Oh, for goodness sake!

Doesn’t that just reaffirm our general opinion about the
RIAA and those associated with it?

Apparently, it’s now improper to have a negative opinion
about the RIAA. (I’m sure they wish it was already illegal.)

“If you’ve got a negative opinion about us, keep it to
yourself, or they’ll be hell to pay!” Sheesh.

I’ll bet they’d sue if they could … maybe they will.
Great stuff.

Stand firm!

> What does concern me however is the repeating of
> malicious falsehoods that … are re-reported as having
> validity

I wonder if Paul could suspend his straw men and confirmation bias long enough to read these articles critically:

Ten inconvenient truths about file swapping
IFPI files 8000 lawsuits but can’t keep story straight
More IFPI disinformation
Slyck Interview With ITIC

I’m not saying the IFPI “repeats malicious falsehoods,” but they certainly don’t have the moral high ground here.

Hmm… Standover tactics.

Thanks for publishing this Andrew. It would seem Paul doesnt “get” the internet and the way the industry is changing.

I imagine back in the day the wooden-wheel-making folk also felt the same way about those new-fangled rubber tires.

Thats some pretty serious charges the RIAA are facing if the Download Squad article is accurate.

I have to say I hadnt read it (or noticed it in NMS until this post with Pauls emails) until now, but now that I have I will be following the cases with interest.

Thanks Paul

We want his email address!

I’m not giving out Paul’s email address.

He has offered his comments and given his permission to publish them here. He has not given me permission to circulate his personal contact details, and in the light of his comments concerning the personal abuse of members of his affiliate organisations, it would be bad form of me to do so, to say the least.

Nor do I encourage anyone to contact Paul directly about this. If he invites debate, then fine. I have merely given him a public forum within which to express his views.

To dispel any potential accusations of bias or agenda-setting, the account is unedited, and I have made sure that he has the last word. He is also, of course, free to post any additional comments here.

I’ll refrain from commenting further, but I just wanted to make it absolutely clear that I wish Paul no ill, and I am not inclined to set the internet on him.

I just wish to report, with fairness and accuracy, issues of interest to the music industries in the online environment, of which the major record labels and their representative organisations form one part. That’s what I do on this website.

Giving out the personal contact details of individuals within that ecology without their approval is not part of that brief, whether I agree with those individuals or not.

Andrew

Thank you for clarifying these are my personal views not those of the IFPI, RIAA, BPI or others.

In response to Mark I actually think there is nothing wrong with making a copy for your own use, in a sense side-loading to an iPod or similar is an extension of that use. Under current copyright legislation there is a need for customers to be allowed that facility but without it giving rise to them then making multiple copies for sale. The very specific instrument that allows the one and not the other is the difficulty in drafting any amendment.

Paul

Revolver Records

You’ve just been BoingBoinged just wait until the US comes online.

in case yopu haven’t seen the Grauniad today : ‘Downloads fail to stem Britains’ love of the CD’

http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2103600,00.html

I’d be very afraid if I were you - who cares if he reports you to your university - but he might just tell on you to your Mum next!!! That could be nasty.

(Childish, ineffective and prone to tantrums? RIAA? Never!)

This Paul fellow is out of touch with reality.

People who fileshare know exactly what they are doing but continue since they realize that a solid moral case can be made for a culture of sharing. Copyright has from the beginning been a virtual right i.e. a construct that societies may decide to have if (and that’s a big if) it leads to better consequences compared with other systems of cultural and intellectual production. Internet and globalization has now provided those other, better systems so laws against non-commercial copying has served its (short) historical purpose. It’s simply time to move on. Polls shows that the people agree on that. Just give us a fair referendum on the issue and we’ll settle it democratically once and for all.

“If people need to affirmatively hide their activities, then there is an understanding of wrongdoing.”

Uh no, rather there is understanding that organizations like IFPI and RIAA have grown so powerful and full of themselves that they don’t hesitate to bully anyone anywhere.

Finally, thanks Paul for drawing my (and probably countless others) attention to the interesting article in Download Squad.

What I don’t like about Paul’s interaction is the underlying threat. He clearly doesn’t like the link, but it’s a link of interest in relation to the music industries and how consumers feel about current developments (but never mind, the biggest downloaders are only the biggest legal consumers too).

