For your second point, the short answer is: Kazaa was the site from which Tenenbaum shared his files.

What you quoted me on was a (kind of) tongue-in-cheek remark about how much easier it is to sue a college kid than a large company. The irony in that being that it will probably take a very long time for the RIAA to get that money. I’m not trying to divert the blame to another party and you are missing the point. The labels are suing their own customers because the customers got fed up with the status quo (remember this Tenenbaum thing started way back in ’03) of high CD prices and no added value compared to the current entertainment market. The industry refused (and is still very reluctant) to hand over any control to the consumer.

Had Tenenbaum counterfeited and sold thousands of physical objects, he wouldn’t be facing a fine, but rather jail time. To get off with a minimum fine by law, is lenient.

“Some folks would suggest that the penalty was handed to the wrong party. Let’s be honest: it’s probably easier to take a guy in his early 20s to court than take on the company that allowed him to do this in the first place.”

I am not sure which company you are talking about, but I am not sure why you think that a party who allows something to happen is more culpable than the person who actually does the action.

Cases like Tenenbaum’s are not exactly new. Remember Jesse Jordan? He was one of four students who ran a file-trading system in college. He settled for $12,000. It’s kind of funny, because if you go back and read about his case in places like http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0305/06/ltm.03.html , it’s not much different than the case going on now. *I don’t necessarily support Jordan, just using this as an example*

I must apologize for being crass, but to think that Joel Tenenbaum not only got what he deserved, but that the fine was LENIENT is shortsighted at best.

A hill that I have been willing to die on for the last several years – The industry must certainly change the way it does business. Fortunately it is, albeit very slowly.

David, I appreciate the conversation. We may disagree with the identity of the “enemy” and certain methods, but I hope you know that we are on the same side. Artists deserve proper compensation for their works. We all deserve to make a decent living with our craft. Our job is not only no less important than any other endeavor, but one may argue that it is essential to human culture.

The key, I believe, is to focus on the positive rather than the negative.

Let’s keep it up, brother!

A

Video games have an advantage in that the major ones can only be played on the manufacturer’s devices. So, it’s a closed system of distribution; I don’t think most people have the skills to create a pirate copy of Halo and make the PS3 think it’s legit.

Of course software is pirated, although I don’t think it’s in the lead. Also, software makes a great example of why people will still pirate stuff even when it’s sold at a reasonable price. http://thetrichordist.wordpress.com/2012/05/12/the-paradox-of-pirate-logic-music-versus-music-software-full-post/

As stated above, I completely reject the whole “industry has to learn” nonsense. Real bottom line: the music business has lost revenue, and there really are going to be great artists you’ll never hear because even small, nimble, very tech savvy labels are unable to support these artists. The whole P2P cliche is propaganda and has mostly worked for previously established artists. I know it all seems very attractive and fair and reasonable, but it simply hasn’t worked. And I believe it won’t.

As a man in the film industry, I’m sure you remember the time when the VHS tape was considered enemy #1 in the film industry. Industry giants like Jack Valenti attempted to block the sales of video recorders because they thought it would be the death of the film industry. Since then, the film industry has discovered that windowing their product is actually a good thing. Why D/L a movie from a P2P when you can go see it in IMAX 3D, and later get the DVD with all of the extra features and at a higher quality than the typical pirated movie? People are more than willing to not only pay for the theatrical experience, but also shell out the $25 or so for the Blue Ray.

The video game industry has it’s share of pirates as well. However, with video games, there is constantly something new being added. New platforms, new physics engines, extra content in collector’s editions, incentives for pre-ordering, games that are free-to-play with in-game content you can purchase at your convenience.

The computer software business has probably been pirated more than anybody else. Software companies keep food on their table by constantly updating their products. Pirated versions of certain software are usually behind the curve because of how often new stuff is being released. Now you have lots of free software available like Open Office and AVG. Consumers are then given incentives to purchase the “full” version of something or pay money to have additional features with their free software – and people are willing to pay for those features.

Bottom line: Big Music needs to find a way to make their customers get used to paying for music once again. It needs to be more convenient to pay for it rather than pirate it. Instead of seeing P2P file sharers as criminals, we need to view them as potential consumers. Let’s face it: they aren’t D/Ling music for free just because it’s free. There’s plenty of free stuff out there that folks won’t touch. The demand for music is huge and with growing mobile technology, the demand is higher every day. However, the record industry for far too long has been internally driven rather than market driven and it shows.

Not that this matters to much… but a personal side note :

What I like to do is focus on the success of guys like Joe Satriani who recently released his Live In Montreal DVD. It hit #3 on the Billboard DVD chart. Steve Vai had huge success with his “Sound Theories” and “Where The Wild Things Are” – yet you can view songs in their entirety on the internet (legally) without paying for it. I bought the DVDs because of the behind the scenes features and other DVD extras and, oh yeah, it looks and sounds better in my living room than it does on my computer speakers.

Tenenbaum and his lawyer Charles Nesson are not defending David against Goliath, although they would have us believe this. Nesson wants to make a name for himself, go to the Supreme Court, and overturn copyright law. Tenenbaum was not singled out by the RIAA for a beating to make an example of at all. He was a repeat offender who received warnings and minor fines, and he (possibly with encouragement by Nesson) decided to make himself the tip of a spear that would pierce the law itself. That’s a threat that goes way beyond downloading a bunch of songs, so you’re damn right the RIAA is going to play hardball. The $675k, by the way, had to be set by a jury, and it is at the low end of standard fines (about $22.5k/song) for the infractions that could have totaled about $4.5 million. People need to focus less on the number and more on what is actually being fought in the case. I support the effort of the RIAA because you and I, as individual artists, will never have the power to protect copyright from those who would kill it. You may think it is an outdated law in the age of the Internet, but neither anecdotal nor economic data supports this assertion.

With regard to the labels, those artists sold their rights to the labels in return for substantial compensation for their work ahead of profits. This is a typical investor/creator relationship that, for its myriad flaws, has historically made artists very good money and those who support them very solid livings. It doesn’t matter if the rights holder is you or the label to which you sold your rights. Breaking the value of that right of copy and distribution will, without question, damage the industries that have been among the most valuable in the U.S. economy. Bottom line: the music industry is worth about 50% of what it was worth about 15 years ago. Regardless of how any of us feels about big companies, a lot of middle-class jobs disappeared with that drop in revenue. Moreover, a small or mid-sized label (I know one that shares 50/50 with artists) will tell you that free is a price point that is threatening their businesses with extinction. They are literally telling great musicians to give up the idea of making a living from their craft.

I don’t buy the “people want to pay, but the industry has to learn” arguments. I know of no other transactions in which the market gets to use a license to steal as a bargaining chip in the fundamental supply and demand relationship. I’d like Mercedes to charge $5,000 for a new sedan but don’t expect they’re going to meet me half way on that one. If I had a way to force them to meet that price point, they’d be done making cars. Spread this dynamic across the entire industry, and every car will be a Yugo.