Bob Parks is a former Republican congressional candidate, Navy veteran, dad, graphic designer, producer/composer, New England Patriots fan - and an opinion columnist for mensnewsdaily.com.

But more to the point, since 1979 he's been a songwriter, producer, percussionist, synthesizer programmer, "Still waiting for my big break ..."

... and while he waits, he's written one of the best pieces on p2p -v- The Suits (and all the rest) in a July 6 mnd opinion piece.

It really tells it like it is.

"Better put your heads under the covers and hope the bogeyman will go away!" he leads off.

And then he goes on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is pissed off.

"We'd much rather spend time making music then dealing with legal issues in courtrooms. But we cannot stand by while piracy takes a devastating toll on artists, musicians, songwriters, retailers and everyone in the music industry."
– RIAA president Cary Sherman

They have some nerve.

Sure, file swapping is technically stealing. But the record business has ripped off its own musicians and consumers for decades, and when the industry starts losing money, it’s time to get payback. Maybe they should try looking in the mirror first before publicly threatening to track down and prosecute petty thieves when they’ve been ripping off everybody so a few non-talented suits could suck off the artistic tits of legends long since gone.

Song Rippers
For a long time, record companies screwed older musicians by charging them for, among other things, the recording sessions (to be paid for off the top of sales), new instruments, food, drink, and any other expenses they could. The companies sometimes paid those musicians a one-time few hundred dollars (big money to broke musicians in the 50’s) and pocketed millions in sales made to this day with digital re-releases and re-packaged box sets.

"Online music piracy through illegal file-sharing is killing the business as we know it today, and songwriters like myself won't be able to write the songs if there's no way for us to make a living. It's the only job I know how to do!"
– Lamont Dozier, legendary songwriter (Stop! In The Name Of Love)

Nowadays, record companies charge musicians for recording sessions, even though the companies keep the master tapes, convince them of the need to embrace MTV and make a few $2-5 million promotional videos. The band later has to re-pay those costs first off the top before they see any money. Some companies even charge the artist for the costs of promotion, which can also be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. And when all is said and done, the artist is lucky to receive even 10% of the record sales.

Some record companies have what are known as '9-5 composers' whose sole job it is to write hit songs according to 'formulas'. Some are paid a 'kill fee' and some get royalties as well. This is money that doesn’t make it to the artists, and some groups are required to use some of these composers even though they are quite capable of writing their own material. This keeps the mortgages paid for friends and relatives of senior record company personnel. The artists may come and go, but do a search of some obscure composer names and see all the different places they appear….

"If you create something and then someone takes it without your permission, that is stealing. It may sound harsh, but it is true."
– Mary J. Blige, multi-Platinum award winning artist

I find it amusing: today’s R&B and hip-hop artists lecturing us about obeying the law. How many of them illegally carry guns, beat their girlfriends (the ones they artistically refer to as 'bitches' and 'hos'), shoot their rivals on the street and in the studio, beat up company employees, commit gang rape, and more. When was the last R&B, hip-hop award ceremony that didn’t need to have the police called?

Content
Why would someone break the law and download a song rather than pay for the CD? Simple: with the exception of maybe two high-profile songs, the other 15 or so probably suck. And the CD still costs near $20.

Today’s compact disks hold up to 80 minutes whereas yesterday LP’s held only 46. There’s almost twice the room to fill and today’s talent, to be quite generous, is questionable.

"Downloading… it’s petty theft for those that don’t have the guts to go ahead and shoplift."
– Marcus Hummon, songwriter and playwright

I remember paying $14 for Stevie Wonder’s 'Songs In The Key Of Life': a double album with a bonus 45 tucked in a sleeve. There was a line around the corner and it was an album everyone had to have. Now why would someone want to pay an additional $6 today for Brittany Spears or Justin Timberlake?

A few short decades ago, you could play an entire album at a party. Almost any Stones album, Earth, Wind & Fire, The Eagles, K.C. & The Sunshine Band, The J. Geils Band, Harold Melvin & The Blue Notes, Boston, The Ohio Players, and lots more.

Watch your average commercial today. Are they playing a hit song from last year or 20 years ago? I’ll bet anyone out there over 30 can name 10 hits from the 70’s and 80’s. The 90’s get a bit murky…. Can someone name me 10 hits from last year? How about five?

As I’ve pointed out on many previous columns, this is what it takes to be a songwriter today:

1. Sit down and create a song from dead air. Tough, but most satisfying.
2. Go to Tower Records, find a Rhino Records’ Greatest Hits of the 60’s or 70’s CD, take a song painstakingly written using Method 1, extract an eight measure 'hook' from a song, loop it indefinitely, and get some rapper to talk over it in an attempt to 'make it his own'. The more profane, violent, and juvenile the sexual references, the better.

