RIAA Proven Wrong? (Also, they get kicked in the nutsack in Canada)

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Has the RIAA been proven to be lying?
Study: File-Sharing No Threat to Music Sales
and, of course, the Slashdotters debate this.

and the Australian version (starring the ARIA) of the same debate
Music industry way off track with song and dance about falling sales
and the Slashdotters debate about this as well.

and in Canada, the RIAA gets smacked down
Music industry loses in downloading case
and Slashdot strikes again.

― Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 18:55 (twenty-two years ago)

I started a thread on 33% of this already, but this looks to be more of an all-emcompassing RIAA issue thread, so power to this one!

― donut bitch (donut), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 19:50 (twenty-two years ago)

(and Lord, I'm about to mail you your goods -- FINALLY -- very soon)

― donut bitch (donut), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 19:50 (twenty-two years ago)

i just heard that emi is cutting 20% of their roster and shutting down operations (somewhere). but ya know, fuck 'em.

― anthony kyle monday (akmonday), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 19:51 (twenty-two years ago)

God Fucking Bless Canada.

Am I wrong that the Oberholzer-Gee study only involved Open-Nap file sharing? I wonder if the results would change if the study used other services and programs. I wonder if there is a different demographic difference between the various types of file sharing. I would think the results may vary.

― Scott CE (Scott CE), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 19:58 (twenty-two years ago)

God Fucking Bless Canada.
I've heard (on several occasions) that Canada puts a small tax on every Blank CDR sold and hands this money over to the music industry. A side effect of this is that -- in the eyes of Canadian law -- the music industry has already been reimbursed for any illegal copies that have been made*; So the RIAA can't demand more money. They've gotten reimbursed and any more money would be "double dipping"

* = This overlooks the fact that people or corporations that are using the CDRs for legitimate business (non-music storage) purposes are getting taxed against their will for a crime they didn't commit (and had no intention of committing.)

― Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 20:21 (twenty-two years ago)

Well, unless they're buying their CD-Rs from the U.S., which isn't against Canadian law. Problem solved.

― donut bitch (donut), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 20:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Wait, you were serious about the CDR thing? What? Really?

Wait, what?

Is this like a secret conspiracy thing or an actual thing?

― Scott CE (Scott CE), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 21:00 (twenty-two years ago)

if you're not complaining about your CD-R costs in Canada, then just whistle along!

(That said, you can get a spindle of 100 CD-Rs for around $50US these days, i think... )

― donut bitch (donut), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 21:07 (twenty-two years ago)

Is this like a secret conspiracy thing or an actual thing?
Its real. Though I may have the details slightly off.
Please stand by while I google for some articles on it.

― Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 21:28 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.sycorp.com/levy/
http://tech-report.com/columns/dissonance/2002q1/canada-levy/index.x?pg=1
http://richard.pacdat.net/MediaLevy/
http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml

and apparently, people are up in arms that the rate keeps going UP!
http://www.medialinenews.com/issues/2002/march/news0320_1.shtml

― Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 21:34 (twenty-two years ago)

This overlooks the fact that people or corporations that are using the CDRs for legitimate business

And also that not everyone who downloads mp3s burns them onto CDR.

― Vitamin Leee (Leee), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 21:37 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, some of us use minidiscs.

― Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 21:42 (twenty-two years ago)

$50 US is pushing it, even--you can get 'em far cheaper than that in the States--I've seen spindles of 100 for around $27 or so.

― Matos W.K. (M Matos), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 21:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Or nothing at all. Nothing at all! NOTHING AT ALL!!

xpost

― Vitamin Leee (Leee), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 21:45 (twenty-two years ago)

RIAA does not equal Canadian Recording Industry Association.

― Vic Funk, Wednesday, 31 March 2004 22:34 (twenty-two years ago)

"Justice Konrad von Finckenstein"!

Can I just say how DISAPPOINTED I am that no one has commented on the JUDGE's name which is fucking hysterical!

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 31 March 2004 23:54 (twenty-two years ago)

I was disappointed that it isn't Funkenstein.

― Kent Burt (lingereffect), Thursday, 1 April 2004 01:47 (twenty-two years ago)

RIAA does not equal Canadian Recording Industry Association.

So, legal sharing for Canadians only means legal sharing of stuff like Anne Murray? Are there bands that are both CRIA and RIAA? What happens then? What can the RIAA do to Canadians sharing RIAA backed music?

― donut bitch (donut), Thursday, 1 April 2004 01:56 (twenty-two years ago)

They call Interpol.

Oh, the comedy. So rich. So many levels.

Dudes in really expensive retro black suits come to your house and smoke in your living room.

― Scott CE (Scott CE), Thursday, 1 April 2004 03:15 (twenty-two years ago)

Canada tacks on %10 (if I remember correctly) on any blank media which could hold music. It started back in the days of blank tapes. The "tax" applies to blank tapes, CDRs, MiniDiscs, etc. And buying them in the US wouldn't (legally) help, you'd still have to pay it, just not at the time of sale. Really, when you figure how high sales tax is in Canada, etc. it's not that big of a deal, plus figure all those buy 1 get 1 free, buy and get 100% rebate, etc. deals (when I stock up on CDRs), it's not that bad. Then you legally have your ass covered, unless you're selling the copies for profit.

I'm not a lawyer, and I don't even live in Canada anymore, but if I remember correctly, what the law allows you to do is make a copy for your friend. Your friend, however, cannot legally copy his copy for someone else. This is why we weren't real worried about sending mixtapes through the mail and such. The music industry was OK with this in the early 90's because it was being applied to lossy tapes where a copy of a copy sounded like ass. The law basically covered all the people who were taking the time and energy to do this, but when CD burners and filesharing arose, they flipped out and are trying to do anything they can through lobbying, litigation, etc. to work out a new "deal" so they can come out ahead again.

― Mike Salmo (salmo), Thursday, 1 April 2004 14:50 (twenty-two years ago)

What's interesting is that the Canadian judgment appears to address uploading only via P2P ("pull technology") and doesn't explicitly consider the legalities of posting files to 3rd party FTP servers or to the Usenet ("push technologies.") These latter avenues likely remain grey areas, since von Finckenstein argued that P2P didn't represent distribution-- something which can't be claimed for actual postings.

Of course, for the CRIA to have chased down FTP/Usenet violators would've be equivalent to caulking one's windows when there's a big freakin' hole in the roof.

― doug watson (solid air), Thursday, 1 April 2004 17:03 (twenty-two years ago)

how come people don't demand free access to concerts?

― keith m (keithmcl), Friday, 2 April 2004 01:40 (twenty-two years ago)

some do

― the surface noise (electricsound), Friday, 2 April 2004 01:41 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.