Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

RIAA Threatens ICANN Over Music-Themed gTLD Standards

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the same-old-song-and-dance dept.

Music 174

think_nix writes "A letter to ICANN (PDF) from Victoria Sheckler, Deputy General Counsel for the RIAA, demands modifications to the future implementation of the .music gTLD, threatening to 'escalate the issue' if certain concerns about 'wide scale copyright and trademark infringement' are not addressed by ICANN in compliance with the RIAA. 'Under the current proposed standard, we fear that we will have no realistic ability to object if a pirate chooses to hijack a music themed gTLD to enable wide scale copyright infringement of our works,' Sheckler said."

cancel ×

174 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

So conflicted (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34956256)

I'm completely conflicted about who to root for in this battle.

Re:So conflicted (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34956480)


I'm completely conflicted about who to root for in this battle.

They're both owned by The Man.

First hope the RIAA goes out of business because the poor millionaire Prima Donnas couldn't sell their homogenized crap.
Next, FUCK ICANN! Don't register domain names: use only IP addresses. Perhaps local host files if you're getting old and can't remember all those digits, especially with IPv6.

Finally, and this is the clincher, stream your own home-made music over teh intranets. Remember to use IP addresses only.

The Man and the motherfuckers from the RIAA and ICANN will be homeless whilst you give away music you make with spoons over the net!

Re:Not Register Domain (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957246)

How can you not register a domain name? Do you mean we'd have an army of sites which only exist as "26.54.25.142"? Wouldn't that be the grandpappy of all confusion?

"Aw damn, I typed 26.54.25.143"

Re:Not Register Domain (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957382)

Generally, the tinfoil hat makes it difficult to see, so you just kind of mash on the keyboard and assume you got to the site you were hoping for. If not, you blame the chip the CIA put in your brain.

Re:Not Register Domain (1)

Bai jie (653604) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957890)

"Aw damn, I typed 26.54.25.143"

And got porn.

Re:So conflicted (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957444)

what happens to clustered resources? 26.54.25.142 isn't your website. It is one server that may or may not host some or all of the content of your site at any given moment.

Re:So conflicted (1)

I8TheWorm (645702) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957912)

Screw that. What happens when IPv6 really comes into play? That'll be a fun little memorization game.

RIAA is still going? (5, Funny)

funkatron (912521) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956260)

According to their lies they should have gone bankrupt by now. Maybe this year they can finally fuck off?

Re:RIAA is still going? (1)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956618)

According to their lies they should have gone bankrupt by now.

Maybe they're just folding the numbers together and calling it the US national debt? It would explain a lot of things...

Re:RIAA is still going? (5, Insightful)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956724)

Lies is right. From TFA:

1. String Confusion. The sought after gTLD is "confusingly similar to an existing one, or one making its way through the application stage.
2. Legal Rights. The applied-gTLD somehow "infringes" on the rights of the protesting group.
3. Morality and Public Order. The proposed gTLD is "contrary to generally accepted legal norms of morality." One guesses that the gTLDs '.extortion' or '.kickstraydogs' would fall under this rubric.
4. Community Objection. "There is substantial opposition to the gTLD application from a significant portion of the community to which the gTLD string may be explicitly or implicitly targeted." See '.lawyerssuck' or '.justinbieberfansmustdie.'

  1. .music is close to .info? Who do these lying assholes think they're fooling?
  2. TFA pegged it. How in the world could it infringe on their rights? What rights, in fact? They act as if nobody but the RIAA is allowed to write, perform, or record music.
  3. "Legal norms of morality?" legal != moral, moral !=legal, immoral != illegal, illegal != immoral. There's nothing immoral about smoking marijuana, but its posession is against the law. There is little that is more immoral than adultery, yet it is legal in most jurisdictions.
  4. What community? Most musicians are not RIAA members, and in fact almost every musician I know personally hates the RIAA's guts.

And Jesus H. Christ, who is the RIAA to preach to anybody about morality? Satan himself has better morals.

Re:RIAA is still going? (2)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957016)

They act as if nobody but the RIAA is allowed to write, perform, or record music.

Woah woah woah WOAH woah. Hold on now, let's not say anything crazy.

Re:RIAA is still going? (1)

Curmudgeon420 (1092149) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957324)

They act as if nobody but the RIAA is allowed to write, perform, or record music.

Woah woah woah WOAH woah. Hold on now, let's not say anything crazy.

