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.

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.

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.

Welcome RIAA Toadie! Big talk, no facts..we can spot you a mile away!