RIAA offers file traders amnesty

[Stryder]

I have been practicing a boycott of the music industry since around 1995. Mainly due to over priced CDs and price fixing by the major labels. I own about 1500 CDs. 97% of them bought prior to 1995. Anything I have bought since was either from an inde or bought second hand via yard sales, second hand record shops or pawn shops. What has transpired over the last couple of years has only made my resolve to not support the major labels even stronger. On a side note, you can get some great deal on DVDs, CDs, software and PC stuff at pawn shops. You just have to have patience and be willing to haggle. I went to one pawn shop every week for about 3 months and finally got the guy to sell me a set of Klipsch Pro Media 5.0 speakers for $150. They retail for $500. I also got Windows XP Pro upgrade for $70. Brand new, still in the wrapper.

[epp_b]

nlinecomputers,I don't consider it piracy to dupliate or duplicate-use software for personal or archival purposes.Piracy is duplicating a song or software, and giving or selling it to someone else.

[epp_b]

How do you sue a 10 or 12 year old??? -  almost makes senseIn today's world it is a known fact that kids no more about computers than the parents, does a 10 or 12 year old know all the legal laws - no.  Most adults don't even know the laws and how they work for internet usage.

I didn't say sue the 12-year old (but tell her not to do it anymore, or else they'll tell the ISP to revoke internet privelages - or something like that)I read a post in this board earlier (although, I can't find it now), and liked the comment I read stating that the Internet should be like radio -- you should be required a license to use it (meaning with radio, you need a license to have a talk-show, for example). So you'd need to know the basic laws, legalistics, concepts, etc. of the Internet, first, before being allowed to use it.

[Stryder]

nlinecomputers,I don't consider it piracy to dupliate or duplicate-use software for personal or archival purposes.Piracy is duplicating a song or software, and giving or selling it to someone else.

Do you mean like putting a Windows OS on more than one computer when the EULA explicitly states that it is illegal and against the terms of use to do so? Yes that is piracy too. You can't have it both ways. Simply making a back up of the disk is not. But if you install it to more than one PC it is. Period.

[BarryB]

How do you sue a 10 or 12 year old??? -  almost makes senseIn today's world it is a known fact that kids no more about computers than the parents, does a 10 or 12 year old know all the legal laws - no.  Most adults don't even know the laws and how they work for internet usage.

Kelly...I don't think the legal systems of the worlds various nations know what laws apply and what don't or how to make it work....I think some times we forget that the internet is world wide...creating a Earth Law for the internet would be a nightmare..or a license." I'm sorry Juan from Brazil didn't do well in internet law 101...the Denmark annex, therefore he is limited to internet use in Brazil...Mexico..and parts of South Carolina on alternating Saturdays"Or yes we can sue Billy because he lives in LA..but little johnny lives in India and the Indian Gov just told RIAA to get lost......Man could this get big

[epp_b]

Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree...

[Stryder]

epp, I personally think it is crap to sell an OS for 2 or 3 hundred dollars and not be able to install it on more than one PC in a home environment. With 98se and 2000 I had them both installed on more than 1 PC inside my home. But if you are wanting the definition by the letter of the Law, it is piracy. And the law is what we are talking about here, not personal opinions. Because my personal opinion is the same as yours. It is not a matter of agree to disagree. It is a matter of the laws that are currently on the books. And those laws state that it is in fact a form of piracy.

[Guest LilBambi]

I have been practicing a boycott of the music industry since around 1995. Mainly due to over priced CDs and price fixing by the major labels. I own about 1500 CDs. 97% of them bought prior to 1995. Anything I have bought since was either from an inde or bought second hand via yard sales, second hand record shops or pawn shops. What has transpired over the last couple of years has only made my resolve to not support the major labels even stronger. On a side note, you can get some great deal on DVDs, CDs, software and PC stuff at pawn shops. You just have to have patience and be willing to haggle. I went to one pawn shop every week for about 3 months and finally got the guy to sell me a set of Klipsch Pro Media 5.0 speakers for $150. They retail for $500. I also got Windows XP Pro upgrade for $70. Brand new, still in the wrapper.

Same here Stryder!Not sure if it is for as long as you but I have been boycotting since they took down Napster.I still say the RIAA and the big 5 could have been the good guys and used the filesharing as advertising as they do radio.

