What, when and how? The RIAA

[Sparda]

I'm just anoyed at the stupidity of the RIAA and how arrogent they are to The Internet dispite been a company thats only source of non-sponcer income been from suing thoughs who apparently have uses The Internet to brake some kind of copywrite law.

It also realy bugs me that they insist that file sharing is killing the music industry which is a total pack of lies. Yes, in shop CD sales have gone down, but legal online music downloads are booming.

[moonlit]

Now, I chose 'Fuck them' but I wish to explain:

Fuck them: I chose this.

Kill all it's employees: Meh - I prefer non-violent tactics wherever possible.

Try to explain to them how the Internet actualy works: They wouldn't listen or probably wouldn't even get it.

Try to explain to them why every body hates them: Slander lawsuit anyone? They'd find some way to sue you for this one.

Ask them where all the money they get from law suites goes on Live Televison (Some one should realy do that): I dunno, it would be kinda interesting to hear the answer but they'd just bullshit everyone, so...

[Sparda]

Ask them where all the money they get from law suites goes on Live Televison (Some one should realy do that): I dunno, it would be kinda interesting to hear the answer but they'd just bullshit everyone, so...

All the money they make from law suite which they do on the behalf of companies that apparently lose money because of the file sharing goes stright into the pockets of the RIAA rather then the poeple they are apparently do the lawsuites on the behalf of.

[moonlit]

Naturally... they wouldn't be so insistant if they didn't stand to gain obscene amounts of money, would they?

[VaKo]

They're scared, really scared. Thats why there on the attack. The problem is that they've built a nice empire, slowly buying up and consolidating everything they can. And suddenly somebody invents a much better, faster system and they're not in control.

There are lots of issues though, but the hours of digg and /. debate can be some up as:

There charging to much for low quality DRM'd crap, and they expect us to like it. Right now there winning, but wait until DRM is unleashed on the great unwashed masses. If they piss the tabloids off there finished.

[moonlit]

Yeah I've noticed that they don't like technology advancements much - also obvious is that if you are prepared to disobey them that much then surely you aren't gonna encourage people to buy DRM-infested stuff, are you? This does not make you their friend...

[Sparda]

It would be nice if it where posible to boycot all DRM'ed crap, unfortunatly thats impratical, it is how ever practical to boycot some DRMing. Best example of all time: Starforce, I had starforce on my computer for a short time (I wanted to play chaos theory), how ever dur in that time my computer would be on for 2 days at most and then crash. After I got tired with Chaos theory, i removed it and starforce. There after my computer was on for 22days, which is a 1000% increas in stability. Starforce needs boycoting!

[moonlit]

Well that does remind me of the Sony case... and that dude's comment that 'people don't know what a rootkit is so why should they care'... that rootkit made systems about as stable as lime jelly/jello...

it's a shame that the general public don't hear this stuff - most of the non tech-savvy people I mentioned that to, thinking they might have heard about it had no clue whatsoever and thus would've/had fallen to Sony...

[VaKo]

What we need to do is start our own FUD campaign against them. The battle for the public hasn't started yet, there still buying CD's and think of downloads as a novelty rather than a standard. What we need to do is convince them that DRM is bad before the record companys can convince them its all bad. And as with all indoctronation, the younger/stupider the better. If the average john doe in a pub thinks DRM is bad, the RIAA will have a harder time since it was them who "broke his computer".

[Sparda]

VaKo, please correct me if I'm wrong (I probably am) but isn't this kind of what IPAC are wanting to do?

[moonlit]

Yeah that's a pretty good idea... as you say, if they guy in the pub gets wind that some music CD broke his computer and then if he so decides, finds out that it was because he's being punished for legitimately buying a CD or a legit download (which he needed 'special' software to play/use) he's gonna be pissed...

Also you make the point that the younger and stupider the better... the kids and the poor make decisions... if you can't sell to those two groups you have a big problem. If a campaign was to be launched it would (kinda obviously) need to hit the general peeps who don't know about this stuff (again, as you said) to really affect things... I'm actually very glad that people haven't embraced and settled with the idea of downloading the things they've bought... it means there's still a chance to hold it back or at least open people's eyes...

[VaKo]

I think so, but my version is less pretty. If you look at all important public desicions, there not decided on fact, or a moral choice, there based on the whim of the masses and the politicans who pander to them. Lobby groups, media and advertising formed as a response to this as it allowed people to manipulate what the public wanted. So, if the RIAA convinces the public that DRM is good, then that is what they will cheer for. We have to sow seeds of doubt before they can do that, its the only way. So tell everyone you know about the evils of DRM.

