An interview with the misguided RIAA

Now that you had the chance to read my column detailing the misguided beliefs of the RIAA, I wanted to give you the opportunity to see the full transcript of the interview I conducted with the organization.

You'll notice that none of the quotes from the previous column were taken out of context because, well, first and foremost, I didn't need to--this organization speaks for itself. You'll also notice that the RIAA really is all of those things most people believe they are. Of course, don't necessarily tell them that, because they won't believe it.

Regardless, this interview depicts the RIAA exactly how they want to be perceived--a group that relies on (and enjoys) lawsuits. It's an organization that has little idea of what we truly want as consumers and, for some reason, has a severe distaste for college students.

In response to my column, one RIAA representative told me that it's easy "to sit on the sidelines and take potshots. It's less easy when you actually have a dog in the fight."

Is it really? Personally, I think it's a sad day when an organization needs to call upon its high-powered lawyers just because it has "a dog in the fight." Along with that, what is that dog in the fight? The artists or the record labels? My guess is the latter.

But without further ado, here is the unabridged transcript of my interview with the RIAA.

Don: Please tell me who you are and what you do.

RIAA: Cara Duckworth, spokeswoman for the RIAA.

Don: What can you tell me about the college deterrence program?

RIAA: Began last February. It was becoming clearer that despite cool new legal services and the ongoing educational efforts, too many students--some of music's biggest fans--were getting their music illegally and learning the wrong lessons about stealing and the law. There had to be a deterrence factor involved so that individuals knew that along with personal consequences (i.e., viruses, spyware infiltrating hard drive) there would also be legal consequences to engaging in illegal downloading behavior. Bringing lawsuits was by no means our first choice, but a necessary step we had to take.

Don: Why college students?

RIAA: First, it should be clarified that our college campaign is in addition to the lawsuits we file against individuals using commercial ISPs to illegally download and distribute music. Second, college students have reached a stage in life when their music habits are crystallized, and their appreciation for intellectual property has not yet reached its full development. These two points coupled together present challenges to those who would like to be compensated for their creative works. Understanding the value of intellectual property is important to the future job market for many of these students--industries that rely on copyright protection employ more than 11 million workers nationwide and continue to grow.

Don: What group of people do you see pirating the most music?

RIAA: While college students used to be some of music's greatest fans, unfortunately that is no longer the case. I would point you to the evidence of the extensiveness of music theft amongst college campuses from Student Monitor and other market research firms to show why we are focusing some of our efforts on universities.

Don: How do you respond to people who say your organization is a group of bullies?

RIAA: I have to step back for a moment. These are certainly heavy issues and none which we take lightly. When an individual is caught illegally downloading music, it sometimes happens that the person creates a stir. The reality of it is that nobody wants to get caught and most people complain when they are. The music industry has lost more than $3 billion in sales over the last few years. Bringing lawsuits is certainly no one's ideal answer--we're well aware of that. But if we had sat on our hands and chosen to do nothing about the piracy problem as the music industry was hemorrhaging jobs and lost sales, imagine what the extent of theft would be today and how the legal marketplace would be struggling to gain traction. The digital music marketplace is demonstrably better because of our efforts.

Don: How have you addressed those huge pirating cartels overseas? Are you going for a soft target?

RIAA: Our preference--first and foremost--is to take action against the services themselves that facilitate the illegal downloading and distribution of copyrighted works. We are actively assisting efforts by policy makers in Washington to encourage countries whose copyright laws have not kept up with the times or who do not appropriately enforce intellectual property violations. Additionally, we are affiliated with IFPI, which represents the interest of the global music community and assists in the enforcement of copyright infringement cases outside of the U.S.

Don: Do you think your policy of lawsuits and settlements work?

RIAA: Absolutely. Since we began this initiative, we've seen a P2P problem that once was growing at dizzying speeds essentially flatten out. People are now more aware of what is legal and illegal when it comes to downloading music. But more importantly, bringing lawsuits is only one piece of the pie--we are actively investing resources in the education of students of all ages on the value of music and importance of copyrights and, perhaps most importantly, music companies are continuously partnering with exciting new services that offer fans an array of innovative opportunities to access their favorite music.

Don: Why do you think you're such a disliked organization?