[Guest LilBambi]

And not been so slow on the techology stick that they couldn't have emerged with a viable alternative to filesharing way back when!They wait all these years and then do something...something negative...that sure makes sense LOL!

[BarryB]

Yes..I think they missed a chance at one heck of a revenue stream..But then again, most of the music today is lousy..they created entertainers not musical artist

[nlinecomputers]

I personally think it is crap to sell an OS for 2 or 3 hundred dollars and not be able to install it on more than one PC in a home environment.

I'll be honest I've never understood that viewpoint. If Windows was a PCI card then you wouldn't be complaining about this. Why does your ability to easily replicate the product somehow make it less valuable to you? Is the OS not just as needed on your second PC as it's CPU or its Video card or it's memory? And why is a home enviorment any less important then a business just because it is software. You don't tell your plumber "oh just unclog my BOTH my sinks for the cost of one. This is a HOME enviroment not a business." Work is work. Your computer would be an useless pile of silcone and plastic if it was not for the software running it. The first computer is no more usefull then your second PC just because you can install the same CD on both. Both PCs need a CPU, both need video cards, both need memory, and they both need to have a copy of the software installed to run. How is this any different if you make money on how many items you sell? Microsoft makes money selling boxes of XP. Intel makes money selling CPUs. Some please justify this viewpoint. Simply wishing for it is not justification.

[littlebone]

There was a discussion of the RIAA lawsuits on PBS' Newshour this evening. A man who has written for performers, but does not perform himself, was arguing that piracy prevents him from making a living and that the song downloaders are stealing.He had no problem per se with downloading music, he felt that that was the way that all music distribution would be done in the future. And herein is my problem with his thoughts: Music downloading will put the hard-copy distributors: Tower, Sam Goody, et al out of business. The songwriter didn't seem to feel that was wrong. Obviously the hard-copy distributors will have to change or go under. But when it comes to his finding a new way to make songwriting pay, well then, the listeners have to buy into the current say of his getting paid. And that way was a contract between the music publishers and the music distributors (radio, record manufacturers) for paying $.08 royalties to songwriters each time their song is played. So; if it's the other guy that's hurt, "download good", they didn't change fast enough. If it's me: "Download bad", I shouldn't have to think of a new way to make this pay.

[Stryder]

nline,I understand your point of view. But....there is always a but. I feel that MS OSs are grossly over priced. They should offer home licenses that offer a significant price break on a second, third, etc. copy. Gouging consumers has become the norm in America and I for one refuse to accept it. I will not buy anything from MS as long as they continue with their current business plan. I am just exercising my rights as a consumer. If more people did the same, companies would be more consumer friendly. Most products are at least close to being fairly priced, but $300 for an OS is gouging in my opinion when there is not a price break for multiple copies. And that $10 price break MS has is a joke and an insult.

[nlinecomputers]

Stryder,Again simply wishing for it doesn't make it true or even right. Why should Microsoft give you a break for 2 copies or 3. Would you get a break on 2 video cards or 2 CPUs. Unlikely. Do you really expect to get a break for 2 or 3 video cards? Perhaps if you buy 10 or 20 but not for just 2. Again why is software different? Considering the overall cost of a computer $300 for something that is essential to the operation of the unit (unlike all other software such as MsWord, Quicken or DOOM) is quite resonable. And note that this same copy has to be just as operational on a $400 computer as on a $2000 one. Perhaps there should be versions for lowend units and high end versions that are priced accordingly. But how you would do that and remain "Windows" is beyound me.

[Guest LilBambi]

Yes, there are so many issues and angles to this whole thing ... it is amazing!And everyone who has posted has valid points of view.I don't know how the government is supposed to sort it all out to the good of all!

[Peachy]

I personally think it is crap to sell an OS for 2 or 3 hundred dollars and not be able to install it on more than one PC in a home environment.

