An Interview With the Misguided RIAA

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
C|Net has an interesting interview with the RIAA posted that really goes after lawsuits against college students, public opinion of the RIAA, the lawsuits and more. I don’t think the RIAA will be granting this guy any more interviews. :D

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.
Click to expand...
 
A severe distaste for the poorest music-loving demographic. Very smart move, as if student loan firms don't ruin our lives enough.
 
I can't find word for how BLIND the riaa fucks really are..

It's astounding how fucking STUPID, they really are.
 
GJSNeptune said:
A severe distaste for the poorest music-loving demographic. Very smart move, as if student loan firms don't ruin our lives enough.
Click to expand...

Poorest and probably biggest demographic. I don't know the stats off hand, but I can bet these college students makes a big chunk of their paychecks.
 
It seems to me that going after college students is an attempt to destroy your best cusomter base.

Right now they are financially not secure, and tend to get what they can for free(food, free laundry at parents, music, so on). Downloading vs purchasing is really a financial matter. It is not lost sales as they don't have the money to purchase anyway. However they download because they still want to enjoy the music.

Going after these people is simply, bad business. While they may be poor at this moment. In 2-3 years after gradution they will become the group of consumers with the largest disposable incomes. 24-28 yr olds unmarried and no kids holding good jobs. They have a ton of cash to throw around on everything, including entertainment.

Just doesn't seem smart to piss off and attack the very people who shortly are going to have the financial means to support your business.
 
The simple fact of the matter is that the recording industry as a whole has outlived its usefulness in its current state -- and they know it and are trying to preserve the status quo via any means they can (e.g. lawsuits).

The artists and song-writers need to be paid and some mechanism needs to be in place for marketing their wares, but the current record company model is NOT it.

Quite frankly, the RIAA has descended to the level of being very little more than a "protection" agency that is effectively trying to maintain what now amounts to a racketeering scheme. Had they not managed to get the laws changed to their liking through massive cash funding to politicians, what they are doing would be considered illegal in almost any other situation. Basically, they have managed to find a legal way to execute an extortion scheme with college students as the primary targets.
 
I actually have a better regard for the RIAA after reading that interview than i did beforehand. True, that's not saying much, but given their reason for existing and the means at their disposal, it doesn't seem like they've strayed much off the path of the logical. The main problem is that the major labels didn't release affordable and DRM-free content back in the early days to nip the huge P2P fad in the bud. I didn't download music from FTPs back in the (college) day because i didn't want to pay for it; i did it because i wanted that song and not the whole album. I couldn't afford the whole album...

Well, i'm sure there will be flamers, but content publishers have screwed up in lockstep since day one, and the RIAA and its antics are only bad symptoms of poor judgement on their part.
 
demingo said:
It seems to me that going after college students is an attempt to destroy your best cusomter base.

Right now they are financially not secure, and tend to get what they can for free(food, free laundry at parents, music, so on). Downloading vs purchasing is really a financial matter. It is not lost sales as they don't have the money to purchase anyway. However they download because they still want to enjoy the music.

Going after these people is simply, bad business. While they may be poor at this moment. In 2-3 years after gradution they will become the group of consumers with the largest disposable incomes. 24-28 yr olds unmarried and no kids holding good jobs. They have a ton of cash to throw around on everything, including entertainment.

Just doesn't seem smart to piss off and attack the very people who shortly are going to have the financial means to support your business.
Click to expand...

QFT

These are my feelings on the matter. As a college student myself I do not have much disposable income. Things such as the radio are to saturated with commercials to be enjoyable.
 
I have a question, if a person was to be sued by the RIAA, what recourse does the RIAA have once the fee has been levied? I have heard of people paying off lawsuits for years, why don't people just say "fuck you" and ignore the fees? If they had sent a collection agency after my ass in college, they would have pulled about $300 worth of stuff out of my dorm room. Credit? Thats the only reason I can think of.
 
