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!

Recording Industry's Unexpected Benefit from P2P

Cliff posted more than 10 years ago | from the having-their-cake-and-eating-it-too dept.

Music 335

Matthew Schultheis writes: "Yahoo / AP is reporting that the record industry is using the files traded on Kazza et al. to track where music is popular. It turns out that they even pay for this information. 'It's the most vast and scalable sample audience that the world has ever seen'" Now if they could only use this data to somehow put out better music...

cancel ×

335 comments

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

/.'ers expected to benefit from first post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499649)

Did I or didn't I?

Re:/.'ers expected to benefit from first post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499783)

Calling All Trolls !!

Are you a troll ?
Do you like making fun of BSD Zealots on IRC ?

irc.squeaknet.net #beowulf

In other news (4, Funny)

BlackCobra43 (596714) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499651)

Razor-sharp irony kills 3, wounds 25.

Re:In other news (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499678)

MOD THIS THE FUCK UP

Uh hu... (1, Funny)

guamman (527778) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499652)

You already know what I'm going to say so I don't really need to post it. (The Irony)

Re:Uh hu... (1)

Selfbain (624722) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499685)

You sound like the Oracle.

Re:Uh hu... (1)

Maserati (8679) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499890)

Sadly, in this case there's no question that you would have made the same reply if "I" hadn't posted at all. But you would have had a better shot at first post.

So there.

Eh? (4, Insightful)

DeadHateMachine (665866) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499653)

So they are sueing us for downloading but yet useing the stats of our downloads? Sounds hypocritical to me.. This really goes to show you that corperations and selfish organizations will stop at nothing to make a profit.

Re:Eh? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499754)

Eh? That is what corporations are supposed to do.

Re:Eh? (2, Insightful)

pvt_medic (715692) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499760)

and just remember all the money from the lawsuits go to help the hurting artist right... oh no wait it goes into their pockets. I love those ad campaings the MPAA and RIAA have about how it hurts the working man, because i know that they are all benefiting from the legal action being taken.

Re:Eh? (3, Insightful)

paulthomas (685756) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499773)

You make a good point about corporate hypocrisy and morality... On the other hand you totally discredit yourself with your conclusion:

You make it sound like selfishness is not a virtue. What drives the world? Certainly not solidarity.

I agree that the RIAA uses underhanded, evil tactics to this end; I do not condone their actions. In fact, I'm boycotting the RIAA and only buying from indie labels or direct from the artists. (I just bought the new Hot Hot Heat album... 8/10 stars for reminding me of the Clash)

-Paul

Re:Eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499823)

Well, theyre just trying to make lemonade out of lemons... yeah thats it.

Re:Eh? (3, Insightful)

illuminata (668963) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499829)

God dammit, we have yet another bleeding heart anti-corporate post.

Instead of crying about how every single company wants to exploit the consumers, why not just hold each one accountable for their own actions? People need to quit acting like anybody with money is dying to fuck them over. Hold each group accountable for their own actions instead of making broad generalizations.

Re:Eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499903)

For the love of God, MOD THIS UP!

Re:Eh? (1)

tambo (310170) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499868)

I'm hardly an RIAA advocate (quite the opposite - check my posting history), but this doesn't seem hypocritical at all. It seems like a good use of resources by the RIAA.

Why should someone be criticized for taking something good away from a condition that they're fighting? The medical profession has been fighting HIV for two decades - and yet we've learned a ton about viruses in the process. In America's fight against terrorism, we've learned a lot by examining how terrorists target our security processes and filter money. Gleaning valuable information during a struggle against something you perceive as bad is a very valuable skill.

I sincerely wish the RIAA (and the MPAA) would recognize the pointlessness of their struggle against P2P networks. Maybe this is a straw that will help break the back of that sorry business decision. (I'm not holding my breath, of course.)

- David Stein

Re:Eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499873)

Just like they tax "music" CD-R disks because people will copy music CDs on to them - yet sue people because they're copying music CDs on to CD-R blanks.

The top dog in many industries - music, movies - are a bunch of hypocritical rich old people who don't give a shit about anything other than how much money they get paid. And then they get laws passed to make their scams nice and legal.

Re:Eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499875)

Eh. The goatse.cx [goatse.cx] lawyer [goatse.cx] has informed us [nero-online.org] that we need a warning [nero-online.org] ! So.. if you are under the age of 18 [nero-online.org] or find this photograph [tubgirl.com] offensive, please don't look at it. Thank you!