Whoa whoa whoa WHOA whoa. There, fixed that for ya.'

Re:RIAA is still going? (4, Informative)

robot256 (1635039) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957492)

I'm sorry, that sounds too much like a song, please have your payment ready when our lawyers come to sue you. ~ RIAA

Re:RIAA is still going? (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957782)

"Whoa whoa whoa WHOA whoa."

"What's new pussycat? Whoa whoa WHOA, whoa whoa."

There. Fixed that for both of ya.

Re:RIAA is still going? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957514)

And Jesus H. Christ, who is the RIAA to preach to anybody about morality? Satan himself has better morals.

There's a great Hunter S. Thompson quote* that says it best: "The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side."

* Note: I am aware that this is actually a misquote, with the original quote being about the TV business, and missing the last sentence, but I still like this version of the quote. Plus, it's been thrown around the web so much that it might as well be real. As Thompson also said (or did he?): "I don't know the percentage of the Internet that's valid, do you? Jesus, it's scary."

Re:RIAA is still going? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957822)

Did you not hear, Hell froze over last night with the setting of the release date for Duke Nukem Forever, Satan has now moved up to earth and is running the *IAA's.

Re:RIAA is still going? (2)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957898)

2. Legal Rights. The applied-gTLD somehow "infringes" on the rights of the protesting group.

See, that's it right there. They're claiming ownership of the word 'music'.

Re:RIAA is still going? (4, Informative)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956762)

Are you at all familiar with the accounting practices rampant in the recording and film industries?

They typically keep at least 3 sets of books - 1 for the royalty payments (which will invariably state that the actual content earned nothing so nobody with net royalties earns a dime), 1 for the tax collectors (which will invariably state that the company owes no taxes), and 1 for the stockholders (which will show the massive profits they're making). That the math has never added up hasn't stopped the very small number of big conglomerates so far.

Re:RIAA is still going? (3, Funny)

funkatron (912521) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956930)

Are you at all familiar with the accounting practices rampant in the recording and film industries?

No, if I was I would be doing them. Instead, I'm watching futurama and imitating bender by drinking and smoking a tasty cigar.

Re:RIAA is still going? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957762)

How do you drink a tasty cigar?

Re:RIAA is still going? (2)

Crudely_Indecent (739699) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957854)

On that note, Futurama Season 6 is out on DVD.

Re:RIAA is still going? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957976)

Paranoid much? Other than the royalty scams, the other options are used by every single company on the planet, if their CPAs are doing a proper job.

Re:RIAA is still going? (1, Insightful)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957062)

My theory regarding their "losses from piracy" has always been that they decide they should earn X billion dollars a year. Then they earn Y billion dollars during the year, where Y is less than X. Obviously, by RIAA-reasoning, piracy costs then (X - Y) billion dollars. Of course, they set X so high that there is no way they can attain it and they dismiss all other factors such as a bad economy, poor music selection, rise of indie titles, competition from other entertainment sources (e.g. video games, DVDs), etc. The one and ONLY reason for not reaching their randomly chosen, too-high-to-ever-reach X billion dollars a year goal is piracy!

Re:RIAA is still going? (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957778)

My theory is that they get a surveying agency to calculate approximatly how many music tracks are downloaded illegally during a year (Including people watching music videos on youtube, and regardless of if the music is RIAA-member-owned or not) and then multiply it by the retail value of a higher-priced CD.

Re:RIAA is still going? (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957846)

The only problem with that theory is that they keep making record profits (altough not necessarily on CDs). So how do they decide on X?

Re:RIAA is still going? (4, Funny)

funkatron (912521) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957516)

To the funny moderator: I meant it, you insensitive clod.

Re:RIAA is still going? (1)

clodney (778910) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957874)

Maybe they aren't lying as much as you assume - for the last 2 weeks, the #1 selling album has set new records for being the lowest selling #1 of all time.

More than anything I think it illustrates the demise of the album compared to single song sales, but the market is going down.

Space in a Parking Lot (5, Insightful)

NReitzel (77941) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956286)

Isn't this akin to the DEA informing a grocery store that they can't have a parking lot, because a lot of drug deals are taking place there at night?

Thanks! (4, Funny)

xMrFishx (1956084) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956356)

Oh hey thanks for your information about the parking lot, I used to buy my drugs at the chemist, where there was a limited selection. Now I can get the drugs I want from this source without the hassle of getting them through proper channels.

