[rickcr42]

I am kinda thinking "bomb" the RIAA was a very poor choice of words.That kind of wording can get one in trouble these days.
So let me state that I did not mean it LITERAL,just that linking copying music with terrorism is as idiotic as my title to this thread,no harm meant

 

[KR...]

To hell with those morons!

Anyway, read this :

Napster may be down for the count, but audio file-sharing is more popular than ever, according to a study released October 10 by research firm Jupiter Media Metrix Inc.
Napster's free service may never be revived, but music fans have migrated elsewhere on the Internet to continue sharing their favorite recordings. Jupiter estimates that the use of other file-sharing services, such as Morpheus and Grokster, has risen by almost 500% since March, with as many as 6.9 million users logging on in August. Napster's user base dropped by 49% to 5.5 million during the March-to-August period, after a San Francisco federal court ordered the free service shut down. Napster has since become an affiliate of MusicNet, a music industry-backed Internet subscription service.

Among the Napster clones, Morpheus appears to be king of the downloading underworld, with an increase of 186% from June to August. Kazaa Media Desktop was runner-up with 1.3 million users; Winmx was close behind with 1.2 million users, Jupiter said.

File-sharing services (other than embattled Napster) have come under legal attack recently, with copyright infringement litigation brought against them by the Recording Industry Association of America and the Motion Picture Association of America. Even if lawsuits are successful, enforcement of any restrictions may be difficult. Among the named defendants, only Morpheus, operated by MusicCity of Nashville, TN, is based in the United States.

now read this:

Will the official online music gates finally stream open and flood us with non-pirated tunes? Perhaps. One important step in the process has finally been taken. The National Music Publishers' Association (NMPA), the Harry Fox Agency (HFA), and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) announced last week that they have come to a "breakthrough" agreement on the licensing of musical works for new subscription services on the Internet.
The groups were in a deadlock for months, trying to negotiate the online publishing rights for streaming music. The NMPA's Edward P. Murphy comments, "This landmark agreement confirms that the streaming of music on demand requires a mechanical license under the US Copyright Act. We are pleased to have reached a consensus with the record industry on this key issue, enabling us to move forward on the matter of determining what the royalty rate for such streaming will be."

Under the agreement, the RIAA and all its member labels and their licensees, including new on-line subscription services, will immediately have access to every musical work authorized to be licensed by HFA, the largest agency in the industry for licensing reproductions and distributions of musical works. HFA says it will now issue licenses for subscription services offering on-demand streaming and limited downloads (ie downloads that can be played only for a limited period of time or number of times).

The agreement also provides for an expedited licensing process, allowing for "bulk licensing" of musical works. The groups say the agreement also confirms the parties' mutual understanding of the relevant copyright law—namely, that a mechanical license is required for these types of subscription services, that the compulsory licensing provisions apply to such services, and that the license covers the server copy as well as transient and buffer copies.

Once rates are determined, the groups say, royalties will be payable on a retroactive basis from the commencement of services. Pending that determination, the RIAA says it will pay HFA an advance of $1 million toward the royalties to be determined. If the two sides do not settle on a rate during the next two years, the recording industry says it will pay monthly advances totaling $750,000 per year until a rate is set.

To protect individual rights holders, the agreement also states that publishers represented by HFA will have the opportunity to opt out of the licensing agreement if they so elect. Likewise, the group says that any subscription service or record company may deal directly with HFA or individual music publishers, if they prefer.

The NMPA's Irwin Z. Robinson says, "This is good news for songwriters and music publishers who want to promote this exciting new outlet for their music and for the Internet companies poised to make it happen." The RIAA's Cary Sherman adds, "This agreement will do wonders for music lovers and the on-line music marketplace. It confirms that the existing compulsory licensing system is available for new subscription service business models; that the mechanical license covers everything from the server copy through to the user's PC; and that the licensing process can be quick, simple, and efficient."

both were taken from here : http://www.stereophile.com

 

[beni]

You have to realize that the RIAA is only part of the problem also...the fact that the DMCA exists in its current form is a shameful testament to the inability of most of our federal legislators to understand copyright issues in the digital world. The RIAA would be up a creek if it weren't for the laws on the books that make it possible for them to shut down napster even though napster served a very significant legitimate purpose as well as being a conduit for copyrighted music transfers. My wife loves greek and indian music and has a hell of a time finding new stuff now that napster is down - 90% of the mp3s she downloaded had no US copyright. Plus, she has purchased several albums of artists she would have never heard of had she not found and listened to their music from napster.

The truly sad part about it is that if the RIAA embraced reliable file-sharing technology and set up reasonable licensing and payment terms, they could make a killing off of the whole scheme and it would work out better for end users on the whole. Their true goal is to prevent other music publishers and independent artists from ever being able to make a name for themselves, not to protect their own revenue from existing artists. What a bunch of losers.