Re:Eh? (1)

Narphorium (667794) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499881)

I also find it pretty hypocritical that even though they obviously value the opinions of these music 'thieves' they still try to put them down as horrible people who are purposely trying to destroy musicians lives.
Come on guys! Either you reward us for our music opinions or you prove why we're criminals, but you can't have it both ways.

Who do they pay? (1, Redundant)

penguinrenegade (651460) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499655)

They certainly aren't paying the users that do the filesharing! So how exactly is this fair?

I suppose... (0, Redundant)

The Jonas (623192) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499735)

I suppose it's fair because the filesharers aren't paying them either? I still disagree with their double standard of suing/using the data.

hmm... (5, Funny)

Hi_2k (567317) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499657)

We could abuse this: Everyone, start sharing plenty of Polka, 80's pop, and Barney. Now lets talk about targeted marketing!

Re:hmm... (1)

penguinrenegade (651460) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499704)

I second this motion! Lawrence Welk ought to be the #1 download from now on! If the RIAA sues people for this, but yet they try to PROFIT from it, that's the most hypocritical thing I've seen!

Re:hmm... (1)

silentbozo (542534) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499730)

Hey! I LIKE Lawrence Welk! We need more polka people! (this post is only half joking)

Re:hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499771)

eat shit and die now

Re:hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499825)

yeah dude, totally. since you don't like polka, nobody should.

Re:hmm... (1)

Arker (91948) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499863)

Hey! I LIKE Lawrence Welk! We need more polka people! (this post is only half joking)

NPR actually did a story awhile back on an album done by doing exactly what all the study groups said people didn't like... it had accordians, banjos, a polka beat, bass voices I think... it actually sounded kind of cool.

Whereas going the opposite route gets us... millions of tenth generations zeppelin clones (I like zeppelin, just not the endless hordes of imitators with no soul) millions of tenth generation madonna clones (OK, back when I was 14 she was pretty damn cute, but she was never a musical genius, and britney spears kissing her is a nice clip, but no reason to buy either of their albums) etc. etc. ad infinitum.

So, now that I think of it, simply doing the exact opposite of what marketing says is far from the worst possible plan.

Re:hmm... (1)

burns210 (572621) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499859)

someone hack together a quick bot to auto download some of that stuff... heck, lets do weekly themes... or daily. what if there was a 500% increase of disco music on monday, but only monday(and every monday for 2 months?) tuesday could be gangsta rap. wed could be, i duno, techno.

Heh, why not, if you download, and then delete at 12:01 the next day, who cares? and it would screw the numbers up bad!

Better music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499659)

I think "Hey Ya!" by Outkast is one of the best songs I've ever heard in my life. Your tastes may be different though.

Re:Better music? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499732)

I think "Hey Ya!" by Outkast is one of the
best songs I've ever heard in my life.
Hi! Sorry to be the Spelling Nazi, but I think you misspelled "overplayed." Just a friendly reminder that you might want to have a look at your dictionary file. :)

Re:Better music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499763)

I love it when they play it. I'd listen to a station that played it 24/7 if I could.

Re:Better music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499796)

have fun [93xmemphis.com] they'd play it 24/8 if they could

cucaracha (1)

ambienceman (721763) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499660)

The RIAA is like a roach. You try killing it, but it never dies

Ironic... (4, Insightful)

danielrm26 (567852) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499661)

So they treat it like it's a child porn network in their PR statements and then turn around and find a way to make money off it.

That's big business for you.

Re:Ironic... (2, Funny)

danielrm26 (567852) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499677)

Evidently the concept of irony is not lost on most /.ers. I have seen like 5 posts that look identical to mine in the last minute. :)

Re:Ironic... (1)

DeadHateMachine (665866) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499692)

It's nothing surpriseing when you look at the source of this irony. I mean, do you really think they'd miss an opourtunity to get some information out of you?

This is why we have Avril Lavingne... (1, Flamebait)

Denyer (717613) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499762)

...sex sells, even when it's underage. I wish I were kidding.

Re:This is why we have Avril Lavingne... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499870)

Avril Lavigne isn't underage, douche-nuts.

Re:Ironic... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499764)

So they treat it like it's a child porn network in their PR statements and then turn around and find a way to make money off it.
That's just the beginning!