I like how the RIAA rep equates music piracy with not being a fan of music, and I also enjoyed the part where she connected music piracy with arms dealing and drug smuggling. What's next, claiming that MP3s put money in the pockets of the Taliban?
 
demingo said:
In 2-3 years after gradution they will become the group of consumers with the largest disposable incomes. 24-28 yr olds unmarried and no kids holding good jobs. They have a ton of cash to throw around on everything, including entertainment.
Click to expand...

I would like to meet these people. Everyone that I know that has graduated college that fall into that age group have this thing called a Student Loan and have no disposable income what so ever.

I have a $36k loan I have to start paying back in May and its going to be $350 a month minimum for it and I will be barely able to pay that.
 
I personally had over $2000 of monthly disposable income about a year after I graduated. Most of my friends are in the same category save the few who went onto grad school.

I found living in a house with 2 friends, rent and utilities were very cheap, car and student loans didn't add too much either. Maybe $1500 total for all of it. Rest was food money and fun. Quite different once you settle down, buy a house, and start a family however. But before that, not much expense. Even if you dont get as high a paying job, $40k after college shouldnt be too hard to earn, and thats plenty.
 
obviouslytom said:
I would like to meet these people. Everyone that I know that has graduated college that fall into that age group have this thing called a Student Loan and have no disposable income what so ever.

I have a $36k loan I have to start paying back in May and its going to be $350 a month minimum for it and I will be barely able to pay that.
Click to expand...

If you can't pay a 350 a month student loan then something is wrong with your spending and saving habits. $350 a month is only $4200 a year.
 
obviouslytom said:
I have a $36k loan I have to start paying back in May and its going to be $350 a month minimum for it and I will be barely able to pay that.
Click to expand...

Try a $714 minimum.

demingo said:
Even if you dont get as high a paying job, $40k after college shouldnt be too hard to earn, and thats plenty.
Click to expand...

Maybe if you went to school for engineering, chemistry, or, you know, something useful.
 
GJSNeptune said:
Try a $714 minimum.



Maybe if you went to school for engineering, chemistry, or, you know, something useful.
Click to expand...
Hello? Embry-Riddle alumni here. Engineering Physics mean anything?
My monthly payment min. was something like $300 total. Oh, I got them paid off in about 15 months, too (by, obviously, not paying the min).
To say people near my age don't have money is poor planning or spending on their part alone.
Even if you somehow have $714 a month, that's not even a single paycheck (if like me paid 2x monthly).

I think it'll be neat to see how things are for the RIAA when everyone they are targeting now is their main source of income - other than being sued. Since well, I don't think they'll be too inclined to buy from them.
 
Do the right thing and leave the records in the store. Whenever you want to buy a movie or a cd or go to movies, think about the damage you cause to RIAA by not succumbing to it! It gives more pleasure than seeing the movie, really.

You can then spend the time with your loved ones or writing crap on bulletin boards, whichever suits you best.
 
obviouslytom said:
Student loans have a 10 year payment plan on them. Without interest it would be $304 a month for 120 months.
Click to expand...

Actually, you can do 10, 20, or 30 year with even payments or graduated among other choices. $350 is pocket change compared to our medical school loans even on the 30 year plan.

If you can't pay $350 a month you are doing something wrong with your spending, savings, or job choice (or all three).
 
Eulogy said:
Hello? Embry-Riddle alumni here. Engineering Physics mean anything?
My monthly payment min. was something like $300 total. Oh, I got them paid off in about 15 months, too (by, obviously, not paying the min).
To say people near my age don't have money is poor planning or spending on their part alone.
Even if you somehow have $714 a month, that's not even a single paycheck (if like me paid 2x monthly).
Click to expand...

Hello what? Hi?

It was a general you. But it's very bold (and ignorant) to claim it isn't hard to get a $40k/yr job. It's very hard, especially for people who didn't go to school for something of which there's a shortage/demand. Pretty much anything in the Arts will have you living in a box.
 
Dethred said:
I have a question, if a person was to be sued by the RIAA, what recourse does the RIAA have once the fee has been levied? I have heard of people paying off lawsuits for years, why don't people just say "fuck you" and ignore the fees? If they had sent a collection agency after my ass in college, they would have pulled about $300 worth of stuff out of my dorm room. Credit? Thats the only reason I can think of.
Click to expand...

