash on cassettes that would have a few songs per side, in much shittier quality, for more than the $1 per song standard used now.

I'm happy to see $1 a song, I see that as being pretty damn low looking back over my past music purchases. To each their own. I'm sure we'll see even lower prices before long.

I agree with both of these posts. Also, if you're interested, there are estimates out there that state the popular online music stores could lower their per song price within the 5-25 cents range and still make a profit. $1 a song, in my opinion, is too much.

[Ancalagon]

You guys are not putting this into context. Obama has a lot more on his plate to worry about it than copyright issues. I know we all hold this issue close to our heart but with the world economy teetering on collapse, I'd rather Obama concentrate on fixing Bush's poor handling of the American economy for the last 8 years.

yeah but remember Obama himself probably isnt touching this. At least I hope he isnt.

Rather, the lackeys he hired in the DOJ are, and they seem to think pirating a $1 song is so bad that you should have to pay $150 000. Thats 150 000 times the value of the original thing.

Thats like, if I stole a car worth $100 000, I'd owe whoever I stole it from worth $15 000 000 000. yes thats a 15 with 9 zeroes after it. Does that sound even remotely fair to you? Oh wait you say, its different. How is it different? The RIAA would have you believe that piracy is theft, the same as stealing a car is. They would have you believe that piracy forces prices up, damages the economy, and deprives record companies (I'm not going to say artists here because I'd be lying, and so are they) of moolah, therefore the fine is warranted. How would that not apply to a car?

The ONE good thing, is that according to another article on this, the DOJ doesnt decide the law but only gives advice to judges. However, with bribery and corruption the way it is, oh sorry I meant lobbying, that need not matter.

[National Kato]

You're basing this on Obama actually having any idea what's going on, he doesn't which is why Congress is running the country while Obama does endless TV interviews talking about how great he is.

This is what you asked for, America, now you get to live with it.

Thank you, Australia, for your thorough analysis of our government system.

[Savok]

Thank you, Australia, for your thorough analysis of our government system.
No worries, we're about a year ahead on electing a hollow man who has no idea what he's doing so we have a good idea how it's gonna go for you.

Mind you, America is waking up a lot faster then Australia is.

[muddi900]

No worries, we're about a year ahead on electing a hollow man who has no idea what he's doing so we have a good idea how it's gonna go for you.

Mind you, America is waking up a lot faster then Australia is.

Savok, my man, you have warped view of the world.

[Shjinta]

Savok, my man, you have warped view of the world.

I think he a pretty damn good view of the world. Then again at this point, I just want to sit back and watch obama get shot, and then watch the world fall apart and burn slowly..ever so slowly.

[OUX]

Is this what they call irony?

No, you're using it wrong.

[TheFlyingOrc]

I think he a pretty damn good view of the world. Then again at this point, I just want to sit back and watch obama get shot, and then watch the world fall apart and burn slowly..ever so slowly.

So, I'm a conservative, and this is a completely unacceptable position to take. The president getting shot would absolutely destroy the economy, as uncertainty always does.

Also wishing death on a person is pretty unacceptable.

[Superman's Dead]

I think he a pretty damn good view of the world. Then again at this point, I just want to sit back and watch obama get shot, and then watch the world fall apart and burn slowly..ever so slowly.

...well...then it kinda makes sense you think he has a good view of the world. Alright.

[National Kato]

...I just want to sit back and watch obama get shot, and then watch the world fall apart and burn slowly..ever so slowly.

Uh huh. And I'm sure you'd remain unscathed in your mountain retreat, powered by glacial melt and mountain goat dung?

[muddi900]

I think he a pretty damn good view of the world. Then again at this point, I just want to sit back and watch obama get shot, and then watch the world fall apart and burn slowly..ever so slowly.

Savok stated his political views on PIRI once. It's basically "evil socialist are gonna get ya, ooooh!". Also, you seemed to be drunk.

[Savok]

The whole disgustingness of shooting an elected leader aside for a moment, turning Obama into JFK Mk2 is only going to cause more problems, it's matyrdom that erases the (numerous) flaws of the man from most people's minds.

And Socialism is a poison that rots everything it touches. Right now the Socialists running Australia are trialing (that even a word? eh) ISP filters that block "bad" sites from the ISP end. Most of the ISPs who'd agreed to test it have pulled out stating it was the most horrible thing they've ever had to deal with. They still want to go ahead with it of course, joining such wonderous places like China and North Korea.