At this very moment, the RIAA is busy compiling statistics from KaZaA about what types of child porn are popular where. Rumor has it they're going to be using the data to determine how boy and girl bands should be dressed on their CD covers in various markets, to maximize CD sales to perverts.

adsf (-1, Troll)

devphaeton (695736) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499662)

hypocrite retards.

http://d.revinc.org/fuck.cgi

You mean... (5, Insightful)

Fnkmaster (89084) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499663)

P2P is just like radio, only the people actually listen to music they _like_ instead of shit that the stations are payed to pimp out as top 40? Fucking amazing. These guys are geniuses.

Re:You mean... (5, Insightful)

paulthomas (685756) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499793)

Oddly enough it serves as a mere extension of corporate radio's long arm. How do you discover new music on P2P? Geeks may know about things like iRate Radio, but your average P2P user is going to download the trash that the radio tells them to like. And next, listen to this new Madonna/Britney smash hit! -Paul

What?! (1)

dukeluke (712001) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499666)

We're being sued for dling the music - yet, at the same time - they're making profits from the research!?

IRONIC!

hmmm.... (5, Informative)

Smitty825 (114634) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499670)

Where have we seen this [slashdot.org] before?

Re:hmmm.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499907)

If it's been at least 12 hours, it's okay to post a dupe.

Their arguments are stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499671)

Beyond a shadow of a doubt I buy more music now that I am able to download MP3's. Their methods are antiquated. That is the problem. I bought a Depeche Mode CD because I had recently downloaded a bunch of songs recently. Get over it.

Re:Their arguments are stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499747)

go shit in your underoos, jackass

Benefitting from a crime... (5, Interesting)

SUB7IME (604466) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499672)

I have absolutely no legal background (that statement goes way beyond IANAL), but I'm sort of thinking that benefitting from a crime must be illegal. If the RIAA considers filetrading (of their copyrighted files) to be illegal, and the legal system agrees, then nobody should be using that data to then profit.

(Just as we do not, for ethical reasons, use information that the Nazis gleaned from their experimentation on the Jews in World War II. Clearly the magnitude is nowhere near the same, but the underlying ethical principle is similar.)

Unclean hands, or something like that.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499699)

..though as I recall, it works the opposite way. The accuser has to be guilty of an *actual* crime in order to have their case thrown out for this reason.

For example, if RIAA was cracking peoples' computers, deploying worms and viruses, etc. in order to locate communist filesharers, then they tried to sue those people, they would be guilty of "unclean hands" since they committed a crime in the process of discovering the infringements.

IANAL, but hopefully someone around here is and can clear this up under the guise of "this is not legal advice" .. :)

Re:Benefitting from a crime... (2, Informative)

jonblaze (140753) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499701)

I have absolutely no legal background (that statement goes way beyond IANAL), but I'm sort of thinking that benefitting from a crime must be illegal.

Usually, the perpetrator cannot benefit from his own crime. Thus, if an heir apparent kills his intestate parent, slayer statutes will often prevent the killer from receiving his parent's estate.

Re:Benefitting from a crime... (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499788)

researched this, have you?

Re:Benefitting from a crime... (4, Insightful)

DarkSarin (651985) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499750)

You are mistaken in one thing though--we DO use the information the nazis gleaned from their experimentation. Sorry to bust your bubble, but they made vast advances in the medical fields with their very unethical methods that would take us much longer today.

DON'T get me wrong, though. I AM IN NO WAY ADVOCATING, CONDONING OR APPROVING OF, what the nazis did, their methods, or of utilizing such procedures. It is one of the most dispicable acts in the history of mankind. Nevertheless, it is a fact that society uses the information they obtained through these methods.

This is not an uncommon situation. In psychology there are a LOT of classic expirements that would not be performed now due to ethical concerns. That in NO WAY limits the usefulness of that information or the fact that is has been used as the basis for a lot of theoretical framework. An example would be the researcher at John Hopkins Medical Center who conditioned a young child to be very phobic of anything that was white and fluffy. Such experiments are not ethical, but much of what we know about phobias and treating them is a result of his research.

Flame me if you wish, but we DO use information gathered in an unethical manner frequently--as long as it is regarded as accurate, which the data gathered by the nazis is. They were, if nothing else good can be said, very methodical in their research.

Once again, I DO NOT CONDONE WHAT THEY DID.

Re:Benefitting from a crime... (3, Funny)

Saeger (456549) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499777)

DON'T get me wrong, though. I AM IN NO WAY ADVOCATING, CONDONING OR APPROVING OF, what the nazis did ... Once again, I DO NOT CONDONE WHAT THEY DID.

anti-semite!

