Like viruses were allegedly created by virus protection companies, I can't help but think that the RIAA will launch some sort of authorised music promo site/store that labels can't help but sign up with. Perhaps the majors are creating a monster that they won't be able to keep on the leash.

Gizmo

@dOk: The RIAA won't be in the dark forever. They'll discover one day that it's just not enough to shut down the channels with which people expose themselves to music. They'll eventually have to target the source of the piracy: the music itself.

First they shut down the channels. When that fails, shut down the source. Kill all music production, and piracy drops to zero. The universe implodes, and the Guild of Calamitous Intent (RIAA) will finally reach nirvana.

Kaiser-Machead's WALL-E fetish

Let the music industry crash and burn. Maybe something good will come out of the ashes. Like uniqueness and creativity.

EdgesRazor

As i understand it, most artists get the vast majority (i heard 80%+, but have no confirmation) of their revenue from tours. y'know whose tours I'm more likely to go to? guys whose music i can find.

The only good thing about the RIAA is the day they choke and die. I'm allowed to say that without being disemvoweled if they've sued me, right?

Themindtaker

@OMG! Ponies!

So you want them to focus on stopping people from making music now huh? Being that Logic Pro is for music creation.

dOk

Well I say let the RIAA completely destroy the music industry...
That's totally fine with me because we need a new improved music industry anyway...

out with the old... in with the new

dOk

@LiquidGravity: Well, if you're talking about mega-artists like Madonna, Justin Timberlake, and Metallica, they like the RIAA because they make enough money to get a benefit from the RIAA. Smaller artists tend to hate RIAA though.

If RIAA was smarter, they'd stop trying to shut down P2P technology and aim their sights at Logic Pro.

OMG! Ponies!

goddamn, i hadn't even heard of this website, and the concept sounds awesome. if it somehow ends up reopening, i'm definitely checking it out

those RIAA bastards

SleepingMartyr

Yeah hate the RIAA!

IVPPITER

Someone should organize a worldwide boycott of ALL music until they disband the RIAA. It would easy to do. Just ask everyone to stop buying music all together until the music labels kill RIAA. It won't take very long since record labels really need money.

Noobs-R-Us

Time to steal some more music.

MikeSWelch

Man I hate the RIAA. They must be the least intelligent bunch of inbred mfrs around. Don't they know the world would like them to just curl up and die? Find me a music artist who says they like the RIAA and I'll point out a RIAA paid liar.

Note: Shouldn't the tape at least be going to the other spool?

LiquidGravity

riaa = dicks

godwhacker

I actually have not bought any music because of the RIAA too.

That and the fact that I have found out how to remove the DRM from Ruckus's (RIAA approved free music system for colleges) music.

SgtToastie

And once again, the RIAA does its job to ensure that no one anywhere gets excited about music.

Mission Accomplished. I haven't bought an album of any kind in 2 or 3 years because it really is too much work to discover new music. And I sure as shit ain't going to listen to the radio.

The Cooler

I was about to make another blatant statement about the RIAA and 1952, but really, there is nothing more to say on the matter. Einstein was right. The universe is finite.

Hvedhrungr

There was a short message on the muxtape blog. It won't be indefinite.

[www.muxtape.tumblr.com]

cloudcavalier

Who the hell runs the RIAA? Can they stick their heads any further up their asses?

Dirk

A spokesperson from RIAA was quoted as saying:

"We have finished conducted a series of studies that shows that music that is enjoyed and listened to has a greater risk of piracy. We at RIAA are concerned about the unauthorized use of our artists' copyrighted work and will continue to do everything in our power to make sure that no one ever listens to that work.

Because RIAA is concerned for its members' welfare, we will keep erecting barriers between its members and their fans, who we believe are nothing more than a rabbelous pack of thieves. We are currently stepping up efforts in making music enjoyment more expensive, more invasive, and more cumbersome."

OMG! Ponies!

It's a good thing all these sites that let me experiment with listening to new artists are getting closed down. Now without any exposure to artists I might normally have never heard about, I will save even more money per year on music. Thanks RIAA!