And as for ‘telling the University’, what is that all about? This is Dubber’s personal space, and is nothing to do with the policy of a University. By the way – ‘redundancy’ is when you haven’t a role for someone anymore, not as the result of formal complaints against some imaginary policy a University should have (in your mind).

If I disagree with you Paul are you going to sue my Mum (who is certainly an institution )? She knows about my opinions, which are personally interwoven into her life; surely this makes it her opinion too. Cripes, she may even be responsible for some of my opinions too; I’m dialling the thought police now. Now I know that sounds daft – but do you?

By the way – aren’t Universities supposed to be arenas of rationalised debate and a variety of approaches and opinions on subject areas through evidence and developments from the perspective of both music consumers, producers and institutions (something that Dubber provides material for)? God help those academics who have ever carried out ethnographies of music consumers who may criticise the controls of the music industry; I can only imagine Routledge will be recalling books as we speak.

Did people not challenge the ‘earth is flat’ in such arena’s under the threat of prison, death and such like….It’s amazing that when people don’t like an opinion they lash out; but do note that being bombastic doesn’t make you right. Perhaps it would have been more useful to put your point across about such matters Paul, rather than lashing out and talking about issues (personal hate mail) against individuals which the link doesn’t even deal with! Paul seems to think that anyone who criticises the current copyright system and legal action is a ‘hate-mailer’; people can actually disagree sensibly you know. Ironically this becomes quite a personal and individualised attack with an attempt at a ‘superficial’ threat against Dubber’s vocational postion.

I don’t like the undercurrent and attempt at bullying here - it’s not big and it’s not clever. Either debate or don’t bother - but don’t start with my Dad is bigger than your Dad stuff and threats to intelligent people’s livelihood and any notion of free debate in the public sphere. As I remember when I was a kid, those who started with those claims, often found themselves with egg on their face (that’s a metaphor by the way Paul, I’m not threatening you in some superficial semi Mafioso way).

This only leaves me firmer on my stance to never buy another thing produced by an RIAA company. Thanks Paul!

Absolutely fascinating stuff! I simply had to bring this to our readers over at TorrentFreak. We have a million hits per month so this will now get a little more exposure
You can find our post here
http://torrentfreak.com/ifpi-board-member-threatens-university-lecturer-for-riaa-criticism/

and of course for all the Diggers (don’t be shy!)
http://digg.com/tech_news/IFPI_Board_Member_Threatens_University_Lecturer_For_RIAA_Criticism

Wonderful post Andrew, thanks for the fast response.

Amen to the above. Since when did a publicly funded institution have to say only the things that businesses want to hear?

Get that, Paul? PUBLICLY FUNDED…not RIAA funded! If Dubber has a duty to anyone,it is to British taxpayers like ourselves, all of us who want to know how to find our way around the ever-changing world that is the music industry. Tools that we can use, rather than the recording industry keeping all its secrets to itself to dole out in teeny chunks to the favoured few, thus keeping all the power and not sharing it with the actual producers of the music.

This blog is empowering musicians like myself who don’t necessarily want to have to sign their rights away in blood to record companies to make a living. and if that means less for the big boys, so be it.

Dear All

There seems to be a lot of bashing going on here that shouldn’t have happened. As you read through all the correspondence between Paul and Andrew, the complaint to Andrew is very clear; the journalist in downloadsquad has used words such as terrorists that is highly inappropriate especially in this day plus many more that were in fact an expression of personal opinion not fact. Paul was correctly pointing out the RIAA are attempting to do their job by protecting the intellectual copyright of the artists and composers. I personally feel that if RIAA were in the wrong then the US courts would have made criticism and thrown out their cases, which from what I understand is not the case.

Paul is a very well respected member of the music community who has done much great work for the artists and independent labels; often he has battled against the major companies all in the name of making the playing field fairer. I feel the comments made by many people show that not only a lack of knowledge and understanding on their part, but also a rudeness in not reading the entire thread. This whole situation makes a mockery of what Andrew is trying to achieve as this is clearly becoming a place where individual thought cannot be expressed.

Universities are for expressing thought however thought should never be expressed until you have a thorough knowledge of the subject matter on both sides of the coin. I hope that people here will read thoroughly the article and the emails between Paul and Andrew before joining the bandwagon of nonsense views and refrain from making threatening and unproductive views. I would hope there are musicians here who realise not everyone is out to rob them and that there needs to be things in place that will protect you from the thoughtless people who blatantly steel (such as the RIAA, IFPI and BPI etc).

