This is Charlie here. Some concern of mine about the music industry has found an outlet recently and I would like to share it. Bear with me, this may seem long. I hope to keep you enticed with my writing style.
———————————————————————————–
As students at Grand Valley State university (GVSU) we are reminded each semester via e-mail that to share materials online is illegal. File sharing is wrong, a no-no, and is looked down upon. However, is it true? I received that e-mail today and it cheesed me off. To think that my GVSU is submitting to the RIAA. Well, I decided to write the sender of that e-mail with my concerns, and here they are:
Illegal File Sharing – The Oppression of the RIAA
Dear Mr. _____________,
My name is Charles Bleisch. Currently I am a student at GVSU and have been so since 2006. Each semester I have received an e-mail from you or your office informing me of the violation of creative rights that is committed when students or people “illegally” share music and other media with one another. At the bottom of this e-mail was this e-mail address and a line encouraging me to give you an e-mail with any concerns, and I would like to voice those concerns now.
As a writer, artist, and musician I can appreciate GVSU’s attempts at preserving the rights of those who use their creative devices. It is our duty, guaranteed by our nation’s standards, to protect those rights so that artists may continue prospering from the work they produce. In this I can not argue. My concern is in a different direction. As a person who seeks to maintain creative integrity and not be insulted by the record industry I must point out that affiliating with the RIAA is a dangerously oppressive move to make. As a university we should not encourage an organization that threatens to stifle the creative rights and sharing of those creations with the world.
The organization that goes by the name Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has become a group that relies on bully tactics to gain a quick buck. At their website (link 1 below) we read in the RIAA’s “What We Do” page that they seek to, “foster a business and legal climate that supports and promotes our members’ creative and financial vitality.” Now that sounds like a worthy cause, but who exactly are the members that the RIAA wants to protect. The sentence after that reveals, “Its members are the record companies that comprise the most vibrant national music industry in the world.” It goes on to say that these industries comprise 85% of the worlds music. In the end the RIAA is another group seeking to back record companies. The money they fight for does not even go to artists, but rather the pockets of those suits in the record industry who already have it made. And what about the other groups? The other 15% of the world’s truly “diverse” music. They stand unprotected, their music totally available for the world. But who’s to say that’s a bad thing?
One study reported on by TorrentFreak.com (link 2) reveals that the decline in music sales reported by the RIAA and recording industry is not as drastic as it is made out to be. This study done by a PhD student at Harvard, a Mr. Blackburn, continues and shows that while the top 25% of the most popular artists saw a decline in profits from file sharing the remaining 75% actually witnessed an increase in profits. In other articles cited by Rufus Pollock, an economist at Cambridge University, he reports (links 3 and 4) on studies done by both the Canadian and Dutch nations showing a net positive increase in music purchases by those who “illegally” share files. Others claim that more research must be done, but so far it has been shown that overall those who download illegally are the same people who invest money in the music being sold either legitimately online or in cd sales, and yet that does not stop the RIAA from bullying the public with scare tactics.
In recent years they have been a major force that continues to drive the “battle” or exclusive media rights. On numerous occasions they have levied excessive fines on individuals for sharing copyrighted materials online. As an example, the case of Jammie Thomas-Rasset remains a cornerstone in this battle (link 5). The summary of this suit is that Jammie Thomas-Rasset had downloaded many files illegally. 24 songs were chosen as a representative amount and the RIAA sued at a per song penalty of $80,000 when the initial amount per song was $750. This forced a final fine of $1.92 million. In another case Joel Tenenbaum, a student, went on trial for sharing 30 songs (link 6). How much was the original fine? $150,000/song. After the trial the RIAA announced that they would use their winnings to fund more trials, and for what? 30 songs? The money being won didn’t even go to the artists whose materials were stolen. But guess what, it does not end there.
Gizmodo.com, a reputable technology blog, has been tracking the RIAA’s scandalous behavior for a while now. In one of their articles titled, “Second Degree Murder and Six Other Crimes Cheaper than Pirating Music” reveals that you can abduct a child, or burn someone’s house down and be fined less than Jammie and Joel (link 7).
In the end, the RIAA is an organization bent on monopolizing the music industry. They don’t care about the artists, and they don’t care about civilian rights. All they are interested in is getting some more money for “The Man.” And it has been this way for years. These are the same people who said the cassette tape would ruin the music industry. They threw a tantrum over the VCR and had a fit when the CD burner and MP3 players were created. And hey, even now if you legally own music protected via DRM it becomes likely that you’ll still end up a criminal. If you lose your collection and try to recover it, or if new technology comes along outdating your old library, you could be guilty of violating DMCA 1201 which makes it illegal to use technology that “circumvents copy protection,” (link 8).
As a university we should not submit the pressures of one group for the profit of a few. I understand you may just be “covering your asses,” but in the end it would be a shame for GVSU to lose its backbone over this issue. Once we prided ourselves on being a diverse university seeking to give student’s a “liberal education.” All I can see is that we are submitting to a bully.
One of my favorite genres of music is one of the only arts forms created in the United Stated. This is of course the blues. Blues music was born out of the freedom slaves fought for in an oppressive nation, our nation. The sweet melodies cry deep down to the soul and make you feel for a people. We artists are being slapped in the face by the RIAA and those who seek to share the music that they have with their friends are being told that what they learned in kindergarten was wrong. Sharing is no longer caring, but breaking the law. We should not support the blatant lies of a bully and the tyrants of the music industries.
I thank you for your time, good sir.
Sincerely,
~Charles Bleisch
Link 1: http://riaa.org/whatwedo.php
Link 2: http://torrentfreak.com/why-most-artists-profit-from-piracy/
Link 3: http://www.rufuspollock.org/tags/filesharing/
Link 4 (Dutch article on filesharring): http://www.tno.nl/content.cfm?context=overtno&content=nieuwsbericht&laag1=37&laag2=2&item_id=2009-01-16%2012:57:23.0
Link 5: http://gizmodo.com/5296249/court-orders-file+sharer-to-pay-80000-per-song-to-riaa
Link 6: http://gizmodo.com/5327995/student-forced-to-pay-675000-to-riaa-for-sharing-30-songs
Link 7: http://gizmodo.com/5344159/second-degree-murder-and-six-other-crimes-cheaper-than-pirating-music
