MPAA & RIAA

Printable View

August 23rd, 2002, 04:09 PM
Joey_Batch_File

MPAA & RIAA

I wouldn't mind having a chance to sit down with these individuals and pick their brain. I'm sure I would want to beat in their thick skulls with a baseball bat when I'm finished, but I am confused on a few subjects.

It is legal to purchase a VHS/DVD and change $3.00 to anyone who would like to view it for a couple days, get the video back and repeat the process. (Blockbuster / West Coast Video)

How is this legal? The MPAA is not getting payment for every view, and if someone rents it, watches it once, and doesn't buy it. They are not making money. So what is the difference is someone downloads it once, views it for free (oh, my a rent one video free card) and deletes it? Another thing, yes I know it is illegal to record a mix track for a friend, but it happens every day. What is the difference is you record a mix track for a friend, or you download a couple tracks for your own mix track. The RIAA is out the purchase sales in either matter, but you don't see people getting busted for sharing a mix tape between friends.

How do you feel about the MPAA & RIAA fighting to get you technology taken away from you, because it does not benefit themselves. They fought for the longest time against recordable audio cassettes, does this mean you shouldn't have the right to record your bands practice session to review in discussion at a later time? What about VHS, should you not have the right to film your children’s birthday parties, because someone else may use their VHS to duplicate a copy of Zoolander (had to use a really lame movie). I understand that I would most likely feel the same way if I was in their shoes, but I don't believe I would try to pull the technology away from a consumer. I believe they have the right to protect their media in a way that would not restrict our access to it. We should have the right to transfer audio songs to MP3 without problems. I feel we should be able to back up any media we own for safe keeping. I believe we should be able to legally update the storage type of any media we purchase (i.e. VHS to DVD). I also feel it is their responsibility to provide services on the actually CD or DVD that would pursue a consumer to purchase the DVD or CD. How about that? If the mail in offer is worth while more people will purchase, if you have to mail in for added video footage DVDs fanatics will purchase the video for the extras. If you push movies and songs that are only going to be worth viewing once or only one good song on a CD, and punish people, because they don't want to give you their hard earned money for something that is not worth it. You are wrong. You cannot hack the feeling you get of checking out your favorite band live, but if your band does something amazingly incredible, that can not be duplicated. Does that mean, because you live in LA and cannot make it to NY you should not be allowed to view this event. If the band records the show, you are only going to get the highlights of certain shows, and that is it. I don't think video recording a show should be illegal. A (Video Galaxy / Movies and More) can purchase a video for $20. and make a $3 profit on anyone who views it. John Smith pays $125. to check out the show. Why should he be busted for selling a couple copies of his homemade video? What is John doing differently than (Video Time)? I can't rant and rave about this as much as I want, and I do not believe I am, I think I have some good points, I would love to hear answers to, and I can't. I do not believe the P2P Networks should be included in a bill, and I do not believe the MPAA or RIAA should have any say in how technology is used. What is your opinions on my thoughts, and am I wrong for thinking so?
August 23rd, 2002, 04:26 PM
g0t r00t

I've posted to several threads like this, so most people know how I feel about it. I do think that Artist should get compensated for the music we download, but I don't think the RIAA should try to force us to buy crappy $17 cds because we like 1 or 2 songs on the album. I think the RIAA's biggest fear might be the fact that, if p2p continues to grow, the RIAA really won't be needed anymore. Think about it, if artist start housing thier own music servers, where the people can pay to download whichever songs they want, there would be no need to be paying a middle man and the Artists would get the money directly.

And as far as the MPAA and RIAA restricting technology, I think that is ridiculous. I can't even begin to understand why this is even being considered.
August 23rd, 2002, 05:18 PM
evilempire

personally I feel if they lowered prices of CDs even just 2 or 3 dollars I would certainly support their efforts in dealing with this problem and purchase more CDs than usual. I don't think they are making good choices for their consumers by assuming we will illegally distribute the music we purchase by making digital copies on our computers. I especially don't like how confident they are that the problem stems from the p2p users and not considering the idea that CDs are too expensive and not good enough.
August 23rd, 2002, 08:20 PM
souleman

Quote:

It is legal to purchase a VHS/DVD and change $3.00 to anyone who would like to view it for a couple days, get the video back and repeat the process. (Blockbuster / West Coast Video)

How is this legal? The MPAA is not getting payment for every view, and if someone rents it, watches it once, and doesn't buy it. They are not making money. So what is the difference is someone downloads it once, views it for free (oh, my a rent one video free card) and deletes it?

1> Video stores don't pay $20/video. They have to purchace video's with a license. I was in a video store and "borrowed" the list when Titanic was about to come out. The store paid something like $750 per copy of that movie. 2> people don't delete a movie that they dl.

Quote:

Another thing, yes I know it is illegal to record a mix track for a friend, but it happens every day. What is the difference is you record a mix track for a friend, or you download a couple tracks for your own mix track. The RIAA is out the purchase sales in either matter, but you don't see people getting busted for sharing a mix tape between friends.