--

Re:Benefitting from a crime... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499835)

alas, that's what the JDL, ADL, and all those other jew-groups do if you don't heil israel and denounce every single last fucking thing the nazi's ever did.

volkswagens are EVIL!

Re:Benefitting from a crime... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499759)

Just as we do not, for ethical reasons, use information that the Nazis gleaned from their experimentation on the Jews in World War II.

Really. I think you should read up on Operation Paperclip [wikipedia.org] . Science/Information is still science/information no matter ( or perhaps in spite ) of whoever uncovers it. At least the government is wise enough to understand this.

Re:Benefitting from a crime... (1)

SUB7IME (604466) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499855)

Thanks for the rebuff; I now know something new. I just had assumed that, based on our oft-means-based legal system, we would avoid that information due to the nature of its source.

It is always good to learn.

Re:Benefitting from a crime... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499877)

who cares where it came from, we have it, why let it go to waste?

oh that's right, because the jews bitch about EVERYTHING.

The nazis found a cure for cancer!!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499787)

It's true! I've just found it in their records! We could save millions of lives if it wasn't so evil and wrong to use the research!

Re:Benefitting from a crime... (1)

Saeger (456549) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499798)

You can get a good idea of what media's popular by scrolling down this list of BitTorrents [suprnova.org] . Most of the time it's predictable what most people are drawn to (NEW and SHINY and MAINSTREAM!), but sometimes you'd be suprised what floats to the top.

--

Re:Benefitting from a crime... (2)

MacJedi (173) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499815)

Not true: Nazi hypothermia tables [jlaw.com]

Re:Benefitting from a crime... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499849)

Wow, a fair and impartial look at the issue from Baruch C. Cohen.

Oy vey.

Almost (1)

Raul654 (453029) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499896)

The legal system does have rules that a person cannot benefit from his crime. That does NOT prevent others from benefitting, thought. Just look at Vincent Bugliosi, prosecutor of the mansom family. He made his reputation and a LOT of $ off of the murders. But he didn't commit them, so to our legal system, that's ok.

Maybe a smart lawyer could so something with this. (2, Insightful)

FatSean (18753) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499686)

I mean...profiting from illegal actions, right?

Re:Maybe a smart lawyer could so something with th (1)

pvt_medic (715692) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499782)

well i guess the issue would be is that they have to prove that the RIAA invested money into things such as KAZAA which they tried to shut down. Then you could have some fun.

Why doesn't an enterprising label..... (4, Interesting)

ShatteredDream (636520) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499691)

work on creating a community site where bands can pay $5-$10 a business quarter to be listed with samples that can be streamed, that connects the bands to venues for say..... 5% of the proceeds and that lets users post comments about the band and rate their music? Then said label gets out of the old business of being a content producer and a service company for musicians providing them everything from merchandising to recording studios to instruments to music software? Basically become a service/product Walmart for musicians and fans as opposed to the current model of milking bands for records.

Re:Why doesn't an enterprising label..... (3, Informative)

femto (459605) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499729)

Don't you mean the Internet Underground Music Archive [iuma.com] ? (since 1993)

Optimistic Aren't You? (5, Insightful)

femto (459605) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499695)

> Now if they could only use this data to somehow put out better music...

Naah. They'll use it to reduce the quality of the music down to the 'most efficient level', whereby the quality of the music is just above the level at which it stops selling.

Re:Optimistic Aren't You? (1)

BlackGriffen (521856) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499869)

I so wish I could mod you up.

Brilliant! That's exactly what they cram in to these execs heads in econ classes.

BlackGriffen

Who is really the optimist here... (1)

orthancstone (665890) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499874)

Reduce the quality of music? My good man/woman, what gave you the idea that they are currently producing a standard of music that is greater than or equal to the 'most efficient level'? I'm shocked by such a notion :O.

If RIAA music is soooo bad.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499697)

...why is it the only thing people want to pirate? According to Slashdot logic, if the music is bad, so no one would want it even for free. There's only two assumptions then, according to Slashdot.

1) People like bad music.

2) People are stupid.

Of course, the typical Slashbot could never think that people may just like RIAA music and not care what some geeks think. Their elitist ego could never allow this concept.

Re:If RIAA music is soooo bad.... (2, Insightful)

Exiler (589908) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499865)

If you haven't found out already that the masses are both stupid and like bad music you must be almost as clueless as the RIAA...