Interestingly the filter didn't just block naughty sites, but sites critical of the filter too among other things the government would rather you not look at. Government controlled Internet in a supposedly free country, I hope you people never have to live under this.

[Froghourt]

The whole disgustingness of shooting an elected leader aside for a moment, turning Obama into JFK Mk2 is only going to cause more problems, it's matyrdom that erases the (numerous) flaws of the man from most people's minds.

And Socialism is a poison that rots everything it touches. Right now the Socialists running Australia are trialing (that even a word? eh) ISP filters that block "bad" sites from the ISP end. Most of the ISPs who'd agreed to test it have pulled out stating it was the most horrible thing they've ever had to deal with. They still want to go ahead with it of course, joining such wonderous places like China and North Korea.

Interestingly the filter didn't just block naughty sites, but sites critical of the filter too among other things the government would rather you not look at. Government controlled Internet in a supposedly free country, I hope you people never have to live under this.

Obviously it is the ideology itself and not the people who try to practice it that are the problem! I mean a right wing government would never try to limit personal freedoms in the name of public good, there has never been an example of that ever!

[bryan]

You guys are going off the rails, no offense. To the politics forum with you!

[Ancalagon]

The whole disgustingness of shooting an elected leader aside for a moment, turning Obama into JFK Mk2 is only going to cause more problems, it's matyrdom that erases the (numerous) flaws of the man from most people's minds.

And Socialism is a poison that rots everything it touches. Right now the Socialists running Australia are trialing (that even a word? eh) ISP filters that block "bad" sites from the ISP end. Most of the ISPs who'd agreed to test it have pulled out stating it was the most horrible thing they've ever had to deal with. They still want to go ahead with it of course, joining such wonderous places like China and North Korea.

Interestingly the filter didn't just block naughty sites, but sites critical of the filter too among other things the government would rather you not look at. Government controlled Internet in a supposedly free country, I hope you people never have to live under this.

Yeah but thats not socialism, thats just government wanting control over undesirable things. That would be more totalitarian or fascist if you ask me - a government controlling things that might be critical of it. Even the USA does the same - look at the patriot act.

As far as I understand socialism, its really about using tax money on social projects like free healthcare and education. You could get a Great Firewall Of Australia in any country in the world, Australia's socialism or lack thereof doesnt influence that at all. Its just someone being a dick really.

Socialism can be a poison if its taken too far - I believe the UK is suffering because it went too socialist and now its kinda fucked. The problem is that people are inherently lazy, and if you give them a way to not work, they will take it. Of course, this is at the expense of your economy. The other side of the coin, is that things like free healthcare can be pretty cool. If I'm sick, I can go see my doctor and not pay a cent. So I dont ever have to wonder if I'm sick enough to warrant the visit. I had surgery earlier this year, completely 100% free. So its got its upsides.

You guys are going off the rails, no offense. To the politics forum with you!

You still havent responded to my conjecture though. If pirating a $1 song can get me a $150 000 fine, would it be fair if stealing a $100 000 car got me a $15 000 000 000 fine? Same ratio in either case.

[bryan]

Ancalagon, I think the fine is ridiculous. I'd rather they apply such a ridiculous ratio to littering, where I can see some damage being done. For someone who downloads your stuff, where's the damage? And even if it's a deterrent, it's unrealistic. Who is going to be able to afford to pay? You download one song and you get instantly bankrupted?

It's monumentally idiotic.

And that's my take on things.

[muddi900]

I believe the UK is suffering because it went too socialist and now its kinda fucked.


What would be America's excuse?

[Ancalagon]

What would be America's excuse?

I dont get your point. What would be America's excuse for being fucked (which I dont quite believe it is) or for being socialist (which it definitely isnt)?

[Savok]

Don't talk to me about the Patriot Act. It still amazes me how the neocons managed to combine the worst aspects of socialism and conservatism.

Government control of things means government power over said things, also government ineptitude. You want public healthcare? You're free to have ours, half the fucking doctors in Queensland aren't even doctors.

But I don't expect anyone to listen anymore, and no this isn't the place. Just don't say you weren't warned, this is only the beginning of the ridiculous decisions and we're all gonna end up fucked by them.

[muddi900]

I dont get your point. What would be America's excuse for being fucked (which I dont quite believe it is)

Exactly. and it's fucked, at least temporarily. It was inevitable. A truly "free" market doesn't work, 90% of third world countries are proof of that.


Government control of things means government power over said things, also government ineptitude. You want public healthcare? You're free to have ours, half the fucking doctors in Queensland aren't even doctors.