I'll be honest I've never understood that viewpoint. If Windows was a PCI card then you wouldn't be complaining about this. Why does your ability to easily replicate the product somehow make it less valuable to you? Is the OS not just as needed on your second PC as it's CPU or its Video card or it's memory? And why is a home enviorment any less important then a business just because it is software. You don't tell your plumber "oh just unclog my BOTH my sinks for the cost of one. This is a HOME enviroment not a business." Work is work. Your computer would be an useless pile of silcone and plastic if it was not for the software running it. The first computer is no more usefull then your second PC just because you can install the same CD on both. Both PCs need a CPU, both need video cards, both need memory, and they both need to have a copy of the software installed to run. How is this any different if you make money on how many items you sell? Microsoft makes money selling boxes of XP. Intel makes money selling CPUs. Some please justify this viewpoint. Simply wishing for it is not justification.

Nathan,I think part of the problem is that people feel screwed if they have to pay full retail price for an OS and then have to pay the full retail price for a second or third PC. In Canada, the full retail price for Windows XP Professional when it came out was $399 to $449 Cdn depending on where you bought it. The upgrade was about $279 to $329. XP Home was $149 for the upgrade and $299 for the full version. Lucky for me I work in an educational institution and qualified for the Academic price of $147 for the XP Pro upgrade. Sure Microsoft had those special Family-Pak licenses but the price was I think $20 off the full retail price. That's not much of a deal. I know quite a few people who purchased computers in 2001 just before XP came out so they came with Windows 98 SE or ME, but not one has upgraded to XP because they can't justify to themselves the expense.

[nlinecomputers]

Breaking News:12 year old settles case with RIAAThe first of many have fallen. I think music swaping is a crime but this is just going to make it worse in the end.

[Stryder]

Stryder,Again simply wishing for it doesn't make it true or even right.  Why should Microsoft give you a break for 2 copies or 3.  Would you get a break on 2 video cards or 2 CPUs.  Unlikely.  Do you really expect to get a break for 2 or 3 video cards? Perhaps if you buy 10 or 20 but not for just 2.  Again why is software different?  Considering the overall cost of a computer $300 for something that is essential to the operation of the unit (unlike all other software such as MsWord, Quicken or DOOM) is quite resonable.  And note that this same copy has to be just as operational on a $400 computer as on a $2000 one.  Perhaps there should be versions for lowend units and high end versions that are priced accordingly.  But how you would do that and remain "Windows" is beyound me.

nline, Simply wishing for it does not make it true???? What are you talking about???? All I said is I feel that MS OSs are grossly over priced and if they want my business in the future they will change their business model on how they sell to consumers. If they don't....they won't see anymore of my money. For me personally, the money they charge for their OS is not a good value. It is as simple as that. And as a consumer I am exercising my right to not use their products. You feel it is a good value so you will buy it. Everyones opinion on what is a good value is going to differ.

[Guest LilBambi]

I hear ya Nathan!I think you are right ... it is going to make this whole thing a lot worse.As Prelude mentioned earlier, they have stated that they are using the money they get to go after more filesharers ... the artists are not going to see that money.

[nlinecomputers]

Sorry I should have been more clear. I'm referring to economics and the laws of supply and demand. If the public didn't see the value of Windows at $300 then it would not sell at all. Even with Microsoft's monopoly on the market if the value was really inflated then they would find other alternatives. They would go out of the way to seek out the few vendors that offer computers sans a MS OS. Some of that is happening. If enough of it happens then the price may drop. My point in all this, and maybe I just having a dim view of humanity, is that I don't think that piracy would change much if Windows would cost only $30 instead of $300. I still think it would be just as pirated and people would still say it costs too much. I don't think most people are able to really put value on abstract things like software or music. They equate how easy it is for them to replicate with the so called value of it. Most people are not using P2P as some grand protest against the evil RIAA. They do it because they can and if it is that easy to do then it can't be worth anything. Problem is alot of people put alot of work into such things. They ARE worth something.

[Stryder]

"If the public didn't see the value of Windows at $300 then it would not sell at all."First, 75% of the public do not know they have a choice. They buy their PCs from Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. There is no choice when you buy from them...you get Windows pre-installed....there are no other options. Which is how most of the public gets their OSs. They do not get them retail at $300, so I do not think that is a fair analogy. It sells because there are no other options for the "general" public.As far as the piracy goes, you are absolutely right. Some people are going to pirate no matter what. That is just the nature of some people. But if some software was more reasonably priced some of those pirates would purchase a legit copy. Not all, not even most, but some. As far as the music goes, that is another case in point of price gouging. I have no problem spending $12 to $15 for a DVD. But the same money or even more for a CD is not worth the money....especially for the mass majority of the crap coming out now-a-days.