Re:Space in a Parking Lot (3, Interesting)

achilles777033 (1090811) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956484)

More like the Home Owner's Association, or the PTA, than the DEA, I would think.

Re:Space in a Parking Lot (1)

Quantus347 (1220456) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956620)

Im thinking more like a group of the girlscout mom's who sell cookies in the parking lot once a year, but ya...

Re:Space in a Parking Lot (2)

mysidia (191772) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956666)

Isn't this akin to the DEA informing a grocery store that they can't have a parking lot, because a lot of drug deals are taking place there at night?

No... at least the DEA is part of the government.

This is akin to the MADD threatening real estate developers that they cannot offer land for sale on a street named "Bar Street", without addressing certain concerns, or they will escalate (probably to a zoning authority), because there is a chance that some business developers might have bars built on the street, some of the bars built might have alcohol available for sale, there is a chance that some tenants of those bars could go there and be encouraged to imbibe, and some of them might try to take their alcohol with them on the road.

Re:Space in a Parking Lot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957748)

there is a chance that some tenants of those bars could go there and be encouraged to imbibe, and

No 'and' needed, MADD wants a return to prohibition, look at their recent track record if you have any doubts.

Re:Space in a Parking Lot (5, Insightful)

spun (1352) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956674)

Not really. I don't think the RIAA is concerned about piracy on .music gTLDs. They appear to be more concerned that they will not have as much control over domain names as they would like. They object to three specific things: "Ultra high standards for community objection," which means it will be more difficult for them to stop things they consider to be cybersquatting; "Lack of transparency" means they will not be able to easily figure out who owns what domain name, and who to sue; and "Malicious Conduct" which means that they suspect people might do things on the .music gTLD that they do on other parts of the Internet, like pirate music. They seem to want to force ICANN to be their unpaid police force, or to do their thinking for them and come up with a technical solution that protects their interests.

Basically, I believe RIAA wants to control anything remotely related to music. The idea of a huge new marketplace of independent music scares the crap out of them. I think they want ICANN to basically say, "The RIAA owns .music. If you want to put music of any sort on the Internet, talk to the RIAA." And I want to date supermodels, plural. Come on, RIAA, you are thinking too small. Take getting paid for doing nothing to the next step and force everyone with ears to pay a music tax directly to you. After all, if they have ears, they might hear some music without paying you for it, and we can't have that.

Re:Space in a Parking Lot (2)

vagabond_gr (762469) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956784)

Isn't this akin to the DEA informing a grocery store that they can't have a parking lot, because a lot of drug deals are taking place there at night?

Worse, it's akin to suing the yellow pages for potentially listing the grocery store (even though it's not even printed yet).

Re:Space in a Parking Lot (1)

zero.kalvin (1231372) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957218)

I wonder what happened to good 'ol "Go Fuck Yourself". Someone needs to relate this message to the RIAA and the MPAA.

God damn it RIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34956320)

It's just a name.

The infringers look for things that end in .torrent not in .music btw ;)

Re:God damn it RIAA (2)

countSudoku() (1047544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956422)

Let the babies have their bottle. No one is going to visit any of those lame .music sites. The more they tighten their grip, the more music will slip through their (fat) fingers.

use the fork luke (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956894)

use the fork ...

Re:God damn it RIAA (1)

bwintx (813768) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957402)

That's no bottle...

Stupid? (4, Insightful)

Nemyst (1383049) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956372)

You'd be pretty stupid to paint yourself in a corner like that, as a pirate. That's akin to the .xxx TLD that'd make porn sites way too easy to filter.

I don't think .music would be used for much pirating. Plus, even if it does, it would've happened WITHOUT it anyways... The RIAA is apparently trying to piss off everyone they can. I don't get it.

Re:Stupid? (4, Insightful)

MartinSchou (1360093) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956612)

Well, if ICANN had a sense of humour, they'd just refuse to register any music related domain names. Period. Nothing that could even remotely be associated with any of the RIAA companies, their subsidiaries, their artists or employees.

I mean - to avoid lawsuits.

Re:Stupid? (1)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956936)

Nice....

Re:Stupid? (4, Interesting)

plover (150551) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957180)

So ICANN should issue a .riaa gTLD, and give the RIAA the authority to be the regsitrar.

Then everyone business and and ISP on the planet could block .riaa resolution, keeping us safe from being subjected to lawsuits for infringing their rights by looking at their content.

Brilliant!