But then, as someone who creates things, at some point I want to get paid for the time and effort I put into that. True, there does seem to be a disparity between some peoples actual effort <cough>tom cruise<cough>, and the money they want as a result. But still, if i've spent months in dark rooms with photoshop and after effects/premier the last thing to make me happy is some little shit pushing my work on bit torrent for free.

But then you get things like TV shows, like Lost, which i download. I don't want to pay for TV, because TV is free. But I also want to watch TV from around the world. But then again i don't watch the adverts.

Maybe if google video could provide a way of pushing shows around the world globally but with locally relevent adverts in the commercal breaks. That way Joe's pizza down the block could get a slot on the Daily Show, with an advert saying "call now and say "the daily show rules" for a free garlic bread. But only your block would see it, the next block would see an advert for kasihers kebbabs on the next street.

Its hard because the world is becoming increasingly more expensive to live in. Capitalism has lead to the amazing sucsess of advertising, its made us want everything. Which is now something they can charge more for. But there is a finite limit to how much money we can spend. So in a culture where we're pushed to desire everything, yet are unable to fund this, is it anywonder people jump at a chance for free things?

[armadaender]

I only wish they would take a step back and understand that no matter how many people they sue or how much they complain to governments and ISPs, they will never be able to stop people from trading files on the internet. There will always be a way to do so, it is inevitable.

Also in the discussion of music pirating, the majority of pop-culture music today are artists who produce shitty music, but that's a whole different discussion.

[moonlit]

@armadaender: I quite agree, but it's greed... Kinda in relation to what VaKo said about people wanting more money that they deserve for whatever they're creating, people want much money as they can possibly get though watever means they can. This includes trying to squeeze every last penny out of us by way of DRM etc. It's the same with hacking and virus writing and such - there's no way you could eradicate that from a network any more than you could've stopped people lending others their cassettes to copy on their 2 deck stereo of the pre-CD era.

@VaKo: I also create things (my avatar is a very very poor example btw lol) and would rather like to get paid something for it... and even though I don't get paid, I'd rather prefer if my content and creative output didn't get strewn around where everyone can get hold of it if it. If it's worth having, surely it's worth paying for, right?

But then on saying that, I also agree with your point where you use Lost as an example - if it's TV, why should we pay to own it if we can legally see it for free elsewhere?! I like your idea of using regional adverts, that would in theory work nicely I think... I also like watching things from around the world and disagree that we should pay for that if the place it came from provides it for free...

You mention that the world is becomeing more expensive to live in and that we are being pushed to want everything we see... it is a great shame that besides their bank balance and credit card overdraft, people don't see it... they see that they spend but they don't see why - that they're being /told/ what they want... We can't afford everything, so yes as you say it's a reasonable situation to see people downloading things left right and centre wherever possible - the media have become a victim of their own brainwashing - they've created an army that's now turning against them.

[VaKo]

But then on saying that, I also agree with your point where you use Lost as an example - if it's TV, why should we pay to own it if we can legally see it for free elsewhere?! I like your idea of using regional adverts, that would in theory work nicely I think... I also like watching things from around the world and disagree that we should pay for that if the place it came from provides it for free...

But you see now that i've downloaded it, convince me to buy the DVD... Things like the 4400 and Taken, both things i've downloaded. There also things I watched all the way threw in one go, and will probally never watch again. Again. if i can download it, convince me to by the DVD in 2 months time.

[moonlit]

True, but then we get to the VHS vs TiVo/Sky+ thing - why use TiVo or Sky+ when you can use a free method of recording shows like VHS or home-brew PVR...? It does the same thing, it's the same content - but without these recording devices we still see the same content... for free... it's just with a VCR or TiVo or whatever, we get to watch them whenever we choose rather than when the TV listings (or rather stations) say.

Of course, this is what makes Hak.5 and all of the rest of the free independant media so great - we get to watch content we choose and like, while we're fed things we're supposed to like by mainstream media and often get charged for it... Ok, so I'm aware that free media is often far from free behind the scenes and that the level of work that goes into free and mainstream media alike is very high (sometimes, anyhow) but how is it that indie media can work while the mainstream media claims to require millions to operate?