The record companies aim their product at kids 14-17 (the teen demographic). One problem guys: this demographic, for the most part, ain’t got no money. The music industry is relying on a hard sell off MTV hopefully (for them) resulting in persistent whining and nagging from spoiled-brat kids to get the $20 from parents who know better.

What do parents know? They’re just the ones who have to listen to their kids play one song over and over and over, later just to leave that CD face up on the floor to be run over by a skateboard.

"Without copyright protection and the royalties it insures, artists and songwriters will have no long-term bankable financial security whatsoever."
– Hugh Prestwood, number-one Country Music hit songwriter

Personally, I would love to be writing and performing songs for a living. I would much rather be on stage slowly going deaf, but taking in the adrenaline rush of playing to thousands of people who are singing my song along with the band. I’d much rather be doing that instead of eking out a living, and writing columns that I feel a passion for but have yet to see any monetary reward.

Bottom line, Hugh: no one owes me a living in the music business just because I write songs. One small suggestion: if the record industry wants to make more money, MAKE A BETTER PRODUCT!

We, the adults in this equation, who give the our brats the money so Christina Aguilera can over-sing every line, pierce her genitals, and tell us how cool she is, bought a lot of the music we download before.

We ditched our records since y’all stopped making turntables. We re-bought a lot of our old record collections on CD, so we really bought those albums at least twice. But the industry expects us to pay more for music with inferior content and album art that you need a magnifying glass to read even if you still have 20/ 20 vision.

"It hurts artists, songwriters and everyone else who brings music to the public, and we will hold those who engage in this activity accountable."
– RIAA spokeswoman Amy Weiss

The music industry had better watch out whom they threaten. Those who are doing the majority of the downloading are kids with little or no earning power. It’s the parents who have to deal with the out-of-control 'artists' who have our daughters dressing like porn stars, and our sons like thugs.

The music industry produces videos that portray young girls doing almost obscene gyrations while being eye-candy for young males cruising the streets while flashing gang signs. When a crime is committed, the industry is the first to deny responsibility.

Now, they produce garbage and issue ultimatums when they can’t meet a bottom line.

Good music sells. People will want a pristine version, physically hold it, enjoy the album art, and play it over again. An mp3 is instant gratification, but it’s a lot better than being made to look the fool again: buying an expensive CD with one or two good songs on it, and a near worthless trade-in value.

Only a dumb business would sue its customers to force them to buy more of a lousy product.

The record industry is dumb. So sue me.

As to these so-called "talents" (read: useful idiots) quoted in this insightful article, my question is: Who (besides Lamont Dozier) are associated with RIAA members?

Again, the proverbial nail has been hit on the head. Fat-cat execs with more money then sense calling people theives when they themselves have been pimping artists for DECADES! Now I ask you, why is it the RIAA bringing lawsuits against people...and NOT the ARTIST who is supposedly getting screwed in the deal? Why is it that more "artist's" haven't jumped up and poured overwhelming support to the RIAA? Also, does anyone know where to get a somewhat complete list of artists supporting the RIAA so I don't buy anything from them at my local second-hand CD shop??

I'm sorry, but despite my beliefs about the failures of the music industry, this man is going about this completely wrong.

His arguments are relatively poor. The personal lives of the artists have nothing to do with this. To claim that every person iun an entire genre is a piece of filth makes me think that the writer of the article is also a piece of filth and makes me completely disregard his comments.

"The record companies aim their product at kids 14-17 (the teen demographic). ..."

first i'd like the movie industry to take note of what's happening here; once true broadband becomes widespread, this same demographic (the one almost all movies in the top-3 are aimed at) will be their 'pirate'.

a 44.1KHz (22/channel) is inferior for the most part to anything analog. only electronic music sounds decent to the trained (and it's not so hard to train) ear. quality products will reap an income: give me a superior (DVD audio or SACD at minimum) sound and i'll save up and buy it. but don't stop the technical progress once the income begins like with the CD. the industry will be lucky to make it far enough to push a better format.

Moreover, as to the hip-hop hypocrites on their sanctimonious high horse ranting against "piracy": I cannot neglect to contrast this with hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons's recent lobbying efforts to bring an end to New York State's so-called "Rockefeller drug laws." I presume that, like all the other "useful idiots" in the industry, this selfsame Mr. Simmons wouldn't lift a finger to defend consumers against the RIAA sharks circling around them. But the implication (as some would see it) seems to be that as far as he is concerned, drug dealers have more rights than P2P users.

