AfterDawn: Tech news

RIAA settles P2P lawsuits

Written by Jari Ketola @ 30 Sep 2003 5:25 User comments (12)

RIAA settles P2P lawsuits RIAA announced that it has so far settled 52 of the 261 lawsuits filed against P2P file sharers earlier this month. The exact settlement amounts were not specified, but experts estimate payments ranging from $2,500 to $7,500 each, which would add up to $250,000.
"The music community's efforts have triggered a national conversation, especially between parents and kids, about what's legal and illegal when it comes to music on the Internet," RIAA President Cary Sherman said in a statement. "In the end it will be decided not in the courtrooms, but at kitchen tables across the country."

A dozen P2P users who might have been sued by RIAA have also agreed to pay settlements to avoid a lawsuit.

Hundreds of more lawsuits are planned for October by RIAA.

Source:
San Mateo County Times

Previous Next  

12 user comments

130.9.2003 6:48

After reading this article and many like it, I am strongly coming to the conclusion that America has got some serious problem. There are many article covering The RIAA and its actions. I am from the UK and this sort of which hunting over copied cd's just does not happen. Who is in charge of these organisations? Have they even stopped to think about why so many people are copying music and movies over the net? For too long now they have artificially keep the prices monstrously too high, then a technology comes along that will even the playing fields and they don’t like it. I understand that laws have to be obeyed and that they are losing money but p2p is here to stay and nothing will change it. The moment they bring in new copy protection, a hacker will find a way around it. So I don’t believe that this behaviour that they are implementing by prosecution ordinary people is worthwhile or positive to there course.

230.9.2003 9:39
realguy
Inactive

it's all about getting the price right - in the East cd/dvd copying is absolutely the standard - you won't pay more than us$5 for a dvd. apple did a neat thing with making it EASY - look at their success (and their affiliated record companies). once they hook on to the fact that distribution of back catalogues costs zero then profits and therefore happiness come rolling in. perversely people in the UK pay us$1.50 for a ringtone...

330.9.2003 14:06

Why not create your own music so u no longer have to download it LOL ;-)


430.9.2003 20:18

Umm So whos winmning here?, somone fillme in. How do the artists get paid and how are they affected. I've downloaded many of songs inmy day and I don't seem to realize how the RIAA works. What are they really after and how are they going to benefit. Is it more for power, because It can't be about the money. And once the RIAA are gone, then what will take it's place. I'm all for the better and leveling the playing fields, but what must be constructed to ensure the thriving of artists?? Also, what will keep another company from monopolizing MP3 sales and distribution, (buying up all the little companys) and hinder another , newer format of music? Just some food for thought.


Shega
(adrenaline Is the closest Total freedom)

51.10.2003 9:36

the sad point is that there are thousands of americans who are shaking in their boots over being on the list.... and the cost of payments to an organzation who dosnt care about anything but money... so lets tear our selves apart over this (well lets not ) because no-one really cares out of the amount of downloaders not 1% has been gone after... but those who keep doing it will get caught by the law... its a matter of time... sad that thats one of the top tech stories of the day after 1year of threats from the RIAA .. man do we give them free press to advertize...... really whats the newest computer break through? other then downloading mp3's and movies and playing games have we as a race used the magic machine to do something right? even NASA cant run theirs right or they wouldn't have bounced the lander off the planet Mars a year ago.. really other then commond things have any of you done something worthy of the same recoudnition the media hounds are pay-ing to the RIAA?????????????????

61.10.2003 11:52

Shegax- The RIAA collects $$$ from radio stations, TV networks, clubs, and anywhere that copyrighted music is played or broadcast in public basically. Artists get paid by their record companies based on CD sales and by the RIAA based on airplay numbers. The way downloading affects artists is, if you don't buy the CD their label does not pay them royalties for that sale. Right now the RIAA's mission is to prop up the dying business model of CDs for as long as possible and to protect copyright "owner's" intellectual property rights. Note that the copyrights for most back catalog music (read oldies, classic rock, etc…) are NO LONGER OWNED BY THE ARTISTS. Record labels and publishing houses have bought up the vast majority of what you now hear on the radio from the artists for a one time fee and then turn around and charge "per use" fees to the public FOREVER. Just as an example, the publishing rights to Credence Clearwater Revival’s music was sold a record label many years ago. The songwriters (artists) never see a dime of RIAA money for any of it. Also note: Studio musicians (anyone on the CD that did not write any songs) get paid a one time fee for their performance no matter how may copies are sold. Some band members (non-song writers) are able to negotiate performance royalty agreements based on sales but these are generally so low that unless you are in a mega popular band it amounts to a pittance. Well, that’s my rant.


