The music industry won the first file-sharing case to go to trial yesterday when a jury found a Minnesota woman guilty of 24 counts of copyright infringement. The $222,000 verdict comes to $9,250 for each of the 24 songs at issue. Perhaps this is how the industry hopes to keep the price of music from going down to zero.
The music industry is hoping that this out-sized verdict will make song-sharers think twice before downloading that next free tune. If anything, though, this case tells music sharers what not to do if they want to avoid getting caught—like having the same username, “tereastarr,” on the file-sharing networks as you do on your e-mail, IM, and other online accounts.
Over the past four years, the RIAA has sued 26,000 of its customers, but it won’t get the same windfall from all of those cases, since most settle for about $4,000. This was the first to go to trial. So the verdict (if it is not reduced on appeal) sets an important precedent. All the music industry needs to do now is win another 52,000 lawsuits with the same size penalty to match its revenues of $11.5 billion last year.
Someone should create some software for the RIAA that automates the serving of subpoenas, because they really have to step up their efforts if they want to save their industry. Or, the industry can spend its time and money trying to find new business models that encourage and profit from the way people actually listen to music today—on their ipods, streaming from the Web, shared among friends and peers. As music goes digital, it becomes more fungible. People are going to do with it what they want because they can. The law may be on the RIAA’s side, but the market is against it.
“Perhaps this is how the industry hopes to keep the price of music from going down to zero….The music industry is hoping that this out-sized verdict will make song-sharers think twice before downloading that next free tune.”
No, I will not “think twice”. If anything it will add to my resentment towards the music industry and it will accelerate it.
Funny you should bring this up. I’m the developer of a new program called “Subpoena Soft” which if everything goes correctly should server Subpoenas to half the western world.
Man, I feel bad for that women. Her life is probably ruined because of this. The RIAA’s image will just continue to get worse and that certainly is not going to help the industry at all.
I just wanted to leave a link for the download of the new album by a band you may have heard of- Radiohead. Pay as much as you like. http://www.inrainbows.com/Store/Quickindex.html. Here’s to your business model, record industry.
The sad part of the matter is that all the RIAA is doing is feeding the need to download free music from sites. They have no idea what this type of publicity is doing for them and if they do then they just don’t care. The RIAA needs to just wise up and get in on the whole digital music bandwagon and make money not by suing people but by building around these needs.
Bill and others, such as NSA, probably know a lot more about you than you think, may share that information in the future, and IP owners might get serious about compliance. Ofttimes spies merely observe rather than reveal their means of gathering information, which may be illegal one day and useful the next.
And they want to kill internet radio too. If they are not stopped they will have their way.
Following on from yesterdays piece, the way forward is NOT releasing free albums. I’m not sure if you noticed but all the artists doing that are already established and rich enough not to care about losing money from this album. Live music will never replace recorded music except in indie, jazz, grassroot type music. There are millions who buy music just to listen to but don’t care about seeing an artist live. General “pop” as in Top 40 music will continue forever and nothing will stop it. Another stat you failed to publish yesterday was that most music pirated is NOT new music, but in fact old songs such as Elvis, The Beatles and such.
It’s just stupid to say that the RIAA is losing money because people decide to download the cd from the internet instead of buying it, the RIAA doesn’t lose a single cent when people download the cd, there is no cost that RIAA loses…
Saying that they lose a specific amount of money because of illegal download is just plain stupid, the numbers are all just speculation and they can’t predict the future! I’m so sick of hearing that they are losing so much money, if I think that the google stock will go up to $700 tomorrow and it doesn’t, does that mean that I lost almost $100?? No, it’s all speculation, the stock never wen’t to $700 so I never lost any money, same with RIAA, the customer doesn’t go to the cd shop to buy a cd so they can’t say that they are losing that money that wasn’t their in the first place because of downloading…
Ms. Young: It’s not only “established and rich” artists that are releasing free (rather, not free, but by suggested donation) albums. Check out the Quote/Unquote record label for extremely independent artists doing the same thing.
I am just going to stop listening to music all together.
Someone set up a donation website so she can hire a better appeals lawyer. Seriously.
Yeah, I feel for that lady, but at the same time, if you’re going to play the game, at least know how not to lose. Sharing 1700 songs (or the 24) is just asking for it.
I feel bad for that women, and many might stop listening music after hearing this…shame
http://vidsonly.blogspot.com
Dear Jenny,
“pop” music is driven by a corporate plan that goes like this: hire a songwriter. Hire four white guys / 3 white girls and 1 black girl / 4 black guys. buy a keyboard with a drum machine. teach the “artists” to sing the songs the writer wrote. use pro tools to make them sound good. teach them to dance. buy white pants. teach them to sing and dance at the same time. get great haircuts, apply makeup and teeth whitener. go to J14 and TigerBeat photo shoot. Sign autographs. tour the country and charge $21 a CD. high school girls go wild. The labels make about 93% of every dollar sold.
This has gone on for years. Why will it stop now? when the CDs stop selling, the boy bands will not be economically viable for the major labels, and maybe real talent will diffuse into the culture. maybe. It’s something I hope for, and that is why I’m in support of “free” CDs. (Though i am one of the losers who still buys CD for the liner notes and also I like being able to hold something I bought). I’m not an economist [similar to george bush] but I know that if bands are losing money on record sales, they are recouping it through tour. If no one wants to see a band, then that means there’s no demand because a) that band sucks, or b) Jenny is right and no one wants to see non-jazz bands play. and bands wouldn’t tour, they’d all lose money and die. And then they can’t buy heroin. Case closed.
I’m pretty sure it will be option a.
