Username: Password: lost p/w?
home | help | subscribe | search | register
An interview with the misguided RIAA
Posted by OtherMike (Shmoo) in on January 16, 2008 at 7:42 AM



Source

by Don Reisinger

url

Now that you had the chance to read my column detailing the misguided beliefs of the RIAA, I wanted to give you the opportunity to see the full transcript of the interview I conducted with the organization.

You'll notice that none of the quotes from the previous column were taken out of context because, well, first and foremost, I didn't need to--this organization speaks for itself. You'll also notice that the RIAA really is all of those things most people believe they are. Of course, don't necessarily tell them that, because they won't believe it.

Regardless, this interview depicts the RIAA exactly how they want to be perceived--a group that relies on (and enjoys) lawsuits. It's an organization that has little idea of what we truly want as consumers and, for some reason, has a severe distaste for college students.

In response to my column, one RIAA representative told me that it's easy "to sit on the sidelines and take potshots. It's less easy when you actually have a dog in the fight."

Is it really? Personally, I think it's a sad day when an organization needs to call upon its high-powered lawyers just because it has "a dog in the fight." Along with that, what is that dog in the fight? The artists or the record labels? My guess is the latter.

But without further adieu, here is the unabridged transcript of my interview with the RIAA.

Don: Please tell me who you are and what you do.

RIAA: Cara Duckworth, spokeswoman for the RIAA.

Don: What can you tell me about the college deterrence program?

RIAA: Began last February. It was becoming clearer that despite cool new legal services and the ongoing educational efforts, too many students--some of music's biggest fans--were getting their music illegally and learning the wrong lessons about stealing and the law. There had to be a deterrence factor involved so that individuals knew that along with personal consequences (i.e., viruses, spyware infiltrating hard drive) there would also be legal consequences to engaging in illegal downloading behavior. Bringing lawsuits was by no means our first choice, but a necessary step we had to take.

Don: Why college students?

RIAA: First, it should be clarified that our college campaign is in addition to the lawsuits we file against individuals using commercial ISPs to illegally download and distribute music. Second, college students have reached a stage in life when their music habits are crystallized, and their appreciation for intellectual property has not yet reached its full development. These two points coupled together present challenges to those who would like to be compensated for their creative works. Understanding the value of intellectual property is important to the future job market for many of these students--industries that rely on copyright protection employ more than 11 million workers nationwide and continue to grow.

Don: What group of people do you see pirating the most music?

RIAA: While college students used to be some of music's greatest fans, unfortunately that is no longer the case. I would point you to the evidence of the extensiveness of music theft amongst college campuses from Student Monitor and other market research firms to show why we are focusing some of our efforts on universities.

Don: How do you respond to people who say your organization is a group of bullies?

RIAA: I have to step back for a moment. These are certainly heavy issues and none which we take lightly. When an individual is caught illegally downloading music, it sometimes happens that the person creates a stir. The reality of it is that nobody wants to get caught and most people complain when they are. The music industry has lost more than $3 billion in sales over the last few years. Bringing lawsuits is certainly no one's ideal answer--we're well aware of that. But if we had sat on our hands and chosen to do nothing about the piracy problem as the music industry was hemorrhaging jobs and lost sales, imagine what the extent of theft would be today and how the legal marketplace would be struggling to gain traction. The digital music marketplace is demonstrably better because of our efforts.

Don: How have you addressed those huge pirating cartels overseas? Are you going for a soft target?

RIAA: Our preference--first and foremost--is to take action against the services themselves that facilitate the illegal downloading and distribution of copyrighted works. We are actively assisting efforts by policy makers in Washington to encourage countries whose copyright laws have not kept up with the times or who do not appropriately enforce intellectual property violations. Additionally, we are affiliated with IFPI, which represents the interest of the global music community and assists in the enforcement of copyright infringement cases outside of the U.S.

Don: Do you think your policy of lawsuits and settlements work?