A mix tape between friends is very low scale. If you take that mix tape and mail it to 500 people and the RIAA finds out, your screwed. Why do you think bootleg music is such big, underground business.

I don't support the RIAA/MPAA. Personally, I would like to blow up their headquarters, but I am giving you the other side of the coin...
August 23rd, 2002, 08:37 PM
Joey_Batch_File

Quote:

Originally posted here by souleman
Video stores don't pay $20/video. They have to purchace video's with a license.

This is not the case for family owned video stores in small towns. It is nice to see that they are getting theirs from these nation-wide chains, but I know of a few small independant stores that do not purchase license. They purchase their videos from (Wal-Mart - FYE - Used Blockbuster - etc)

I would also like to thank you for your knowledge of the situation, I knew if I was going to get any information on these issues, someone here would know what they are talking about... keep up the good work soul.
August 23rd, 2002, 09:56 PM
allenb1963

Well Joey, I've had a lot to say on this subject in the past, yet here I am again. I use P2P quite a bit. 98% of the music I have downloaded on my computer is music that I already own but cannot enjoy due to the condition of the CD. I have children, s**t happens...LOL. So basically my P2P use does not deprive the RIAA or the MPAA of any revenue. Yes, I admit that I downloaded the latest 'Star Wars' before it was even in the theaters, but I still spent my 8 bucks to see it on the big screen. The only difference between myself and the other movie goers was the fact I knew that when Annikin was making a play for the princess in the meadow, I could be in the mens room secure in the knowledge that I wasn't missing any of the action.

To sum it all up, the RIAA and the MPAA represent a dinosaur slowly sinking in a tarpit, screaming for congress and the DOJ to throw them a line and pull them out. It is our duty as responsible citizens to prevent this from happening by any means possible, for if the dinosaur gets loose, it will surely eat us all.
August 24th, 2002, 07:39 AM
indolent

The Artists should be compensated for whats being downloaded but thats as close as I get to agrreing with the RIAA and MPAA. The RIAA has made clams that sales have been down as a result, can they prove the people downloading this would have bought the cd otherwise? I doubt it, in fact i've been buying more legally pressed cds as a result because i can in my free time sample music to see if i want to buy it or not, i've decided if i wanted to see a band in concert due to it, so to say its hurting them is hard for me to believe. just my .02$
August 24th, 2002, 04:54 PM
digitalgadfly

I think that everyone should know that most artist get a very small cut of their CD sales to begin with. I believe that more artists should go with "indie" type labels so that the sales they make go to them. The MPAA and RIAA has made far more than their fare share of profit in the past. If they want to combat this issue they need more solutions. You can't win anything by just fighting, you need to reach an agreement. They are sinking, and as long as they keep themselves in a negative light with the majority of the public they don't have a chance. Just my opinion. :)
August 24th, 2002, 06:25 PM
alittlebitnumb

I am sorry, even though the MPAA, RIAA, BSA, SIIA, FAST, and other anti-piracy groups may seem overly gung-ho these days, we have to sit back and analyze the sheer enormity of the P2P and piracy problem in general. However, I am not going to let the industry or lawmakers off the hook either. I will explain why...

Piracy has always been a problem since media has been available for sale, and pirates will always be around. In the past, it was sneakerware, boot-of-the-car sales, flea markets, wherehouses, illegal plants, defeating hardware dongles (damn, I remember those), softlifiting, grey market, and many others. Just like then, it's still here now, but with an added twist:
Low cost and widely available broadband
Anonymity of the Internet
The law can't catch everybody, so there is power in numbers
The media is making piracy "cool"
DIRT CHEAP CD/DVD burners (I remember a burner costing $10k!!!)

With these factors, the industry is getting really angry, frustrated, and sales are going. However, it nothing new! Remember when VHS first came out? Remember cassette tapes and the "extra cost" padded on every sale because of piracy? The bellyaching has not subsided.

Another point is piracy has trends. Ten, fifteen years ago, when the Internet was still young, BBS piracy was gigantic! In fact, if you want to see the enormity of BBS piracy, you will want to visit http://www.textfiles.com/piracy/ and see some of the classic "nfo's" (usually little text files pirates use when distributing electronic pirated files via BBS, NNTP, FTP, HTTP and other means) and you will see the industry was just as animate then as they are now. It's just sneakerware, NNTP, HTTP, FTP (FXP is really popular now), BBS, and other means are just not as "popular" now, and the industry needs to follow the trends. And as we all know, P2P is the "in thing" now even though other piracy is still out there and going strong.

IMHO, once the dust settles, P2P and the industry is going to some kind of standard or truce and the piracy trend will focus on another trend. Then there will be another war and the legacy will continue. In the meantime, there will be debates, arrests, litigations, casualties and martyrs for each side of the battle.

The bottom line is: People like things for free, and business wants to make money. We just need to find a happy medium and both sides are failing the test.