Re:Stupid? (1)

Crudely_Indecent (739699) | more than 3 years ago | (#34958064)

Certainly, you're not implying that anything remotely related to music be refused!

With a tld of ".music" everything becomes a music related domain.

Shitty (not related) becomes shitty.music (related)
Elevator (not related) becomes elevator.music (related)
Rock (not necessarily related) becomes rock.music (related)

I'd love to see ICANN tell them to f-off and immediately prevent registration of riaa.music as well as domains related to any artist represented by the RIAA.

Re:Stupid? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34956648)

That's akin to the .xxx TLD that'd make porn sites way too easy to filter.

As someone who's done business with porn sites, they're all about it. Porn sites want to be filtered by libraries, schools, parents, etc. because it lessens the hassle and negative image they have to deal with while not seriously effecting their business (very few people in any of those situations buy porn instead of looking at free stuff). Heck, most of them voluntarily add tags to help filtering programs know to filter them.

P.S. going to company mandated sexual harassment sensitivity training being done by an outside consultant is a riot when a number of the "rules" they tell us to follow would prevent us from doing work. The trainer eventually just blanked over, stopped taking questions, and read from her script pretending like no one had asked anything.

Re:Stupid? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34956776)

Please see note on "effect" versus "affect" below.

Re:Stupid? (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957946)

True for the majority of porn sites. But there is a portion, funded by ads, malware or scams, which just want to get as many viewers as possible. As these sites are more visible (They arn't afraid to use search engine manipulation, spam or indiscriminate advertising), they tend to get most of the attention.

Re:Stupid? (2)

jammer170 (895458) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956700)

Honestly, I don't think has to do with piracy at all (or at least very little). What the RIAA and associated organizations are worried about is a single identifier that can be used to find, promote, and distribute legal music that isn't under their complete control. As more and more artists are moving away from pursuing a record label contract, the RIAA has less power. If they have basically the right to knock any website off the domain they choose (in an effort to "protect the consumers from pirates" or whatever bullshit they claim), they maintain their power and business model.

Re:Stupid? (1)

future assassin (639396) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956720)

>The RIAA is apparently trying to piss off everyone they can. I don't get it.

Is it RIAA or their lawyers pushing this? Who stands to gain money atm.

Re:Stupid? (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957290)

Yes, the RIAA treats music like an ATM machine.

Re:Stupid? (1)

TheLink (130905) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956810)

Wouldn't a .xxx TLD be helpful for those looking for porn? Don't see how that would be like painting yourself into a corner.

Of course what happens to most such domains is they end up being link-spam sites.

Many years ago I personally proposed the reservation of .here for private local use, similar to the way the RFC1918 addresses are reserved. I thought it was a much better idea than the .biz and .info that were being proposed at the time (which were just "yet another .com" and hence added rather little value from a technical point of view).

In case anyone is unaware: .local is not a proper reserved/allocated TLD. Perhaps it should be reserved by ICANN since lots of people and companies (including Apple) are already using/abusing it. But it's the ICANN after all - they're incompetent and/or evil.

Re:Stupid? (1)

British (51765) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957676)

This is ICANN. They made/proposed TLDs nobody had any interest in, and refuse TLDS people wanted(.xxx for adult sites, etc) for no real reason. I'm starting to think it's just a front for selling more domain names. How is that .biz TLD workin' out for you?

Fuck Everyone, We're the RIAA (5, Funny)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956816)

The RIAA is apparently trying to piss off everyone they can. I don't get it.

Dear Everybody,

You're not us. So that means you're either a pirate or a pirate pretending to be a consumer. That includes ICANN. That includes the Vatican. That includes OPEC. That includes the United States Government.

You want to use the word "music?" We can assure you, only if you pay royalties to us and right now all we see is people profiting off of our artist's copyrighted works (i.e. all music) that we broke our backs locking down with crippling contracts.

Remember our motto: "If you're not us, you're against us."

No, that wasn't a typo. We're sick of making weak individuals our enemies -- it's time we pick on someone our own size.

Notes, scales, chords, percussion, etc. It's only a matter of time before we own those words and what they represent.

The RIAA

P.S. Resistance is futile.

Re:Fuck Everyone, We're the RIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957728)

P.S. Resistance is futile.

You're as dumb as a Borg!
Resistance is V/I how many times do I have to explain this?!

