eclectica
2004-02-22, 08:28
The Recording Industry Association of America (http://www.riaa.com/) and the Motion Picture Association of America (http://www.mpaa.org/) are often thought of as twin evil forces by p2p filesharers, or analogously, twin towers of digital hubris to be brought down through p2p jihad. Let us not forget though, the Business Software Alliance (http://www.bsa.org/) from the group. The holy trinity of greed and the crusade against piracy would be incomplete without them.
Each of the three groups has a different reason to be opposed to p2p filesharing. For the RIAA, it is believed that they are losing sales from the sharing of music. That is a big misconception of theirs. They don't lose money, because people are often introduced to new music by way of p2p filesharing. The MPAA has an instinctual animosity towards p2p filesharing, but movie files are large and not as good quality when downloaded. Their clashing with the p2p community has mostly involved issues of copy protection of DVDs. Of the triumvirate, p2p filesharing is the least threatening to them. The RIAA's copy protection is meant to thwart internet piracy, while the MPAA's copy protection is meant to thwart piracy of bootleg videos on the streets. Finally, for the BSA, there really is a lot of money to be lost from p2p filesharing. Yet the most prominent enemy of p2p filesharing, based on the hype and the lawsuits, has been the RIAA.
Ultimately the interests of the BSA will end up being destroyed not by p2p filesharing, but by the open source movement.
I believe that the RIAA's biggest threat and loss of sales is not from p2p filesharing, but from DVDs. A DVD contains both visual and auditory stimulation and tends to be twice the length as a CD. Many consumers think they are getting a better deal from a DVD. I personally think that a CD is a better deal, because I play it many times. I rarely watch a movie more than once.
The RIAA will continue to lose until they are able to think outside of the box. They believe that the solution to their problems is to control music distributed through the internet. Instead they ought to focus more on trying to compete with the movie industry, to try to win over customers who can't decide between buying a CD or a DVD.
People and cultures fall into habits, and there is a collective inertia that a culture has. The music industry ought to foster the music loving element of culture and encourage people to choose music over the cheap thrills of movies. By doing so they would be investing in their own future as well. The music industry already has an intellectual advantage over the movie industry, because music is more artistic and abstract by nature. The mistake of the music industry has been to try to compete on the same level with the entertaining cheap thrills that the movie industry provides, rather than to promote talent and quality. If they are going to market cheap thrills, then they ought to expect people to buy DVDs instead of CDs.
Each of the three groups has a different reason to be opposed to p2p filesharing. For the RIAA, it is believed that they are losing sales from the sharing of music. That is a big misconception of theirs. They don't lose money, because people are often introduced to new music by way of p2p filesharing. The MPAA has an instinctual animosity towards p2p filesharing, but movie files are large and not as good quality when downloaded. Their clashing with the p2p community has mostly involved issues of copy protection of DVDs. Of the triumvirate, p2p filesharing is the least threatening to them. The RIAA's copy protection is meant to thwart internet piracy, while the MPAA's copy protection is meant to thwart piracy of bootleg videos on the streets. Finally, for the BSA, there really is a lot of money to be lost from p2p filesharing. Yet the most prominent enemy of p2p filesharing, based on the hype and the lawsuits, has been the RIAA.
Ultimately the interests of the BSA will end up being destroyed not by p2p filesharing, but by the open source movement.
I believe that the RIAA's biggest threat and loss of sales is not from p2p filesharing, but from DVDs. A DVD contains both visual and auditory stimulation and tends to be twice the length as a CD. Many consumers think they are getting a better deal from a DVD. I personally think that a CD is a better deal, because I play it many times. I rarely watch a movie more than once.
The RIAA will continue to lose until they are able to think outside of the box. They believe that the solution to their problems is to control music distributed through the internet. Instead they ought to focus more on trying to compete with the movie industry, to try to win over customers who can't decide between buying a CD or a DVD.
People and cultures fall into habits, and there is a collective inertia that a culture has. The music industry ought to foster the music loving element of culture and encourage people to choose music over the cheap thrills of movies. By doing so they would be investing in their own future as well. The music industry already has an intellectual advantage over the movie industry, because music is more artistic and abstract by nature. The mistake of the music industry has been to try to compete on the same level with the entertaining cheap thrills that the movie industry provides, rather than to promote talent and quality. If they are going to market cheap thrills, then they ought to expect people to buy DVDs instead of CDs.