“thought should never be expressed until you have a thorough knowledge of the subject matter on both sides of the coin”

This sentence violates its own edict. In fact, universities are places that embrace dialectic — that is, the proffering of contradictory theses and the vigorous discussion of their clash. If you understood “both sides of the coin” (e.g., how academic discourse works), you wouldn’t assert this.

And no one at the site in question called anyone a terrorist. The word is “terrorize” — as in “frighten.” Given that the RIAA’s publicly avowed purpose for its lawsuits is to frighten students and other downloader, this seems like a fair accusation.

Everything else in that post is a quote from a legal filing: IOW, the site reported on a lawsuit that alleged several charges, and, in the course of its reportage, recited the charges. This is just journalism.

Oh cry me a river Paul!
Do you even realize how much PR you’ve just generated from this threat? Sans the threat this would have just gone down as another e-mail exchange about the music industry, but thanks to your immature hollow threats I would have never known about this blog (thanks to Boing Boing) and e-mailed the link to several other news sites.

Your industry is dying, thanks to people like you.

Now you going to tell my mom?

Hi Andrew: Interesting post, to considerably understate it : )

I’m running it in full in p2pnet here http://p2pnet.net/story/12517.

It’ll be interesting to see if Birch follows up on this, and if any of the Big 4 cartel members have anything to say about it.

Cheers!
Jon

To me, Paul Birch’s responses only further underline this ‘control’ focus, even to the extent of academic debate (which Dubber was not really indulging in with the link). Does this now mean that as an academic one cannot go and interview consumers about their opinions, consumption practices and music use (ethnography) then publish the material online/in literature? Would our publisher (and potentially as the provider of funds for research our University and/or international funding body) be sued as these ideas are ‘only opinion’ and we are then introducing them to the wider world? If this is the case then that’s exceptionally worrying, especially for media studies, social sciences, criminology, psychology – the list goes on. Perhaps it would be wise for some people in this forum to really make themselves aware of what Universities do before making claims and threats about how to potentially hush/restrict an employee of one on his personal blog.

The online article offered a perspective on something which actually happened, and barring getting into a debate about the impossibility of objectivity in any reporting I don’t see anything wrong with that (what fun we could have with a variety of news networks and their labelling of various groups in society). In fact the article DOES NOT mention ‘terrorists’, but uses the word ‘terrorized’ (please ensure your comments ARE accurate). As I say, it would be wise to ensure that accusations and claims regarding the article are correct – especially before you publish that opinion.

If you want to be pedantic, internationally renowned journalists use in their everyday reporting:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_yorkshire/3496117.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/england/4484395.stm

http://newswww.bbc.net.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tees/4233635.stm

Your vague allusion to events in the wider world is a little tenuous. It is odd the BBC have not been briefed on such a consideration. In fact, as many journalists will know the word can also be used to discuss coercion and dominance too, as it is in the linked articles.

(cont.)
This rather undermines your claim, although sadly most other plaintiffs just pay up rather than face three years of such a suit and the emotional, financial and health consequences of such litigation.

You may be right that the RIAA’s job is to protect copyright. But there is something which is NOT their job, and that is to try and restrict online blogs which may link to content which reports an actual event. Neither is it their role to control academic research and debate (although as this is Andrew’s site this is really not an issue).

What is really sad here is that Andrew is probably someone that the music industry bodies could learn a huge amount from, as are the consumers of music. His research offers insight into the development of the music industries and how it can benefit music and economy. Nick, I really think you are underplaying the threat contained in Paul Birch’s interaction; it’s misplaced, unfair and unfounded.

In my opinion (if I dare have it) change seems to be something seen as dangerous which must be restricted; even through media coverage and creating a fear of litigation. Can change not be embraced and developed? The opinions and feelings of the consumers in the industry matter – many feel maligned and I think that the RIAA should take some notice of that.

I wouldn’t buy a music CD if it was given to me. These jokers have to be put out of business!

Nick Dunn: “the complaint to Andrew is very clear; the journalist in downloadsquad has used words such as terrorists that is highly inappropriate especially in this day plus many more that were in fact an expression of personal opinion not fact.”

