Anyone worried what RIAA's latest action will do to AMV's?

ZeWrestler · Post by **ZeWrestler** » Fri Jun 27, 2003 8:16 am

and this one http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/0 ... index.html

RurouniKakita · Post by **RurouniKakita** » Fri Jun 27, 2003 9:07 am

CNN.com wrote:More than 2.6 billion songs, movies and other files are copied over computer networks every month, according to industry estimates. Executives believe such trading has led to a 14 percent slide in revenues since pioneering service Napster opened in 1999.

14%.... a lousy 14% is what they are worried about. Hell the falling economy could account for the 14% slide in revenues. I wonder if they have any evidence that p2p networks are directly responible for their loss in revenue? oh well i don't use any p2p software anymore but IRC is my friend and it's been around a lot longer.

Anlushac11 · Post by **Anlushac11** » Fri Jun 27, 2003 9:23 am

8)

What pisses me off about the whole ordeal is just how much money RIAA and the record companies make off each CD.

There was a recent lawsuit won by several States on behalf of the American people. The Attorney Generals from IIRC about 27 states filed a lawsuit agains the record companies for artificially inflating CD costs and price fixing.

I saw somewhere how much the companies make off of each CD.

IIRC it went like this.

80% goes directly to the record company
10% goes toward shiping and packaging and marketing

The musician gets the rest. Out of that the musician is expected to pay for the recording studios, mixing, technicians, any additional back singers or musicians.

One of the biggest albums of my generation was Meatloaf - Bat out of Hell. IIRC that album is still on the top 100 Best Selling albums. Meatloaf barely broke even on the album and was so disgusted that he finally dropped out of the music business for awhile. John Foggerty, former lead singer of Creedence Clearwater Revival was so disgusted with the corruption and politics in the music industry that he quit the music industry for many years.

If you look around you will notice that many Artists that hit it big then move to their own record label. David Bowie, Peter Gabriel, John Mellencamp have their own label and in the case of David Bowie he has been releasing songs for pay to d/l off of his website.

Several years ago IIRC it was Arista records CD sales were slumping. To increase sales the record company got the reat idea to lower CD costs by about $2 per CD. Except teh $2 was supposed to come out of the artists cut. The record companies didnt lose a penny.

Alan Parsons of the Alan Parsons Project, and grammy winning record Engineer for Pink Floyds Dark Side Of The Moon, when told he had to take a cut out of his share of $2 per CD said screw that, Im not taking a cut. Arista responded by pulling all of Alan Parson's CD's off of the market.

Alan Parsons response was thats fine, screw you again, my contract expires in 4 months and I have other offers to consider. So he sat back til his contract expired and moved to another label and re-released all his stuff on the new label.

Problem not many artists are in the position to even argue about something like that. They just have to grin and bear it.

I do not condone people who sit there and try to d/l an entire album or a lot of the new songs off Kazaa the day the album is released to the publi for sale.

What I dont mind is someone like me who wants one maybe two songs released in 1983 by a relatively unknown band. If I do it RIAA's way I will pay close to $30 for 2 songs. At that rate they dont have to asume they lost a sale. No one would pay $15 each for a song.

I personally think AMV's should be exempt from RIAA since they are using the song for an artistic purpose. In RIAA's defense the AMV producers are supposed to get permission first, although I think the AMV market is small enough to get off with a warning... I hope.

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Fri Jun 27, 2003 10:01 am

Hmm... well, I think we've said pretty much all we can say. Now, what I wonder about is whether any artists have responded to this yet. I'm interested in what they'd have to say (particularly, the independent ones).
I know one of my favorite songwriters has previously said that he doesn't care if people download his music, as long as they care to go out and buy his CD's after.

ongakuka · Post by **ongakuka** » Fri Jun 27, 2003 12:29 pm

Lyrs wrote:Fear can be very inspirational.

neway, i'm not worried.

personally, they can sue me for a billion dollars, and i don't have a nickle. I'll just move to some third world country. if The US Gov't can't find Osama and he's the most wanted man in on teh world, they probably couldn't find me.

/end

how will you move w/o a nickel :p osama can't be found because he has a bit more than a nickel

*soapbox*

everyone wants to forget that stealing, doesn't matter how or what, is still stealing. the RIAA is legally justified in their actions, where as the downloader (assuming they haven't already purchased the music) is breaking the law, period.

sure, people may not like what's going on, but much like everyone is telling the RIAA they need to adapt to techology advances, new methods of martketing, etc etc, in reality it's those who are stealing who need to adapt. they will be caught, they will be prosecuted if guilty, and it's their own fault.

EarthCurrent · Post by **EarthCurrent** » Fri Jun 27, 2003 1:11 pm

If you let people take cookies from the cookie jar long enough, they just start to figure it's okay, and they get mad when you suddenly decide to start swatting at their fingers. The RIAA waited too long to do anything, and their own inaction helped create the song swapping culture they are now fighting to bring under control.

ongakuka · Post by **ongakuka** » Fri Jun 27, 2003 1:19 pm

I definitely agree.. one part of me says: 'tough RIAA, you waited (deliberatly or not) too long, so it's up to you to adapt to how things are now', but the other part of me (that makes $$ working in media & understands how piracy effects the bottom line) says: 'better late than never, they finally got a clue'.

Oye vey, the whole situation sucks

Quu · Post by **Quu** » Fri Jun 27, 2003 1:27 pm

god wrote: Thou shalt not download music

yea right ^_^

basically AMVs are a sticky thing... it will never be ileagal to make music videos only to distro or show them... and convnetions can get an ascap lisence to cover showing them (from the RIAA, but the anime companies don't care)

its the internet distrobustion of AMVs that is in danger from the RIAA

you forget that AMVs were made, shown, and enjoyed long before the internet was big...

they will continue on either way... so I don't think it will effect AMVs all that much

The Non-Professional · Post by **The Non-Professional** » Fri Jun 27, 2003 2:43 pm

Quu wrote:you forget that AMVs were made, shown, and enjoyed long before the internet was big...

they will continue on either way... so I don't think it will effect AMVs all that much

Preach On Good Sir.

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Fri Jun 27, 2003 2:47 pm

Stealing, shmealing...

The fact remains that I don't owe anything to the RIAA, and if it fell over and died, not only would I not mind, but in fact I would rejoice and dance the watusi on its' rotten carcass. I cringe when I have to buy anything from its' member labels (when I have no other choice), but gladly spend about 1/3 of my yearly income (quite a miserable sum considering I'm mostly unemployed) on concert tickets, merchandise and records produced by my artists of choice, most of which (thankfully) is produced and managed by independent labels.

I'm probably gonna quit downloading MP3's shortly anyways, since my collection is quite complete by now, but that's not gonna mean that RIAA will suddenly start getting my money.

To reitorate: RIAA (and its' member labels) screws over genuine artists, rips off costomers and manufactures 'music' solely for profit. And if a lot of people lose money because RIAA is getting screwed over - I don't have any sympathy for that, they should've known better than to get in bed with them.

So, the moral of the story is - steal from the RIAA and be a modern-day Robin Hood.