Better Music? Hah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499708)

"Now if they could only use this data to somehow put out better music..."

Have you ever *looked* at what's commonly shared on p2p networks? The crap! For every host sharing Rush, there's at least 100 sharing insipid boy bands, Creed, Nickleback, POD, 50 Cent, and all the rest of the stuff you already hear too much of on the radio. If anything, this is going to lead to *worse* music being released.

Re:Better Music? Hah! (1)

nate nice (672391) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499751)

"For every host sharing Rush, there's at least 100..."

Are you implying that Rush is good music? Or even music for that matter?

Re:Better Music? Hah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499804)

Are you implying that Rush is good music? Or even music for that matter?

Right. I sudder at thinking what you DO call music...

Re:Better Music? Hah! (1)

orthancstone (665890) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499891)

I shutter to think that you two fools insult a band that had one of the greatest drummers of all time in it...apparently quality musicians aren't important to music today...

Re:Better Music? Hah! (0, Offtopic)

nate nice (672391) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499899)

I enjoy music which has taste, thought and doesn't try and be a calculated mess of obnoxious, cluttered, boring drool. If you want to break your bad addiction to music created for people who "miss the point" then check something like ESG, Wire, Talking Heads, The Clean, Young Marble Giants, Chris Clark, Muziq, Seefeel or even Devo and/or Berlin...yes, Berlin. Any of the artists I have listed have more integrity and intellect in an 8000 bit sample of any of their music than Rush could ever even accidentally come up with by some fluke of writing so much bad music that eventually an accidental good song came to together,... maybe. Good luck listing to crap and believing it's any better than the piss you mentioned that is played on the radio.

Re:Better Music? Hah! (1)

psykocrime (61037) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499897)

Rush sucks. Find somebody sharing some Fog, Unholy Ghost, 137, The Accursed, Dreamscapes of the Perverse, etc., and you'll be onto something worthwhile...

Of course RIAA is going to use this data... (1)

jlleblanc (582587) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499709)

...to think otherwise would be foolish. They know that most people won't even be aware it's going on, and that aside from the /. crowd, nobody will make any noise about it.

-Joe

Kazza? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499711)

Be careful how you spell it, Kazza [kazza.com] is a recording industry frontend where you fill a form with your name and e-mail address. You probably mean Kazaa [kazaa.com] .

All the more reason... (0)

CelticWhisper (601755) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499712)

In my opinion, this is all the more reason to boycott their products. They're obviously benefiting from what we're doing, and yet showing no signs of gratitude for what basically amounts to a service we're providing them. Yes, I know it's of questionable morality to download music, I know some consider it stealing, but...is it any better for them to go and sue 12-year-olds, then turn around and use the statistics from what people are downloading for their own ends? If for no other reason, I'd boycott them for the hypocrisy that they're displaying. Just this slashbot's $0.02

I just thought about this.. (1)

DeadHateMachine (665866) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499715)

What if they leaked news that they were watching the downloads to see what people were downloading, just so people would stop.. out of spite? It would seem like a really good idea, seeing as how many people have stoped buying cds from the RIAA. What ever they touch, dies it appears.

Glitch in the Matrix (3, Funny)

Gyan (6853) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499718)


Goto's should be avoided in programming. So far, it has gotten this story posted 4-5 times already within the last few months.

Yo, to all of you Alanis' out there... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499722)

Stop telling us how ironic this is. It's not. It's just fsckin' sad.

This is a dupe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499726)

This is a dupe of the same information from so many weeks ago I can't even be bothered to search for it.

Re:This is a dupe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499799)

I remember it also.

On another note, I hope this produces more music that I'll be willing to steal.

I want to believe... (1)

Lodragandraoidh (639696) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499728)

I want to believe these CEOs and lawyers were once human beings.

Unfortunately, it all started going downhill for them when their temper tantrums brought Mommy and Daddy running to slacken their every discomfort. The rest, as they say, is history...

Re:I want to believe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499908)

I want to believe these CEOs and lawyers were once human beings.

I don't. If they were that says an awful lot about human nature.

Treachery. (0, Redundant)

Agent R (684654) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499785)

First they scrape up as much marketing information they can get from you, then they sue you.

RIAA: "Hi. We caught you stealing our music. But our market research shows that you will be more than willing to give us a blank check. Thank you for your selection."