Inappropriate? Quite possibly yes.
Personal opinion not fact? Absolutely

Why should Andrew face a formal complaint for pointing out someone else’s opinion? If we stand idle to such threats, what do we open ourselves up to next, being threated for linking to a one-star review from Rolling Stone? After all, such a review would merely be one’s opinion, not fact, and could hurt those with a financial interest in the album in question.

Birch, are you attacking our freedom of speech? We’re all entitled to our opinion! that is why this is the free world!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8956330@N05/556063377/

I am fully aware of Paul Birch, he has been a cornerstone in the industry for many years. I have been running my own label for about 8 years now.

Paul has helped the music industry dramatically over the years, however, his ideals havn’t moved on and his theories havn’t evolved with the times.

Please DO NOT take his opinion as the opinion of ALL record labels. I disagree with the way individuals are sued for downloading. I am angry in the way he our free speech is deemed as unviable towards the industry brass.

I saw the site was offline last night and I scoured the internet for contact details for Andrew to tell him about it and voice my anger at the way this site has been treated.

Long Live New Music Strategies!

I’m a lyricist and have also worked in different capacities with indie labels. There’s one myth I’d like to kill: the idea of the labels making millions on the backs of musicians.

Many, many labels have gone to the wall over the past five years and many more have become even smaller. Nearly every label I know has cut back on production and certainly development. This despite the fact that many of these same labels embrace the new technologies, etc.

So the idea that, “they had this coming” only goes so far. It was certainly true of the majors, but that’s only about 20% of music production. It’s kinda tiring to hear the indies being painted with the same brush the whole time.

Music-sharing has had a direct effect on every level of the business. Mr Dubber’s blog reflects one mentality: “well, let’s make the most of what we can”. I subscribe to that as well. But it takes a brave man to sink upwards of €30,000 / £20,000 or whatever in the production of a first album these days, with the double or more in promotion (very modest estimates by the way).

Apart from that, I find the exchange with Mr Birch as gob-smacking as the rest of you! Not very inspired.

So I JUST finished watching “V for Vendetta” - with all the censors blocking your freedoms, prosecuting dissidents, etc. And then I read this. A guy being threatened (financially and through employment) for linking to an op-ed piece written by someone else. Scary times.

I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t really have a clue about what’s going on about the whole RIAA thing. I do know a thing or two about Free Speech though. This is not a good precedent being set here.

Good luck.
I think you should try some other media outlets out there and get this exposed as much as possible.

Amazing read. I knew it was bad, but I never really knew how bad.

Dear Paul,

In your attempt to defend an industry that has serious problems you have now managed to alienate a large number of people that might have been receptive to your arguments, had you not completely blown your credibility by including some veiled (and some not so veiled) threats.

Normally if you don’t get your way the proper response is not to threaten to use force but to try to find common ground and then to use reasoning and factfinding skills.

You misrepresent the piece that was linked to, you threaten a respected individual, you reserve the right to have your own ‘personal opinions’ but you deny that same right to others.

I don’t know what your position with ‘revolver records’ is, but I hope that your management and shareholders will see this for what it is, an old fashioned attempt at bullying whilst being in the wrong.

You have managed to do Revolver records unimaginable harm with your careless words, and you have harmed the interests of all the artists that are currently with ‘revolver’.

Congratulations.

Now aim for the other foot…

Jacques Mattheij

“Universities are for expressing thought however thought should never be expressed until you have a thorough knowledge of the subject matter on both sides of the coin.”

Mmf. As one with a thorough knowledge of scholastic numismatics, it is incumbent upon me to express the thought that this is either tripe… or a sublime expression of ironic absurdity.

Occam says tripe.

Thank you for being civil to this pinhead. The RIAA will be history in a short time. The usefulness of hiring a gang of lawyers is destroying the corporations PR. They will fall together. Seen it many times.

great read but shows how much the Riaa is losing this battle
rather then reading what people are saying and learning they just attack

Hello Andrew Dubber,
I’m a bit confused;

“Revolver-Man” demanded:
“but I think that what is more desirable is to take down links from your site that promote this hatred of the recording Industry”

While I tried hard to find on your site some of those links Mr. Birch talks about in your email conversation, I couldn’t.
Of course, it could be that my search capabilites aren’t as good as his, or that I did it wrong even when I tried to use google as aditional help when my own initiatives where fruitless.