[Sparda]

I simpley don't like buying DVDs for the follwing reasons:

1. If I want to watch it, insted of opening it in my favorite media player I have to find the DVD put it in a DVD player and then watch it, I physicly don't like having to look for my DVDs. If i could rip them all as easily as my audio CD's I would be very happy.

2. I fear physical damage, if you buy a DVD and then for what ever reason it gets damanged, even though you still legaly have the right to play the content for privet viewing, you physicly can not. and you can't get it replaced with out forking the money agian for some thing you alredy own even though you have physical evedence you alredy own it. If i could easily RIP all my DVDs to hard disk, i would definitly buy DVDs more then download them.

[moonlit]

Yeah I agree... the amount of music CDs I have is ridiculous but despite the fact I've paid for them I can't play them... for the first reason, I have no idea where a given CD is at a given time (so I should be more organised, but I don't think my situation is much different from other people) and also they are easily damaged... so if my CDs are scratched and I have to buy it again then why shouldn't I download it? I had a CD broken some time back which I would find it quite difficult to get hold of and according to some people, despite this I shouldn't be allowed to download the content that was on that CD...

Same would go for DVDs if I bought them...

[Sparda]

Also, I would be much more happy if DVDs and CDs where lower in price. It costs the company to a few pence to make each individual DVD, but you have to pay for the delelopment as well. If the companies didn't inlude any nasty copy protection, it would make the dev costs noticably lower, which would make me happy becasue it would mean i can rip it to hard drive easily and the amount i have to pay is lower. I'm happy to pay £10 for a DVD that has no copy protection on it, I am not happy to pay £20 for a DVD I cannot rip. It's kind of like the iTunes Vs. CD thing, on iTunes it costs a couple of ponds (what it is now, like £3? I don't use iTunes at all) for a whole albume, yet for the same content it would cost you any thing upto £15 for the exact same content in shop.

[moonlit]

Yeah it's ridiculous... as you say, the actual media itself (the physical distrobution media, that is) costs very little to make... which leaves production, the artist or cast's pay and the advertising... now, advertising shouldn't cost all that much for a well established popular artist especially when you consider the volume of CDs that would be sold -especially if they were to cost less.

The artist should get enough money to count as a wage suitable for the effort they have put into creating their music and a 'being famous' fee... the production costs should cover just that - the production costs... ok, so you have agents and whatever in between but if the money was fair, then why do loads of pop stars (however talented they /really/ are) end up eventually owning more money than they have sense and cars, clothes etc that royalty would have trouble affording?!

[Sparda]

I half like Bluray. It has lots of storage space, which is always good. However, Sony are implimenting DRM as part of the media specification, this I do not like. It just seems obsurd to me that companies want you to pay for some thing, but then they don't want to let you use it how you want to use it, which kind of reminds me of microsofts philosaphy, "The user is the problem, not the operating system!". It also reminds me of certian australian ISPs that want to take your money, but then don't want to give you the band width.

[moonlit]

Yeah it surely doesn't make business sense to do that, does it?

I guess people's ignorance is the issue, but absurd though it sounds, it's like this slightly OTT example:

'this car is great! they gave me the colour I wanted, it's great with fuel consumption - but it doesn't work in the town/city you live in... I'll sell it to you for twice what it's worth...'

'sure! I'll take 2 of 'em!'

...it sounds stupid but it's how it's going at the moment...

oh, and I'm going for HD-DVD - but not for a while yet, I'm sticking with SL-DVD±R/RW ... I don't even use DVD-RAM because it doesn't do what I want...

[melodic]

like wat you guys are talking about the damaged dvds and cds, i bought a game called Painkiller a few months back and i only decided to try to install it last night. well i put disc 1 of 3 in the drive...and it did nothing, the installer would NOT load :S so i put it in my other drive, wouldnt work much better either, in the end i copyed the cds contence to a folder on my desktop. n it installed from there. by this time i was pissed off. because ive bought this game, i have a legal cd key, but if i downloaded it purely for the working files it would be illegal! AND i finally got it installed AND then the bastard thing wouldnt play...'you have cd/dvd emulation software installed' i uninstalled it n threw it back on my shelf for a rainy day :@

[moonlit]

yeah I despise that - and the only way around it is a no-cd crack and even if you have a legit copy, they would say that it's a circumvention of copyright protection methods and is therefore illegal...

grr...

[melodic]

its all BS