Don't Sever a High-Tech Lifeline for Musicians
By Janis Ian

February 2 2003

The Recording Industry Assn. of America recently won a court ruling that effectively will cut off the recording artists it represents from new listeners.

In RIAA vs. Verizon, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that anyone suspected of downloading so-called "infringing" files on the Internet -- usually an MP3 of a song -- could be sued. No evidence is required. An accuser fills out a form for a court clerk and the machinery is set in motion.

The record companies say this decision will mean more money for musicians, but they have it backward. The downloaded music they're shutting off actually creates sales by exposing artists to new fans.

If this ruling stands, many smaller musicians will be hurt financially, and many will be pushed out of the music business altogether.

I've been a recording artist for nearly 40 years, with top-selling songs such as "Society's Child," "At Seventeen" and "Jesse." Six months ago, I began offering free downloads of my songs on my Web site. Thousands of people have downloaded my music since then -- and they're not trying to steal. They're just looking for music they can no longer find on the tight playlists of their local radio stations.

That's how many artists gain new listeners these days -- through the Internet.

After I first posted downloadable music, my merchandise sales went up 300%. They're still double what they were before the MP3s went online.

I'm not going to make a fortune selling these extra recordings, but it does add up to a few thousand dollars a year. That's a welcome bit of additional income for me and for the vast majority of artists who don't sell as many records as Nelly and Ja Rule.

The Internet means exposure, and these days, unless you're in the Top 40, you're not getting on the radio. The Internet is the only outlet for many artists to be heard by an audience bigger than whoever shows up at a local coffeehouse. The Internet allows people like me to gain new fans; if only 10% of those downloading my music buy my records or come to my shows, I've just gained enough fans to fill Carnegie Hall twice over.

With the court's decision, the RIAA didn't just defeat Verizon, the Internet service provider that the RIAA sued. It damaged the viability of recording artists who don't conform to the mainstream musical tastes of the moment.

Do you like '50s-style acoustic folk? Big band music? European synth? If the decision stands, you'll have to rely on word of mouth to find it -- not the Internet. Because if you get hold of an "infringing" file, you may find yourself on the receiving end of a record company lawsuit too expensive for any individual to fight.

The entertainment industry has a long history of trying to shut down new technology. Most often, it has imagined that new products and services threatened industry sales. It's been proved wrong time and time again; it fought home video tooth and nail, but videotapes and rentals now bring in more money than movie releases. Music history is littered with record industry campaigns against reel-to-reel home tape recorders, cassettes, minidiscs, music videos and MTV.

Verizon is appealing the decision, and it is vital that the judge's ruling be overturned.

The RIAA says it is doing all this to make more money for me and other artists like me, but don't be fooled. Many musicians would lose money, many fans would be denied a universe of new choices and the possibilities of Internet music would be cut off before the revolution even begins.

*

Janis Ian is a singer, songwriter and recording artist with nine Grammy nominations. Web site: www.JanisIan.com.

yeah i agree taht the internet is a powerful tool to get new listeners for artists

"yeah i agree taht the internet is a powerful tool to get new listeners for artists"

my thoughts exactly

due process, due process! What happened to that? Also, what the fuck happened to innocent until proven guilty? God damnit, fuck the government and it's shitty ass ways. We're long over due for a revolution!

I too, agree with taht concept.

when janis Ian wrote the last pro file sharing article, i was so impressed I went out and bought her cd.

Too bad more musicians don't speak up about this stuff.

Yeah, lack of Due Process just isnt American. If the Content Cartel wants to rule this country by fear and intimidation, ill take up a hobby just to spite them.

Hey Janis, can you allow tapers to digitize and pass around SHN files on E.Tree? Most of my favorite Jam Bands (I'm a college student) like Oar, Guster, Umphree's McGee... allow this and I have bought CD's as a result.

The internet is the medium that transcends all boundaries. The RIAA is so scared that this thing is way beyond their control that's why their trying to stifle it (yeah right!).

And why'll you're at it, why don't you abolish habeas corpus as well??!!

My hat is off to Janis for this. She really is an advocate for internet music, and really slams the RIAA's greedy practices hard!

Way to go, Janis!

taking nothing away from Janis Ians wonderfully worded piece, or its content, isn't this what a lot of people have been saying all along? that downloading and sampling actually HELP an artist instead of hurting them. The ONLY people that stand to get hurtin the long term are the companies that (do not) support the artists. Great job Janis! I wish the Cartel was so well informed and agreeable.

Janis needs to take this direction directly to where it can benefit her and musicians like her the best. To our lawmakers!!!

Unless we get our lawmakers to realize what's really going on here (namely, lack of due process, judges being paid for by huge conglomerates that shouldn't exist in the first place), then nothing is going to be done to fix this.

Janis, if you happen to be reading these replies, I suggest you get a campaign started to preserve the Fair Use rights we were guaranteed by law. It's quite obvious that this court ruling violates our rights to Fair Use. The only way I can see it done is legislation... protecting Fair Use.