So please, If you do have somewhere on your site a posting of yours where the link is mentioned by you (or in a comment) please be so nice and point me to that post.
Thanks.

I’ve read through the email correspondence, followed the links and then followed a few links-of-links.

To be honest, I’m not sure what the fuss is all about.

The RIAA are being sued by someone, a blogger wrote a post about it, then Andrew re-posted the link.

It seems to me that other than the word ‘terrorize’, which perhaps in America has now taken on a new meaning and has become unacceptable to use, that the Download Squad article was the kind of thing of which I would normally scan through the first sentence and then close the browser tab.

The RIAA and other trade associations are no doubt going to be redefining themselves over the coming years, and as a co-owner of a record label I would urge them to do so as rapidly as possible to maintain their relevance, support and influence - especially for independent labels like mine that have embraced the Creative Commons / non-DRM environment we operate in.

However, I do think that Paul has a valid point in questioning your position in who you represent, Andrew. From his point of view you are a University lecturer, and as such most of us would expect you to treat your blog in the same way as any other academic publication method. By linking to another site, does this mean that you endorse the content I will find there? Has it been peer-reviewed for accuracy? Can I trust your sources? etc.

In other academic situations I would expect a degree of filtering to have taken place before publication occurs. It seems to me that the blog article you linked to is relatively sensationalist in the adjectives it uses and is not the kind of reference I would expect to see in a publication.

I think at this point we need a clear lead, maybe a link on every page on whether you are blogging here as an academic ( I heard you’re using some the content of your 20 things on your course? ) or independently.

Perhaps your next area to look at is freedom of content publication for music academics? I know that many academics are afraid of publishing content on blogs external from their departments because this content will not be handled by their Universities’ legal departments. Could academic content move to an open source model? What happens to the 6 year PHD in that kind of environment?

“New academic strategies”?!

Perhaps a Manifesto for academic bloggers?

Anyway - I hope it resolves itself.

Best

Stef

Thanks Andrew,
so do I understand it right that he was “mad with you” just because of a link you gave in some semi automatic newsletter RSS feed stuff thingy that is not even a “real work”-posting like your minifesto link or other postings of you that involve real editorial work of yours!

Oh boy, under those circumstances me wonders what Mr Birch might thing about this (*) posting then, where there is also not so much editorial work in it but links to the “story about the story” which I understand introduces Mr. Birch as “RIAA coward”.

(*) http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/06/story-about-story-riaa-coward-threatens.html

I’m a 40 year old average consumer who isn’t a big buyer of music and who never goes to the trouble of downloading it either - but I was thinking of buying a CD recently just to support an artist whose politics I like. Now after reading this I’ve decided to never buy a CD again. I’d rather not hand any of my hard-earned dollars to thugs like Paul.

I’ll stick to listening to the radio, like we did in the olden days.

Nice thought, Stef. I’ve made an amendment that will hopefully deflect even the most wilful misinterpretations.

It now reads:

My name’s Andrew Dubber. I’m the Degree Leader for Music Industries at UCE Birmingham, UK. I’m a senior lecturer and researcher with a particular interest in online music, radio and new media technology.

I tell you this not to suggest that anything here is connected to UCE — merely to offer context, and in some small way, present my credentials.

(etc.)

I am mostly eating popcorn and laughing my head off at this one. Some people have nothing better to do than argue all day on the internet, some of us have nothing better to do than read it. What does Paul do for a living again? Where does his income come from again? What percentage of his total income comes from Music? Is he saying he has never done anything illegal? Sorry I can’t offer any additional discussion on the issues raised above but i have work to be getting on with and i can’t spare the time right now. ha ha. I tell you what, I’ll write to the university and make a complaint myself, this stuff should be televised, not blogged. I wonder how Paul would react if anyone who disagreed with him wrote to the suppliers of his wages and threatened to make complaints about him. oh sorry, i forgot, thats bully boy tactics isn’t it. Cheers Paul and Andrew, you both make top entertainment for someone with no idea about anything anymore. more! more!

Jesus Christ what happened to freedom of speech ??