Follow the money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34956824)

Somebody is merely trying to justify their 7-figure salary. Like a career politician, they aren't interested in whether their plan "succeeds" or "fails" as much as whether it can be used to justify a bigger budget. As always, the more money you control, the bigger your perceived worth, and the more precedent you have to take it to the next level.

Re:Stupid? (1)

sorak (246725) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957342)

You don't think The Pirate Bay would have the balls to buy thepiratebay.music?

Re:Stupid? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957372)

I don't think .music would be used for much pirating.

Of course not. That's what .pirate is for.

Re:Stupid? (1)

drb226 (1938360) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957624)

The RIAA is apparently trying to piss off everyone they can

That actually sounds like a good infiltration strategy.
1) Infiltrate RIAA
2) Get them to do stuff that pisses everybody off
3) Rinse and repeat until RIAA is universally rejected by everyone

Instead of #1, you can just use inception, but only if you don't have freaky memories of a dead wife that will mess everything up.

Uhhh... (1)

slapout (93640) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956378)

What?

Re:Uhhh... (2)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956696)

Apparently the RIAA has a yearly summit to decide the most ungodly drop-stupid way they can think of to piss off the rest of the planet.

Their other idea (have agents walk around handing out random invoices to everyone they catch humming a tune in public) apparently never made it past the focus groups. Probably because everyone would tell them to fuck off or something...

Essentially (1)

MonsterTrimble (1205334) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956410)

The RIAA group wants to make it easier to block TLDs from being enacted by simply saying 'this effects us' without showing any actual proof.

Re:Essentially (3, Insightful)

McTickles (1812316) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956476)

effects = affects... know the difference people...

LIAAS (1)

xMrFishx (1956084) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956778)

The Language [IAA] defines the difference as $4M for incorrect usage of the English language. Please pay yesterday, thanks - LIAA.

Re:Essentially (2)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957486)

Good luck effecting that change...

(I swear I'm not trolling, that statement was grammatically correct!)

Re:Essentially (1)

Bob9113 (14996) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957908)

effects = affects... know the difference people...

The fact that most people don't know how to use those two words correctly in all situations is strongly (1:1) correlated to the fact that most people don't know how to use those two words correctly in all situations. If your comment included an explanation of the distinction that is so important to you, it might actually help remedy the problem. And in the process, you would be promoted from useless sanctimonious douchebag to useful sanctimonious douchebag.

Re:Essentially (1)

PhrostyMcByte (589271) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956832)

what the fuck does it matter if it affects them?

Using a gTLD "Responsibly" eh? (1)

decipher_saint (72686) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956414)

Is this "responsibly" as defined by the dictionary or by RIAA's cracked logic?

Responsible organizations like RIAA sue their customers, repeatedly, as a deterrent, against non-customers...

Why this one? (5, Insightful)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956424)

How exactly is any one TLD more or less capable of being used by pirates than any other?

Re:Why this one? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957202)

The associated music groups have shown themselves to be butt heads. A .music or .song or .mp3 top level domain can be used by anyone for any purpose, just like any other top level domain can be used for any purpose. Its up to the user of the site name what they do with the site. There haven't been, and there are no restrictions on what people do with their site. .com sites don't necessarily all belong to companies or commercial businesses. While its true that most .edu tld's are educational institutions, not all are, and there is no rule saying one way or the other. Since a TLD doesn't either allow nor prevent piracy (or anything else), the letter seems quite stupid and ill informed. It only appears that these groups are trying to 'demand' where they have no business 'demanding', 'order' where they have no business ordering, and 'controlling' something that isn't any of their business. If it were up to me, I would create .music TLD's as I would have created any other, and hand out sites as before. The music industry isn't the internet or computer industry. They can cheerfully go fuck off (oh, and I won't demand artists write certain songs or play only specific instruments, if I tried it, then I would start to look like the music industry).

Re:Why this one? (1)

surgen (1145449) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957432)

just like any other top level domain can be used for any purpose.

Might want to check your facts there. Good luck buying .gov and .mil domains for your own personal use.

While its true that most .edu tld's are educational institutions, not all are, and there is no rule saying one way or the other.

Except for the rules about it: http://net.educause.edu/edudomain/show_faq.asp?code=EDUELIGIBILITY [educause.edu]

Re:Why this one? (1)

Captain Spam (66120) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957552)

How exactly is any one TLD more or less capable of being used by pirates than any other?

Because it's about music, which, as they keep reminding us, was clearly entirely an invention of the RIAA.

