Thanks to Prof. Deirdre M. Smith of the University of Maine Law School, and the faculty advisor for its Cumberland Legal Aid Clinic, for bringing this law review note to my attention:
A thoughtful article has appeared in the Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, a publication of the University of Minnesota School of Law, authored by law student Daniel Reynolds.
It begins:
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)’s lawsuit campaign against copyright-infringing file sharing is controversial. Many critics allege that this campaign is unfair and paint the RIAA as mean and a bully. Some critics even claim that the RIAA is subversive toward the rights of the public. At the same time, any file sharers continue to violate the distribution and reproduction rights of copyright holders, record labels, and artists, all who have justified expectations of payment for heir products.Complete article:
This Note examines the RIAA’s approach and alternative approaches to the file sharing problem, and proposes an integrated, comprehensive strategy for dealing with the problem of illegal file sharing. Part I provides a background on the RIAA and its opinions, the development of the RIAA lawsuits, the public backlash against these lawsuits, and the relevant law. Part II describes the challenges to be met by any solution to the file sharing problem, reviews a series of proposals for their strengths and weaknesses, and sets forth a strategy that balances the strengths of a number of previous proposals against each other’s weaknesses. This Note concludes with the assertion that the file sharing problem is solvable without wasteful, unpopular lawsuits or major changes to the law, provided that the music industry is willing to adapt to and take cues from the consuming public.
Reynolds, Daniel. Note. The RIAA litigation war on file sharing and alternatives more compatible with public morality. 9 Minn. J. L. Sci. & Tech. 977-1006 (2008).
Commentary & discussion:
Keywords: lawyer digital copyright law online internet law legal download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie independent label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs intellectual property portable music player
3 comments:
It's a pity Daniel Reynolds didn't consider one of the most obvious revenue models to take the place of 'sale of copies', i.e. the sale of the original music recording.
This is where a musician's audience doesn't purchase copies from retailers, but purchases a recording from the musician directly (taking the place of the record label). This way, given the music, rather than copies, is sold, there is no concern as to how many copies are made subsequently. The buyer has the music they wanted, the musician has the money they wanted.
All well and good, and like its been pointed out sale of music directly from the artists website should have been mentioned but... this will never be accepted by the RIAA,simply because their present payment racket is FARR too lucrative.
Take just a second and think of 1.how much money they have made so far and 2.how much has reached the artists that they are supposedly protecting.
Answer:
1. Millions
2. $0.00
If I was a lawyer, I would say "I rest my case" :D
but will leave the above sentence to a person fighting the good fight and whose blog I am writing this comment on.
That's funny because after speaking with one of the artist named in my petition, they have no idea of WHAT is being collected on their behalf and reports that NOTHING has been disbursed to them! My goal is to alert as many of the artist as possible through the one contact that I have! Let them put the fire to RIAA, I mean after all, they ARE entitled to a portion of the proceeds; correct???? Use the Social Media to your advantage, A message with substance will receive a reply!
Regards,
Everyman for themselves
Post a Comment