W-B:

Further argument;

You ARE AWARE that these laws affect the low-level drug users or the ones unfortunate enough to have the drugs in their hands when the cops pass by, right?

I'm sorry, you're just an idiot if you think that Simmons is doing that in defense of drug dealers. People don't deserve lengthy sentences for having drugs. The dealers are the ones who are able to save their own butts because they're able to put someone else in their place so they don't go to jail. (I'm a Poli. Sci. major. I've seen research that basically refutes this point.)

There was a case talked about in a past issue of Rolling Stone related to the Rockefeller drug laws where cops ran after a guy, the guy dropped the drugs in a trash can, an older lady grabbed the drugs out of the trash can, wondering what they were, the cops saw her with the drugs, and -- despite the fact that she didn't even have them intentionally -- she got arrested and sent to jail for six years. Even that sentence was seen as lenient, because the judge basically said, "forget the mandatory minimums, she doesn't deserve 20 years in prison".

As much as I agree on the whole RIAA issue, the comments I've seen in this thread about rap and R&B stars are downright racist and unethical. You want people to support your cause? Don't step on the toes of your potential allies.

im not seeing anywhere we the author mentioned race anywhere....can u prove your alligations of racism?

Potential Allies?!? No thanks! Who needs thieves, murderers, rapist and crack heads for allies? If that story sounds racist, then you must be reading something into it thats not really there. How many times has Eric Clapton shot at Jeff Beck, or Kiss tried a drive by on Aeorsmith? I don't like what Rap, yea call it what it is, represents. If you want to hear something racist, listen to rap. And please don't call it music. They spew their hate mongering diatribe over a tune that someone else already did but since the record label has already screwed the artist of that ownership, who cares?

So I can't spell either, Sue me!

"As much as I agree on the whole RIAA issue, the comments I've seen in this thread about rap and R&B stars are downright racist and unethical. You want people to support your cause? Don't step on the toes of your potential allies."

I wrote the column. I am Black. Deal with it.
Bob Parks

BS. Just because it's not sugar-coated and politically correct for public consumption doesn't make it racist. By the way, Eminem is a white boy and, correct me if I'm wrong, but he's a little punk gangster too, right?

He's right. Nobody in the R&B community has the right to criticize us about the law.
1. Many of them are criminals
2. That's what this is about anyway, and *we're* right.

RythmMethod

Blah blah blah. If you really supported this cause wholeheartedly, you'd leave your mind open to all kinds of music, even the music you don't like. Anything else means that you're limiting your victories.

bocopar

Okay, so you're black. Where does this give you room to stereotype not one, but two genres of music?

"Oh, he's a rapper! He must be a mysoginist, gang-banging thug who obviously has nothing to say about this world."

By that same token, let's go back to the 1950s:

"Oh, it's a rock star! Look at him shake those legs! Oh gosh, would you look at that leather jacket? He must be a social deviant with nothing to add to this world whatsoever."

I rest my case. Support all kinds of music in your boycott, or support none. The victories have to be for everyone, or it's a complete waste of time.

1) You're assuming ALL the songs on every CD suck. There are tons of RIAA CDs that are all good.

2) "It's the only job I know how to do!"

Get a real job, dumbass. Music should be a hobby, not a moneymaking endeavour, imo.

"If you create something and then someone takes it without your permission, that is stealing. It may sound harsh, but it is true."

Well, I bought the CD. How can it be stolen if they and I still have it?

I'm going to have to agree with StickFig on this one and state that this man's arguments are relatively poor. The whole content section is clearly geared toward conservatives over 30. It would have been nice if he strayed away from his personal bias, even though I realize you are an opinion columnist, towards modern music and addressed the wrongdoings of the RIAA more than he did. You have to understand that the "There's no more good music!" stance you're taking is so tired and typical with your age group that the industry really doesn't care and never will. At any rate, to a limited extent informative statements about the RIAA can be found in the song rippers portion. The information here was very accurate and gives everyone the low down on how labels are basically stealing the artist's work from them. However, it became evident when he started discussing hip-hop that there was a lack of knowledge and a hint of bias. My guess is that Mr. Parks hasn't listened to any acts outside of what he constantly hears on the radio. Also, his only other exposure to this form of music (yes, RythmMethod I said it and this applies to you as well by the way) comes from what is deemed insanely offensive by society and makes its way into the news or, if he has children, what he hears them play in his household. If you want to become this close minded every single genre of music can be black-balled. I'm sure if all you heard of rock music was Nine Inch Nails screaming, "I want to fuck you like an animal, I want to feel you from the inside." you wouldn't think much of it either, no? Anyway, it's wonderful to have support against the RIAA's actions but I'm not to fond of your reasoning.

