2006-06-21

RIAA threatens YouTube users

RIAA have hit another low in a desperate struggle to try to get rid of the piracy even themselves know they won't get rid of.

This time, according to Moneycontrol Tech Blog, they are sending seize-and-desist mails to YouTube users who are dancing to music they haven't licensed.

So, here we have a video taken of someone who's making a fool of themselves in front of the webcam, perhaps on a party, with someone expected to be a good friend on the other side. Perhaps the dance was recorded and put out on YouTube to the everlasting embarassment of the person in the video. Instead of focusing of the morality of someone actually putting out such a video on YouTube in the first place, the horrible crime in this is that there is music in the background, and the person posting the video doesn't pay royalties.

Or, we have the dancer himself making sure this is recorded and put on YouTube. Perhaps it's a call for some attention, the chance to become a meme, to become a new Gary Brolsma, or just because it was a fun thing to do. And again, he doesn't pay royalties.

This is clearly a desperate step in the fight against piracy, but it is highly misdirected. And it's so narrowminded and shortsighted I can't find words for it.

What do the RIAA expect? Are they expecting that millions of people will go to YouTube, find a video that happens to play their favourite song, rip the sound from the video, and sell it, and thereby cut the record industry's profits to half?

3 comments:

davID said...

Chasing you-tube users smacks of sheer desperation to me...

I want to know if U-Tube are supplying data for this? how are they getting IP addresses otherwise??

Thaumiel said...

To be honest, living in Sweden, I don't have enough information on how American legislation works in this area.

In Sweden, I believe, a crim need to be severe enough to merit prison, or if it's prison for two years, for the police to be able to demand IP logs from ISPs or websites.

If someone has any information of this, please tell me.

American Sovereign said...

I know this sounds confusing but this is why even most Amercians despise their government. There are two seperate political systems at work in the USA.

1. The De Facto Washington DC system for U.S. citizens (Federal citizens). Any government can legislate for its citizens.

2. The Dejure Constitutional Republic for State Nationals living in a State of Union. The Federal government cannot legislate in the Union state.

Most American wrongfully assume that they must be US citizens and the law is purposely structured by the powers that be to trick the average American into giving his support for this corrupt government.

How does this deal with copyright laws?

U.S. citizens (and in any country where rights are merely priveleges given by the government) are presumed to be guilty and must prove themselves innocent.

Sovereign Human beings must be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

The key aspects of a crime:
1. Suspect
2. Injury
3. Injured
4. Witness

Copyright violations can only be consider a valid crime if all 4 elements can be established with solid proof. That's hard if not impossible because it is a crime not against a flesh and blood human being but a series of ones and zeroes. While the ones and zeros might be presumed to be owned by company or person, is it really possible to own a concept or data?

No, because data is abstract and does not take up space. If you can represent something (CD, DVD, videogame, etc) digitally, no matter how many laws and protections you create you can NEVER be guaranteed that a copy will not be created.

Think about it carefully
It's a paper (imaginary) crime, it only exists if the suspect hangs himself because the prosecutation can never prove points 2 or 3 (because only the suspect knows if *might* have bought it in the first place. Why does the RIAA ignore that many people actually buy MORE after listening to mp3's because they find new music they like?). Point 4 depends on invading the privacy of suspect since his communication would have to be monitored.

If you are in the industry read the following carefully:

As long your customers are free to buy, listen and watch

What they CHOOSE too
When they CHOOSE too
How they CHOOSE too
you will NEVER completely control them.