If you are an internet music listener, the name Ray Beckerman will not be an unknown one. Ray has become the one shining star in the dark world that the music industry would prefer we live in. The Recording Industry of America Association (RIAA) supposedly is a loose industry group that assists the music giants to co-exist. In practice they have become the most hated organization in recent history. Their mandate being to seek out and destroy anyone that downloads illegal copies of music. To date they have threatened more than 20,000 people with law suits. What is truly insidious, is the tactic of ‘pay us $3,000 and promise not to do it again, or else we will take you to court, and go for megabucks’ letters that they send out to people who they deem as music pirates. They have targeted dead people, young kids, the chronically ill, and the chronically computer inept. It matters not to the RIAA, or more importantly the lawyers paid by the RIAA.
Ray has been at the forefront of defending people from the onslaught of the RIAA. He also runs the very informative website Recording Industry Vs The People.
Ray was gracious enough to spend some time talking with me. He is the master of not saying much, yet saying a huge amount.
Ray, I did a Google search on you, and there are over 34,000 references. You are without doubt the biggest pain in the butt to the RIAA. How did you get involved in this debacle?
In late 2004 or early 2005 I learned of these lawsuits from the EFF. I thought to myself “I’m a litigator, I’m a copyright lawyer, and I hate bullies. So maybe I can help some of these folks.”
Then in Summer or Spring 2005 I got my first client who wanted to fight back. It occurred to me that one of the RIAA’s strategic advantages was information. It had one law firm controlling all 25,000 cases, and knew what was going on in each one. A defendant’s lawyer, on the other hand, had no information at all except what the RIAA wanted us to know. I didn’t know what was going on in other cases, or, indeed, if there were any other cases where defendants were fighting back. So decided to set up the blog as a place to collect information.
The RIAA seems to think that suing their own customers is a good idea. I can not think of another industry that has played this game and won. Are they just a school yard bully?
Yes. The ugliest and cruelest school yard bully I have ever encountered, and I have seen some bad ones.
Does the RIAA understand the concept of freedom of choice?
The people running this lawsuit are not exactly human. They understand nothing. They are like the bad robots in RoboCop.
Some might say that the bully-boy tactics actually encourage people to “rebel” and go for illegal downloads? I guess the analogy here would be being told by your mom not to touch something, and of course you, as the 5 year old are now galvanized into action!
I don’t agree with that, but the bully-boy tactics have created a whole new class of consumer — people who seek out independent music not tainted by the ghouls and freaks running the Big 4.
The RIAA make the argument that music piracy is killing the music industry, and they can back that claim up with statistics. My view is somewhat different. If you like something, you will buy it. Is music piracy the reason that sales are flat?
I think their sales are declining because the companies are being run by morons who have been hypnotized by some unscrupulous lawyers, who have never had any imagination as to how to sell music on the internet, and who are bringing lawsuits — and trying to blame others — strictly to cover up their failure to capitalize on one of the greatest money making opportunities ever.
Why do they actively attempt to blur the line before legal downloads approved by bands/put up by bands and those that are merely thieving?
I’m sorry, don’t understand the question. Their goal is to try to monopolize digital music. They will say and do anything to try to make that happen.
Why do they do it? Because these robots don’t understand competition. They do everything as a collusive pack of 4.
What do you see the RIAA doing in future as they become even more desperate?
Chapter 11.
I realize that you can not discuss cases that you are involved in, but maybe you could share some general thoughts about the way you see this issue moving. There are noises about taxing internet access, as a way of recompensing the music industry. This idea, at least in my mind, is about as sensible as invading Iceland. What are your thoughts?
The courts are starting to reject the RIAA’s stupid theories and starting to get irked at its lawyers’ frivolous behavior, and more lawyers and defendants are choosing to fight back, and are doing so in a better informed way. So the cost of pushing this madness forward is increasing.
Meanwhile, the shareholders can’t be happy to see the value of their stock declining so drastically, so I would imagine they’ll eventually wake up and stop the madness, even before the Courts — which move slowly — get around to it.
There are not many lawyers that can talk the talk, and walk the walk, when it comes to the computer world. Yet you talk happily about IP addresses, wireless routers, DHCP, and even the basic structure of the Internet. Was this a huge learning curve?
Yes of course I have had to learn a lot about the technology to keep up with the RIAA’s lies. If the RIAA’s lawyers weren’t professional liars, I might not have had to learn so much.
Recording Industry v The People has been a very successful and useful site. But it must take an enormous amount of time and effort to keep it up to date. How many folks work on it?
One.
Thanks for taking time to talk with us here at Blogger News, and good luck with your quest.
Simon Barrett
(4 votes, average: 4.75 out of 5)
Loading ...
12 users commented in " An Interview With Ray Beckerman About The RIAA "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackRay Beckerman fancies himself a public rebel and seeks the media attention of the truly needy just as this article evidences. He claims to be for the underdog while is enriching himself taking a suck-up, populist stance that defends illegal piracy, and is contrary to existing copyright law, proper compensation to the artists themselves, human decency and even common sense. He knows how the laws are properly changed. He’d rather masturbate in public. So be it. As the courts unfold the legal implications of this sad and unprecedented mass looting of the last 50 years of artists work, he’ll slowly be exposed as the self-interested charlatan that he really is. One can only hope he becomes legally accountable to the illegal downloading and the ensuing anarchy he defends. Self-interested bleeding hearts inevitably bleed, and that’s okay with me.
“Sam I Am” is that you lars? come in from the cold, embrace music again.
Sam I am, did it come to you that the cases against RIAA are largely pro-bono? Because people sued do not have the funds to pay the costs.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Sam I Am is on the RIAA’s payroll.
I Am Sam
Welcome RIAA Toadie! Big talk, no facts..we can spot you a mile away!
There are people, mostly not actually musicians, who still defend the RIAA and their tactics. Its amazing but true. The sad thing, of course, is that the UK version the BPI are starting to copy RIAA tactics.
Sam I Am is a pathetic record industry shill.
There is so much disingenuity on all sides of this debate that illegal downloaders and those like Beckerman and his ilk who defend them can claim no moral highground. Piracy of anything intended for sale, tangible or intangible, is wrong and illegal and just sad. Complicated rationalizations for taking without paying do not disguise the basic facts of illegality and injustice and when you break the law and do harm to others, you deserve apprehension and punishment. This will not change and Beckerman is no more evenhanded or unbiased than the organizations he seeks to damage.
I have no connection to the RIAA, the MPAA or any other lobbyist and have never had even a communication with any of them. I do work in the arts, I know what it feels like to have my own work pirated and unpaid, and I speak my mind about what I think is right. Taking something intended for sale without paying is wrong. It always will be. And the entertainment industry will be monetized in some way that is likely not as fair as simply paying for whatever you take. The legacy of your illegal online behavior will be a network bristling with advertising, law enforcement and filters, and that’s sad too. And it’s all your fault.
But I don’t hide behind some cloak of selflessness the way Beckerman does, either. While pretending in the media that he is some latter day Robin Hood with a touch for the common man, his offices reside at 110 East 42nd Street , one of Manhattan’s legendary old bank buildings. This luxury address houses Harry Cipriani’s plush bar at ground level and is nestled within some of Manhattan’s toniest real estate, including Grand Central Station, just steps from New York’s fabled and impossibly wealthy Park Avenue. Robin Hood, my ass.
The RIAA lawyers say what they say and spin their case because they are lawyers with a job to do, precisely what Beckerman is and does. Any of you out there who think for one minute that altruism is what pay’s Beckerman’s luxury rent is just as deluded as those who still believe the world’s governments will allow the threat of illegality to eventually destroy the promise of online commerce. And if it were you personally being taken from illegally, your tune would change quickly. Wouldn’t it.
There seems one thing lost in all of this. I was sued in the same manner by directv. It was a fraudulent suit where they had to lie to sue. Then I had to sign a coincidental agreement not to be a complainant in any criminal charges.
Problem is where were the US Attorney’s office in protecting me from this crime? It is a crime to make up a story to a court, lie then to get money from another who cannot afford the fight.
I do not like the RIAA or Directv. Most of all I hate the US Government for not having protected me from a crime where the courts were used to perpetrate the fraud.
Many falsely accused will evaluate how the Justice department failed in investigating this a crime. Justice in the end loose all credibility.
Dear Son of Sam I Am,
You are undoubtedly a blowbag mouthpiece for the domestic terrorist organization known as the RIAA. Sam, try to imagine this. Remember back to when you were 5 years old, all skinny, and snot running from your nose. All of a sudden a great big 12 year old bully jumps out of the bushes and beats the dog poop out of you. Then to make matters worse, as you’re laying on the ground screaming for mommy, the bully kicks you in your tiny peepee.
WAKE UP A__HOLE. The RIAA is the 12 year old bully and little 5 year old Sammy is “we the people,” being terrorized by your pals.
Dear lesaroka,
My experience with bullies was different. I used to fight back and win. Sure I got a bloody nose or something, but they sometimes got hurt worse. And they usually went away rather than continue.
They were bigger, older, taller, and stronger…. but I was madder.
One important lesson I learned in those days is that all bullies are cowards.
Sam I Am,
I support your position on not looting art. However, I disagree with the RIAA’s lawsuit campaign entirely. What the RIAA did is create a copyright and technology policy that the general public as a whole did not adopt. These media companies and their corporate lobby associations (i.e. RIAA, MPAA, NMPA, BSA, ESA, etc) lobby congress to set these policies with little or no public input. Then, with these policies set, the general public rejected them. They used this to extort thousands of people, including many college kids who have no assets.
The RIAA should have taken public input, and not set policies that were not well adopted. With the public acceptance of P2P file sharing as the general means to get music on computers, I think that the RIAA should have LICENSED P2P companies from the get-go. Blender.com recently reported that Mistake #1 the music industry made was to sue the original Napster. I beleive that the record labels could have made money if they would have licensed Napster, Scour, Aimster/Madster, KaZaa, LimeWire, Morpheus, et al from the very beginning, and adopted MP3 as the dominant format instead of formats with DRM. I bet people would have paid a few bucks a month for a certain number of tracks to legally file share if the artists/songwriters were compensated. Many P2Ps in the past have approached the major labels and they seem to not be interested in licensing to P2P.
I know that there is some trend in the direction I advocate. MusicCreators Canada and Songwriters Canada have called for P2P to be legalized and a compensation system implemented. Warner Music has also hired a consultant to move in this direction as well. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, Nashville Songwriters Association, and others are also backing the idea of compensating creators for P2P.
Leave A Reply