Comments on: Six months later, no ISPs joining RIAA piracy fight

Internet service providers were supposed to provide the music industry with a new, powerful line of defense against illegal file sharing. It hasn't yet worked out that way.

[myles taylor]

Well I think they're taking the wrong approach anyway and it won't work. If they want to stop piracy, they need to find a new technique.

[Random_Walk]

Indeed... I can almost read an ISP response letter to the RIAA just by guessing:

"Dear RIAA. Are you frickin insane!? Why on Earth would I want to be the first to implement your program and watch at least half of my paying customers bolt for the competition the minute they get wind of us doing so? We appreciate your concerns over intellectual property, and we really do share your views, but there's a two-fold problem with your program: We have shareholders to keep happy, and we'd really like to keep our jobs. Sincerely, (insert ISP name here)."

[dargon19888]

You can't stop piracy.

As long as there has been a way to copy recorded music, you had people making copies and sharing them with friends.

Reel to reel, 8-track, cassette, etc ... all allowed one to make a copy of an album and listen to it or loan it to a friend.

As a kid, I remember making mix tapes, or borrowing a tape of an album from a friend to listen to the music. Then if I liked it, I'd buy the album. Even if you didn't buy the album, the rock groups benefited because people would know them and go to their concerts and watch them live.

The record industry has to change their business model and accept that there will be leakage or losses from people making and sharing copies of an artists music. Its when those copies are sold or done for a commercial purpose that they would then have to take action.

[Lumiseon]

Random_Walk....That was funny XD True though. The ISPs won't do they. Not unless they want to lose a huge chunk of their customers.

[Petoskey116]

Why do they even try to stop music piracy over the internet. If they find a way to stop it, people will find another way to get around it...

[gerrrg]

The problem for the RIAA and MPAA, is that they're placing the ISPs into a grey area, where affected individuals would have the ability to sue the ISP for any mistakes the hackers working for the RIAA and MPAA make. Let's not kid ourselves, the methods employed by the RIAA and MPAA are those of hackers. If anyone else were to employ these same methods against the RIAA and MPAA, they'd be in a world of DMCA hurt.

[stalker6recon]

Well its funny, they are trying to use the ISP as a proxy to fight their ugly war against the consumer. The ISP has no place in this fight, they are not losing money from the subscribers, so they don't care. And the RIAA is trying to pass the cost of the fight, getting the ISP to do the work, onto the ISP. The RIAA is dying, and they know it. They have won a few cases in court, but most of the public scoffs at these cases, and gets more angry with the RIAA. And there are many places on the internet that you can buy music, legally, and cheap. Lets face it, many albums you buy have 3 or 4 good songs, then the rest is just filler. I lost interest in CDs as soon as the price went up to 15, even 20 dollars an album. I know that in some cases, the price has returned to something closer to friendly pricing, but its way too late for that, I won't pay for a cd ever again.

The other problem with buying it legally online, many of the retailers have restrictions on what you can do with the music once you own it. And that also leaves a bad taste in your mouth. I know friends that have lost their hard drive, to viruses or other failures, and in doing so, lost their library that they already paid for, cause making a back up, or moving the library to a new pc, can be very difficult.

I have no sympathy for the RIAA, and musicians that are smart, have embraced the internet, and sell their music directly to the public from their own website. That is a much better route anyway, screw the middle man, just sell it yourself, and enjoy all the profit.

Things have changed since I was young, and a tape cost 7 dollars, and a concert ticket cost 15. The artist now make their money by touring, and that is where they should make their money. Lets face it, with the modern technology, you can make anyone sound good in a studio, its the live show that proves their weight as artists.

I for one, will never embrace the RIAA, they love to bite the hand that feeds them, when you have a dog like that, you put him down. That is what should happen to the RIAA, just be put down, no tears, no funeral, just a shot behind the ear, and lights out, goodbye.

[CodeyH]

In a day and age where major players are dropping DRM, what's the point?