RIAA: Absolutely. Since we began this initiative, we've seen a P2P problem that once was growing at dizzying speeds essentially flatten out. People are now more aware of what is legal and illegal when it comes to downloading music. But more importantly, bringing lawsuits is only one piece of the pie--we are actively investing resources in the education of students of all ages on the value of music and importance of copyrights and, perhaps most importantly, music companies are continuously partnering with exciting new services that offer fans an array of innovative opportunities to access their favorite music.

Don: Why do you think you're such a disliked organization?

RIAA: I don't agree with the loaded premise of the question. In some online quarters, there may be lots of heat about the tough stands we sometimes must take. But amongst the general public, the favorability ratings of the record industry remain as positive as ever and surpass other forms of entertainment like movie or TV studios. I believe my answer to question No. 5 can apply here as well. But let it be said--the RIAA is much more than lawsuits. For example, we also are responsible for the Gold & Platinum program awarding artists who have achieved successful album sales and are active proponents of free speech in music. But no one likes lawsuits, and no one likes to get caught. It's not an ideal situation for any party involved. But with all the new, innovative legal alternatives in the marketplace (and more emerging on almost a daily basis), the music community is proactively offering fans ways to avoid lawsuits and get their favorite music at affordable prices.

Don: How do you respond to the people who say you're going after grandmothers and young children when you should be going after real criminals in gunships?

RIAA: I'd give them the facts and encourage them not to believe everything they read that aggressively villainizes the organization. We have a physical antipiracy unit that assists law enforcement agents in shutting down piracy operations both big and small. Oftentimes street peddlers selling bootlegged copies of music are also involved in large-scale drug and weapons trafficking, and we find clear evidence of that on raids. As for individuals themselves, we have no way of screening defendants based on demographics, socioeconomic status, or perceived sympathy. Upon initial discovery of a violation, we have an IP address, a sampling of the files that were shared, and a timestamp of the activity. We consistently follow the prescribed legal process to obtain identifying information and always try to be fair and reasonable in resolving each of our cases.

Don: Is there anything else you'd like to add?

RIAA: Regarding our college initiative, a university's role in reducing the level of piracy on its campus cannot be overemphasized. We have consistently said that the more proactive a school is in the education of its students regarding its IT and enforcement policies, the offering of great legal alternatives so that students can have access to their favorite music (at deeply discounted prices or even for free), and most importantly, implementing effective technology that helps protect the integrity of its network, will lead to fewer instances of violations and fewer instances of hearing from us--a win for everybody!

So there you have it. The full interview with the RIAA.

Have a field day.


User Comments

OtherTwarrior
Date: January 16, 2008 @ 8:14 AM
"While college students used to be some of music's greatest fans, unfortunately that is no longer the case."

Yeah, their obviously downloading music because they hate it, not because they're fans. *rolls eyes*

The RIAA obviously has no concept of the definition of FAN. So, I'll help them out. The term "fan" is derived from the word "fanatic" or "fanatical". But of course, downloading music isn't a fanatical act, now is it? lol ... idiots.

"The reality of it is that nobody wants to get caught and most people complain when they are."

I used to pirate music and was never caught doing so. Why did I stop? Not because I've seen the light or whatever the fuck the RIAA would like to explain it as. Not because I fear lawsuit attacks. Not because I think it was wrong because quite frankly -- I don't see it as being anymore or less wrong than turning my radio on. I stopped pirating and STARTED COMPLAINING once the RIAA proved just what sort of ungrateful shitheads they really are.

I used to be the Head Administrator of this website. I still support this website with every fiber of my being. I'm not only a fan of music but an independent artist as well!!

So I can see things not only from the fan's point of view but an artist's point of view -- because I happen to be BOTH!

"Absolutely. Since we began this initiative, we've seen a P2P problem that once was growing at dizzying speeds essentially flatten out."

Yeah, which is why for every BitTorrent site they take down -- 10 more spring up -- and p2p has become the most widely accepted standard for content syndication. Sure, must be some good shit they're smoking. lol

"Our preference--first and foremost--is to take action against the services themselves that facilitate the illegal downloading and distribution of copyrighted works."

Is that why their first and foremost action was to attack individuals in an attempt to scare the shit out of the public at large?

"I don't agree with the loaded premise of the question."