Let us not forget the role that the big dogs play in purposly stereotyping the music genres for marketing purposes. Sorta like taking the Jerry-Springer-lowest-common-denominator facter times 100. If a rapper is decent, hide it..or lie that he is a thug. If a woman is clothed, undress her, even though she may be uncomfortable. You guys and gals get the point. Don't fall for all the hype. As for the race thing...that is a cheap way to skirt the real issue, which is the marketing manipulation of the whole deal. The more we are at each other's throats, the more the big dogs have control.

hey StickFig, I doubt we would still have racism at all, if it wasn't for some rap/R&B "stars". (...well, 'some' means ALL of them, actually.)

The bottom line is:
The RIAA is doomed, because their business model ended a decade ago, they just dont know it yet.
Cary-shitty-Sherman knows it, the fat bitch knew it, and anyone with IQ above 80 knows it.

As for all the losers out there ("It's the only job I know how to do!"):
This is what we call "natural selection".
If you can't get a real job and reduce your musicmaking to a mere hobby, or, if you can't get hired as a spokesperson, well, starve and die, mofo, see if I care.

and no, file swapping is technically not "stealing", it is technically "copying".
you wouldn't have any doubts if you could just walk into a store, copy yourself a free candy bar, and later reproduce indefinitely from your PC, would you?
damn brainwashed ethics pussies.

To StickFig, ago-v5 and anyone else who thinks the argument against the hip-hop category is based on racisim, hypocracy or any other word you want to use to denote the article's bashing rappers.

It seems to me the writer's beef is with RIAA rappers. They are the ones complaining after all.
My suggestion is listen to a station that plays some of the top RIAA artists for atleast 3 hours. Listen to the content of the songs. I hear three different stations 3 days a week 8 hours a day at work that play hip-hop. 90% of the songs on those stations include three things and three things only. Sex, violence and womanizing. This may just be an act I don't know for sure becuase I don't like any of the artists enough to follow their personal lives. However most fans (kids) don't even do that either so they are left listening to Shawn-Paul telling some woman to shake that thing, the hacked version of Vitamin C's Graduation where some girl beat up on this other girl for talking bad, and to Tweet coming home at 3 a.m. to masturbate. They have no idea if what they are hearing is what the artists behind the music are really like. I do hear reports about some rapper being arrested for possesion, or molesting some girl, or brandishing a weapon in a public place without a permit etc. Isn't Eminem quoted somewhere saying that he would personally maim anyone he caught uploading his songs? The morality of uploading and Eminmem's reason for being angry aside isn't the threat of injuring someone violence? That wasn't in a song either. So perhaps some of them are truly what they rap about.

I won't deny that there are hip-hop songs out there that don't speak of these things, and rappers that aren't at all bad. I have heard very few of the songs and I know of even fewer rappers by just going on the radio. The RIAA is peddling too much of the other crap. That is the medium kids have though, the radio. Like I said I listen to it all day and I don't hear many of your good rappers. Find a station in your area and listen before you drop any judgement on this article or the writer for those comments.

"Like I said I listen to it all day and I don't hear many of your good rappers. Find a station in your area and listen before you drop any judgement on this article or the writer for those comments."

I listen to tons of music of all sorts.

Some of it may be questionable, some not, but the fact of the matter is, you're totally side-stepping my point: To deride any genre for personal reasons is damaging the cause, which is to benefit music in general.

People thought it was filth when Elvis shook his legs. This is no different. Take out the moral part of the equation, for the fifteenth time. This is an issue between one person who makes music and another, and if a successful boycott of the RIAA is ever going to go off, it needs support from everyone, not just a clique of indie artists who have something personal against another genre of music.

You can post about the moral details all you want. I don't care. That's between the artists and their God/blank space. They don't need moral posturing right now, and you don't need to question their morals; you need to question the RIAA.

On a side note I'm a classic rock fan. Almost all of that was written waaaay before my time. I'm also a techno fan and I like some classical pieces like Moolight Sonata, and Ave Maria. I also like some lesser known groups like The Coors, Walflower and Dishwala. Can you call me close minded then? I listen to some groups that perfomed in the 60's and early 70's when I wasn't born until '79. I have a broad range of categories that I like and you know what I like hip-hop too. 80's hip-hop, T-U-R-T-L-E Power, Journey Into Bass, and Planet Rock Machine Mix are some of my favorites. Since then hip-hop seems to be more about sex than even the other two ingreedients. To reitterate my point from my previous post though do most kids bother to go looking for an alternative to the radio or television to find more decent rappers when it comes to music? Do they look back to when the music was about just cutting a new groove and getting heard? I would be willing to say no. They want what their friends have and chances are their friends have what they heard on the radio.