Haha, I guess the RIAA doesn’t believe in our country’s freedom of speech. All they care about = $$$$$!!! Hey, doesn’t bother me considering USA is on it’s way to a big bad downfall, considering everythings shabby state.. How much longer will we allow lawyers to destroy the world we live in? Down with RIAA, up with PIRATING MUSIC, and DOWN WITH THE INHUMAN SUITS!

I absolutely _hate_ seeing the RIAA and its ilk post (mis)information that says ‘file sharing is illegal’, or worse, ‘downloading music is illegal’. Those are INCORRECT statements! In America, the Copyright Act of the United States very specifically allows for any copyrighted items for purposes of criticism, comparitive journalism, reviews, and parody. It also allows for, very specifically, the making of backup copies of the media for ‘archival purposes’. The actual ACT OF DOWNLOADING is NOT illegal, REGARDLESS of what you are downloading!!! The burden is on the user who downloads, and what they do with the content. If any laws are broken, it is by what the user does with the content after they download, NOT at the point of downloding it!

Good grief.

We also have a Very Bad law amendment that unfortunately got passed called the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA). In part, it makes bypassing ANY copy protection device or code illegal, except under some very restrictive situations (such as university algorithm analysis). The problem is that this law is in direct opposition to the Copyright Act in that it now makes it impossible to create an archival backup copy of purchased media because everything is now copy-protected! OOPS. It is bad law and needs to be amended and/or thrown away…but the RIAA has too many of our legislators in their deep pockets. /sad

Hang on, isn’t this the same Paul Birch the Stone Roses threw paint over when he re-released their single without permission?

I rather think it is!

To Paul:

I think the biggest issue you face isn’t downloads. You work in an industry that is hated and loathed by many. You may not like negative or differing opinions but please point me to a place that has a positive spin on the music industry. As long as you engage in models that sue your customers you won’t find many supporters.

The biggest issue you face is reforming your own industry to produce products that consumers want and delivering it in a way that they will purchase it. I am 44 and own roughly 600 cd’s. I bought Vinyl, I bought cassettes and I bought cd’s. I think I have purchased about sixty plus albums in all three formats. I am your model consumer and demographic but I no longer purchase cd’s. I bought a roughly 12 cd’s after last years Grammy’s and six of them were crippled and did not allow me to rip them for use on my ipod. When the Sony root kit issue came to light of course being a purchaser of lot’s of cd’s got the root kit screw over from Sony. This is the price you pay for doing the right thing.

So how can someone like me who wants to buy his music get it in a way in which he can use it without drm crap from apple and without buying cd’s? If you spent as much time, effort and energy to promoting models and places to support consumers I think you would have a better result than suing them.

My kids clearly think differently about entertainment and music than I do. However, my kids pay money for ring tones and other stuff which they discard and buy again and again. If you made it as simple and easy as buying a ring tone I know they would buy music too.

In Paul’s defense, the Sally Cinnamon escapade, to cut a long story short, was NOT about re-releasing their single, it was in fact about the video. HOWEVER, this episode happened because the Stone Roses manager at the time screwed them over by stealing the money Revolver had delivered for the creation of the video.

Mani from the Stone Roses recently talked to Paul Birch at In the City, Manchester. Paul explained the full situation to him, Mani then walked away and assulted their old manager who was a guest speaker at a seminar at the time. This is because Mani then knew all the facts. There have been man Stone Roses biographies who have printed false information.

It seems everyone has a misconstrued perception about record labels. Single sales have fallen by 11% within the last year alone (Source: Music Week). If you think label owners are millionaires, it’s almost a comical image. The reality of it, indie labels have never had it so hard. I would seriously suggest if you are intereted, to apply for work expierience at a label and get to know what exactly happens.

People who aren’t in the music industry have painted an evil image of labels and that the artist gets manipulated. Well, this HAS happened in the past, and it has ALSO worked the other way around. There are therefore companies in place to ensure artists will always get played, PPL, VPL, MCPS & PRS (England).

It’s important to understand, the MMF (Music Managers Forum) in association with the Musicians Union launched a campaign 2 years ago to attempt to spread the word of how labels we’re being screwed over, they gathered a panel of industry experts. What they concluded? that in fact they weren’t aware of all the facts and the campaign was scraped.

Many labels have dissapeared since the birth of Napster, another indication how little labels are earning.