If they sue you in court and win, they can destroy your credit, take everything that you own, and if you still owe, they may even have legal means to garnish your wages or any award winnings.

Basically, they can screw up your life pretty good. Your best bet is to pay it or to try and negotiate showing them your lack of funds and come to some sort of settlement that will most likley leave you dry for a while.
 
I'd rather jerk off with lava soap, than attempt to understand their corporate mentality. You can thank me for the visual later.. :)
 
Using the execuse that college students are poor so they should be allowed to illegally download music is bullshit. If you really wanted that cd, you save the money to get it. Don't order that pizza, or buy that six pack of beer saturday night. There you go. I was in my mid-teens when P2P just started to really take off. Everyone I knew was just downloading whatever they wanted, glad they didn't have to pay. I would d/l music occassionally too, but I can't think of once where if I didn't like the song(s) I didn't delete them. If I did like them I would go buy the cd.

The music industry was bleeding big time. At first you had individual bands trying to fight it, i.e. Metallica. Then the idustry as a whole cut costs on cds. Still, why wouldn't anyone just d/l their music, the P2P people were being targeted not the people actually taking the music.

If the RIAA wasn't putting out lawsuits, why would anyone bother using services like iTunes, Amazon, or the Zune Marketplace today? I don't blame them one bit. I blame the greediness and absence of morales in todays general populous.
 
EricSV said:
If the RIAA wasn't putting out lawsuits, why would anyone bother using services like iTunes, Amazon, or the Zune Marketplace today? I don't blame them one bit. I blame the greediness and absence of morales in todays general populous.
Click to expand...

Well to disprove your point. I can get any song I want, untraced pretty much. I know where to get it and how to get it.... but... I still buy all my songs via itunes.

Why? Becasue of various reasons, I don't have to search, works well on the ipod, i get a proper edit, proper quality, etc. So even with the old napster and everything, I'd still use itunes.


You make it sound as if when napster took form that everyone stopped buying cd's. lol
 
I'm going to make it out without loans and a double major, one being computer engineering:p
It's called working your way though college

But back on topic, why is it that they think they will be able to accomplish anything by crucifying the occasional person? All them making an example of someone does is make me think they're a bunch of jerks. I know they'll never catch 99% of the people that do it, so if I do it I'm not worried about getting caught, and henceforth they just piss everyone off.
 
I'm not saying they are wrong, nor that their actions are in error. I have an issue with what they do, and how they go about doing it. I rank Jack Thompson in the same category.

How can an organization that is paid for with large corporate funds, whose "external goal" is to "provide the artists with the monies they deserve for a product they created", when really it just goes back to the whomever fronted the monies to create the "music" (I winced when I typed that), and minimal goes to the artist / band. It's only responsibility is unto itself, accountable only to itself, and only serve itself, with a poorly attempted guise of helping the artist.
 
Desdichado said:
I'm going to make it out without loans and a double major, one being computer engineering:p
It's called working your way though college
Click to expand...

Maybe a public school. If you can work your way through a private school education, you probably don't need the education in the first place. :D
 
GJSNeptune said:
Maybe a public school. If you can work your way through a private school education, you probably don't need the education in the first place. :D
Click to expand...

Public/private it can be done for undergraduate. My wife and I both did its the whole post-graduate that is a killer and racks up the bills.
 
Paul_Johnson said:
Public/private it can be done for undergraduate. My wife and I both did its the whole post-graduate that is a killer and racks up the bills.
Click to expand...
ERAU was $15500 a semester. I don't think most people can afford to work their way through that. That was just tuition and room and board. No food, no books, no supplies etc. Good luck with that one. Sans a full time job, you're not going to anyway.
 
Ockie said:
Well to disprove your point. I can get any song I want, untraced pretty much. I know where to get it and how to get it.... but... I still buy all my songs via itunes.

Why? Becasue of various reasons, I don't have to search, works well on the ipod, i get a proper edit, proper quality, etc. So even with the old napster and everything, I'd still use itunes.


