What the RIAA is doing instead of figuring out a new business model
Ars Technica notes that the RIAA spent $2M-plus lobbying Congress last year.
What was it spending money on? The answer is pretty interesting. The whole article is worth reading. Here’re the most outrageous parts:
- The PRO-IP Act: “The far-reaching PRO-IP Act* was introduced to the House in December 2007. The bill would create a new executive office, the Office of the US Intellectual Property Enforcement Representative, which would be charged with coordinating IP enforcement at the national and international levels. IP agents would be sent to other countries to assist in investigation and crackdowns in much the same way as they do drug-trafficking investigations.”
- The Intellectual Property Enforcement Act: “Over in the Senate, the Intellectual Property Enforcement ActPIRATE Act. The RIAA loves this bill because it would outsource the thousands of copyright infringement lawsuits filed each year to the Department of Justice, saving the group millions of dollars in legal fees. The IPEA would also increase funding for the FBI’s investigations of crimes “related to the theft of intellectual property.” The IPEA has also yet to emerge from committee.”
- The College Opportunity and Affordability Act: “The RIAA’s interest in the College Opportunity and Affordability Act comes from a very controversial provision that requires schools to make plans to implement copyright filters on their networks and offer legal alternatives to file-sharing. Colleges and universities across the country opposed the IP enforcement provision of the financial aid funding bill out of fears that it would ultimately lead to financial aid being cut off. House staffers have told Ars that is not the case, saying that failure to plan for filters and legal music services would have no consequences.”
Aside from the first, each of these are fairly pernicious in the way they expand an already pointlessly over-the-top battle against an enemy, file-sharing, that is unstoppable.
* As Ars notes, the PRO-IP Act deserves a special footnote for a particularly creative provision that has, for the time being, at least, been taken out: A tweak that would make, say an illegally copied ten-song compilation CD eligible for dectuple penalties, if dectuple is a word, on the ground that each separate song is a separate violation.
No comments yet. Be the first.
Leave a reply