They spent 4 years... (3, Insightful)

thumbtack (445103) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499789)

trying to prove that P2P had no substantial no infringing use. Case closed.

it's really not that hypocritical (4, Insightful)

nudicle (652327) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499795)

Guys, I'm on the anti-riaa, etc boat with you guys but I don't think it's that hypocritical. The music industry currently finds itself in a world in which there's massive p2p going on. If it can keep the control it once had (eg win the legal war or develop some effective technical self-help), well, then it sees that as the best. So we have the lawsuits and the DRM attempts.

But then there's also the first part of the above sentence -- the world as it is now features p2p and music sharing. Even if this isn't the world as they want it, they need to figure out how to exploit it as best they can. Hence, makethe most of (from their perspective) a bad situation, and mine p2p for some useful data.

They're trying to maximize their profits. If there's money to be made scouring p2p data then they'll buy the research, but just because they are scavenging some benefit out of it doesn't make it hypocritical for them to want it to go away .. it just makes them pragmatic.

Read this carefully... (4, Insightful)

Entropy248 (588290) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499814)

"When someone plops down 99 cents to buy a single, that shows a higher level of interest than just getting it for free," Welt said.

As any 1st year marketing major could tell you, this data will not be as useful as one might imagine. Knowing who wants a product (in this case, a CD) in no way relates to knowing who is willing to pay for a product. Some consumers want Ferraris; not all of them will buy one (for reasons of Price). Without a clear way of associating user names with demographic or psychographic data, this will not even help to more clearly define the target audience for an artist. All this data represents is the number of computer literate people who are actively sharing a song; this may or may not be related to whether they actually enjoy the song; this may or may not be related to whether they would/could pay for the song; this may or may not be related to the fake files that are being posted on KaZaa (that song's popular? Shove a couple thousand fakes online; discourage lots of people). Move along people, nothing to see here...

What the fuck? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499817)

What kind of editor comment is "Now if they could only use this data to somehow put out better music..."??

Yes, that's right, you read it on Slashdot -- EVERY SINGLE CD the RIAA puts out is shit!

Why can't we mod the editors down for trolling in THEIR posts? Sigh.

So far the music industry.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499818)

So far the music industry has found some very popular music files, such as:

Britney_Exposed_2pen_fist_squirt.mpg.mp3
2on1_b kgrnd_Everclear.mpeg.mp3

Thank you, I'm here everynight.

deleting music? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7499837)

I thought everyone was *deleting* their music?!?!?

isn't it ironic? (2, Insightful)

professorhojo (686761) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499846)

You hear it all the time - and, most of the time, actually no, it isn't. Hypocritical and/or cynical, more likely.

prof. hojo

legal implications? (1)

Suppafly (179830) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499847)

It would seem like the RIAA using data collected from file sharing systems to do something other than sue filesharer's would have some kind of legal implication.. giving tacit approval for filesharing, etc.

Where do I send my bill? (3, Funny)

psoriac (81188) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499856)

I've downloaded dozens of songs today alone... to whom do I address my bill for services rendered?

well... (1)

EspressoFreak (237002) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499876)

"It wouldn't be very smart if we weren't looking at what they're doing."

Took them long enough to figure that one out...

Piracy is not the reason. (4, Insightful)

rice_burners_suck (243660) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499888)

Well, as you can see, the file trading networks aren't all bad-news to the poor artists, like the RIAA would have you believe. But then, some people are aware of the real reason that the RIAA wants to kill filesharing, and it's not piracy.

What? Not piracy? Then why in the world would they want to kill a system that is so beneficial to them?

Because of a problem that they consider bigger than piracy: The growing number of independant artists, many of whom are becoming increasingly popular. Yes, that's right folks. The RIAA doesn't want to protect its poor artists from the piracy that is putting them in the poorhouse. On the contrary, the RIAA is the one putting its poor artists in the poorhouse. No, no, no, folks. The RIAA is doing this to take business away from the artists that the RIAA is incapable of putting in the poorhouse, because it is incapable of stealing their money, because they didn't sign their soul over to the RIAA.

That, my friends, is why the RIAA wants to kill filesharing.

An exisiting irony ... (1)

value_added (719364) | more than 10 years ago | (#7499894)

is that even without the Profit! factor, there's a promotional aspect to Free Stuff(TM).

The concept is hardly new, I suppose, but worth remembering. Maybe it's time that a company like Adobe considers asking their acccountants to calculate a Goodwill book value for all the warez copies of their software being distributed that have encouraged users (myself included) to buy what they got hooked on using when it was free cough Red Hat cough.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>