RIAA: I don't agree with the loaded premise of the question. In some online quarters, there may be lots of heat about the tough stands we sometimes must take. But amongst the general public, the favorability ratings of the record industry remain as positive as ever and surpass other forms of entertainment like movie or TV studios. I believe my answer to question No. 5 can apply here as well. But let it be said--the RIAA is much more than lawsuits. For example, we also are responsible for the Gold & Platinum program awarding artists who have achieved successful album sales and are active proponents of free speech in music. But no one likes lawsuits, and no one likes to get caught. It's not an ideal situation for any party involved. But with all the new, innovative legal alternatives in the marketplace (and more emerging on almost a daily basis), the music community is proactively offering fans ways to avoid lawsuits and get their favorite music at affordable prices.

Don: How do you respond to the people who say you're going after grandmothers and young children when you should be going after real criminals in gunships?

RIAA: I'd give them the facts and encourage them not to believe everything they read that aggressively villainizes the organization. We have a physical antipiracy unit that assists law enforcement agents in shutting down piracy operations both big and small. Oftentimes street peddlers selling bootlegged copies of music are also involved in large-scale drug and weapons trafficking, and we find clear evidence of that on raids. As for individuals themselves, we have no way of screening defendants based on demographics, socioeconomic status, or perceived sympathy. Upon initial discovery of a violation, we have an IP address, a sampling of the files that were shared, and a timestamp of the activity. We consistently follow the prescribed legal process to obtain identifying information and always try to be fair and reasonable in resolving each of our cases.

Don: Is there anything else you'd like to add?

RIAA: Regarding our college initiative, a university's role in reducing the level of piracy on its campus cannot be overemphasized. We have consistently said that the more proactive a school is in the education of its students regarding its IT and enforcement policies, the offering of great legal alternatives so that students can have access to their favorite music (at deeply discounted prices or even for free), and most importantly, implementing effective technology that helps protect the integrity of its network, will lead to fewer instances of violations and fewer instances of hearing from us--a win for everybody!

So there you have it. The full interview with the RIAA.

Have a field day.

[andrewrm]

They are so far behind the curve. Artists established and new are now marketing without the leaches at the major lables. They are going to be left behind as they refuse to accept the real world. Fools.

[Leria]

I agree wholeheartedly. The artists have got the right idea with distributing things themselves, and if they truly do still need the record companies, threatening to make and distribute things themselves will put them into a position of more power than they currently have with the record labels.

[skyzophrenyk]

The RIAA disgusts me. How is it the responsiblity of college campuses? They are suddenly babysitters for grown adults? So everyone should be punished by loss of financial aid becasue somebody decided to download some music? Please, its not even theft, its COPYRIGHT INFRINGMENT. They are not synonyms.

[talk2farley]

"How is it the responsiblity of college campuses?"

How is it not? Picture this, you knowingly allow me to use your gun to commit murder on your property. Would you argue that you aren't responsible because I am a full grown adult?

"Please, its not even theft, its COPYRIGHT INFRINGMENT."

Are you daft? Copyright infringement is the THEFT of intellectual property. Spend less of your university time stealing music and more of it studying, you ingrate.

[James7777777]

It's wonderful how they can spin numbers. The RIAA starts acting like the Mafia suing everyone in sight so consumers begin to boycott. Rather then recognize the boycott and improve their business practices they claim the lose of sales is due to piracy.

WAKE UP! You are a hated group. You are losing money because educated consumers are boycotting all music that supports the RIAA.

[gminetos]

Don, what I wanted to hear/see you offer in these columns re the RIAA was what solution WE as the public want. What's OUR answer to the problem ? How would WE want the recording industry to change ? We need to stop ******** about them and offer solutions to get them to change ! And as a journalist on Cnet you should be leading that.

My offer you might ask ? I favor the "all-you-can-eat buffet for one low price" model. This is where for each technology item that you buy that can record and/or play ANY media file then $1 or 1% (or some such portion) of that goes to pay the music/movie industry for your right (or license) to FREELY copy/trade media files without limit or restriction.

Such a model does not impact anyone except those enjoying the use of music/movies/videos/etc and it only impacts them in a small way at only discreet times when they purchase certain tech equipment. This should be pitched to the RIAA and MPAA as a solution. If you don't like this model, don't just throw stones at it but come up with a better one. It's high time to offer and debate real solutions instead of crying about the Big Blue Meanies.

[biffhenerson]

Good example. For the RIAA. Ha Ha! Even an "all-you-can-eat buffet for one low price" has rules about not sharing or removing food from the establishment. Are you proposing that Dad pay for himself at the buffet then bring his food to a table to share with 8 children & a wife? Why stop there, perhaps share with other tables and familys as well? Fill up bags and take them home? How does the buffet stay in business?

