Wrong. In fact, the only thing more incorrect than this is any radical interpretation of theology. At least the MPAA had the common sense not to claim that movie piracy was hurting the actors financially.

The RIAA only exists because it is paid by the recording companies to exist. EMI recently threatened to pull out of the RIAA because their fees were too high. All major recording companies threatened legal action against the RIAA for not handing over any of the money it has received from ’settlements’ thus far. Accordingly, the RIAA cut its fees otherwise it would have gone out of business. So far, none of the money paid has made it anywhere near any of the artists it claims in court to represent.

RIAA stands for Recording Industry Association of America. Nowhere does it refer to the artists themselves. At best, it only ever says it represents artists when trying to make an emotive argument to 12 people that were either too stupid to get out of jury duty or just wanted a bit of time away from their jobs. Every single person that had an opinion on file-sharing was excluded from the jury. Who better to make an informed decision and set some of the most important case law to the current generation than 12 people that have no idea what is being discussed or at stake?

There’s so much more to this than just movies and music. Paintings have been stolen (actually stolen, not just copyright-infringed) and other works of art copied for centuries. The invention of the printing press took power from the church and gave it to the people up until the governments of the world took it back and handed it to the media companies.
The US’ entire industrialisation process was founded on stealing the ideas and methods from Europe and reproducing them at a lower cost. Hypocritical much?

The RIAA is the best thing that ever happened to both consumers and the record companies. iTunes is achieving insane sales results by not being associated with the RIAA. The cost of music is now both more realistic and affordable. There’s no need to buy a CD with 2 good songs on it….and for those people that use this to support filesharing I’d ask you to look up albums from the mid-late 80’s.

Aside from compilation albums like “1982 - With A Bullet” most albums had 8-10 songs at best so you paid more money for less content with a higher percentage of quality. Confused? You should be. It’s what supported the music industry for so long.

Co-incidentally, all companies are fighting for their lives against copyright infringement and intellectual property and it’s only going to get worse. The 3D printers used by industrial designers to prototype things such as shoes are now becoming more available to consumers. Just waiting for the day that people can download a design from the web, make their own shoes from a Nike design and there not be any difference between them. All Nike, in this example, has to do is find a way (and quickly) to sell the design and not the shoe or it too will need an RIAA.

Oh, I know. Maybe we can just tax everyone to their knees then distribute the taxes to live on. That would be a fine improvement. One man’s culture is another man’s merchandise, and merchandise should not have owners.

I agree that copyright law should be amended. But piracy is not an effective way to do it. Why? Pirates benefit from their actions.

I’d like to see a boycott of one or two record labels — or five or six bands. Don’t buy their music, even as legal MP3s. And don’t pirate them. Boycott concerts with these performers. Spread the word. Even a short-term boycott would get the attention of the record labels, whose revenues are already declining.

This is not true. The artists do not pay them the fee. The record companies do. And will the artists get paid if someone buys the CD? Look at major label recording contracts and see how long it takes and what has to be paid first before the artists get any money. It is almost slavery and definitely highway robbery.

I applaud Joel for fighting this. Major labels are loan sharks and scum.