There is a divide in the industry between Major’s and Indies, the majors can demand and they normally recieve, they have more power, money and resources to develop their artists careers. Indies, on the other hand HAVE to club together to ensure they aren’t elbowed out of the game by the bigger boys. Indies HAVE to give discount’s to get into stores like HMV and TESCO (up to 50%), they get less when a track is downloaded, they basically have to pay more for things.

People who envision the demise of governing bodies of the IFPI such as the RIAA and the BPI are kidding themselves. As long as there is music, these companies will exist, they are funded by their members, who are the music companies, labels, publishers & managers etc.

Didn’t mean to waffle on, but couldn’t sit back and have people read this blog and walk away with the wrong information.

Anthony Herron

What a ridiculous scenario…one that’s becoming more and more common these days.

Good for you, and don’t let the buggers grind you down.

Hello Mr. Dubber ( and the others who posted),

First of all I would like to specify that I’m not a native english speaker so I hope I don’t sound too confusing. I would also like to state that I have no elaborate expertise in law, economics and business ( the music industry in particular ), and… in your blog in general.
I was linked here from SlashDot, and decided to read this while bored at work.
Despite the current debate, and your understandable style of writing in particular ( which I really appreciate, considering that I have no background in the fields stated above ), I have refrained from reading more of your material in order to avoid being influenced by your ideas. That way I can stay true to my ignorance and bravely ensue this utterly unfounded comment.

There’s 3 short points I’d like to bring up.
1. Mr. Paul Birch’s reaction and the total incompetence of the MPAA/RIAA in matters of PR.
2. The actual effects of these law suits on illegal sharing.
3. The lack of dynamism on behalf of the big record companies and RIAA.

1.
I am saddened by his not-so-subtle threats.
Some others have posted about the many, positive contributions Mr. Birch has made to the music industry. As someone who, like many, really enjoys music, I can only congratulate him and thank him for that. But he has given a perfect example of how things should NOT be done. It is not just him. The record industry and RIAA have been making one huge blunder of a statement after the other. I’m no expert on PR, but let’s analyse the definition.

public relations
–noun
1. the actions of a corporation, store, government, individual, etc., in promoting goodwill between itself and the public, the community, employees, customers, etc.
2. the art, technique, or profession of promoting such goodwill.

Hmmmmmm… I’m not a university professor, but I’d have to fail them on this point. I think their actions have earned them anything but a good reputation in the eyes of the public.
In that case, if Mr. Birch or someone from the RIAA is reading this, I hereby request a job at a record company or with the RIAA. I have no degree in Public Relations or anything, but I believe that not being a stubborn idiot would already prove my superiority in relation to the current employees. ( Mr. Dubber should have my e-mail. You are welcome to contact me. I could certainly use the money if I want to be able to afford CDs nowadays. )

Scaring people only works for a short while and is hardly effective.

2.
Despite all these aggressives moves on behalf of the RIAA, has their situation improved?
The answer is obvious enough. These people need to spend more time on the internet. Nothing (realistic) can end the proliferation of unwanted material on the internet. It’s simply impossible. And if it were possible, it wouldn’t be through the use of the legal system. I rather enjoyed the Slyck interview with ITIC, a company that has been analysing p2p networks and thus the effect that recent legal actions have had on those networks.
The entire debate on the effectiveness of the RIAA’s recent legal battles can be concluded with the following quote:

“Lawsuits and lobbying are useless against networked, distributed, impersonal and decentralized file swaps whose P2P is just an implementation. If you want to fight misused technology, use the technology itself first. If you reject the technology, technology will relegate you to the past.”

The desire for total control over their music is something of the past.

3.
Despite what ITIC said about fighting technology with technology, I still do not agree with that kind of solution. In my oppinion ( and that of many other people ), these companies should not fight the recent evolutions in the market, but embrace it. Rather than spending money and manpower on countless legal struggles, it is imperative that they use those resources to come up with new and innovative way to market their goods.
The true motor of any economy is innovation.
It’s hard and takes a lot of time, but in the long-term it will be what makes the difference between failure and success. The record companies can not go on like this. Someone stated earlier on that the RIAA and record companies will never disappear. I have to agree with that. But that’s because I’m sure that the companies will somday see the light of their mistake. I just wish they did it sooner than later.

Thanks for reading my useless rant,
Eduardo

Back to oblivion!