NC State Defends Students

NC State is taking a stand against the RIAA and protecting its students. Pam Gerace, the director of Student Legal Services at the University, is the one taking chrage on the matter:

[Gerace] is warning students to remain anonymous because the RIAA has said that it will make sure that their job records are blighted.

Since this is so out of proportion to any copyright protection problems, it was dangerous for students to put their hands up and admit anything. She told the Technician Online that this could prove dangerous for the students, as the RIAA could pursue other legal actions or give the names to record companies.

She said the RIAA implies that cash must be handed over right away, when this is not true.

The outfit has also been changing the number of songs it thinks have been nicked and how much students should pay, which makes it sound like they are making it up as they go along, Gerace said.

Wow. A university that stands up for its students. How refreshing.

The RIAA and the MPAA Want Pretexting Back

The RIAA and the MPAA are none-to-happy about the anti-pretexting bill put into place by President Bush back in January, and as such, recently submitted an amendment to the bill in California that would allow the two organizations to utilize pretexting in their endless search for online pirates.

Although the amendment has not gone through yet, it would certainly be a dangerous precedent if it did. The anti-pretexting bill really does a public service in protecting citizens from corporate overreach - we can only hope that it is turned down.

Foxtrot vs. the RIAA

(Foxtrot via Idolator)

DT Quotes Show File-Sharing Rift on Campus

The students quoted in this Daily Trojan article show an interesting rift in sentiment on the USC campus in regard to file-sharing and the RIAA's lawsuits:

"It's a rippling effect. [The RIAA] starts doing this, and we find sneakier ways to download illegally," he said. "Until they get the picture that we're not going to stop until they make it much easier to get music at a reasonable price, we're not going to stop." - an anonymous freshman interactive entertainment major

versus...

"It seems like they're trying to make some sort of compromise," he said. "You've seen the lawsuits where some grandma is sued and pays thousands of dollars, so if they're willing to settle out of court - sort of like a, 'You help us, we'll help you' - that's a good thing." - Brandon Lang, freshman business major

Notice that the budding cultural creator is opposed to the RIAA's tactics and expresses dissatisfaction with the music industry, while the budding business mogul views the RIAA's actions as defensible--even beneficial.

I'd like to think that the rift between the two viewpoints is mostly an information rift--that with more knowledge, Lang would ultimately come to see how the RIAA's tactics are dangerous to civil liberties and dangerous to our future as consumers and technloogists. But what would be the best way to go about having that dialogue?

(via the Daily Trojan)

Don't Worry, We Get in Trouble with the RIAA, Too

According to our very own Daily Trojan:

The Recording Industry Association of America has announced it will send letters to several universities offering students who illegally download music a chance to settle with the RIAA before they are sued for copyright infringement.

...

The letters are part of the RIAA's new plan to crack down on illegal downloading at college campuses. Of the 400 letters sent, USC received 20. Ohio University topped the list with 50 letters, the release stated.

We still lost to Ohio, though.

This DJ Drama Mixtape Raid is Going To Be a Huge, Huge Mess

There is an incredible six-page New York Times article on the January 16 RIAA-endorsed (at a minimum) raid of DJ Drama's Atlanta studio. The number of legal issues this case is going to confront (should it go to trial) is astounding.

First of all, and not necessarily a legal issue, is what the hell were the record labels thinking? Drama was instrumental in the start of the careers of Lil' Jon and T.I. and is responsible in a huge way for the recent resurgence in Lil' Wayne's popularity. Say what you will about their talents (especially Lil' Jon's), but there is no doubt that those artist and others have made the record labels lots and lots of money.

Secondly, can these artists be held responsible for copyright violations if the RIAA has given tacit approval to their actions? If record labels leak tracks to these DJs and pay them upwards of $10,000 to build hype for upcoming studio releases, are they endorsing the mixtape industry? And if so, why the hell would the RIAA raid these DJs? Miscommunication? Unfortunately, though, there is likely little or no evidence of such transactions ever happening, considering the underground nature of the mixtape industry.

Which brings me to another issue... How does this affect the artists? There is also little reliable evidence of mixtape sales, but there are plenty of allegations of mixtape DJs fudging figures so they can underpay the artist.

Who is going to win? Anyone?

DRM is Dead. Long Live DRM.

There is a great article over on the Freedom to Tinker blog about how many of the major labels are getting ready to release their music DRM-free.

Itself a response to a NYTimes article, The Freedom to Tinker guys astutely point out two very important things. Firstly, a huge fuss is being made over allowing MP3s to be 'unrestricted' (i.e. sans DRM). In reality, MP3s (and almost every other creative work) are protected by copyright law, the granddaddy-of-them all in terms of content security (theoretically speaking). This use of questionable rhetoric in turn leads to the second interesting point: in the minds of record labels copyright law was simply not enough - a more closed system (DRM) was a necessity to thwart 'untrustworthy' consumers.

As such, why would you sell anyone something they can't be trusted with? Record companies have continually told everyone (consumers and artists alike) that consumers can't be trusted with 'unrestricted' MP3s, that the few who purchase such 'unrestricted' files will simply distribute them freely. As a result, a culture surrounding the 'untrustworthy consumer' (whether correct or not) has been perpetuated by the very companies that now will attempt to sell 'unrestricted files' to 'untrustworthy users'. Getting consumers to be trustworthy will be doubly hard than it should be and getting artists to feel comfortable selling unprotected MP3s will be equally as difficult.

Corporate short-sightedness again rears its ugly head. Had the recording industry , in the words of the FTT folks, "embraced the Internet early and added MP3 sales to [their] already DRM-free CDA (Compact Disc Audio format) sales, they would not have reached this sad point. Now, they have to overcome history, their own pride, and years of their own rhetoric."