I don't agree with the loaded premise of your unethical attacks and asinine agenda. But we can all agree to disagree, right?

"We are actively assisting efforts by policy makers in Washington to encourage countries whose copyright laws have not kept up with the times or who do not appropriately enforce intellectual property violations."

Intellectual property violations, exactly. NOT "stealing". It's no more stealing than the speed violation you might get a ticket for when you go 45 in a 30 zone. The officer doesn't throw you against your car an accuse you of stealing an extra 15mph that you weren't legally entitled to. He doesn't haul you off to jail nor do you end up in court needing to settle for $2k nor being demanded you pay $250,000.00 per mph "stolen".

RIAA -- I dare you to claim I'm not a fan. I dare you to claim I'm not an artist just because I'm not under an RIAA label. I dare you to find any flaws what so ever in my statements. But, you won't accept the dare. Why? Simple. Are you reading this? Most likely. I'm sure the RIAA heavily monitors sites like this. So why won't you accept the dare? The same reason you wouldn't accept my dare when I was Head Administrator for your chance to debate us on this site and explain your views of the situation. You know you're wrong and we all know you're a bunch of cowards. Your silence speaks a thousand words.

-Dave
Otherindependentm...
Date: January 16, 2008 @ 11:59 AM
If p2p use has "leveled off" it is because YouTube recently became "the" place to sample music. It is much easier to use than p2p. (Plus, it has visuals.)

Something better came along (in terms of "quick and easy")

It's that plain and simple.
DMembernitedreamerxp
Date: January 16, 2008 @ 12:20 PM
no person I talk to has a favorable opinion of the riaa everyone from teachers to average people.
They really have no idea how turned off people are about not the riaa. but other trade org.

Wanna know how bad take the place I work at for example yes it is an elementary school
from software,music,movies the IT guys are scared to death to let teachers have actual accsess to anything they really need and it makes everyone mad.

Everytime a teacher complains I explain the best I can about who's really responsible for their access the reaction is the same everytime.

So you could say the BSA,RIAA,MPAA an all the rest who want to criminalize everyone who uses the internet they have a chill effect they truly do.
AdminCodeWarrior
Date: January 16, 2008 @ 1:12 PM
CARA DUCKWORTH?

Ins't that a character from a Marx brothers movie?

I think her last name should be
LITTLE...

Cara Little
Otherindependentm...
Date: January 16, 2008 @ 1:39 PM
I don't Cara f**k

Evil Grin

----------------

nitedreamerxp, I agree wholeheartedly that the enemy copyright abusing corporations certainly do have a "chilling effect"

Another example of the madness:

Just take a photo you paid Olan Mills to take of you on your wedding day down to Kinko's and see if they will make a copy of it for you to send to grandma.
RockgdZiemann
Date: January 16, 2008 @ 2:21 PM
...there would also be legal consequences to engaging in illegal downloading behavior...

...in addition to the lawsuits we file against individuals using commercial ISPs to illegally download...

...When an individual is caught illegally downloading music..."

...take action against the services themselves that facilitate the illegal downloading...

...People are now more aware of what is legal and illegal when it comes to downloading music...


Cara, you ignorant slut, there is no basis in the entire U.S Code to support the premise that downloading anything is illegal.

The RIAA has never sued anyone solely for downloading. There is no case law to support this theory.

Downloading is mentioned exactly three times in the laws of the United States. Two of those appearances concern veterans and medical records. The third is an affirmative defense for possession of child pron.

There is no situation in which the word "illegal" can accurately be applied to a download.

This leaves us with only the question of whether Duckworth knows full well she is lying out her ass or if she rides the short bus to work every morning with the rest of the RIAA staff.
Otherindependentm...
Date: January 16, 2008 @ 4:45 PM
It's just "smoke and mirrors" misdirection.
(But YOU already know all that George. lol)

I'm talking to all the folk out there.

(And the Sheep and Kinko's etc.)
DMembergfmlcka
Date: January 16, 2008 @ 5:41 PM
"Cara, you ignorant slut....."