Tell me would the questionable image help our cause or would it hurt it? It's not only hip-hop either. Britney Spears and Christina Agiulera have some pretty smutty videos too. Does anyone remember Ricky Martin the Latin singer? There were a lot of nearly naked women in his videos too. The image seems to be a theme with the RIAA artists. I stated that I think the writer's beef is with the RIAA artists. The RIAA hip-hop crowd may very well be all he knows. The RIAA does try to oppress every other form of copetition does it not?

Date: July 7, 2003 @ 11:08 PM
"As much as I agree on the whole RIAA issue, the comments I've seen in this thread about rap and R&B stars are downright racist and unethical. You want people to support your cause? Don't step on the toes of your potential allies."

"I wrote the column. I am Black. Deal with it.
Bob Parks"

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




OH burrrrrrrrrrrrrrrn!!!......check-mate man!

Date: July 7, 2003 @ 11:08 PM
"As much as I agree on the whole RIAA issue, the comments I've seen in this thread about rap and R&B stars are downright racist and unethical. You want people to support your cause? Don't step on the toes of your potential allies."

"I wrote the column. I am Black. Deal with it.
Bob Parks"

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




OH burrrrrrrrrrrrrrrn!!!......check-mate man!

Date: July 7, 2003 @ 11:08 PM
"As much as I agree on the whole RIAA issue, the comments I've seen in this thread about rap and R&B stars are downright racist and unethical. You want people to support your cause? Don't step on the toes of your potential allies."

"I wrote the column. I am Black. Deal with it.
Bob Parks"

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




OH burrrrrrrrrrrrrrrn!!!......check-mate man! way to show em Bob..great article

The writer's beef is that a few twenty-something punk executives are throwing out the junk, that's right; it said it: JUNK for consumption by kids. Pure and simple. I understand the point about Elvis and it is valid. But the perception of his hip-swinging as deviant was an opinion based on those who had never heard a lick of his music or seen him in person.
Hip Hop is all around us from MTV to Nickelodeon. Good and bad, clean and dirty. But if it seems I picked on R&B disproportionately, I would add: there are some rock bands that shouldn't be marketed to kids either. Kids are impressionable, adults should know better.
It's more about shock today then about melodies. If the RIAA is losing money, then maybe they should produce more melody, less shock.
Is that so hard to understand?
–The Author

And if they were making money, the music companies wouldn't give a damn if artists weren't getting paid. That's called "business as usual".

Artists have been strange and morally corrupt since at *LEAST* Mozart, who was outright mad as a hatter and a dope fiend to boot.

It comes with the territory, the stress, the power over others, the money - there's a certain level of corruption there, has to be, we're only human.

So when you take a guy from a poor, hard, hating environment and put him in that world, YES - his behavior along those lines WILL GET WORSE, duh.

Much as I dislike Eminem or whatever his name is, the movie 8-Mile is extremely accurate (I should know, used to live down there..) - and when you consider kids plucked out of THAT world, and then placed in the ivory towers, with the money for tons of dope, and record company execs covering up as many of their moral excesses as possible ? things like that happen.

And it's not just ONE theme of music, it's all of em, it's just more severe in a world where most of the true talent is drawn from such an ugly environment... and as for folks problem with the usual lyrics ? I don't like em either, but they are singing what they know, what they feel, and see every day in their own home neighborhood - change THAT, if the lyrics bother you so very much.

Anyhow, it's not about race, it's about the music, the morally corrupt world of music creation and production, and what it does to people - it seems everyone gets screwed in the deal, financially, morally, psychologically, hell.. maybe physically too.. save for the ivory tower execs.

Reserve your hate for them, not each other.

-user

Basically, it's a classic move of misdirection...the recording industry is making a big stink about "piracy" so that people will not pay too much attention to the REAL thieves...

For the record. When Elvis appeared on the Ed Sullivan show, sans his lower torso, it wasn't because of any smut police or moral majority. The reason Elvis was only shown from the navel up was the show's sponsor, Ford Lincoln Mercury. Their reasoning was, "Anyone who is interested in Elvis' hip gyrations, are not people who will go buy a Ford, Lincoln or Mercury on Monday. As much as we would like to blame the moral right, it just doesn't fly. Although it would seem feasible from Ford, who in the early days hired detectives to spy on Ford employess to see that none smoked, drank, danced or fornicated. That's a hoot coming from a family that has some deformed, retarded offspring of an incestuous liason hidden away from public view.

litheon: Sex sells.

On the origional artical: Some nice points, but it really seems too fanatical. Not enough examples and a tandency to overgeneralise which ruins credability.