You make it sound as if when napster took form that everyone stopped buying cd's. lol
Click to expand...

So you buy music out of laziness, point taken.

In response to your last comment not everyone, just a lot of college students, which is an awful lot of customers. I was in college in the late 90's and if there wasn't Napster or similar on a students computer in their dorm room, they were the minority. The customers who mattered most either stopped or reduced their spending, which was enough to draw attention to Napster for starters.
 
The issue I have with the RIAA is how underhanded their practices are. They:

1. Arbitrarily add an overly high per-song value to inflate their lawsuits to a point where nobody can afford a trial loss
2. Deliberately go after individuals who cannot afford legal counsel
3. Deliberately exploit this to force a settlement
4. Operate under the guise of protecting their artists whith 0 proof that any settlement money goes to the "effected" artist
5. Posit illegal downloading and not an aging business model with high corporate fat as the reason for their loss in profits


Is downloading/sharing music illegal? Sure. Does it hurt the artist? Doubtful.

Does it deserve the legal action/attention that it is getting, from the source that it's coming from? ABSOLUTELY NOT
 
Paul_Johnson said:
Public/private it can be done for undergraduate. My wife and I both did its the whole post-graduate that is a killer and racks up the bills.
Click to expand...

Maybe some schools. Mine was over $30k/year, and you can't live off campus until you have senior status or a medical condition. So that's three years (without post-secondary credits acquired in high school) of overpaying to live on campus and to eat, plus tuition. Roughly $10k per quarter sans scholarships and grants.

But even with scholarships and grants, the average student still has to pay a third to half (or more) out-of-pocket. Only one person per year gets a full-ride, and that's by winning the Presidential Scholarship competition, which consists of all the top prospective students coming to the campus and partaking in a day of testing, interviews with faculty of their major, and an essay. There are one or two other scholarship competitions of a lower tier, with only one winner. Granted, the people who don't win them usually get a little bonus to their scholarships.

The average undergraduate student would need an unusually well-paying part-time job to get through four years of a private school without taking out a loan. Or wealthy, generous parents. A full-time job and the pressure of a private school would be killer, and there's no way that job would pay enough.

Well, I suppose if you had a parent working at the school, you could pull it off. They pay dirt compared to everyone else.
 
GJSNeptune said:
Wait, who made that claim?
Click to expand...

demingo said:
Right now they are financially not secure, and tend to get what they can for free(food, free laundry at parents, music, so on). Downloading vs purchasing is really a financial matter. It is not lost sales as they don't have the money to purchase anyway. However they download because they still want to enjoy the music.
Click to expand...

tacosareveryyummy said:
As a college student myself I do not have much disposable income. Things such as the radio are to saturated with commercials to be enjoyable.
Click to expand...

There's a couple.

Ockie said:
Well to disprove your point. I can get any song I want, untraced pretty much. I know where to get it and how to get it.... but... I still buy all my songs via itunes.

Why? Becasue of various reasons, I don't have to search, works well on the ipod, i get a proper edit, proper quality, etc. So even with the old napster and everything, I'd still use itunes.


You make it sound as if when napster took form that everyone stopped buying cd's. lol
Click to expand...

The fact that you are on this forum leads me to believe you, like most of us here, are pretty tech savvy. Most of us here probably know how to get files untraced. The P2P programs made/make it very easy for less savvy to share their music. They don't care about how well the ID3 tags are filled out. They aren't that concernec with audio quality, to a point. All they care about is not having to pay for the music. These are the people that everyone is so upset that the RIAA is going after. These are the people that the RIAA, in my opinion, has no choice but to scare into acutally using pay services like iTunes.
 
Eulogy said:
ERAU was $15500 a semester. I don't think most people can afford to work their way through that. That was just tuition and room and board. No food, no books, no supplies etc. Good luck with that one. Sans a full time job, you're not going to anyway.
Click to expand...

GJSNeptune said:
Maybe some schools. Mine was over $30k/year, and you can't live off campus until you have senior status or a medical condition. So that's three years (without post-secondary credits acquired in high school) of overpaying to live on campus and to eat, plus tuition. Roughly $10k per quarter sans scholarships and grants.

