View Full Version : We're not heartless here at RIAA...
08-14-2006, 09:24 AM
The RIAA really knows how to handle its file sharing lawsuits in ways that make themselves look incredibly heartless. It seemed like maybe they'd scraped bottom when they suggested a student should drop out of MIT to pay a few thousand dollars for file sharing, but they've now topped that one. When one of the people they were suing (who appeared to be fighting the charges) happened to die earlier this summer, the RIAA kindly requested that the case be pushed back 60 days for the family to grieve, before the RIAA started deposing the dead man's children. This for a few thousand dollars? It's been quite clear for some time that no one at the RIAA ever bothers to think about the PR impact of their moves, but isn't there someone there who thought that perhaps this was a case that they could let go of?
Yeah, I can't really say anything else about them that hasn't been said before. I wish that cash cow would dry up.
08-14-2006, 09:36 AM
I'm doing my part - I don't buy any CDs made by major labels anymore. I'd rather go without than give them my $$.
08-14-2006, 09:40 AM
I just don't buy music anymore.
08-14-2006, 06:26 PM
ehh. i still buy CDs.
but from used records stores. and anywhere i can find CDs for under $6.
i cant stand downloads - the fidelity is lost during the compression.
that being said i also STILL buy vinyl records. lo-fi has a certain soul to it...
I still buy CDs through yourmusic.com and used for cheap.
I rarely download from sites like itunes or napster now because I hate having to burn a song to CD to rip it back to the aacv2 format that i love.
08-15-2006, 11:31 AM
The followup to the story is even better. Holy crap these people are villains....
RIAA's "abundance of sensitivity" ends harassment of grieving family
Last week, we posted about the family of a recently deceased defendant in a lawsuit by the RIAA being given 60 days to grieve before the RIAA went on to depose the dead man's children in a renewed suit against his estate. In the intervening days, the publicity about this despicable act -- suing the family of a dead man -- has mounted. Today, an RIAA spokesperson, Jonathan Lamy, contacted me today with this statement:
Our hearts go out to the Scantleberry family for their loss. We had decided to temporarily suspend the productive settlement discussions we were having with the family. Mr. Scantleberry had admitted that the infringer was his stepson, and we were in the process settling with him shortly before his passing. Out of an abundance of sensitivity, we have elected to drop this particular case.
I wrote back to ask him this followup question:
Where was the "abundance of sensitivity" when the RIAA failed to initially drop its case against the Scantleberry family following the death of the named defendant in the case? Given that this "abundance" only materialized within 24 hours of this story hitting several large news outlets and blogs isn't it fair to say that the RIAA is demonstrating sensitivity to its public image, and not its sensitivity to the Scantleberry family?
To which he declined to further comment.
This is par for the course with the RIAA. A year ago, the RIAA contacted me to say that a takedown notice sent on their behalf to RPG Films was a forgery. When I asked if they intended to sue RPG Films for real, and whether these forgeries were common, and whether the RIAA would investigate the forgery, RIAA Director of Communications Jenni Engebretsen promised me she'd get back to me with answers. After repeated emails and phone calls, I finally took the extraordinary step of calling her from a different, borrowed phone (suspecting that she was ducking my calls) and reached her -- only to be told that the RIAA had no further comment.
The RIAA's approach to PR is much like their approach to culture in general: read-only. The RIAA issues statements like the Pope emitting a bull, and we mortals may squabble over its meaning among ourselves, but they are not available to participate in any further discussion. This is reminiscent of the RIAA's approach to things like YouTube lipsynch videos: "our songs are released to be listened to and nothing more; should you dare to make them part of your life, we will use the copyright law we bought to break you."
That'll be enough CD buying for now. Thanks RIAA.
08-15-2006, 12:16 PM
:stupid: I do buy the occasional great CD but now I'm going to check the record label.
08-15-2006, 03:11 PM
Check carefully - it's a long list:
08-15-2006, 04:26 PM
There goes my idea of putting the list on a buisness card.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.12 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.