The underlying issue is the slow decay of a proud history of the "pursuit of freedom" as it pertains to the American business model.
I have wrote on this subject before, and most assuredly will again.
"Small business is the backbone of the American economy" This has been said by millions, and is, for lack of a more appropriate term, the TRUTH. Once more, with feeling, THE

TRUTH!!
The free market economic model only works efficiantly with a viable microeconomy. However consolodation of powerbase and market share are also principles of the same model. Where to draw the line between the two is a good question that bears some thought. I suggest that when the effects of corporatization actively stifle lower end markets that it's time to
throw up the red flags.
The DMCA as an example is terribly stilted towards large money players. Odd considering the accessability and cost effectiveness of new tech like internet radio. This is a free market ideal, entry cost is low, softwares free, and it's a new, i.e, growing market. These are hallmarks of a productive marketplace, one that should go through a more "regular" business evolution.
The codes of common law in business are established by practice, based on the repeated, acceptable to all parties, actions of business people for thousands of years.
Through this process a common code of behavior has developed. I would put forth that the current environment of legislation and lawsuit sets this process back and should be
considered an attack on the free market itself. The music industry is losing the trappings of a free market and being monopolized, end result, a breakdown in profits. That's the bottom line folks and I don't think it can be accredited to filesharing. Centralization is killing the record industry, I wonder if they know.
I would further put to you, the independent artist that it is, your obligation is to continue to pursue new technology and media and artistic expression with even more vigor in these times where the infrastructure of our livelyhood is in question each day. Put simply, take a bit of it back to the cottage and street where it belongs.


The underlying issue is the slow decay of a proud history of the "pursuit of freedom" as it pertains to the American business model.
I have wrote on this subject before, and most assuredly will again.
"Small business is the backbone of the American economy" This has been said by millions, and is, for lack of a more appropriate term, the TRUTH. Once more, with feeling, THE

TRUTH!!
The free market economic model only works efficiantly with a viable microeconomy. However consolodation of powerbase and market share are also principles of the same model.

Where to draw the line between the two is a good question that bears some thought. I suggest that when the effects of corporatization actively stifle lower end markets that it's time to

throww up the red flags.
The DMCA as an example is terribly stilted towards large money players. Odd considering the accessability and cost effectiveness of new tech like internet radio. This is a free

market ideal, entry cost is low, softwares free, and it's a new, i.e, growing market. These are hallmarks of a productive marketplace, one that should go through a more "regular"

business evolution.
The codes of common law in business are established by practice, based on the repeated, acceptable to all parties, actions of business people for thousands of years.
Through this process a common code of behavior has developed. I would put forth that the current environment of legislation and lawsuit sets this process back and should be

considered an attack on the free market itself. The music industry is losing the trappings of a free market and being monopolized, end result, a breakdown in profits. That's the bottom

line folks and I don't think it can be accredited to filesharing. Centralization is killing the record industry, I wonder if they know.
I would further put to you, the independent artist that it is, your obligation is to continue to pursue new technology and media and artistic expression with even more vigor in these times where the infrastructure of our livelyhood is in question each day. Put simply, take a bit of it back to the cottage and street where it belongs.

oops! double pasted, my apologies!
YEr PAl Ethan

what makes them think i wont burn my hard drive when i get the notice that i'm being sued?

With this obscene, despicable ruling, perhaps the RIAA should abandon the pretense of its being a music lobby and instead reconstitute itself as a de facto reincarnation of the old Soviet KGB. Speaking of which, the judge who made that ruling would've made a good jurist in Stalinist-era Russia.

Moreover, if this ruling is allowed to stand, what will happen to those designated "violators" by the RIAKGB -- forced exile to a remote, deserted leper colony with NO computers, a la Siberia? Being dragged out of their homes and machine-gunned to death on the spot? Don't laugh -- we are perilously close to this kind of world.

I would like to hear what an "infringing file" is first. If I put my stuff out there for a free download, and I am the writer and own the rights to do so, how is any of this going to affect me? And if anyone else is putting stuff out there owned by the majors...do we really care?...let them cut their own throats. I don't see how this hurts me.

Thanks Janis ,and your insight is excellent and correct. Other artist need to come out of hiding and speak up.Like you and like myself. The RIAA needs to be told by the gov't to stand down !!!
Everyone write to Verizon write to people in Washington D.C tell everyone you know what tis fight is about get everyone involved !This is bigger than just file sharing the outcome of this Verizon vs.RIAAKGB will make the internet a very bad place to be for anything !!!!
James Earl Jones Where Are You ??

Do you how many bands have gotten exposure from Mp3 tracks...a promotion they didn't even create. Something stronger than word of mouth. Because of Mp3's 50 Cent gained more hype before his release than anyone else in a long time and made his record sales for one of hisold albums "Guess Who's Back" explode to the #43 spot. An album that has been off the chart for years!

This whole concept of suing for "infringing files" is kind of scary. Especially since many of those files are bogus ones planted the RIAA to discourage downloading! And sue for what? The damage for one downloaded file is what, maybe a $1.00? What if I only got half the download ?

The sh*t is going to hit the fan when lists containing 1000's of IP addresses start going out. It will cost ISP's millions to deal with stuff.

Format c: /u

What? Me? Worry?

Does this ruling have any effect on UK users of P2P software? I mean, the dude who made the ruling has no jurisdiction in the UK does he? Man, the RIAA suck more ass everytime I hear their name. Infact, the next person from the RIAA to speak gets my foot up their ass. >

Late-comer here.

"due process, due process! What happened to that? Also, [...] happened to innocent until proven guilty?"

Welcome to the civil court system. He who has the most bucks wins. If you're sued in this manner, it is because someone (or some company) decided they didn't like something you were doing. See, I can sue you because I don't like you using the F-word (as an example). True, any judge with a brain will throw it out as frivilous, if it even gets to him. The problem is that this matter with music is that it has taken on a semblance of validity due to the distorted "facts" of the RIAA et. al. So, that makes it less likely that the case will be thrown out at the start... which means it's your bank account vs. a multi-million (billion?) dollar organization's account.

The long and short of it is that the whole court system is up for a complete re-write. :/