[ibe98765]

"If the public didn't see the value of Windows at $300 then it would not sell at all."First, 75% of the public do not know they have a choice. They buy their PCs from Dell, HP, Gateway, etc. There is no choice when you buy from them...you get Windows pre-installed....there are no other options. Which is how most of the public gets their OSs. They do not get them retail at $300, so I do not think that is a fair analogy. It sells because there are no other options for the "general" public.

Umm, but is there REALLY any choice? What is it? Linux? I don't think so. 1. Linux is still much too complicated for the average non-techie person. As proven in the last virus attack, the vast majority of computer users don't even know what a firewall is. Messing around with Linux is out of the question. And even for those with the capability, the question is - do you want to spend your life keeping an OS up-to-date and working correctly? Windows is enough of a problem without trying to tackle Linux. Personally, I wish that a computer was like a stereo system. You turn it on and it works. If you want to add devices, you just plug them in and they work also. No drivers, add-on code, updates or anything else needed.2. You have to look at this from the companies view also. They want to ship a PC that they don't have to spend a lot of time supporting. Linux is like Unix - you've got untold number of variations, each one just enough different from the others to cause many potential problems for support. Companies just want to sell as much product as possible with as little support as they can get away with. They don't give a hoot about the OS wars. If Linux was equal to Windows in all aspects, companies would choose and ship the OS that was cheapest and required the least support energy.This is why Windows has won the consumer battle. There is only one standardized version for each release. If Linux wants to compete with Windows and perhaps eventually supplant Windows, then the Linux companies like Red Hat, Mandrake, SUSE and all the rest are going to have to come together and agree on the adoption of one standard for everyone. If they keep doing their own things, then they are just shooting themselves int he foot. This was something that the Unix groups were never able to do which is also why Unix has never had any success on the consumer desktop. As to the perceived $300 cost of a Windows OS, that is only list price and also for a full version. As you state, most people get their OS's from the seller as an OEM version. However, if they keep the machine long enough (or buy it at the wrong time), then they will be in the retail market for an upgrade version. In the case of WinXP Pro, that will generally run them between $150-$200, depending on if they know how to shop around. So I think that $150-$200 is the real perceived cost to consumers of a new OS. While $300 might be somewhat excessive, $150-$200 isn't too bad, considering that you will be getting somewhere between 3-5 years of use out of it. AND upgrades are free from MS!I think that a lot of perception problems are created by people who don't understand business economics. Too many shoot from the hip without having ever worked for a software or hardware company and thus are unaware of how companies run and the costs of developing, updating and maintaining either software or hardware.

[Guest LilBambi]

OK, the Linux and Windows debates are for other Topics. Let's keep this to the subject at hand, please.

[ibe98765]

Breaking News:12 year old settles case with RIAAThe first of many have fallen.  I think music swaping is a crime but this is just going to make it worse in the end.

How exactly will it make anything worse? I'm of the mind that it will actually makes things better.This 12 year old girl has to pay $2000. Since it is unlikely that she has $2000, it will be her parents who have to pay. Maybe all the parents that are caught up in the same situation will learn that they have to pay more attention to what their kids do. You takes your chances and if caught, you pay the price. No different from shoplifting, speeding, DUI. Ignorance or age isn't an excuse.I'd be a lot more comfortable if people would take responsibility for their actions. I'd love to hear someone say:"Yeah, I knew I was taking something that didn't belong to me. I thought I could get away with it but I got caught, and now I guess I'll have to pay the price. Don't you do it also or what is happening to me might happen to you".