RIAA sucks (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34956436)

Why can't all the crazy morons in the world who go on shooting sprees atleast shot the right people? EVERYONE in the RIAA would be a good start.

MAFIAA letter explained (1)

Edsj (1972476) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956450)

"Dear ICANN.
We think we should control the .music TLD and get all the money we can from it. Our lawyers think we can make a quick buck renting domains at this TLD at 80 cents an hour to anyone wishing to have a website to share some music that we might think we own. If we don't.... well, who cares.
This will surely help our fight against piracy.

Regards,
MAFIAA "

simple solution: .riaa ghetto (4, Interesting)

bugi (8479) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956486)

There's an easy solution to this. Give them their own .riaa gtld and let them ghettoize it however they like.

That can be the official newspeak channel for angry out of touch distributors, and the rest of us can get on with appreciating music for its aesthetic value.

Re:simple solution: .riaa ghetto (1)

TheL0ser (1955440) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956606)

There's an easy solution to this. Give them their own .riaa gtld and let them ghettoize it however they like.

Please let this happen. So many people would block it so fast it would probably make a sonic boom or three.

Re:simple solution: .riaa ghetto (1)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956710)

It'd be easier to blackhole, anyway. Think we can talk 'em into it?

Re:simple solution: .riaa ghetto (1)

dAzED1 (33635) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957680)

yeah, great policy - give a tld to every whining, annoying group out there.

My understaning (2)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956496)

The RIAA wants special considerations for rights holders that no other business or perons on the Internet has today and wants to limit criticisms under the guise of morality. For example if I want to register JustinBieber.sucksballs the RIAA wants to make it easier to challenge it because of the use of "JustinBieber" and they don't like the suffix for morality reasons. The first part of the objection may be partially valid, however in the context of parody and criticism, it should be allowable. The second part they object because of community standards like morality. I have no doubt though that they would object to JustinBieber.terriblemusician and JustinBieber.isnotverygood. The best counter case I have to this is when someone registered the Did Glen Beck rape and murder a young girl in 1990 case. The courts allowed the domain and shot down all of Glen Beck's objections.

Re:My understaning (4, Informative)

careysub (976506) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957168)

The RIAA wants special considerations for rights holders that no other business or perons on the Internet has today and wants to limit criticisms under the guise of morality...

17 USC 1008, Section 1004 imposes a 3% tax on blank music CDs since 1998, even though making copies of music for your own use is legal, and the music industry did just fine with no tax on analog media supporting them. Once they got a taste of having a special tax in which the proceeds flow directly to private for-profit businesses they have been eager to extend this "business model."

You may have seen proposals being floated by the RIAA for some sort of Internet tax to replace their "lost" revenues (compared to their all-time high banner year of 1999). This idea does not seem to have gotten traction yet, but the more Congress resembles the U.S. Chamber of Commerce the more likely they are to dust this one off again.

Yessiree - protecting private intellectual property is best done through tax-supported corporate welfare.

Re:special (3, Funny)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957396)

Someone has gotta find a way to pit the RIAA against the TSA.

Re:special (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957590)

You kidding? That's Aliens Vs Predator territory right there.

"Whoever wins, we lose"

What about domain squatting (3, Interesting)

kabloom (755503) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956546)

I'm surprised that the RIAA is more worried about piracy than having their domains bought up by speculators who will charge them millions of dollars for the names of their bands.

Re:What about domain squatting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957018)

I'm surprised that the RIAA is more worried about piracy than having their domains bought up by speculators who will charge them millions of dollars for the names of their bands.

It won't happen because it has been ruled quite a few times that someone's brand is protected even from domain squatters - IOW, you can get a domain based on a named brand and the owners of that brand can get you to cease - it's been going on a several years now and I'm surprised that you don't know about it.

No I will not cite - I'll leave that up to folks who'll benefit from the karama to do that for me.

From the mouths of? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34956572)

And this is from the very same people who have hidden away and make great classical music performances hard to listen to except on internet radio? Assholes. Not that I do not understand copyrights and the implications of what is going. Gone are the days when you could just go out and get a recording take it to your friends house and spin it. This is how great music was sold. I would show another music lover how great a performance was and then they would find that a copy of the recording was gifted to them by their wife or relative because they really want to add the record to their collection. What is their thinking? They have killed the classical music industry and strangled great organizations like symphony orchestras and specialized groups like Music Antiqua Koln! Die you bastards!

nometo (1)

McTickles (1812316) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956596)

linti eikejjrlzlljrjoaja
rjaejrjarueiduivhsoi jsdofosjfeojfee !
jfeifje !