We mustn't lower ourselves to the level of those we loathe, lest we become loathsome ourselves.

71.10.2003 19:07

GreyArea- What do you see happening To us as the consumer, and the almight RIAA in the next year or so? I mean Yeah, I love downloading music and listening to what i want, and then buying the CD. But aside from that, I'm learning more and more about this whole war. Just would like your educated guess


Shega
(adrenaline Is the closest Total freedom)

81.10.2003 22:19
ladyluck5
Inactive

The movie business thought vcrs would be the end along with cable tv etc. It wasn't the end. The music companies should realize that this is a huge market and take advantage of it. They could all get together and advertize perfectle crisp clear downloads of your chosen song for .50 here is one better make your own cd for 5$ chose the picture and cover you want on it. another 1$. Make it cheap enough for people to use it in bulk. eventhough it's cheap the music label gets their share, the artist gets their share and they can even make extra money selling advertisements on their sites. The advertising money can go to marketing their site like netflix does. Everybody knows that downloading music does not guarantee quality of music. They are also not stopping people from copying music. How many times have you been asked hey can I copy your cd? The RIAA needs to get with the times. Sueing 12 year old and grandparents is ridiculous. I will never buy a cd again.

92.10.2003 6:08

2 bucks a disc is all i ever pay! GO to your local cd trading store and buy what you want for 7 bucks. Then go home and copy it. The next day go back to the store and trade it in for 5 bucks. ( prices vary-they are used you know) Thats a no brainer for me. They even let me listen to it before i buy it. BTW - some genius will come up with a better way to share in a different format soon and the cycle will start all over again. Have a nice day !

102.10.2003 14:23

Shegax- I think if the market is allowed to find it's own balance (a BIG if with George Jr. and his "business friendly" pals in charge) we'll see the price of downloadable music drop to a place where the risk and inconvenience of "pirating" will make legit purchased music the norm for most people. I think this will also depend somewhat on how tight the DRM noose is cinched. If I can't play/burn songs the way I want to due to some crappy DRM restrictions, I won't buy them. I think once the general public finds out what DRM means many will feel the same way (unless it's already too late by then). To be honest I think your guess is as good as mine or anybody else's on this one...


We mustn't lower ourselves to the level of those we loathe, lest we become loathsome ourselves.

115.10.2003 0:39
Actuator
Inactive

I HATE DRM WITH SUCH PASSION - I WANT TO SPILL THE FLOOR WITH THE BLOOD OF THE PEOPLE WHO PUSH FOR IT! "DRM systems that have been designed impinge on users' control and use of content. Many DRM systems will not allow a user to transfer content to portable devices, such as MP3 players. In addition, many DRM systems work only with Windows operating systems to the exclusion of Linux and Macintosh users. DRM systems may also be designed to actually harm a user's system. One product in particular, InTether Point-to-Point, can impose "penalties" for "illegal" uses of files. The program can force a reboot of the user's computer or destroy the file that the user was attempting to access. A Celine Dion album released in 2002 by EPIC and Sony records can crash a user's computer if the disc is inserted in a CD-ROM drive." read more here: http://www.epic.org/privacy/drm/

127.10.2003 0:58
pappy7
Inactive

Artist getting paid from the sale of their music. That's a laugh, They only make their fortunes on tour. If the record companies want to eliminate piracy, drop the price to the level that piracy is no longer profitable. If pirates are making thousands of dollars in profits selling look alike and perfect copies at $5 bucks each, this tells us that there is something very askew when then big recording companies are retailing the originals at $15 and the cost to manufacture and distribute that product is less than $1. So whose raping the consumer here? The pirates or the Record companies.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive