The RIAA is in a lose-lose situation with these cases. But they have put themselves there. I have little pity on them, as they collapse their existing business model into one strategy of suing their customers.
There have been several companies that went out on a strategy of suing their customers, and it never ended pretty. Take SCO for example, out there, twisting in the wind...
The RIAA claims illegal downloads are hurting them: I would claim that is their members failure to conceive of a sustainable business model which takes into account the existence of the digital landscape (and yes that includes the existence of black market and grey market activities) But, the RIAA doesn't even have to think anymore because, lo and behold www.allofmp3.com has shown them the path forward:
It's called reasonably priced downloads....
Jerry Brito
· 3 years ago
I don't get this criticism, which I've seen all over the net. For better or worse, the RIAA had a lawsuit pending against the deceased that it will now continue to pursue against the estate. If a 60-day stay is not long enough, how much is?
The RIAA should be questioned on the legality of its claims, and perhaps whether it's smart for them to follow a strategy of suing consumers. But is it really necessary to demonize them? Are they really ogres that take pleasure in deposing kids after their father has died? I doubt it.
Tim Lee
· 3 years ago
It seems to me that the decent thing to do would be to drop the case. A big part of the justification for the lawsuits is deterrence, after all, and it's hard to deter a corpse. I doubt they're going to take pleasure in deposing the kids, but that doesn't make it any less callous.
zi
· 3 years ago
Jerry, I don't understand how you don't get the criticism that is all over the net toward the RIAA. In addition to suing dead people (Mr. Scantlebury and Gertrude Walton), the RIAA has sued children (Brittany Chan), single moms, grandparents, people on welfare and disability support, and even those who don't own PC's or computers capable of running Kazaa (Sarah Seabury). The RIAA has shown that its investigative techniques are shoddy, to say the least, and lacking in human decency in many of the cases, by maliciously prosecuting children and the elderly.
As an update, the RIAA has dropped "this particular lawsuit" against the late Mr. Scantlebury after an "abundance of sensitivity" (which is their spin on the widespread outrage generated by the news, all over the internet).
All Comments
There have been several companies that went out on a strategy of suing their customers, and it never ended pretty. Take SCO for example, out there, twisting in the wind...
The RIAA claims illegal downloads are hurting them: I would claim that is their members failure to conceive of a sustainable business model which takes into account the existence of the digital landscape (and yes that includes the existence of black market and grey market activities) But, the RIAA doesn't even have to think anymore because, lo and behold www.allofmp3.com has shown them the path forward:
It's called reasonably priced downloads....
The RIAA should be questioned on the legality of its claims, and perhaps whether it's smart for them to follow a strategy of suing consumers. But is it really necessary to demonize them? Are they really ogres that take pleasure in deposing kids after their father has died? I doubt it.
As an update, the RIAA has dropped "this particular lawsuit" against the late Mr. Scantlebury after an "abundance of sensitivity" (which is their spin on the widespread outrage generated by the news, all over the internet).
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2...