Anybody who has UHC and thinks it sucks should come down here, at the very least you'd have reality TV stardom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Fulton) to counter awesome health care.

[Shadowstorm]

Fuck The Patriot Act!

[Ancalagon]

Exactly. and it's fucked, at least temporarily. It was inevitable. A truly "free" market doesn't work, 90% of third world countries are proof of that.

its fucked? Out of all the countries affected by the depression, it doing the best and recovering the fastest. The UK is said to be worst affected - we wont pull out of depression for ages.

African countries are fucked for a number of reasons, one of them is the fact that markets are NOT free, not the other way around. They arent allowed to sell their produce to most western nations, and are forced to import cheap crops from western countries, which basically forces their own farmers out of business cos they cant produce crops for that cheap. Western countries have huge import barriers to other countries to protect their own industry, and use their economic power to force weaker countries to accept their shit. that is exactly how it works, thats exactly why markets arent free, and thats exactly why a lot of countries are in deep shit.

[muddi900]

its fucked? Out of all the countries affected by the depression, it doing the best and recovering the fastest. The UK is said to be worst affected - we wont pull out of depression for ages.

African countries are fucked for a number of reasons, one of them is the fact that markets are NOT free, not the other way around. They arent allowed to sell their produce to most western nations, and are forced to import cheap crops from western countries, which basically forces their own farmers out of business cos they cant produce crops for that cheap. Western countries have huge import barriers to other countries to protect their own industry, and use their economic power to force weaker countries to accept their shit. that is exactly how it works, thats exactly why markets arent free, and thats exactly why a lot of countries are in deep shit.

What does africa have to do with?You do know there's a whole bunch of third world countries besides the ones in Africa, countries with industrial, rather than agricultural, economies. And that any regulatory laws that do exist in those are stamped on. So what happens then is everybody does whatever the fuck they want, however the fuck they like it and growth stops down to a halt. And no this not a rhetorical parable, this IS what happens.

And this is what happened is America in the past half a decade.

"Hey look everybody's is screaming 'Freedom Fries'!"
"Lets Party"

It's current state isn't "recovering". It's "haphazardly jumping on scapegoats"

[TheFlyingOrc]

If I'm sick, I can go see my doctor and not pay a cent. So I dont ever have to wonder if I'm sick enough to warrant the visit. I had surgery earlier this year, completely 100% free. So its got its upsides.

Umm...you've been paying for that surgery for years, whether you needed it or not.

[Ancalagon]

What does africa have to do with?You do know there's a whole bunch of third world countries besides the ones in Africa, countries with industrial, rather than agricultural, economies. And that any regulatory laws that do exist in those are stamped on. So what happens then is everybody does whatever the fuck they want, however the fuck they like it and growth stops down to a halt. And no this not a rhetorical parable, this IS what happens.

And this is what happened is America in the past half a decade.

"Hey look everybody's is screaming 'Freedom Fries'!"
"Lets Party"

It's current state isn't "recovering". It's "haphazardly jumping on scapegoats"

Um because I'm South African?

I dont know what examples of industrialized economies doing what they want you are talking about. Got any examples?

As for the States, its industry and agriculture is pretty well regulated? Know why avocados are more expensive in the states than elsewhere? Cos your government doesnt want to import them from Mexico to protect American farmers. Know why soft drinks use high fructose corn syrup in the states but cane sugar everywhere? Regulation on behalf of cane farmers. Know why hemp is banned in the states (it can be a useful crop)? Again, industry wanted it banned.

Yeah, the mortgage backed securities was a fuckup and to be honest I'm not sure I understand it well enough to say whether it was a result of over regulation or under regulation.

Umm...you've been paying for that surgery for years, whether you needed it or not.

Well yeah, thats true. I mean, of course its a gamble. If you are a fit and healthy person your tax pounds go nowhere. If you are sick you get maximum benefit of both your and someone elses money. I think I probably break about even right now, but yeah, I'll admit its not perfect. Their administration system in particular leaves a lot to be desired, but its relatively hassle free and it works for the most part. If I was like a 70 year old pensioner or something I'd probably be loving the NHS. Unless I had a rare form of cancer or AIDs or something, in which case I'd be pretty fucked (they cover most diseases and disorders for free, but some drugs the NHS wont pay for).

[Generation ABXY]

Given the topic (or, um, the original one, at any rate), I thought this story (http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/first-sale-president-obama-and-queen-england) was a bit amusing.