[nlinecomputers]

Ibe,It going to make it worse because all this is going to do is tick off the consumer base. Most people aren't looking at this case as a case of theft. They see this as big corporations picking on innocent little kid. Or picking on a poor single mom who could use the $2000 to pay the rent and buy food. As I said previously most people do not really appreciate the value of what they are stealing. They equate ease of replication with value of the product. Gold is worth something because it is hard to find. If every goose laid the golden egg then gold would be everywhere and it would be worthless because it would be so common.The laws of supply and demand for the most part govern and determine what the cost of an item will be. But many IP products like software and music have a complication in that it is possible for the consumer to also be the supplier. That makes an artificial appearance of an infinite supply which should drive prices down to the ground but all it really drives is the public perception that the price should be lower as the "apparent" cost of production is lower. (I can make my own cd for 50 cents so why pay $20) The problem is the cost of making a CD is NOT the only costs of any production be it software or music or a movie. In this kind of enviroment how do you come up with a fair price that the public will pay? Because in my opinion Windows would be just as pirated at $30 as it is now at $300. And frankly I think that music is going to just as pirated at $5 a CD as it is at $15. IMO lowering the prices will not change the rate of piracy one bit.

[Prelude76]

"hmmm...I know I can buy these songs on a CD for about $20, but I can download them for free with KaZaA...I wonder if this is OK?"  Duh...

wrong. to dispell your misinformation that all people who download know their are CRIMINALS and should be sued til they're blue in the face, please read the following REAL LIFE examples. we live in a complex world, not a RIGHT & WRONG world you seem to portray."its ok to record songs off the radio to a tape, so its ok to download mp3s and record it to a CD"or, "i already own the CD, so i'll just get this and this mp3 for my mp3 player in my car and my mp3 walkman player",or, "i bought this tape or CD 10 years ago. i want to listen to it again, haven't heard guns'n'roses lately on my radio, so i'll burn it to a CD"or, "i remember this group from the vinyl / 8-track days. i used to listen to it all the time. my kid said he could get it for me from the internet, so why not? its not like my car has a vinyl or 8-track player, and i already paid for that music a long time ago"or, "i just want that one song by J. Lo, but i dont like her other songs, and she doesnt offer that one single song on a single CD. i'll just download it, and make a compilation cd from my other dance cds."or, "tapes used to cost $10. now, CDs cost $25+, yet CDs are cheaper to make than tapes. and artists still get 10 cents out of every tape/CD purchased, so who does the other 24.90$ go to? screw them, i'm just going to download it"or, "there is this great new DJ from Holland. i heard he's good, but i can't find his music anywhere in the local music store. they said i could order it special, takes 4 to 6 weeks and $35, and i dont even know if he's really that good, so i'll just download it and listen to it first"or, "this local DJ had a live set last summer at this toronto club. my friend said he download the live set, and its great, better than all their CDs i have, so i'm going to download it too since its not even available in stores."or, "i liked the Canadian Idol performances on TV, and i bought their CD compilation, but it has just 1 song from each contestant. i found my favorite contestant's mp3s that someone recorded from the tv show. now i can hear all 10 of their songs, which are NOT available anywhere else"or, "i'm broke, the bill collectors are calling, and i just got laid off. but i've been dying for this new CD from so and so. i'll just download it for now, and once i get a job, i'll buy their CD to support them, if i like the CD"or, "i was watching MuchMusic on TV, and linkin park was interviewed and they told everyone to go download their songs from kazaa in mp3 format if you want. they gave all their fans permission, coz they love their fans. they rock! i'm downloading their songs now, and i'll probably buy their CD next allowance. (p.s.. - this is TRUE story, i saw the linking park interview where they said that)

[Guest LilBambi]

The point I was making is that it didn't have to be this way with the music industry. They didn't have to cut off their nose to spite themselves.They were slow on the uptake! They did not have the foresight to have a competitive product and see that folks didn't want entire CDs to the degree they once did. They wanted songs! And they wanted them downloadable on the Internet.They could have used filesharing and webcasting just like radio ... as free advertising.But no, they had to be vindictive and nasty and turn on their customers.They lost this type of battle against radio years ago.I do not fileshare, but they must take blame for the monster they themselves created with their lack of vision and lack of providing a product that people would want.Plus, they are blaming consumer filesharing for all their woes and coming after them individually and bankrupting or at least making life unbearable for their own customers...when everyone knows that real PIRACY of music and movies is where the great loses are coming from.Killing Piracy's Selling Point Malaysian minister warns that high CD prices fuel piracyModern Music Culture And PiracyEven the MPAA has shown more brains on this score. You can get an entire movie on DVD for less than a music CD with 8-14 songs on it.And the MPAA is trying to work with a way to get video content delivered over the Internet to broadband users. It is still a little ways off but it is coming.They are going after the real pirates, the cartels, not their consumer customers.This is where the RIAA missed the boat. They have the same cartel problems, but they go after their consumer customers and expect them to come crawling back as customers?!?I think not....