Saboth

1. Close site where I stream songs which I frequently make purchases based on (pandora/muxtape).
2....
3. Profit? No. Sorry, our princess is in another castle.

StartingAces

FUCK ME. This sucks. I actually - for the first time in several months - **BOUGHT** a couple of albums after discovering new tunes on Muxtape. How shortsighted can these guys be?

peteH

ughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

dorylomorphs

@mechfluff: Yes.

However, would you spend $10 on an album you've never heard by a band you'd never heard of? I wouldn't.

But I've also downloaded albums I've never heard by bands I've never heard of, and upon listening, become a fan of the bands and bought not only the album I'd already downloaded, but other albums as well.

Napster was an alternative to radio in a time when ClearChannel had locked down radio. It was a place to experiment and discover new music.

I consider myself lucky enough to have spent time and lawn-mowing money during my teenage years at my local record shop - Joe's Record Paradise. The guys there knew music and cared about it. They charged a little more than Tower but they knew their stuff and they knew me. I could ask them if an album was good and they'd tell me why it was or wasn't.

Buying an album shouldn't be like playing three-card monte. The consumer should have a reasonable opportunity to determine whether an album is good. Best Buy can't tell you that. Billboard charts can't tell you that. Even iTunes reviews can't tell you that. Your ears can.

What RIAA is fighting against is an informed consumer.

OMG! Ponies!

Never give up on music! Support your local artist and go see them at shows. That is where they make their profit. Buy their CD at the show. Most of the time small bands pay out of pocket to make those CDs so the money goes right back to them.

Husar

@dOk: That's not what I'm saying at all and I know what Logic Pro is for.

RIAA is on the verge of obsolescence. It used to be that artists would sign a recording contract with a label which would pay for the studio time to make the album, along with the distribution and advertising costs. Often, the album would not generate enough revenue for the artist to fully pay off the debt although, after enough albums, the artists would see a little revenue off of album sales.

Logic Pro enables people to mix music at a professional level with consumer grade computers. That negates (to some extent) the need for studio time. Additionally, P2P has decentralized the distribution chain. Music is information which can be sent out quickly and easily over the internet. That is the point of experiments like "In Rainbows" and "The Slip" (by NIN). Being able to sell an album directly to the consumer removes RIAA from the equation - which means that RIAA gets no money.

Napster (and Morpheus) were the first part of the equation. They made optimal use of burgeoning broadband subscribership and revolutionized the distribution chain.

iTunes is actually RIAA's wet dream. It is a walled garden with a central choke point for payment. You can't get anything for free. Directly opposite are sites like Mininova and TPB which are open and have no choke points.

RIAA is still fighting the last war - the war against P2P. It lost that war badly. Napster taught everyone not to keep centralized servers. Morpheus refined the lesson.

My point (tongue in cheek, as per my MO) was that RIAA is still trying to win a battle it lost a long time ago with weapons that are obsolete on a global front. C&D letters are scary - unless you run a website in a country without a treaty. Just look at TPB, which sloughs C&D letters off like water off of a duck's back.

Look at RIAA's other tactics: payola to ensure that RIAA artists' music - not independent music - gets on the air; lowering royalty payments for online music; and often just plain stiffing artists on the royalties due.

RIAA is in decline.

OMG! Ponies!

@OMG! Ponies!: ummm... "enjoyed and listened to". Isn't that what would also make you want to BUY music? This doesn't make any sense at all.

Fail.

mechfluff

I'm to the point where I'm like F@ck music. I won't buy it, I'll steal it and if I like it I'll go see the guys in concert. The RIAA is like a semi-legal mob, I wouldn't be surprised if they are out roaming dorm rooms right now threating to break some college kids legs if he streams music online. It's such a shame that I have to buy music the music first before listening to so that the RIAA can support their drug habbits. WE ALL KNOW YOU CORPORATE HEADS DO COKE.

GHETTO.CHiLD

@fusedinertia: I think we've come to a point when even the RIAA is saying "FUCK OUR ORGANIZATION........who wants to sue little Suzie Meyers in Glendale?"

