RIAA (milestone in court case)

I believe you're right for the most part about musicians just wanting to be heard, with the exception of the few jerks who get greedy of course. The sad story is, it's the record producers that hold the purse strings. How much money do most bands ever get to see anyway? I know some have gotten greedy. I remember Metallica throwing a huge fit over people pirating their stuff, and that was right before the RIAA started all these lawsuits. On the flipside, you have bands like Iron Maiden, where Bruce Dickinson said at a concert where they previewed one of their songs for their then upcoming Dance of Death album, "Go ahead and download it. If you like it, go out and buy the album. If you think it sucks, then don't!" Which to me seems like the best attitude: Let your stuff speak for itself.

Which brings us to a huge problem when it comes to music. How much of it is actually worth buying? The record company logic works like this:

Find "young, talented" person for the genre in question.
Produce 1 or 2 "hits" for use on the major radio networks.
Spam the hell out of them on the radio and spam their videos on MTV, etc.
Cram the albums with substandard filler and charge people $20 for 1 or 2 good songs.
Repeat process when said young, talented person's usefulness is worn out.

That's why you only hear one or two songs from a band played over and over on the radio, and why some bands never get air time at all. Look at bands that have been around for 10-20+ years. They stay around because they don't NEED this deceptive business practice. The fans support the band and buy their stuff. They have a fanbase that sticks with them, and they know it. They have real musical talent. All they have to do is keep doing what they do best. They usually don't get hurt bad by piracy, and a lot of them never get any radio time. The problem is, they're not "hip" to the "young person" image the record companies want to promote. It's these one-hit-wonders that the record companies depend on for their cash cow because it requires a minimal amount of work on the record company's part, with the largest return. That's why you see so many of these pop and rap stars come and go. The record companies use them up, and throw them away, then come up with new ones for the next generation.

The reason the RIAA hates file sharing is not just because of piracy. The main reason is it destroys their exploitive business model because people get to hear only what they want. Companies do not like the consumer being in control, and like any tyrannical powermonger, they're using heavy-handed tactics to try to keep the "peasants" in line. The RIAA uses copyright law like a club, demanding unreasonable penalties from people who are very often innocent of wrongdoing, but lack the financial resources to fight them in court. Using the legal system as a weapon against the poor, and as a tool for extorting money from the innocent is grounds for damnation to the lowest level of hell as far as I'm concerned.

I'm glad this woman won her case. I hope more decisions of this kind follow. Thumbs up!

	Author	Topic: RIAA (milestone in court case) (Read 4865 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.