[MikesVoiceOfReason]

OK, maybe I'm probably missing the point again, BUT....
Who cares if the RIAA goes after Grannies, kids, colleges, etc.?
Yes it?s the low hanging fruit, and yes this makes them lazy and hated, and yes they probably are out of touch with the ?real? world, but there is an incredibly easy way to stop all of this. It's a 2 prong approach:
1) Stop stealing. Yes, it really is that simple. We have to put into place all kinds of laws to punish the rest of us (charging more to cover the costs of those who break the laws). Everyone has a basic understanding of right and wrong - ask any 5 year old - we just sometimes choose to ignore the little voice and hope we can get something for nothing.

2) Vote with your wallet. I live in a great country that runs quite well on the free enterprise system. There are a lot of things I WANT for free - free health care, free housing, free transportation, free food, free music, free internet, free text messaging, etc. Guess what, I don't have the RIGHT to these items for free. I can, however, pay for them and am empowered to negotiate for the best price. It always amazes me how people are willing to pay ridiculous prices for sports tickets, concert tickets, etc., but complain when they have to pony up for music, cell phone service, etc. The RIAA may be the most evil org on the planet, but they won't exist long if people get together and collectively boycott their services. I am writing this on Martin Luther King Jr's birthday; a man who accomplished quite a bit of change using the same boycott practice. If you don't like the current price of music - stop buying it! Trust me - prices WILL change.

Don, I heard you on TWiT and I'm not sure I see it the same way you do. You are probably closer than I am, but what did you expect them to say? Again, if we don't like them, let's band together, set a price point we are willing to pay for music and stop stealing it. BAM - they are out of business. I work in a group where intellectual property is extremely important to our business' survival. I guarantee if someone infringes on our rights, we will be all over them as well.

[starmarie10]

Mike, I do not download music...not even from iTunes. I have not purchased a CD since Metallica lashed out at the fans some seven odd years ago. I have nothing but disappointment and disgust for the entire industry. But the money they have lost by me not purchasing music is thrown into the category of lost sales due to piracy. It's a sham and that fact is the RIAA won't see things as they are. I am not the only one boycotting the RIAA but you don't hear that part on the news or when they whine about lost sales, do you? The industry is in a panic and they choose not to address any of these issues in a decent manner. I agree that we are not doing enough to make a clear statement to this organization. You have to understand, by me not purchasing music I am still silent because the RIAA will ONLY believe that those lost sales are clearly due to piracy and nothing else. Why? because in their minds "favorability ratings of the record industry remain as positive as ever...".

[aka_tripleB]

I like how they say, "Bringing lawsuits was by no means our first choice, but a necessary step we had to take."

Yet have they ever tried any other means? Have they ever pressed criminal charges against anyone? Isn't it considered extortion when they allegedly catch people illegally downloading songs, and take people's money for it without a trial or litigation? Is it possible that the RIAA doesn't follow standard protocol for theft because then people will find out how much their product is worth, have investigation into the worth of their product, or police give their cases low priority because of the worth of their products and frequency of the occurrences? Or have the judicial system question how well they actually secure their products from thieves?

[Leria]

You hit on one of the big things that I dislike about what the litigation against these people as well: the record companies are basically saying "Pay up or I will sue you!"
Now, if I was to do that, it would darn well be called what it is, extortion. But when it comes to the record companies, it seems that they get a free flipping ride from the government.

[MedicineHead]

I heard you on TWiT as well, and was intrigued to read of the "insulting" nature of the RIAA representative. I don't see it. Many of your questions were very biased and worded poorly, and despite the somewhat hostile nature of the questions, I think the RIAA representative handled things pretty well.

[jpmays]

I noticed there was no mention about the skyrocketing prices of CDs over the last five to 10 years! I also saw no mention of the fact that the reason people are downloading music from P2P networks is because of the exorbitant/prohibitive cost of a single CD, which may only contain four or five songs one likes?

Maybe the RIAA should address this issue first before pointing fingers!

[lumper5]

What skyrocketting prices? When CDs first appeared in the mid 1980s, most were priced between %16.98 and $18.98. Depending on which inflation calculator you chose, that figures to be over $31.00 - $33.00 in today's dollars - for a single CD. The fact that CDs are genarlly priced at $14.98 - $17.98 today and even $9.98 for deep catalog suggests that if anything the real price of a CD has declined in the last 20 years. When I browse the isles of Best Buy I seldom CD a new release over $17.98. Amazon's even cheaper.

CDs were WAY overpriced to begin with. (I think they're still overpriced today, but you can't justify a claim that the price of them is skyrocketting in real dollars and cents.)

