Posted by  Bill Evans in on July 9, 2003 at 6:09 PM
|
|
![]()
From time to time, I update the list of RIAA member labels on Boycott-RIAA.Com. The information is obtained from the horse's mouth so to speak - the RIAA website at http://www.riaa.com/about/members/default.asp
Our most recent update was June 27th, 2003, based on info at the RIAA website.
I was contacted by a concerned individual and it was posted in the forums on boycott that Matador Records is not an RIAA member.
I checked the forums on Matador Records website and lo and behold Matador Records is not a member of the RIAA, according to their manager Patrick Amory.
I've removed Matador Records from the listing on boycott-riaa.com and urge our vistors to visit Matador Records They have great music and its all indie.
They have a store on their website, samples of the music, band info, and much more. Pay them a visit and buy something....The indies need our support.
I wonder what else on the RIAA website is inaccurate?
Bill Evans
|
|
User Comments
 TameasDust
|
Date: July 9, 2003 @ 6:16 PM
Best to check with all of them. The RIAA dont want anyone making money if they aint.
The RIAA thinks they own the record industry so anyone with music is automatically a member.
tx for pointing out that one they thought they had in their pocket isn't.
|
 directive
|
Date: July 9, 2003 @ 6:46 PM
Just looked on www.riaa.com and it still says they are supported by the RIAA, please let me know whats going on, tried calling the RIAA about this?
Thanks
|
thumbtack
|
Date: July 9, 2003 @ 6:55 PM
I've exchanged e-mails with PArtick the manager of Matador Records, we had the same problem back when I first started boycott-riaa.com The RIAA removed Matador from their listing for quite a while, now on the new site its back up there. If they can't keep track of who their members are, how can we expect Soundexchange (part of the RIAA) to accurately pay royalties to the artists and labels?
|
 eaglesniper
|
Date: July 9, 2003 @ 9:27 PM
I just saw this on Yahoo! News. You'll love this:
RIAA Sues Puretunes.com Music Web Site
58 minutes ago Add Technology - Reuters Internet Report to My Yahoo!
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A recording industry trade group said on Wednesday it has filed a lawsuit against a Spanish company that operates Puretunes.com, a music download service launched in May.
The lawsuit, filed last Thursday in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., against Sakfield Holding SA, alleges the company engaged in copyright infringement and unfair competition.
The lawsuit filed by the Recording Industry Association of America (news - web sites), a trade group representing the music industry, also claimed that Puretunes had defrauded its customers into believing that its service was licensed by record companies.
A representative for Puretunes could not be immediately reached for comment on Wednesday.
Matt Oppenheim, senior vice president for business and legal affairs for the RIAA, said the group was seeking damages and an injunction against the Web operator.
The lawsuit was filed in U.S. federal court because the service operated as a business in the United States, selling U.S. recordings to U.S. consumers, he said.
The RIAA is a trade group for major labels Sony Music (6758.T), AOL Time Warner's (NYSE:AOL - news) Warner Music (AOL.N), Vivendi Universal's (NYSE:V - news) Universal Music (V.N) (EAUG.PA), Bertelsmann AG (news - web sites)'s BMG (BERT.UL), and EMI (EMI.L).
The group has been increasingly aggressive in its efforts to crack down on online piracy as fans have turned to such unauthorized services for music and the industry struggles with a steep decline in CD sales.
Javier Siguenza, a Madrid-based lawyer representing Puretunes, told Reuters in May the new company abided by Spanish copyright laws.
Puretunes had also previously said it was a legal service operating under licensing agreements from various Spanish trade associations representing performers and recording artists.
Unlike other download services such as Kazaa, Puretunes manages a music library and says it will pay royalties to performers. Eight hours of downloads cost $3.99 while unlimited downloads for a month cost $24.99, a steep discount from industry-sanctioned services such as Pressplay and those operated by Britain's OD2.
Reuters/VNU
|
chance11
|
Date: July 9, 2003 @ 11:47 PM
Maybe the RIAA hasn't heard of NAFTA? It's a FREE trade agreement between the US and Mexico.
(That was a joke  |
directive
|
Date: July 10, 2003 @ 12:53 AM
Pretunes is under a different laws than us, what is this all about. Why even acknowledge the RIAA.
|
DCMaven
|
Date: July 10, 2003 @ 9:35 AM
Matador has Arab Strap, Cornelius, and Mogwai, which are all great artists. Check them out.
|
thumbtack
|
Date: July 10, 2003 @ 10:46 AM
The RIAA is a member of IFPI, who is run by Jay Berman, former head of the RIAA, THE IFPI acts as an agent for the RIAA in international matters...
|
SinisterX
|
Date: July 10, 2003 @ 3:37 PM
The RIAA never updates its website, never believe anything they may have written on it. best to try to as the label directly before coming to any conclusions.
|
SinisterX
|
Date: July 10, 2003 @ 3:38 PM
thats contact the label directly.
|
diggit
|
Date: July 10, 2003 @ 3:39 PM
directive, you said "supported by the RIAA" in your first post in this thread. I'm pretty sure it's the other way around? Or does the RIAA actually support anything? I thought it only existed because there was money to be siphoned off people who actually have talent...
|
furrball316
|
Date: July 12, 2003 @ 1:19 AM
This sounds similar to a point I raised a while back about finding labels that are NOT listed on the RIAA's member list despite the fact they are indeed members. Didn't Hillary make some kind of statement about how we should know if it's illegal or not because anything on an RIAA label is illegal? Problem is, if they don't even know which labels are theirs then how in the hell can they reasonably expect us to know???
|
You must be logged in to post replies to news articles.
Log in or register with the form at the top of the page.
|
|
|
|