WOOOSH!
riaa!

Re:nometo (1)

beschra (1424727) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957322)

Ok, I'll bite. The only parts I get are "WOOOSH" and "riaa". What about the rest?

this is news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34956748)

I didn't know the RIAA is music. I thought they were just the people who cheat and steal from music.

WOW ! "in compliance with the RIAA" (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956812)

When did compliance with RIAA become a law, regulation, or directive ?

Who says RIAA owns "music?" (1)

mlwmohawk (801821) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956918)

There are lots and lots of bands and musicians that don't sign with RIAA members. (i.e. MOST of them)
There are lots of music categories that have nothing to do with RIAA.

These people piss me off.

Re:Who says RIAA owns "music?" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957088)

But the RIAA 'think' that they represent everyone who makes music even those who they clearly don't.
That my friends is IMHO the root of the problem.
If more artists came out and publicly told the RIAA to get lost/drop dead/(Add appropriate phrase here) we might see their real fan base go up in smoke.

Sadly, this won't happen.
Sigh

RIAA master plan to regain control of their music (1)

rcb1974 (654474) | more than 3 years ago | (#34956990)

  1. 1. RIAA gets full control the .music TLD
  2. 2. RIAA then starts requiring companies who legally distribute RIAA music online, to do it only through a *.music domain.
  3. 3. RIAA can then be sure that any RIAA music offered for download from any other TLD (such as .com, .net, etc) is being distributed illegally.
  4. 4. RIAA can now more easily identify people who share their music in a way they don't like. You know those people -- there are millions of them and they're just as bad as those Somalis who attack ships with AKs and RPGs.
  5. 5. RIAA Profits!

OUR works? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957022)

Under the current proposed standard, we fear that we will have no realistic ability to object if a pirate chooses to hijack a music themed gTLD to enable wide scale copyright infringement of our works

Ah, so really they're worried about people copying their ridiculous lawsuits, since that's the only thing the RIAA has ever produced. The RIAA's works does not include music. The artists' works include music, but not the RIAA's.

If they really are concerned about music piracy, then whoever decided that the .music gTLD is a piracy aid needs to go take a basic computer class and learn a thing or two about the internet. It's about as ridiculous as me writing the word "music" on my router in sharpie and therefore my entire home network is contributing to music piracy. Get a brain, RIAA.

I've had enough of this legal stupidity (1)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957304)

Music industry as a whole can go screw themselves, I'm not giving them any more money and not paying attention to them until some measure of sanity is restored and I can listen to music without a legal Damocles sword dangling above our collective heads.

Too late (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34957306)

.cd, .fm, .am. .es (itun.es), .tv, .mu (music), .gg (as in ogg files), and probably more.

Revelence in the information age. (1)

devlynh (857521) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957428)

When did the internet revolve around what the RIAA thought. It seems that their ultimate concern is that they will become irrevelant and end up with the buggy whip manufacturers. The world they were created in no longer exists and they are fighting to keep it around. What will happen if the RIAA is not around... nothing at all. Good bye, don't let the door hit you on the way out.

just move the RIAA to their own TLD (1)

swschrad (312009) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957504)

namely the .ratfukr domain

not my job (2)

v1 (525388) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957548)

Under the current proposed standard, we fear that we will have no realistic ability to object if a pirate chooses to hijack a music themed gTLD to enable wide scale copyright infringement of our works

They appear to be under the mistaken assumption (dilution) that it's the world's job to make sure they obtain maximum profits.

You know what? Fine... (1)

Xserv (909355) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957602)

So be it. Give it to the greedy bastards. And the moment ICANN signs over the rights to the .music TLD to them, I want all, and I mean ALL, music groups and music related sites OFF of my ever valuable and largely becoming scarce .com TLDs.

They have no "rights" to them. You can't own the word "music". Period. I'm a musician and have been for the last 24 years. I own only what I create and that's all I've got. Nothing more, nothing less.

F 'em.

"escalate the issue" (1)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | more than 3 years ago | (#34957792)

This cracks me up. Basically she thinks she sounds imposing by saying those words (they're so generic that they allow the reader to fill in his worst imaginings, she imagines).

There's no escalation and nothing the RIAA can do in this instance. Empty threats.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?