[ddhboy]

Well, Cuomo may be out of office soon enough anyway. David Patterson hasn't really been doing the democrats to many favors in our state, and if we're talking NY state, then we're talking about Verizon, Cablevision, Comcast, and Time Warner/Road Runner. If its Verizon, then its not unexpected that they wouldn't want to act as the internet police, much like how all ISPs didn't want to save customer web history data when people in congress started talking about it. If one of the cable companies however decided that they didn't want in, it really cements the RIAA's (and now ESA's) war on piracy to be dead in the water

[dbodizzle]

I don't think they will EVER entirely remove piracy. People will always have ways..such as VPN. It's not like the music/movie industry is hurting(because of piracy, more of the US economy).

[gstah]

I think this could work (at least for casual file sharers), but it all depends on how much the RIAA is going to pay the ISP's to do their bidding. If the RIAA just thinks that the ISP's are going to spend their resources for free to implement filters and other measures they're very naive. That's probably why ISP's aren't signing up. I'd probably ask for $1-5 per ISP account to make this worthwhile. That's potentially a lot of $$ for the RIAA, but the only way it'll get done. They need to put up or shut up. Nobody is going to do their policing for them for free, and they shouldn't. More tech saavy people, and the worst offenders, will still figure out a way around this anyway, so I think it's just a losing battle. Until the RIAA embraces digital distribution and actually **gasp** trusts their customers, they'll continue they're slow slide into irrelevance. Artists will become their own distributors, cutting them out completely and they'll just die, as they should.

[Random_Walk]

"...but it all depends on how much the RIAA is going to pay the ISP's to do their bidding. "

...obviously not enough to compensate for the loss in income once the users flee their service.

[Maccess]

Several ISPs indicated their willingness to join the program -- provided RIAA pay them for the extra work and reimburse them for the lost income from the remaining lock in period for disconnected accounts. RIAA never replied to them.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10127841-93.html

...but a promise to share in "potential" awards from piracy convictions in exchange for regular income streams, didn't inspire ISPs.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10144105-93.html

[GateCrasher311]

When news of ISP filtering and speedblocking BitTorrent users became known, all major bittorrent clients implemented an encryption software in the bundle. With this software, ISPs can't detect that you are actually downloading torrents because of this encryption. With 90% of Seeders and Leechers using this technique, ISPs won't be able to help the RIAA out anyway.

When the RIAA started scanning IP addresses of peers on bittorrent networks, PeerGuardian and Bluetack started the effort to block known Anti-p2p IP addresses from even connecting to the clients. This isn't 100% foolproof, but it just goes to show that any time a 'major' breakthrough is thought up by the "Empire", the resistance will always have a means around the new technology within days.

I know any competent person would see this logic and realize the fight is futile. The RIAA is pissed soley on the fact that this hurts record sales, which is the portion of the artists they benefit most from. File-Sharing promotes more people to Live events which is where the actual artist makes most of their money. In sort, RIAA gets less money... while the artist gets more. And that really pisses them off, their 19th century brand of 'piracy' isn't working for them anymore. The RIAA and BigMedia has no talents, but yet, they have weasled their way into being a middle man, and skimming off the profits of the artists.

[karpenterskids]

I agree wholeheartedly with what Cohn said.


Disconnecting someone from the entire world (by cutting off their internet) is a harsh punishment indeed.

And the fact that it's STILL better than getting sued $150,000 per song should say something about the RIAA.

[sharmajunior]

ISP's would lose an of a lotta business if they became the RIAA's bi**es.

Lately the response to these idiots....the common consumer is downloading more than ever especially at this time in the recession...who has the money to go out a buy CD's...?

[contentcreator--2008]

GM has lots full of cars they can't sell... why don't you go steal some of them while you're at it. A felony, right?

[i_am_still_wade]

To contentcreator--2008: Just because you are anti-RIAA and anti-MPAA and anti-DRM doesn't mean you are a thief. I like the part of the Constitution where it requires police to have a warrant. Does that mean I have something to hide?

[Sausagebiscuit]

contentcreator-2008: Yes a felony, because it is grand theft which is something clearly show illegal by law. You take something from someone that cannot be replaced.

I wish people would stop with this stupid idea that theft == copyright infringement. Two totally different situations with different laws, protections and punishments. Copyright Infringement should be (stay) a civil manner unless money was involved (counterfeit sales, etc), not a criminal matter like grand theft auto where physical property was removed.

[El_Segfaulto]

@Sausagebiscuit

Well said!

