A recording industry spokesman took the brunt of several pointed questions at Ohio University yesterday during a panel discussion on file-sharing and the future of the music business.
About 250 people attended the discussion, which was prompted by the university’s problems with file-sharing that drew national attention.
Jonathan Lamy, spokesman for the Recording Industry Association of America and an OU alumnus, was one of eight panelists invited by Brice Bible, the university’s chief information officer.
Several students exchanged heated words with Lamy and many expressed displeasure with the RIAA’s litigation campaign. Five OU students are currently facing lawsuits over their alleged sharing of copyrighted music.
More than 100 OU students received pre-litigation settlement letters — which threaten lawsuits unless the recipient pays $3,500 to settle alleged copyright infringement claims — last year as part of the RIAA’s crackdown on music sharers using campus networks.
"Speaking as the CIO of a university that has had to take fairly expensive action, I would have to say yes — universities have been unfairly singled out,” Bible said, adding that universities are easy targets and that students are a minority of file-sharers.
The university spent more than $75,000 on a software and hardware package from Audible Magic to reduce file-sharing on its network this year, after the RIAA announced in February that it sent more copyright complaints to OU than any other university nationwide.
"The notices, they’re not a perfect measurement,” Lamy said. “But it’s a pretty good reflection, at least comparatively, of how one university stacks up against another.”
Though all panelists agreed sharing copyrighted music is illegal, opinions varied on how to solve the problem.
"Suing fans is not going to save the recording industry,” said Eddie Ashworth, an OU telecommunications instructor and record producer. Using file-sharing to generate revenue and allowing unrestricted use of purchased music would be a better solution, he said.
The RIAA considers litigation — along with education and licensing music to subscription services like Ruckus — an essential tool in its fight against piracy.
"It is a last resort,” Lamy said of lawsuits against college students. “We’re an industry that is hemorrhaging jobs and money.”
Songwriters Bob Regan and Stewart Harris attributed a two-thirds decline in the number of U.S. songwriters over the last decade directly and indirectly to piracy.
Speaking emotionally about his career as a songwriter, Regan tried to humanize the effects of piracy on the music business and had no kind words for music pirates.
"If they send my son one of those notices and he calls me and says ‘Dad, I need 3,500 bucks,’ I’ll say ‘Sell your car,’” Regan said, adding that he’s sure the RIAA’s litigation has alienated fans, but he doesn’t care.
Reader Comments
"Regan said, adding that he’s sure the RIAA’s litigation has alienated fans, but he doesn’t care."
what blindness. "my industry is dying, and i realize i am helping to kill it but i don't care." the music industry is changing - for the better. i don't know where those guys got their numbers for a "two thirds decline" in song writers, but i'm guessing it has something to do with the number of people for whom songwriting is their primary profession. think back to the early 90s - there were some good songs no doubt, but in general it was pretty homogeneous, as were the 70s and 80s. today there are more artists exploring styles that would never fly on commercial radio, as well as a bevy of remixes, covers, mash-ups, etc. this is attributable directly to the internet, and like it or not, it's here to stay.
it's sad whenever anyone loses their job, but it has to happen as technology advances. we didn't outlaw the telegraph to protect pony express riders, didn't outlaw steamships to protect sailing ship crews, etc. progress necessarily means that a new way of doing things replaces an old way, someone should tell Regan.
Oh whoa is me! I'm but a poor, defenseless recording industry; I leech upon the talents of others to turn a profit, often kicking bands to the curb once I've wrung every ounce of creativity from their burned-out bodies. Won't you have pity on me and buy a twenty-dollar, highly-modified disc that passes itself off as a CD?
Regan writes songs, and the government says that he can get a few cents per song sold. He uses that to sustain his writing. He appreciates the big labels and how they promote his music so he can pay the bills.
Now, you people are denying him his few cents per song because you can just get it for free. He spoke to me afterwards and clarified that he doesn't like DRM, doesn't like restricting sales of music, and doesn't like alienating people. But if you make $25,000 a year, write music that everyone loves, and are losing money rapidly because people still listen but refuse to pay, you'd be bitter as well. It's important to keep in mind that Regan isn't even failing: he's a successful songwriter who writes songs that people want to hear. This isn't a free market where the weak die: this is a free market where they *all* die, successful or not.
The situation created by illegal downloading is one where talent and innovation aren't rewarded financially. If you don't pay talented people for their efforts, they will stop those efforts. I'd rather not see that happen because a few of you can't see past the CEO's and to the real people who hurt from your actions.
Lastly, I think suing people for this is insane. .001% heavy punishments isn't a deterrant, it's just inhumane (imagine what the world would be like if only ten speeders were punished a year, but got life in prison). You need much higher enforcement for much lower per-hit cost. I'm interested to hear people's ideas on this: what if, instead of lawsuits, we had a mechanism for much smaller punishments.
For instance, imagine you shared stuff illegally. Like speeding, you knew it was illegal, but didn't really care. The government would catch you now and then, and send you a ticket. No lawsuit, no six-figure jury verdicts, just a ticket for, say, $150 or so. You'd be pissed that you got caught, pay up, and it's a settled matter (you could contest in court, of course, if you wanted to). No fear of *huge* consequences or intimidation, just paying your debt to society.
Submit a comment to The Post