Hacker News Reader

Comment by dirtyhippiefree | Hacker News Reader

Boy, but it sure took the RIAA •years• to figure out that suing fans (aka “customers”) wasn’t the greatest idea…

To be fair it is incredibly hard to think clearly with the haze of booze and cocaine that fuels the music industry.

How was it not a great idea for the RIAA? I understand how many fans / customers didn't like it, but I think people kept buying the music and the RIAA's terms and definitions like 'piracy' became mainstream (I think that was from the RIAA?).

https://www.theregister.com/2005/05/13/otto_rosen/

(Hillary Rosen) presented the notion of lawsuits against consumers that her successor Mitch Bainwol would turn into a course of action. Who among us hasn't wanted to slit the tendons of thieves and watch as they hemorrhage justice back to The Man?

Rosen, however, led a fruitless crusade that in the long-term was more of an attack against capitalism's progress than the defense of intellectual property rights.

It was an absolutely successful strategy for them. It was traditional terrorism: they went after a few extremely sympathetic, small-time victims to show that they definitely wouldn't have any problem going after you. It worked, and was reasonably cheap.

Billboard had to recalculate its charts because so many of us stopped paying for what is essentially extortion (Jammie Thomas, statutory damages of $1.92 million ($80,000 per song, within the allowed range of $750 to $150,000).

Streaming didn’t kill sales, and yes it was cheap…and not in dollars…

Yeah, now they use Spotify to rip off their artists and their customers even harder.

Weird Al wrote an open letter to this effect more than a decade ago, but he broke through again to be Spoticific… Fairly certain that letter is older than Spotify, but this is 2023…

https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2023/11/30/weird-al-spotify...

Embrace, extend, extinguish!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com