Kaiser-Machead's WALL-E fetish

Thanks to the RIAA I have bought no more than 3 CD's since 2003. I think that more and more artists and fans will rebel against them and they will go away.
This is a counter-intuitive and broken system and damnit if I didn't just put Pandora on my iPod!

hardtoremember

Can't believe no one has said it yet so here goes the obligatory comment for RIAA posts= "FUCK THE RIAA!" In keeping with their time honored tradition, they keep on throwing gasoline at their burning house!

fusedinertia

I enjoyed Audiogalaxy for the same reason I enjoy Pandora. It took bands I liked and gave me similar bands/songs. The only CDs I've bought in the last 3-4 years I bought from the band at a show or (recently) because I found them on Pandora. The only local radio station that plays music I haven't heard of is the college station, and they rarely come on and tell me what band I just heard.

In short, I agree with nearly everybody in this comment thread. When Pandora and Muxtape go under, I stop buying music. Unless I'm handing the bass player money, that is.

ninjasuperspy

You sure that RIAA is on the artists' side?

Petitions Judges to Lower Artist Royalties
[gear.ign.com]

Universal Music Sued for Cheating Music Artists Out of Royalties
[www.zeropaid.com]

RIAA Keeps Settlement Money, Artists May Sue
[www.nypost.com]

Payola pact could boost airplay for indie music
[articles.latimes.com]

OMG! Ponies!

Article about royalties comparing radio and file sharing. This article says radio stations do not pay royalties. So why should internet radio stations have to pay?

What about FM stations that broadcast on the internet?

[arstechnica.com]

Navin R Johnson

@OMG! Ponies!: Consumers view the RIAA as the symbol for all that is evil in the music business. But that's not what NIN or artists generally rebel against. From their perspective, it's the record label itself that is the bad guy. Consumers don't make the distinction between the labels and their agent (the RIAA), but the artists' angst tends to be with the indentured servitude and micromanagement of label relationships. /further explanation.

frigg

@OMG! Ponies!

well I wasn't being all that serious myself.... but don't give those bastards any ideas... ok? ... lol

dOk

Can someone tell me if FM radio stations pay the RIAA to play music? If not, how is that different from Pandora or sites like that?

My local radio station plays the songs people request, then makes money from selling add space. Pandora plays song SIMILAR to those I request and makes money from selling ad space.

Sounds the same to me.

RIAA in 5 years...

Hey you! Yeah you! Are you whistling a copyrighted song? Pay up buddy!

Navin R Johnson

@OMG! Ponies!: I'm not sure your description of the RIAA is accurate. Know the bogeyman you wish to defeat! Incidentally, bringing down royalties on the internet is very much in the artists' interests. Royalty rates are all over the map. Terrestrial radio royalties are lower than internet radio royalties, which makes no sense, is an unlevel playing field, and prohibitively expensive for internet radio. It's Clear Channel and their lobbyists who are to blame.

frigg

RIAA == FACHISTS!!

madlogik

@Themindtaker: Artists that get the vast majority of their money from tours don't prefer it that way, it's just that fans steal their recorded music so they have no choice. That's like saying, if computers were easy to steal, computer makers would be happy to produce them as a way to sell t-shirts and mugs.

Of course artists want you to buy their albums and not steal them. A recording is a product, not a poster. They cost money to make, and artists prefer to get paid for what they do than sell matches in Times Square.

Who says: "This is what I spend my blood sweat tears and money producing, and yes, please, steal it and don't pay me for it. Much better!"

The only real reason people pirate is because it's easy. If you could download an iPhone as easy as you could pirate a tune, there'd be a million "good reason" for stealing iPhones: patent law sucks... reception is spotty... FUC the FCC... I bought a "Think Different" t-shirt... etc.

