The major labels are truly desperate. Having been rendered obsolete in the past 7 years by continuing to promote an outdated approach to music distribution, they are grasping at straws in an attempt to stay relevant. First, it was suing online file sharing programs like Napster and Audiogalaxy. Then, when that failed to stop file sharing, they started suing their very own customers. This has proven to be a bit more effective, with most people settling out of court, and in the one case that actually went to trial, the verdict came down in favor of the record industry.
But now, they're trying to tell us that importing a copy of a CD to your computer is, in fact, breaking the law.
Excuse me, but has anyone seen my right to fair use?
I'm no lawyer, but I don't see this getting much traction. The legal precedent is already set with the decision that using VCRs to tape television shows is allowable.
While rampant downloading of leaks in place of actually purchasing the music is at the very least, rude, (I mean, come on, I don't work for free, why should anyone else?) I think that file sharing is actually a service to not only the industry, but ultimately, the artists themselves. There are, naturally, those who disagree, but there has been so much music that I have purchased that I would have NEVER EVEN HEARD OF had it not been given to me for free to try out. Of course, that argument only works if you actually go out and purchase the music afterward.
But to try to tell people they can't put their CDs on their iPods? Well, I can think of no better way to alienate the customer base even more.
i absolutely agree. so much music i have sampled and then gone out and bought. And not being able to put cds on my computer? Just ludicrous! Should i buy the music twice - once to have the cd and once to have it on my computer? I think emphatically no!
None of this is news to you, Dan, but think about how a certain somebody gave me ONE Hem song and now I own what, four albums? And as for that CD importing--do they plan on suing iTunes for letting you? Me retroactively for importing my 80s stuff?
If they would figure out that the majority of their clients would purchase music if they made it easier to buy--like say, oh, IMPORTS--they'd be fine. I guess if they're going to be obtuse they get what they deserve.
Ironically, I have a close friend who works for the RIAA, so I will ask her about this. She will probably be livid with the Post article, because they are not suing people for ripping their own CDs or even making a copy for a friend. There has to be more to this case. ??
Not that I think the lawsuits have done any good at all. They have been a nail in the coffin actually.
Post a Comment