[Dalkorian]

Thank you Sausage. It's the RIAA itself that has promoted the idiotic misunderstanding that copying = copyright infringement = theft = piracy = "scum of the earth" and the smallest minded folks have taken that misunderstanding and run with it.

It's nice to see someone else has their eyes open. Down with the MAFIAA and long live TPB! Argh!

[dumbspammers]

@ contentcreator--2008 : There's a huge difference between taking a car without paying for it, and making a copy of the car using your own materials, without removing the original car. File sharing is the making of unauthorized *copies* - it is not theft. Theft involves depriving the rightful owner of his property.

If the RIAA wants to seriously cut into piracy (not eliminate it - that will never happen), they have to sell high-quality digital tracks in single quantities for about a dollar a track, and offer a discount if the customer is willing to buy the entire album. Eighteen dollars for a CD that has one or at most two tracks with listening to is unacceptable.

And summary execution of the Jonas Brothers would help the RIAA's rep tremendously.

[stalker6recon]

to contentcreator........

I took pictures of the Mona Lisa while in the Louve, since I now have my own copies, does this make it illegal for me to share those photos with friends on the internet? I just took money from the airlines, the hotels, transit authority, and many others by posting my pictures on the internet. Or do you think I should go to the grave of Da VInci and pay him a royalty for the use of his painting?

[rtuinenburg]

I have said this before and I will say it again....

RIAA has to sign deals that allow unlimited music downloads for $5, and it gets billed with your ISP bill if you want to. This may seem like little money for unlimited, but the sign up rate will be so dramatic that they will make more money then ever before. If the cost is so little, its not worth pirating it. People want easy, cheap access to music, give it or die!

[Seaspray0]

Rhapsody does basically this for $15/mo. Perhaps a median value of $10/mo if you can get enough subscribers. $5/mo may not be economically feasible to the provider.

[El_Segfaulto]

You can subscribe to a Usenet with SSL for about the same and reap the same benefits. The RIAA needs to view pirates as competitors and not criminals.

[pentest]

There is a difference between renting and buying music.

[ralphmcmac]

You want to reduce piracy by a significant margin, then drop the prices. The music and film industry has been charging exorbitant prices for far too long now. As a consumer I don't like the idea that these industries seem to think that too many of us have an endless pit of money. I don't and I work hard. Reduce your prices, stop with the neurotic need for DRM and respect your consumers.

Personally I really want the music and the film industry to under go a radical change other wise we the people will always be subjected to the vile marketing tactics.

[tacit]

ISPs can barely be bothered to do anything about people using their networks in fake PayPal and bank scams, to distribute computer viruses, and to steal identities. What on Earth makes the RIAA think ISPs will join in looking for file downloaders?

[BtmnHatesRbn]

Few facts:

Mac and Linux users have never been named in any lawsuits from the RIAA/MPAA.

Does the RIAA really represent anybody in the music industry with DRM-free music being sold for the last two years? In fact, on iTunes alone, it seems that most music I've bought in the last two years have been DRM-free.

When faced with a counter-suit, the RIAA/MPAA trembles and tries to do it's best to convince an ignorant judge about the technology used. However, if that judge is 60, say, and was 50 during the Dot-Com Boom, meaning he bought a Windows 95 computer at 45 years of age, and was 30 when the Apple II, C-64, TRS-80 and such were being introduced into the workplace...no, I don't buy it that judges are **THIS** ignorant!

[timothywmurray]

The reason they announced this before they had any ISPs on board is:
http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,25642,23090754-5014239,00.html
EMI threatens to withdraw funding if watchdogs don't change

[Button Boy]

Once again, much ado about nothing. The RIAA has become so irrelevant that this is the only way it can keep its name in lights.

[ralfthedog]

Two unrelated statements:

1. Many people who don't like the MPAA/RIAA have a great deal of computer skills.

2. It would be quite sad if every member of the RIAA/MPAA were to have their internet cut off on July 15 due to an accounting error that added 65 million dollars to their cable bill.

[Dalkorian]

by ralfthedog June 3, 2009 11:12 PM PDT
2. It would be quite sad if every member of the RIAA/MPAA were to have their internet cut off on July 15 ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------

No it wouldn't, they are the scum of the earth and deserve to be punished for all eternity.