[Leria]

Once you take into account inflation, the prices of CD's and DVD's have gone up precipitously. Secondly, because the manufacturing techniques for CD's and DVD's are old, lumper5, the prices for both should have gone down. Instead, they have gone up or stayed staid, at best.

The companies need to realize that more and more people want to pick and choose their own music, without DRM, and start offering that in stores. Maybe have a full shelf of DVD/CD burners in the stores and allow people to pick and choose their own music and burn it to DVD/CD themselves that they have bought outside of the store.

[kwhittingham]

Sad. I don't think that big record companies (i.e. the bulk of the recording industry) are good for music. Quite the opposite. Currently music is no longer successful on its own merit - Darwinism is out. Mostly someone is pre-selecting what we buy. I think (and hope) that over the next few years, the record company as we know it will dissapear. The bulk of the service they provide to us has been replace free of charge by the internet. Good bye and good riddance.

[mcooper13]

Like someone alluded to yesterday, going after college students is a poor strategy.

These students will eventually be running the country. In a decade or two these students will be leaders of government and industry. I wouldn't be surprised to see them overturn the DMCA and destroy the RIAA and MPAA - no matter how many lobbyists are thrown at them.

Nice short term thinking.

[Leria]

That is a good point there. Many people who I have talked with are getting seriously tired of being told they cannot do certain things (DVD-ripping, etc.) by the content owners, and are seriously in favor of overturning and rewriting copyright laws to make them MUCH more lax, to the point of basically saying that if something is not being actively sold or the person distributing it is doing so without the profit motive, they are allowed to do that.

[Begauerx]

"free health care, free housing, free transportation, free food, free music, free internet, free text messaging, etc. " ....

"free health care" -- If I could take my favorite doctor, clone him for free, and send him to 10 of my close friends, I would.

"free housing" -- If I could drive down the street in the most expensive neighborhood in my city and point at my favorite house and make an exact duplicate with no labor, materials or time, for myself, I would.

"free transportation" -- The other day on i-71 I saw a yellow Lotus pulled over. What i wouldn't give to be able to pull off on the side of the highway and have an instant free copy at no expense to it's owner... "you mind if I copy your car?" "what do I care?" "thanks!"

"free food" -- I'm a bit of a nerd, but to anyone who's watched Star Trek, I'd like to be able to replicate this killer shepard's pie my mom used to make. It's not even the recipe's creator that would care, it's the middleman who sells the recipes that's going after people.

"free internet" -- This buddy of mine used to play Quake1 with me back in the day. He had a "backbone" connection, a t3/oc83 or something like that. What I would have given to copy that connection.

I think you're getting my point. As a previous posted stated, you can't "steal" something if the original owner still owns it. The RIAA is furious that someone created a free car that runs on water while their gas guzzling high priced SUV's are declining in sales. Innovation always trumps those who root in and refuse to change. The campaign your running will only alienate yourself from your end user, who ultimately pays your bills. I wish you the best...

[lumper5]

Small quibble and it's only one of grammar. Isn't it "without further ado" stead "further adieu"? "ado" means "fuss or delay" and "adieu" means "farewell".

[rickfle]

It seems obvious that the RIAA is either seriously wrong-headed, or they just think we're stupid. College students are an easy target (I am father to a Cal sophomore): most parents would probably do whatever the RIAA asks of them to simply remove the distraction from their lives. Large overseas cartels are a difficult problem. The solution for this involves diplomacy (yeah; right), money and time. It's not about training for later-life experience with intellectual property rights; where did they think that up? It's surely not about morality; I've been a pro musician and composer for over thirty years: trust me when I tell you finding morality in the record biz is like finding Vista fanboys at Macworld; like finding razor blade in a ProTools room. It's about the money, and about the fear of irrelevance. Of course it's wrong to steal. But if it's wrong when consumers steal from RIAA members, how come it's OK when RIAA member companies steal from artists? The old model has fallen away; most of what the RIAA knew twenty and thirty years ago, even ten years ago (even five) is wrong, or meaningless. Why has the CD profit margin remained an untouched subsidy for twenty years, even as sales volume long ago outstripped whatever R&D and creative investments were made in the 'seventies and 'eighties? News: when a "catalog," i.e. old material, CD is sold, it's pretty much pure profit for all concerned, especially if the artist has moved on to a better deal at another company and the catalog item pays a small royalty, especially for artists who aren't composers. In some cases, catalog items generate no royalties if certain sales thresholds haven't been met. It's true that some of Don's questions made some unstated assumptions, but the RIAA has worked hard to paint themselves into this corner. Funny thing, though - there is still a "recording industry," it's just that the venue has moved to the home studio and the "project studio." The are more artists than ever involved in making business decisions that used to be made by lawyers and managers that were trained to make these decisions and exercise good judgment in these complex matters. These new entrepreneurs could probably use some help; I know I could. Too bad there isn't some kind of, oh, I dunno, "recording industry association" we could join. An organization that understands the music business as it exists now.

