DISQUS

Tom · 1 year ago

Well, I hate to be the guy who pops in and posts a link to his own blog but I wrote a much better version of what I’m going to bang out below here: http://www.tomstechblog.com/post/2007/12/Making...

That said, the Readers digest version is this: What the RIAA is doing is legal strategy and while it might not be pretty to the laymen that is what lawyers are for (and that is why everyone hates them). They want copying on the table as a claim so that they can make their case against pirates as clear cut as possible. So yes they aren’t coming out and saying that copying is legal under the fair use principle because they want it as a legal club to beat people who are sharing illegally.

For those that are paranoid that they’re going to start going after legit people who bought the music legally I can’t help but roll my eyes a little. Anyone who looks at the negative press the labels are already facing has to know they’d be crushed by the outcry if they tried to sue someone who purchased music legally and just copied it to their own computer.

What people forget is that the RIAA is walking a fine line too. They create too much public outcry and congress is going to end up passing a law that hurts the labels (lobbyists or no). So if you really think they’d even chance suing someone who legally bought the music and isn’t sharing it I think you are jumping at shadows.

mathewi · 1 year ago

I would agree that suing people who copy legally-bought CDs is
unlikely -- but it's obvious that the RIAA doesn't want to give in and
admit that copying is fair use, because they don't want to weaken an
already weak argument. In a word: weasels.

Tom · 1 year ago

Any good lawyer knows that law isn’t about being right it’s about finding a loophole and getting the decision maker (judge or jury) on your side. People look for ways to do what they want to do so even having the law overwhelmingly on your side isn’t going to help if the Judge doesn’t want you to win and your opponent has found a loop hole (however slim it is) to allow him to do what he wants to do.

As a legal strategist your job would be to cut your opponent off from as many loopholes as possible. That is exactly what the RIAA is doing.
Now look at the RIAA’s position from a legal strategy point of view. The file sharing angle is full of loopholes by definition. Can Kazaa be used legally, if so does that mean illegal traders can’t be prosecuted, etc… So what they need to do is to find a way to pull back and make the acts leading to that trading illegal which cuts off their opponent’s access to all those loopholes.

Hence arguing that copying the music in the first place is illegal which cuts the other side off from making any arguments that would excuse the file sharing. By saying that they make the case against the file sharer iron clad which is what from a legal perspective they want. So they ARE saying that legally-bought copying is illegal but not to prosecute people who aren’t illegally trading them.

It isn’t about “giving in” it’s about legal strategy and while I might not like that the world has come to this there’s no doubt that the music industry has been forced into this position by society. If people would just accept that sharing music is stealing the record companies wouldn’t have to take these measures to make sure they can prove it in a court of law. I certainly don't think it makes them weasels because they listened to their lawyers who said this was the only way to protect their legal interests.

Karoli · 1 year ago

In case you want it, here's a link to the <entire question and answer that started the storm in the first place:
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2...

mathewi · 1 year ago

Thanks, Karoli.