Oh wait, you were being sarcastic weren't you. My meter doesn't seem to be working this morning.

[Inconnux]

Music piracy was around long before the internet went public. remember dual cassette players?

[Sausagebiscuit]

Piracy in general (not the Arrr Matey! type) has been around for centuries. Printing presses were restricted on what they could print and guess what...there was a black market for so called 'illegal books'.

There is a good video called Don't Steal This Film which covers alot more about this. It's also free, yes legally, via most Bittorrent sites.

[magusat999]

You partially right, we had dual cassette players, VCRs, even cd / dvd burners and recorders before the internet became so popular - but it was not PIRACY. It was entirely legal to use those means to copy, share, and publicly play media.

The hypocritical part is that those devices were made by some of the most influential companies involved in the MPAA / RIAA (like SONY, who make billions selling media copying devices). SO now that our experience is "upgraded" they are doing their best to unplug the rights that we acquired in the Sony vs. Betamax case? And where are the government entities that are supposed to say "they already have the right, they have the precedent, so BACK OFF, copyright creeps..."???

It would help if journalists would include the fact that those same companies sitting on the boards of the RIAA and MPAA manufactured devices created to do the exact same thing they are trying to stop, so people can get a clearer picture of how things really are.

And a Pirate is supposed to be someone who SELLS things anyway, so the loosely abused term is wrong in the first place. I guess it's harder to justify criminalizing "sharers" than it is "pirates". Another place the average journalist is right there lock-step with the RIAA - calling sharers, or sharezerz and warezerz pirates - don't think the mass media is not trying to help the RIAA - if they weren't they wouldn't do stuff like help them develop a specific catch-phrase and build a certain veiwpoint. I'm sure that journalist know the difference between a Pirate and a Sharer - but they continue to call everyone Pirates - just like the RIAA / MPAA pays them to do. - So take the news with a grain of salt, and read between the columns.

Look at the ads and who placed them to get a clearer view of who is running the media your reading...

[gertruded]

Actually, the RIAA/MPAA have done a lot. The fact that we are calling copyright infringement "piracy", and fair use "illegal" means that they have had some victories.

They have been successful in lobbying politicians too.

They have convinced Microsoft to load down their Windows software with draconian DRM and chips to be added to computers, limitations to electronics appliances functionality to control us. Who could have predicted that companies such as Microsoft and Apple would become so anti-consumer with their DRM help to the RIAA?MPAA.

[Inconnux]

People call it piracy because pirates are cool... much cooler than Ninjas :)

[ralfthedog]

Long live the Ninja Pirates.

[grimmw]

I'm in Japan now. Living the dream.

There are hundreds of musicians selling their CDs, doujin style.

They do it for the love of the music. Wish that would translate to the American scene, but they seem to be making CDs about how much money they have and how great they are. Lost track of how many rap albums I've heard about how the artist makes so much money. Guess they can't come up with decent lyrics anymore. :S

[Sausagebiscuit]

Signed for being jealous.

[magusat999]

LOOK - your in Japan, OK. Why did you feel it necessary to plug in a comment about Rap artists? This story isn't about rap artists it's about the RIAA and anyone they represent as an artist. You just have some issue with rap and HAD TO stuff that ignorant comment in, didn't you? For you information, peopel like Rap artists are not the ones struggling over here - a rap artist can and will sell his stuff out of a trunk of a car and still get rich (just ask Too Short). Rap artists don't need or care about the RIAA. You are extremely mis-informed - and your in Asia, but I bet your not Asian, because rap has been explosively popular, especially in Japan, since the Run DMC days. There are people in japan who dress like and imitate rappers oon the streets. What did you think asia is another planet that only you had access to? People know about the most remote parts of the world now - so before someone like you says something assuming he's talking to "unworldly people", I suggest you remember that you aint the only person that can buy a plane ticket to Osaka, buddy.

[mmntech]

No surprises here. ISPs most likely don't have the time or resources to be policing the internet for the RIAA/MPAA. Of course I'm sure they'll just pressure the government to pass a law that forces the ISPs to do it.

[Michichael]

I find it amusing that the RIAA/MPAA don't go after anyone that's tech savvy.