Hmmmmm let's see... Artists perform, write (in some instances), and create the music, the record label puts it out and promotes it. Cd sells one million copies. Final tally when done: Artist net earnings $0.00; Label net earnings $4.4million. And we argue about the poor man struggling with his music career? What career?? Musicians have little choice these days. The only way to make it big (which isn't always just in terms of dollars) is to sell out and PRAY you sell millions, since that is the ONLY way you'll recoup and make some money.

Sounds to me like the real pirates are the Record Labels themselves. And since they wouldn't settle with Napster, Aimster, Kazaa, or any other P2P network, they actually cost themselves AND their artists MILLIONS of DOLLARS!!! That's right, EVERY P2P networks has offered to PAY, but has been turned down. Sounds like monopolistic actions to me.

We all like some styles of music and many of us dislike others. But this forum hopefully will not be denigrated into a "my music is better than yours" shout-out. ALL music has merit. (Yes, even the industry stuff that we boycott for reasons OTHER than percieved "quality.") Let's not loose sight of the true thing we ar fighting for ... a level playing field! Because the RIAA and the media oligopoly exists and wield such power makes a level playing field impossible. Bob Parks latches onto the fact that the industry puts out one sided "music" ... or as we all know, a very limited variety of music. The content of that music should NOT the issue here. It can be all guns sex and violence or it could all be family value sanitized... the content itself does not matter. What DOES matter is that these corporations have control of the gateway and there is no way to fair way compete with whatever lowest common denominator that they will continue to put out. So, don't get lost debating these "race" and other alleged content issues. Freedom of the media is NOT a right wing, left wing, republican, democrat, religion, atheist, etc. issue. It is a FREEDOM issue. If the ability to reach an audience with our tunes rests only with one entity (currently the RIAA/industry) then we will all suffer the many consequences.
Censorship, in an ideal world, should only be used by the person who is about to say something,
and only used of thier own free will.

Well said.

Suggestion: say no to a new CD, and donate the $20 to a local organization such as the Salvation Army or your local animal shelter.

Then send an email to your favorite RIAA representatives stating that $20 has been donated to XYZ charity in lieu of ABC CD.

What I would love to see -- one of these wonderful non-profits sending their standard letter notifying the RIAA that contributions have been made in memory of music, and then listing a few pages of names. And taking my little fantasy further, I wonder what the RIAA's reaction would be? Lawsuits against dog pounds and soup kitchens for misappropriating their profits?

**I stated that I think the writer's beef is with the RIAA artists.** -- Litheon

Bingo! You hit the proverbial nail on the proverbial head. It does indeed appear that the majority of these b****ers and whiners -- not only the "hip-hoppers" like Eminem who advocate and / or incite violence against P2P computer users, but also the diabetes-inducing sweet peachfuzz acts like the aforementioned Ms. Spears -- are on RIAA-member labels, and thus chief among the RIAA's legion of "useful idiots," all ending up serving the nefarious, insidious purposes of the multinational entertainment-media complex. As it is the RIAA guiding this vendetta, after all, these so-called "artists" should be seen in that vein just described. I was simply trying to point out the skewed priorities of one of these individuals in this whole context.

**The RIAA does try to oppress every other form of copetition does it not?** -- Litheon

Certainly sounds like it, dunnit? And continuing to get away with murder a la O.J., being as one of their bought-and-paid-for judges' recent ruling that Sharman (parent of Kazaa) couldn't pursue a collusion lawsuit against the multinational entertainment-media complex.

And to the individual who mentioned that this issue is not exclusive of any political or ideological persuasion, or racial or religious or whatever: We should all keep this in mind.

follow the money...follow the money...follow the money...follow the money...

By the way, RIAA, prove to me that the artist get the money. If you are not stealing from your artist, clear accounting will publicly prove that "your" artists, songwriters, etc. are adequately compensated...LOL!! If you wanna see the RIAA's accounting methods, check in the dictionary under ENRON!!

And what I meant to point out before, but had forgotten at the time: Like in all large corporations and other various group entities, there is that "collectivist / groupthink / herd" mentality in spades we see from these "artists" ('If you don't toe the RIAA party line, you're not a legitimate artist'). Those who've deviated from this (think Courtney Love), as we've seen, have in the past been subjected to massive retaliatory retribution (i.e. media hatchet jobs, de facto Stalinization -- where's Chuck D. of Public Enemy, for example?).

As people lose their homes,jobs,cars,etc...as the economy plummets, there is less disposable, discretionary money to spend. Do not buy the stick for the RIAA to beat you with. Let the artists they represent know that you are not going to buy their products as long as they are part of the RIAA mafia, as long as their record company pays protection money to the RIAA family, and that you are not going to support their extortion attempts (150 grand for a single downloaded song). I guess we see what the RIAA thinks record prices should go to!