That said, the music industry could not be acting more stupid. If the RIAA had any brains, they would partner with Pandora and SUPPORT IT. They would use industry profits to create more outlets like Pandora to get as much music to as many ears as possible. Pandora, Muxtape, is the poster that invites users to pay at the pump.

frigg

RIAA's Board of Directors:
[www.riaa.com]

Nearly 1/5 is from Sony alone. RIAA is predominantly run by the Big Four. So your distinction appears academic only.

OMG! Ponies!

@frigg: What you said the first time that is...

I understand the second post.

Navin R Johnson

@OMG! Ponies!: The conflicts (and there are many more than those) are between the artists and their labels, not between the artists and the RIAA.

frigg

@frigg: And I tend to agree with the small to mid-size acts that are in contractual relationships that they can never pay off with album sales alone that it is a form of indentured servitude.

And when labels game the system by not paying royalties to artists, it's hard to be on their side. Maybe it's because I'm a sucker for the underdog but I usually root against the party with the antitrust exemption.

OMG! Ponies!

@frigg: What your saying doesn't make sense. Please detail the difference between a recording label and a trade group that represents that recording label and other recording labels.

They are one in the same essentially.

That's like saying "I have no problem with Joe, I just hate Joe's lawyer because his lawyer is suing me".

Navin R Johnson

@Navin R Johnson: Radio stations do not pay the RIAA. You don't pay the RIAA. The record labels pay the RIAA to represent them.

Radio stations pay ASCAP and BMI. Because technology is progressing faster than the music industry's ability to deal with it, royalty rates are set higher for internet than terrestrial radio. Which is stupid.

frigg

@Navin R Johnson: I'm probably not the best person to give the difference between the label and the trade organization that represents them (OMG! Ponies! could probably do a better job), but basically, EVERYTHING is the label. The label has the contracts with the artists, supports their recordings, makes all the decisions about how the music is distributed and sold, is who the customers pay (when they pay), and in turn pays the artists or screws them over.

The RIAA is like a lawyer (a team of lawyers, actually) hired by a huge corporation (the music labels) with the task of going after pirates. Therefore, the RIAA has become the symbol for consumer wrath, and consumers often confuse the RIAA with the labels who've created it. But the RIAA is actually much more limited than people think, and only does what the labels ask.

Artists like NIN who deal directly with their fans are interested in bypassing the label, which takes a large cut from their profits, and offers less and less for that cut. Bypassing the label is more about cutting out hoards of staff, lawyers, secretaries, rents, systems in which established artists subsidize unestablished artists, executive salaries, unfair contracts, traditional distribution, and other vestiges of the traditional music business -- all of which cost money and which the artist pays for (and needs less and less).

An artist who deals directly with the public can charge less for an album because the album price doesn't also have to support the overhead of running a large record label. Most artists also prefer to sell less albums, but sell directly to customers, and in turn get a larger percentage of profits.

However, as even Trent Reznor has blogged, it costs money to make an album and pisses him off when fans don't pay for it (if asked to). If an album costs $100,000 to make, and only generates $20,000 in legal sales, but millions of people have pirated it, how can you make the next one? If the "Dark Night" was largely pirated, it wouldn't exist, because the movie has to reimburse its expenses (and profits provide incentive for the next blockbuster.)

Popular music in the 20th century took off after systems were put in place to enable musicians to profit from their work. Before that, musicians were little more than servants, barely able to profit from their work. Organizations like ASCAP and BMI were formed by musician members to get royalties from other businesses (like radio and clubs) that profited from their members' music. Copyright laws were passed because the ability to profit from creative work gives incentive to produce new creative work, which benefits everyone.

The labels are a mess. And the RIAA is a mess. But the fundamental principal is one everyone agrees on -- if you like a musician, and their work has value, they should get paid for their music so they can keep producing it. Otherwise, if their music is not worth paying for, then not only must they do something else, they should do something else.

