"It has been stated that much of the incentive for file-sharing is the prohibitive cost of CDs (the average teenager has to work 4 hours to afford one CD) and as such, the majority of file-sharing is best seen not as piracy, but as civil disobedience. Do you think if labels reduced prices more in accord with traditional profit margins that the issue of file-sharing would largely disappear?"

It is not that I am naive or idealistic enough to fool myself into believing that hundreds of thousands of computer-literate, music-loving teens were making some political statement against The Forces That Be when they were downloading music. What I am suggesting, however, is that file-sharing music would be a non-issue (or no more of an issue than 1980s cassette-sharing) if the cost of CDs were more in line with financial realities of the buyers. Yes, people would still trade music, "test-drive" new bands, make mix collections, and all the other things that the RIAA and their supporters find distasteful (although they likely did the same in their younger years). But they would likely also buy more music, as lower prices would enable them to make MORE choices rather than fewer choices.

Bear this in mind, please, and keep the words "civil disobedience" in mind, as you read the following.

I'd like to briefly cover some wide ground....

1) The RIAA lied to Congress and the media (and many an artist believe them) when they stated that record sales were down. This was a lie of omission, and revolved around the number of releases from RIAA-member labels as opposed to the number from the previous year(s). I point you HERE for details, but in summary, we can point out that when the RIAA testified in 2002 (using figures from 1992-2001) their sales had, as stated, dropped from a high (in 1999) of $14.6 billion to a 2001 figure of only $13.7 billion - a 4.1% decrease in sales (by dollar). What they did NOT tell anyone was that they had fewer releases in 2001 - to the tune of roughly 25% (or almost 12,000 offerings). What do these figures mean? They mean that sales (by dollar, the way the RIAA measures them) were actually UP per unit, from about $376,000 per release to over $500,000 per release.

2) The RIAA lied by omission (again) to Congress and the media when they stated that record sales were down. At best they should have said "RIAA-member labels have seen a decline in sales", as they do not include the sales of independent labels and DIY releases. Considering the huge success of everyone from underground techno labels to DIY artists like Ani Defranco and Muriel Anderson, their statement, in the kindest possible light, must be viewed as disingenuous. To further make the point, indie sales were, in fact, reported as on the rise by several industry reports (and reported on here at Tinfoil Music).

3) The RIAA lied to Congress and the media when they said sales were down DUE TO PIRACY. They have NO data (empirical or otherwise) to support such a claim. Furthermore, there is no way to determine how much of that music was high-quality, copyright-protected, "that's mine don't touch it" major label music, and how much was legal file-sharing of independent music...not to mention how much file-sharing was of music that is now out-of-print (leaving few options for fans).

4) The RIAA blames diminished sales on piracy despite the fact that many industry reports point to an artificial spike in sales for the late 1990s due to the "media exchange effect" (people buying CDs to replace older media like vinyl and cassettes).

5) The RIAA blames diminished sales on piracy despite the evidence that file-sharing may well act more as free advertising for their bands (especially in a strong economy) than as a alternative to purchasing music.

6) The RIAA blames diminished sales on piracy despite the fact that they RAISED CD prices in a weakening economy - something that goes against the tried & true methods of healthy retailing.

In essence, the RIAA has lied to Congress and the media - period. That Ashcroft has not responded with criminal charges is a disgrace, and that congressmen keep allowing media companies to buy legislation (DMCA, Sonny Bono Copyright Extention Act, etc.) is a disgrace. That artists and consumers buy into these lies is disappointing. Finally, that people seem so willing to allow this to happen is the biggest disgrace.

I urge everyone who fights for copyright reform to read Joe McGuire's "A Call For Unity" so that orgs might better work together to bring about healthy change. Let me say that again: Work together! I urge all reform orgs, artists, and Tinfoil Music readers to immediately sign the MRA Platform Petition and ask your family and friends to do the same (and ask them to do the same). I urge all said orgs to link to each other and encourage their readership to sign the petitions and join the actions of other orgs.

Finally, I call for not passive, but an active civil disobedience - download music, boycott the RIAA for a month, write your congressman (and e-mail him this story)...and anything else you can think to do (and share those ideas with us all!).

Civil disobedience. It worked for Gandhi, and it worked for King. Can it work for us? Depends on if you are willing to sweat a little; work a little; suffer a little.

"Those who profess to favor freedom, yet deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightening. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." - Frederick Douglass

I, for one, embrace this struggle. I'm ready for it and welcome it TODAY. How about you?

--

David M. McLean

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites

Add your comment

Your name:
Subject:
Comment:
Word verification:
	Post Preview

yvComment v.1.17.1