Destroy their capital base and we will see the house of cards fall. The RIAA sucks money from the record labels..they suck their money from you, the consuming public. Let's just give them the middle digit and say to them...keep your stinking vinyl. Most of us have years of purchased music on hand, we have radios, we have cable (MTV and the rest).

RIAA...consumers ...JUST SAY NO!

If someone had the technical ability to make a truck that looked just like mine, and ran like mine, in fact, they made a copy of my truck, and after making that copy, drove it away without changing my truck in any way, do you think I would call the cops and report the theft of my truck? Hell no.
If someone made an exact copy of my business suit, and walked away wearing it...hey, I still have my suit, and I can wear it, sell it, whatever.

MP3s are NOT CDs. They are not physical media, they are only 1s and zeros. Anyone can delete an MP3 and no physical destruction occurs.

It is odd to me to say that copyright violation and theft are one and the same. If you were to xerox a book from the library, should you be criminally punished for the crime of theft of a book?

Geez, this is a bizarre notion. The traditional deal about theft arises from English common law of torts, which comes from Roman law. The notion of theft is that someone deprives you of the use of your possession, and deprives you of its value (such as with conversion), in which they physically take the product from you without any intention of returning it to you.

The actual MP3 does not leave your computer and go to another computer..it is a copy that you have. There is not actual transference such that it is no longer where it originally existed.

Is taking a CD without paying for it theft? Yes, it is no longer there for the vendor to sell, you have deprived him of that physical unit to sell.

BOYCOTT THE BASTARDS!

won't be able to take care of all opinions, but few points of the article should be mentioned:

1) you have to choose well if u buy a cd these days. i remember times, not too long ago, when more artists were on top who could deliver a complete supa dupa album. some of these todays artist have a really thin performance on whole albums, while some singles can kick ass. album art is not single art... check some older alan parsons project albums to see what i mean with a great, closed album concept... despite the sound, just talking of a concept with a tremendous throughout quality...

2) the behaviour & esthetics of some artits are indeed to be doubted and ever have been (i'm 28jrs. btw and no conservative, just educated...) and certainly don't have a good impact on teens. where are the parents to discuss and reflect this behaviour with the teens? imo a conscient and parental respected teen won't dress like a whore (i have enough examples for that in my environment...)...

3) i guess that there is happening the same to the recording industry like to the computer industry... the development takes over and these lame-ass-riaa dudes didn't have the guts to push different new concepts to access "the future of music". the computer industry seems much more intelligent and versatile, they already have met lotta measures for the cleansed and still cleaning market, and the price is sinking, the people are buying like hell, talkin 'bout an example... EVERYONE of us will sonner or later have to deal with less money than maybe used to, and a more fairly distribution of the money that is around. and btw:i don't need 5000000$ clips to enjoy my music, nor i'm willing to help these size-mad so called "creatives" with fundraising their coke-mind-driven ideas... i know people that can do a kick ass video with 10000$, and that's considered to be a nice sum for a video. yup

4) what was "denunciated" as racism appears to me to be more a close socio-psycho-logical analysis of some (not all!) of the actual rap artists and their output. as i am european i can't tell of the actual race related tendencies in u.s., but to me some of the rappers but also a (white, english) robbie williams are really making me ask myself about what kind of ideal today people are longing for. i don't do and never have worshiped psychos, criminals, depressives, racists etc. ... these people don't deserve my attention, my money. i don't care about where ones from or how he looks. i just listen what is beeing said and done. that's far enough to judge a person on some topic, but not at all...
yup.
quote: BOYCOTT THE BASTARDS!

All good points. I for one am Boycotting, and am telling all of my friends to do the same and spread the word. I explain to them what is happening and they most join the cause. No RIAA CD's for me.

I agree, let's call crap crap. You turn on MTV, or turn on the radio, you hear rap music, by so-and-so, "featuring" 3 or 4 other people who look, sound, act, and suck just like the headliner. And it's not just about rap, either. Back in the 80's, you had Chuck D and NWA. Granted, what they wrote and produced was, at best, controversial, but it was based on a social issue. They were angry about something that affected them, their neighborhoods, etc. What do todays current crop of posers write about? Rape, murder, drugs....the videos look like bad porn out-takes, the women are for the most part gosh-awful ugly, it's the same Akai sampled drum beat you can get with any 20 dollar sequencing program....in short, no talent.

Christina? Britney? Give it a rest....didn't you laugh at Tiffany 20 years ago? Backstreet Boys.....um, New Kids, anyone? They used to be novelty acts, now they're the mainstream. When did the record industry decide talent wasn't a requirement anymore?