What I think will eventually happen, whether we like it or not, is smart filters will be installed in internet nodes to monitor the traffic of copyrighted material. An internet tax will collect a pool of money (much the way ASCAP and BMI collect license fees from radio stations, stores, and other places), and then that pool will be distributed based on how much of a percentage an individual artist's music flows through the internet. At that point, the RIAA will slink back to being an obscure office of cubicled lawyers, and when customers get mad at paying for music, they will get mad at Comcast, as usual, since music will be at a surcharge on their Comcast bill.

frigg

@frigg: Obviously, on this point, I think we will have to resign ourselves to the fact that we move in different circles. Your note that bypassing the label is cuts out hoards of staff, lawyers, secretaries, rents, and subsidies for unestablished artists, reminded me of this horrible New Yorker magazine article which lauded how the super-rich ain't so bad.

[nymag.com]

I've downloaded "The Slip" and "In Rainbows" both and paid $10 for each of them, more as a statement than anything. I don't know if I'm the exception or part of the majority, but more often than not, music I download from certain "Bays" I wind up paying for.

As far as the distinction between RIAA and its constituent labels - well that's the trick now, isn't it? It wears so many hats, from lobbying group to consortium to spokesman. That's in large part because of its board makeup.

An analog is the old "Trial Lawyer Association" conundrum. The NYC Trial Lawyer's Association purports to represent all trial lawyers in New York City. This includes personal injury lawyers - both plaintiff and defense. The NYCTLA gives a significant amount of money to various judges' election campaigns. It sounds innocuous until you look at the board which is comprised overwhelmingly of the senior members of the plaintiffs' attorneys' firms.

Can you separate a representative from the client when the client makes up the representative?

OMG! Ponies!

wow. this is garbage. this site was amazing, and i thought they beat out the RIAA by providing links to actually purchase the songs.

karp2381

Im old enough (child of the sixties) to remember when it WAS OK to record on a tape from the radio and most people exchanged tapes and lent records to each other and WE BOUGHT MUSIC! A LOT OF IT!
I haven't bought a CD in years mainly because of DRM and the RIAA.
I have had an ipod since the 2nd gen came out and buy music online BUT I will not buy DRM laded music.
Pandora, Musicovery, Muxtape & many others keep me buying music so if the RIAA and the Copyright Royalty board shut these sites down then I (and i suspect a lot) of people will substantially slow down on buying music!
They (RIAA) will be responsible for driving a lot of people back to illegally downloading again!

lunasdude

You realize that RIAA lawyers are usually "unhirable". Even lawyers would diss their own kind because their work for RIAA. I dont want to name names but some of the most prestigious law firms in NYC, Boston & Chicago would not hire a slimeball from RIAA.

RIAA does not think busines because it is run by lawyers - not HBS / Yale / Wharton grads who think business.

RIAA has nothing to do with consumers because they think consumers are bad. They have a very narrow policy mindedness approach to resolving issues - not strategic or logical. Again - that is because these folks are lawyers. Just like I told my HR rep that I need to take 2 weeks off for a medical emergency - her retarded response was "you need to co--ordinate some paper work with me and I will see if that is possible". To that I just walked out and said goodbye to the company. The hiring manager to to counter offer me to come back & the HR rep got transfered. Lessons learnt for those smart enough tomake the analogy.

RIAA is not on the decline but stupid little white kids in love in a NJ suburb still buy $25 CD's from stores. The record labels run RIAA. The RIAA CEO is also the biggest contributor to political parties . . . fyi!

JJ910

@OMG! Ponies!: That article is a good analogy for the economy of a major label. As the majors crumble under the weight of that economy, another analogy would be "Ozymandias." Not that I read poetry or anything.

frigg

Continuation of purchasing less music due to the RIAA's interaction with the listeners environment. I used to purchase a new album nearly every single week of a band I had heard either from an online streaming site or music I may, or may not have illegally downloaded. Now I purchase no music unless I am at a concert I chose to go to and purchase the cd from the bands themselves.

basicvisual

I sent a letter to pandora after yesterday's article and suggested they open a store where I can buy the music I discover on their site, through them. They replied that free, ad supported internet radio is far from dead, and they were not giving up. I hope they're right.

Synik103

@frigg: Thank you.

OMG! Ponies!

"STOP ENJOYING THE REASON FOR OUR EXISTENCE!"

-RIAA Spokesperson

justhesh