[Prelude76]

Even the MPAA has shown more brains on this score. You can get an entire movie on DVD for less than a music CD with 8-14 songs on it.

*STANDING APPLAUSE* BRAVO!!! best point i read so far in this thread, lil'bambi.makes you wonder how DVDs cost less, yet have more storage room, and a LOT more costs involved, paying actors millions of dollars, paying producers, directors, casters, designers, animation people, etcc etcc etcc etcc, while CDs are just one or two good songs, and entire albums are recorded in one or two studio sessions, and most of rest of songs are filler songs that wont ever be played on radio coz they're crap.

[ibe98765]

The point I was making is that it didn't have to be this way with the music industry. They didn't have to cut off their nose to spite themselves.They were slow on the uptake! They did not have the foresight to have a competitive product and see that folks didn't want entire CDs to the degree they once did. They wanted songs! And they wanted them downloadable on the Internet.They could have used filesharing and webcasting just like radio ... as free advertising.But no, they had to be vindictive and nasty and turn on their customers.They lost this type of battle against radio years ago.

But you're missing the point. Just because there is, IYO, a better way to do something or a better way to run a business, doesn't excuse anyone taking control into their hands and stealing something that isn't theirs. It's not an excuse for music and it isn't an excuse for anything else, such as software (e.g MS makes so much money, it doesn't matter if I don't pay them for the copy I have). There has always been under-the-table copying of music since the first tape recorder was invented. But it wasn't that big of a problem when the music business controlled distribution and it was difficult, time-consuming and expensive to make and distribute good copies. The development of the internet and powerful, cheap computers killed the old music business distribution model. Should they have adapted? Of course. Will they adapt? Probably. But changing a companies business model is akin to turning an aircraft carrier. It's a long, slow process. Picture yourself as an executive in the music business. You're making a good income and you appear to have all the pieces in place (at least up until a few years ago). Changing the business model would involve a lot of dislocation, perhaps lower earnings, perhaps massive lay-offs, perhaps loss of relationships, etc. Why take a chance on this if we can make the current model work?This is just human nature. Nobody like change except a wet baby. Despite warnings about the dangers of smoking, 25% of the US population (and generally higher in other countries) still smoke. 63% of the US population is overweight. Do you see them trying to lose some weight by working out and eliminating, say, fast food with high fat content? No. You hear of people who are in debt up to their ears. Do they stop spending and try to fix their problem? Not generally. Too many keep spending until they have destroyed their families and are forced into bankruptcy. The music business is run by people and therefore, they think the same way that most people do. Until (like now?) they are FORCED to change, they aren't going to do anything different.

[Guest LilBambi]

Thanks Prelude!New development ...CNet Article - P2P group: We'll pay girl's RIAA paymentExcerpts below, full text at site:

P2P group: We'll pay girl's RIAA payment A peer-to-peer group says it will cover costs for a 12-year-old New York girl who agreed to pay record labels $2,000 to settle a file-swapping lawsuit. P2P United, a peer-to-peer industry trade group that includes Grokster, StreamCast Networks, Limewire and other file-trading software companies, said Wednesday it had offered to reimburse Brianna Lahara and her mother's payment to the Recording Industry Association of America. Lahara's mother agreed Tuesday to settle copyright infringement charges on behalf of her daughter. "We do not condone copyright infringement, but someone has to draw the line to call attention to a system that permits multinational corporations with phenomenal financial and political resources to strong-arm 12-year-olds and their families in public housing the way this sorry episode dramatizes," Adam Eisgrau, the executive director of P2P United, said. ---Eisgrau said P2P United had no plans to pay other file-swappers' legal fees. The recently founded group plans to lobby in Washington, D.C., for policies such as compulsory music licensing on peer-to-peer networks, which would force the music companies to allow songs to be traded on file-trading networks in return for some payment to copyright holders.