Music has always been about rebellion, from the Beatles, all the way back to Mozart, but they had talent. Alice in Chains' songs were primarily about Layne Staley's addictions to heroin and coke, but again, he had talent. Where is the talent now?

Would you buy a car that looked like everybody else's, ran like crap, and was undrivable in a year? No. Now, how would you feel if Ford sued you for not buying their cars? Why is this even an argument?

Not even 10 years ago, you could buy 10 albums, and get one clunker. Now, you're lucky if you get one that's worth keeping. So why would I, as a consumer, continue to buy the product?

R&B? Riiiiiiight. R&B is Curtis Mayfield, Aretha Franklin, etc. Call it what it is...rap. And not very good rap either. I almost died when I heard "ghetto supastar", sung over a Kenny Rogers/Dolly Parton tune. And a pretty bad one, at that. That's creativity? Better give Wierd Al more credit then, he does a better job of it.

Racism is also always the first defense, and it's tired. Take a look a the news, the music video channels, etc. What do you see? Black "rappers" glorifying drugs, crime, and excess. Girls dressed up like 2 dollar hookers "shakin' da booty" in my face. Sorry, I don't think my kid needs to watch that, or support it. That's certainly not the only genre suffering, but it's the most visible. Makes me sick when Shug Knight gets arrested again, after breaking his parole numerous times over, and the first cry is "RACISM!" Nah, he's a violent, misguided idiot. Put him in jail, I'd say the same thing if he were a skinny white boy.

I judge on talent, and I don't see any.

On a different note, I find it odd that, for example, Sony is big on anti-piracy. They've begun selling cd's overseas that won't play on computer cd drives, nor can be copied to mp3. Odd, for a company that also sells MP3 players, and in fact, sells a car stereo with a hard drive in it, which you're supposed to rip your cd's down to MP3! RCA sells home stereos with USB connections, so you can connect your computer and play your burned music through the stereo. You can't have it both ways, folks. Let's also not overlook the obvious.....dual well cassette decks, commercially available cd recorders, dual well VCR's, DVD recorders, etc. The same companies that are backing the RIAA are also trying to sell us products to make copying music easier. Who are they kidding?

Get real folks. I, for one, am boycotting the RIAA, and any company affiliated with them. Please, don't sue me, treat me like an idiot. Without me, and the millions like me, you're dead in the water. Worried about losing money? You're losing it even faster now, and it's your own fault.

Oh, one thing I forgot. Mr. Parks is dead on in his accounting of where the money goes. The general order of business goes like this:

Band A forms, struggles through the cover band bar scene, starts to write music. Eventually, gets gigs where they perform nothing but original songs. At some point, a record industry scout may come by, or they get a gig where they're known to hang out. Company Scout loves Band A's music, gets them an audition/interview. Record Company loves them.

Now, Band A cannot record in their home studio, it's not professional enough. So, they have to go to a studio, pro producer, in most cases, studio musicians to do backup vocals, add instruments, etc etc etc. Big bucks. Company advances that money. Band A now has to pay for production of 1-2 million cds/tapes. Cover art, photographers, etc. More big bucks, advanced by the company. Advertising, delivering the chosen top hit (almost never the one picked by the band, btw). More money, more advances. Band goes on tour, bus, planes, PA, lighting, roadies, union labor. More advances. Even IF a band sells platinum on the first album, a minimum of one more platinum cd is required just to break even, if you're lucky, and don't eat the peanuts on the plane. Along with the debt, alot of the control of your music is lost, as the company reserves the right to re-record/edit the music the way they feel it should be. Plus, you're usually locked into a contract for 4-5 albums. What happens if the band breaks up? What if nobody buys your second or third album? Bang. You're now sued for breach of contract.

These are also the folks who sued John Fogerty for plaigarising HIMSELF.

And we wonder why they're doing this now.

You hit it all right on the head there heffie.

I got a stereo reciver by JVC that has a UBS plug in the front that lets me play all the sounds off my computer thru my home system.

And you talk about different types of music all being the same, well let me add one to the list: Smooth Jazz

If you listen to most music that is called that these days, a lot of it is in the Kenny G mode, as in mellow crap. Thers is some that is not like that, like the British jazz group Down To The Bone for instance, are not like that, yet they can't get as much airplay because they don't tow the "Kenny G-smooth jazz" party line, and play music that is more a jazz type groove thst mixes jazz with soul, and dance with a bit of funk added too.

And many so called "smooth jazz" radio stations also play soft rock and pop and R&B, to attract the Adult Comtemporary listeners too, and thus,are not even "smooth jazz".