Facebook Plunges Again
Tumblr 101: Tips And Tricks To Get Started
An open response to an IFPI board member
Our editorializing seems to have ruffled the feathers of an IFPI executive who is now threatening action, not against us, but against another blog who simply linked to our piece. In an effort to quell what Paul Birch of Revolver Records calls, "malicious statements and blogs on the internet" he has threatened Andrew Dubber of the blog New Music Strategies with veiled words about lawsuits, and by directly threatening to file a formal complaint against him with the University of Central England, Dubber's employer. All because in the course of discussion on the topic Andrew Dubber's blog follows exclusively he felt it relevant to link to something we wrote.
Shame on you Mr. Birch.
We may not like hot dogs Mr. Birch. However, when we see someone eating one we don't attempt to knock it out of his hand, we simply continue to eat our hamburger and remind ourselves that the hot dog eater is free to hold whatever belief, preference or opinion he wishes. If the juicy hamburger of opinion we attempted to share with our readers offends you, you have every right to say so. Threatening the career of another human being who shares our distaste for hot dogs is unethical and wrong. Just as it would be if we slapped the hot dog from your hand.
The defendant in this case has every right to file counterclaim against your sister organization, the RIAA and we have every right to offer opinion on that counterclaim. Andrew Dubber has every right to link to our opinion in the course of conversation. These are all luxuries we enjoy and obligations we undertake as members of an advanced and free society. You also have the legal right to complain to anyone about whatever you deem worthy of complaint; Ethically and professionally however, you've planted yourself on rather shaky ground.
Let me make perfectly clear; We'd do it again. I've personally followed the RIAA/BPI/IFPI's litigious nonsense for years, writing many widely read and well respected articles on the subject. I've never, nor has anyone who writes for this blog, made any threatening statements -- as Paul Birch claims -- or given more than opinion from the perspective of a music fan, computer expert and hobby-grade legal analyst. RIAA lawsuits are a subject we feel passionate about; Not because we support widespread and rampant piracy but because we are dedicated to individuals like ourselves who increasingly come under attack from corporate interests, and the erosion of fair use rights. We firmly believe that the RIAA's legal tactics are unfair, advantageous and despicable, and we know quite well the stories of lives which have been torn apart financially and, emotionally by their incorrectly aimed "scattergun" approach to legal action.
If Paul Birch would like to discuss how he feels we've been wrong -- how we've "singled out RIAA management" for malicious statements -- we welcome his inquiry. I'd personally love to discuss the concept of malice with a high-ranking executive in the music business.
Paul, you can personally reach me, Grant Robertson, the Lead Blogger of Download Squad by email or through our comment system. I look forward to your reply.
Update: Andrew Dubber's blog has gone off-line for reasons which are still unclear. Jon Newton of P2Pnet has republished the email exchange between Dubber and Birch in full, Thanks Jon!
Comments
27
Subscribe to commentsDeanEJun 17th 2007 10:05PM
Amazing read. I haven't followed all of the non-sense the RIAA has been doing that much but I have come across and article every now and then. Blogs and articles like these make me want to get more involved in the subject.
Thanks,
Dean
KirstyJun 17th 2007 5:23PM
Great article, I loved the hamburger/hot dog analogy.
If the RIAA is not the enemy then they need to stop acting like the enemy! When they stop acting like gangsters and bullies then I might respect them.
I don't steal music and music being available online has actually encouraged me to buy more music over the last few years. However, because CD's are so stupidly expensive I buy a lot of my music second hand. Unfortunately this means that the musicians still don't see a single penny. If the record companies want to increase sales they might want to consider reducing their exorbitant prices.
As a visual artist, I have every sympathy with musicians trying to make a living from their work. Personally I'd like to see more musicians putting up donation buttons on their sites, I'd be happy to give if I knew that it was going directly to them rather than the record companies, who, let's not forget, pay their actual artists a pittance.
Pie PantsJun 18th 2007 7:24PM
"By definition those who steal are theives. It is unfortunate that copyright protections weren't enough to keep people honorable. Now we are witnessing the beginning of the end of how music is developed, distributed, and marketed. Those that don't get this are either defending the status quo or otherwise failing to adapt in productive ways."
Most of the RIAA-related hate is regarding cases like Tanya Andersen, where they believe they can get away with suing people who have never actually downloaded music in the first place.
Bob HalloranJun 18th 2007 4:20PM
Re: comment #20 by pediculide, the writer appears to be very sympathetic to the industry, and derogatory to the community.
"It is unfortunate that copyright protections weren't enough to keep people honorable." - We don't object to the industry protecting their material, we object to the methods used. When the technique used amounts to "we accuse you, settle or be dragged into an expensive lawsuit", and applied to pensioners without a computer, is used with no more attachment to the accused than a dynamic IP address changed daily by the ISP, etc., it comes off as little more than an extortion scheme by the industry to scare off people rather than a true effort to address piracy.
"It is the unfortunate victim of technology and mob rule." - ITunes just moved its billionth song recently; if the industry had been more interested in this, rather than (a) remaining preoccupied with moving shiny discs in plastic boxes and (b) working more on long-term talent development vs. pumping up the latest pop-tart one-hit wonders, their business prospects might seem less dire.
No one is guaranteed a business; the recording industry is failing to adapt to technology changes, and attempting by lawsuit to stuff the genie back into the bottle rather than step up and change their model to reflect reality. I *don't* condone illicit copying, I *do* think the industry has their collective head in the sand and has been paying the price for some years now.
Ray BeckermanJun 18th 2007 12:42PM
I truly doubt that pediculide is a song writer.
timJun 18th 2007 1:45PM
I absolutely _hate_ seeing the RIAA and its ilk post (mis)information that says 'file sharing is illegal', or worse, 'downloading music is illegal'. Those are INCORRECT statements! In America, the Copyright Act of the United States very specifically allows for any copyrighted items for purposes of criticism, comparitive journalism, reviews, and parody. It also allows for, very specifically, the making of backup copies of the media for 'archival purposes'. The actual ACT OF DOWNLOADING is NOT illegal, REGARDLESS of what you are downloading!!! The burden is on the user who downloads, and what they do with the content. If any laws are broken, it is by what the user does with the content after they download, NOT at the point of downloding it!
Good grief.
We also have a Very Bad law amendment that unfortunately got passed called the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA). In part, it makes bypassing ANY copy protection device or code illegal, except under some very restrictive situations (such as university algorithm analysis). The problem is that this law is in direct opposition to the Copyright Act in that it now makes it impossible to create an archival backup copy of purchased media because everything is now copy-protected! OOPS. It is bad law and needs to be amended and/or thrown away...but the RIAA has too many of our legislators in their deep pockets. :( /sad
AndresJul 9th 2007 9:07PM
My comment was for #20.