[Travis Ernst]

RIAA's reply doesn't even dignify our comments. They evaded true answers and skirted around their tactics. The arresting a grandma WAS a truth that RIAA was implying was misleading by bloggers or people who are plotting against them. I don't think a 70+ year old granny would be DLing rap or offensive music. Old Blue Eyes, maybe <grin> .

RIAA's statement (last week) to the Post (corrected article) that we cannot even load our purchased music from CD to our computers, MP3 player, or PC goes on to prove their bully stance. If we have purchased the song/s or a hard copy of the material from a retailer, we have a license to install it on our MP3 player (fair use act). RIAA ignores the fair use clause throwing it out the window and running it over with a bulldozer.

This is one of the reasons a lot of artists have gone Indie. My last purchases of music have been from indies that I know, who before were inked to a national label. Now two of those boys have their own home studios. Avoiding the problems that RIAA causes.

Of the national acts I like, I have not seen reason to buy their releases recently. Only one has put out an album in recent years. I don't listen to the radio so I have yet to hear his new materials.

YES you are a bully RIAA. You act like a peeping tom and we are sick of you saying people are guilty before proven such. We don't need another J Edgar Hoover listening in on us, unless everybody at RIAA is a cross-dresser like Hoover.

[Stasco]

I'm blown away by the RIAA's argument that college students are too young to have an appreciation for the concept of intellectual property. Is is that we haven't grown up in and become accustomed to a world where an artist can legally charge someone for access to an idea? If I were to plant a beautiful tree, and spend all my time and creative energy in nurturing that tree, could I prohibit the ability of another person to gaze upon that tree even if he or she was not interfering with my rights?

Maybe we as young idealists simple appreciate intellectual property for what it is - not a moral absolute but a social contract meant to encourage creative expression - a contract that we as a society have full power to alter as we see fit. The very idea that our creative nature as human beings would be lost without the promise of millions of dollars in royalties is an insult to the concept of art. Lets stop calling musicians artists and label them what they truly are - greedy businessmen.

[starmarie10]

The RIAA does not only screw fans, but also artists. I have not purchased music in years because of their disgusting tactics. College students are THE biggest fans....keep biting the hand that feeds.

[Goodman.seth]

Wait a second...everyone who downloads through P2P services should stop and answer this simple question:

If the RIAA and the major record labels suddenly disappear, will you stop downloading music for free and start legally purchasing music?

Of course not! The fact is the RIAA is trying to save their ***** and keep their jobs...and consumers are trying to keep their rights to free music. Nobody will just CHOOSE to start paying because the big bad labels are gone. It's long past that point. I personally believe when music is valued again, both artistically and physically, the money will roll in. All this arguing about who's the bad guy is pointless, the world has changed the RIAA is just as guilty of ignoring reality as P2P users are of copyright infringement (which although not synonymous with THEFT, is still very much illegal...come on, let's at least agree on that!)

[please_be_smarter]

Really...
Ever think about how poor many college students are? The RIAA is just ridiculous.

[ryanlim00]

Stop stealing. ANY company or industry that experiences theft of products will do everything in its power to stop such theft. They have a responsibility to their shareholders to do so (that's the law in our country in order for a company to become incorporated), which is to say maximize equity value. No company or industry in the U.S. exists for the benefit of consumers. The music industry is no better, no worse. Grow up and stop vilifying the music industry. Do you think Citigroup, Apple, American Express, etc. is any better? They just don't have a product that is so easily stealable.

[natelink44]

I laughed so hard when i read: "The digital music marketplace is demonstrably better because of our efforts."

who are they kidding?

[Dalkorian]

A minor point many RIAA prostitutes ... I mean advocates ... are missing. Downloading for free from a torrent-type site is not stealing. Period. The file is still there, it's not suddenly missing. This is copyright infringement, but it's not "stealing". That's just RIAA spin to make you think they aren't the bad guys.

It's funny when their first answer is always to sue sue sue, but then they claim it's not their first choice. Hmm, evil corporations don't lie, do they?

I'm getting so ticked off with this hole RIAA thing that I'm seriously considering getting all my music through torrents. Why pay the hand that bites?