Downloading Legal Music

From LoveToKnow Music

Downloading Legal Music

According to the International Federation of Phonographic Industries (IFPI), as of January, 2006, there were over 300 legal music download sites operating online, offering 2 million songs, and counting. They approximate that 870 million songs are available through peer to peer file sharing networks. Are these file sharing networks and their millions of users worldwide in violation of copyright laws? And if so, what is the best way to deal with them?

[edit]

The Controversy

When home taping became possible in the 1980s, the record industry panicked. They feared people would stop buying so many albums, if they could just swap tapes with their friends, and feared music piracy would increase. The solution they came to was to add a penny onto the price of each blank tape, which was then split between the major record labels. Of course, people still bought albums, and swapping mix tapes became just one more way of enjoying music. The Internet brought all these old fears back the surface with new intensity. File sharing allowed people to swap songs with the click of a mouse, and not just with their friends, but with anyone around the world who logged onto the same network as them, all for free. As the technology became more and more popular, the labels, and some artists, began to wonder how they were going to collect royalties without any regulation of this trading. Another problem arose when tracks began leaking out online well before their release date.

[edit]

Napster

Launched in 1999, Napster was the original music file sharing network. The Record Industry Association of America (RIAA) filed a lawsuit against the service that same year, but the network grew to millions of users while the case was being fought. Metallica also launched a legal challenge against Napster, when unreleased tracks were leaked online. Metallica’s lawsuit failed, but in 2001, the record companies successfully forced Napster to shut down. They also collected a multimillion dollar settlement from Napster for past copyright infringement.

Napster now exists online as a legal, pay to play, download service.

[edit]

After Napster

Napster was an easy legal challenge for the record industry, because it operated on a centralized server. In its wake, new peer to peer technology was created using decentralized servers, making it harder for the industry to target users – the most popular being Kazaa and LimeWire.

The RIAA announced in the summer of 2003 that they would go after individual users such networks, and soon after filed their first 60 lawsuits against music traders. The lawsuits advised people that the RIAA could collect a minimum of $750 per traded song and offered to reach a settlement. Though some people settled, some people challenged their cases, usually successfully. Bad press ensued for the RIAA, when it emerged that they had sued minors, and in one case, sued a deceased woman, who was 83 at the time of her death, for swapping hip-hop music.

The RIAA is now filing so-called “Doe” lawsuits, in which they subpoena an Internet service provider for a particular person’s personal information – lawsuits are pending in various US district courts fighting these subpoenas.

[edit]

Problems With Regulating Downloads

The biggest problem faced by the music industry in regulating downloads is the fact that websites can be accessed anywhere in the world, and copyright laws differ from country to country. In Australia, it is illegal to use Kazaa P2P network, but in Canada, the courts have ruled that P2P networks are legal. Only international law could regulate the problem with any real effect. Also, some moves by the RIAA and labels have been criticized as heavy handed.

[edit]

Sony/BMG Copy Protection

Sony/BMG, one of the so called “Big Four” record labels, was sued in November 2005, by the Electronic Frontier Foundation – a group that fights for individual rights on the internet – over copy protection software they included on 24 million CDs without the knowledge of their customers. The CDs included XCP – Extended Copyright Protection – which only allows users to make 3 copies of a cd. XCP works by using Rootkits, allowing it embed itself deep within Windows operating system, undetected by the user. Rootkits are a popular tool with virus makers, since they are undetectable by anti-virus software. The program does not offer an uninstall feature.

[edit]

Impact On Music Sales

Music sales have declined over the past several years, but many studies have concluded that illegal downloading is not to blame. A Duke University/Harvard University joint study found the effect of file sharing to be zero on music sales, and a study by The Economist reported that three-quarters of the decline in sales could not be blamed on illegal downloads. The study of P2P network users in Europe found that one in three people who download music purchase less music than they previously did.

Some artists actively encourage their fans to download their music, believing it to be a promotional tool.

[edit]

Possible Solutions

The RIAA would like to see free file sharing networks enter into licensing agreements with the record labels, so they pay a royalty on the songs they distribute. The sites would then pass that on by charging their customers for each song.

The EFF advocates a voluntary blanket license for P2P sites, which would work in the same way that radio licensing works.

Canada has imposed a tariff on MP3 players, much like the record companies did on blank tapes. The money from the tariff goes into a fund to pay artists.

[edit]