**On another note, everyone goes to concerts. Literally everyone. I think that if you haven’t been to a concert in a year, then a) you live in montana or b) your taste is so eclectic that not one band you like goes on tour. Personally, I love live music and I think millions of people would love to be able to see their favorite bands live if they just came around more often.
sorry for the long post.
I say, we all go onto Bit Torrent and download at least one album “illegally” in protest of this retarded verdict.
Seriously, Ars Technica said that the jurors did not want to talk to the media. I think it’s that the only word the jurors knew was “Derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr Guilty”
You can effectively cut the music public into three. Those who like Top 40/Pop, those who like “indie” (i.e. not pop) and then those who don’t like music at all.
Most Top 40 listeners, averaging 5-14 year old boys and girls but off course can go up to an infinite age, it’s music for anyone who likes catchy, non-deep music. They want something to dance to in the clubs. They buy the music for the artist as a whole, the package. They couldn’t care less if the song has a message or some deep innate feeling, hence all the pop artists being styled all the time, photoshoots, bla bla. These people want into that image. They also do tend to go to concerts, but just the “arena” concerts for big spectacle shows. These are the consumers who won’t let Top 40 die and they far outweigh the other 2 groups.
The “indie” group are more concerned with their “real” music and listen to the songs for a message and couldn’t care less if the music was cool or not. These listeners would go to the middle of a forest for a campfire performance from their favorite artist.
And the third group just don’t like music… for some reason totally unbeknown to man.
The point I’m trying to get to is that it is impossible for top 40 to fall out because there will always and forever be that need for that 5-14 year age group and there will always need to be something to dance too.
I think some developer types should find out how the industry is picking out the people they go after and create a program that just floods them with false leads. Make it miserable for them to go after people.
@ Mr. Colin
Just a quick clarification - a vast majority of Americans do not go to concerts. Check out this link from Michael Rapino’s speech at the annual Pollstar convention. Rapino is CEO of the largest music promoter (LiveNation). He states that over 70% of people never go to a concert and most that do, only go to one show a year. Overall spend on concerts is “miniscule”.
http://www.pollstaronline.com/.....eynote.htm
Or you could just buy the music legally? How is stealing a digital item different from stealing a physical item from Best Buy?
@John C. McClore:
http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.c.....t-was.html
I guess I’m just hoping for two things:
1. more touring, less musical BS…i can dream….
2. to stop being wrong.
Thanks for the stats about tours. I guess I was taking a short view of the whole situation.
Cheers!
Yes - a perfect example of winning the battle while losing the war…
Everytime I here about a record company “win” due to a lawsuit I think of this quote:
“that in the heyday of Napster, if record companies had agreed to charge just a nickel a download, they would have been splitting $500,000 a day, 24 hours a day, 52 weeks a year.” source
Congrats to the music industry, they have made half a day’s profits of a nickel a song on Napster, I people say their business model is dead…
My suggestion is for one our tech money folks give her a million dollars to fight this and move her to France. She deserves our support and I don’t have that kind-a bread.
Record Companies have already lost the war even if they won this court battle.
Its just a matter of time before artists go direct to the users.
What are record companies anyway? They are just organizations which help produce, distribute and market music that they think will bring them money.
Musicians are people who do what they want and do it from the heart.
Listeners and fans are people who listen to what they like.
Get it, record companies don’t have a place in the future. Low cost or free digital distribution will take their place. Sorry.
EXCELLENT! I’m glad they won! She was stealing and she got busted. Why don’t you all put together a fund and help her pay the fine? Right… just as I expected.
It seems that many posters here also believe that the grocery store is where food comes from. They also believe that music comes from a USB port. Chalk it up to our excellent education system…
Get a life. Grow up. Recognize the tremendous amount of hard work and massive amounts of money it takes to make and keep an artist popular.
I’m NO fan of the music industry and its ways, but to just say “I’ll just steal music because the music industry is corrupt and rock stars already have too much money” is complete idiocy.
And one more thing. All this “digital distribution” crap is overrated and nonsense. Can someone please provide the name of one — just one — MTV, Grammy artist that started with Garageband and became famous? Just one is all I ask. They’ve been promising that “equalized” crap since the very first Music website came on the scene and the only thing that has happened is that most of those “industry equalizing” sites are road kill.
this thread reminded me of Paul Bucheit’s thoughts on his blog:
“So what’s my point? Owning a “right”, which is a form of “Imaginary Property”, is not the same as owning real property. If someone violates your exclusive rights, they may be breaking the law, but they are not stealing. To claim otherwise is silly and dishonest.”
The best thing the recording industry could do to stop their revenues from falling is to produce better music. Why would anyone want to pay to hear Paris Hilton? The glory days of the industry had better music; the revenue freefall has nothing to do with downloading.
For perspective, I should state that I’m a songwriter disturbed that others might want to deprive me of the right to decide for myself whether to charge for my work or give it away. My own view of the latest court judgment is that the fine, if anything, may be too low (but with a qualification I’ll mention later). These fines are intended for (a) restitution; (b) punishment; and (c) deterrence of others. Deterrence requires that the “cost” of stealing (my word for it) should exceed the cost of paying for the music. However, the cost of stealing is calculated by multiplying the size of the fine by the probability of being caught. Realistically, that probability is less than one in ten thousand, and with this in mind, a fine of even half a million might be reasonable. Even so, my guess is that once the RIAA gets as much mileage as it can from the deterrence value of the news story, it will privately arrange with Jammie Thomas to mitigate her penalty to levels she can live with. At least, I would hope so.
Finally, my views on this don’t contradict those of others who believe that the music business needs a new business model to adapt to changing times. In all likelihood, new models in combination with penalties for piracy will be more effective than either approach alone.
Fred Moolten
Hey guys………..
im doin a debate soon on why downloading music off the internet is not stealing. I’m not so sure what to do. Help?!?!?
Sharpay Adamson