Thanks George, haven't had a nasal beer lavage in a while.
OtherTwarrior
Date: January 16, 2008 @ 6:09 PM
"Just take a photo you paid Olan Mills to take of you on your wedding day down to Kinko's and see if they will make a copy of it for you to send to grandma."

Wallgreens would make the copy :-) (Smile) At least the Wallgreens here would. Why? Because it's the self-serve instant automated photo machine. So, what the store doesn't see and no one can prove, they don't mind as long as they're making $$ hehehe.

-Dave
RockgdZiemann
Date: January 16, 2008 @ 8:52 PM
"Thanks George, haven't had a nasal beer lavage in a while."

Just one of the many services I try to provide.
IntermediateDreddsnik
Date: January 16, 2008 @ 10:44 PM
" "Just take a photo you paid Olan Mills to take of you on your wedding day down to Kinko's and see if they will make a copy of it for you to send to grandma."

I use my scanner.
Maybe those should be illegal.
IntermediateDreddsnik
Date: January 16, 2008 @ 10:46 PM
Sorry bout the dbl post.

The Wal-mart nachines around here
detect the watermarks on professional
photos.

I have to scan them, and photshop the
watermark out.
Then I can take them and have them
bulk processed.

Photoshop .. must be banned, it aids
piracy.

Scanners .. another piracy aid.
OtherTwarrior
Date: January 17, 2008 @ 2:04 AM
Ok well to have some fun mocking the RIAA, here is a list of things that should be banned and why:

CD / DVD Burners - Because VCR's are good enough for your home videos and if you want pictures developed, goto wallgreens or something and use the film we've all been using for well over a century!

DVRs / Tivo - Because the people who make them and the satellite / cable services that distribute them are blatantly violating copyright law. Buy the DVD's and sound tracks, you cheap fucks!

Portable Flash Drives / iPods - go buy a regular hard drive or a lap top you lazy bastards! We all know only INTERNET PIRATES need PORTABILITY!

Scanners - it's your own damn fault if you loose your film negatives and / or original pictures get lost or ruined -- you incompetent fools! We all know the real reason for scanners is to violate the copyright of the photographers who you paid money to take pictures of YOU! It doesn't mater that they are your pictures and you paid for them. Maybe the photographer just likes keeping them around so he can whack off to the thought of your wife! Thats not illegal, but copyright infringement, is!

THE INTERNET ITSELF -- yes, we all know that the ONLY REASON ANYONE uses THE INTERNET is for viewing child porn and downloading that newest pirated copy of Adobe Photoshop! You want the news?! Turn on your tv or read the paper, you fucking criminals!


Ya know, the RIAA probably thinks exactly like this, too. lol

-Dave
DMemberGottagetsome...
Date: January 20, 2008 @ 9:32 AM
I wouldn't be a bit surprised if they did!

Actually, thanx to cable and satellite signals now being encoded with "copy flags" (I think that's the correct term), they can now stop you from recording movies and even some tv shows. Next thing ya know the RIAA, MPAA, or whoever will think they should ban TVs too...
RockgdZiemann
Date: January 20, 2008 @ 1:36 PM
If the writers' strike continues much longer, banning TVs won't be necessary.
Otherindependentm...
Date: January 21, 2008 @ 12:23 AM
I would like to see a total shift in the kind of TV programming we have in the USA. I hope the writer's strike continues forever and breaks the mold.

There is virtually NOTHING worth watching on TV anymore.

I only watch PBS, Discovery/History channel, Adult Swim cartoons, SCCA car races, Colbert/Daily Show, and the news. Everything else sucks.
DMemberGottagetsome...
Date: January 21, 2008 @ 7:04 PM
Independent, I agree. I watch some of the same channels you do: History Channel (including History International), GSN, Discovery Health, MSNBC, BBCA. NatGeo, TCM and on-demand versions of A&E, NatGeo TCM & BBCA. Even tho MSNBC has a lot of political crap, I don't watch that for the most part but instead watch some of their documentaries.
You must be logged in to post replies to news articles.
Log in or register with the form at the top of the page.

 

 

 

search

news tree


advertising



 

 
© DMusic LLC - Advertising | Employment | TOS | Subscribe