But even with scholarships and grants, the average student still has to pay a third to half (or more) out-of-pocket. Only one person per year gets a full-ride, and that's by winning the Presidential Scholarship competition, which consists of all the top prospective students coming to the campus and partaking in a day of testing, interviews with faculty of their major, and an essay. There are one or two other scholarship competitions of a lower tier, with only one winner. Granted, the people who don't win them usually get a little bonus to their scholarships.

The average undergraduate student would need an unusually well-paying part-time job to get through four years of a private school without taking out a loan. Or wealthy, generous parents. A full-time job and the pressure of a private school would be killer, and there's no way that job would pay enough.

Well, I suppose if you had a parent working at the school, you could pull it off. They pay dirt compared to everyone else.
Click to expand...

Yes it can be done for undergraduate.
 
Music is free.

Sorry, its a fact, and I haven't bought a CD for a decade now.

CDs are ancient technology. Albums are an ancient concept.

The RIAA doesn't even include music videos or digital files with it's "albums".

Why the fuck would anyone buy this ancient shit when its so much more convenient to basically download it with absolutely NO repercussions?
 
GJSNeptune said:
As long as you qualify it as being possible at some schools for some people. It's not universally possible.
Click to expand...

If you need that qualifier to make yourself comfortable fine.

But it is possible it just requires effort, planning, hard work, responsibility, and maturity....something 18-22 years in college partying like they never have before lack in great amounts.
 
maverikv said:
The issue I have with the RIAA is how underhanded their practices are. They:

1. Arbitrarily add an overly high per-song value to inflate their lawsuits to a point where nobody can afford a trial loss
2. Deliberately go after individuals who cannot afford legal counsel
3. Deliberately exploit this to force a settlement
4. Operate under the guise of protecting their artists whith 0 proof that any settlement money goes to the "effected" artist
5. Posit illegal downloading and not an aging business model with high corporate fat as the reason for their loss in profits


Is downloading/sharing music illegal? Sure. Does it hurt the artist? Doubtful.

Does it deserve the legal action/attention that it is getting, from the source that it's coming from? ABSOLUTELY NOT
Click to expand...

1. Well if they didn't, where would the scare be? I mean they obviously can't sue EVERYONE. Risk vs. reward. If I d/l a song and I MIGHT get sued for the $1-2 I would pay at a service like iTunes, why wouldn't I still just d/l it for free. Even at just $100/song, the chances of being targeted are so slim, it would probably be worth my while to just d/l for free.

2. When all they have access to is your IP address and the history of the file transfer, not much they can tell from that. And again, being poor isn't an execuse for doing something illegal.

3. From my understanding a lot of the settlements come out cheaper then they really have to be. I could be wrong on this though, I don't check up on the cases really.

4. The money probably doesn't make it to the artist, but the artist does get more money when people actually start paying for their music because they don't want to get sued.

5. Well, if people stop getting the music illegally, there will be no one to sue. Then they will be forced to become a more efficiently ran organization.
 
EricSV,

I think you misunderstood me. I wasn't saying they should be allowed or that it is legal for them to due so. I was just simply explaining WHY they do it. Food and drink, even beer and pizza is generally considered my most college students as a higher want than owning music legally. From there its pure economics. There is much more risk involved getting free beer and pizza than there is free music. Also, it is easier to obtain free music.

For those simple reasons they will buy food and drink and download music illegally. Once again, not saying it is ok for them to do so, just explaining the WHY of the situation. In simple economic terms, The risk of downloading is less than the cost of purchasing. If the risk of downloading was higher than the cost of purchasing they would either buy music, or not buy and not download.


It was a general you. But it's very bold (and ignorant) to claim it isn't hard to get a $40k/yr job. It's very hard, especially for people who didn't go to school for something of which there's a shortage/demand. Pretty much anything in the Arts will have you living in a box.
Click to expand...

Thats your fault for poor planning and no one elses if you chose the arts and are now financially unstable. If someone chooses not to pursue an education that will be productive in society the expected outcome should be obvious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top