RIAA Not Sharing Settlement Money With Artists

Klatoo55 writes "Various artists are considering lawsuits in order to press for their share of the estimated hundreds of millions of dollars the RIAA has obtained from settlements with services such as Bolt, KaZaA, and Napster. According to TorrentFreak's report on the potential action, there may not even be much left to pay out after monstrous legal fees are taken care of. The comments from the labels all claim that the money is on its way, and is simply taking longer due to difficulties dividing it all up."

I Wonder...

...how difficult it is to divide by one...

Re:I Wonder...

One is the loneliest number...

Re:I Wonder...

Sir, you've violated the copyright of Three Dog Night with your dissemination of their song "One is the Loneliest Number".

We're here to take your first born to our Vinyl Mines.

Re:I Wonder...

Harry Nilsson wrote "One", Three Dog Night merely covered it... WITHOUT ASKING!!!

Re:I Wonder...

But it was done from within the music industry, so it was fair use. It's only stealing if someone without enough money for lawyers does it.

Of course it's coming!

The comments from the labels all claim that the money is on its way, and is simply taking longer due to difficulties dividing it all up.

Of course it's coming. We've just got to process it with all our high expense people so that you, the artist, receive the mere pennies you deserve!

Re:Of course it's coming!

Actually they are probably figuring out how to divvy up the remaining lawyer bill amongst the artists.

T'was Ever Thus

With these crooks.

Why is this not surprising?

The recent RIAA extortion has never been about the artists, merely keeping the "coke & whores" budget healthy.

...and the lawyers are friends/relatives

The hefty legal fees are staying in the family so it's all good.

Well....not so good if you're an artist, but any artist who still hasn't figured out what the RIAA is all about probably deserves it.

The only CDs I've paid for in the last couple of years were from places like CDBaby who state exactly how much the artist will receive for each CD sold. Worse, I've bought albums I didn't really like from CDBaby because that artist has made other albums which I did like. The reason was I wanted the artist to have some money but the RIAA had control of the album I liked.

Pissing off your paying customers? Not a good business model.

The main reason I share music these days is just to annoy the RIAA.

Is anyone surprised by this?

The RIAA does not exist to serve the artists. It's mission now is to suck all the money it can out of a dying business model.

I'm shocked...

Give me a moment to recover.

makes sense

Well why should they share the money when a good portion of it was gotten from people that didn't even download music from a copyrighted artist? You don't give money to artists if there was no damage. Logically what should be done is the RIAA should go to hell.

They have all the data...

They have all the data on how many times each song was infringed, so I'm sure this ought to be easy.

Blame the RIAA's advanced storage methods

The RIAA's royalty database uses a fantastically advanced quantum storage technique. The whole thing fits in a cryogenic cell the size of a medicine pill bottle.

Unfortunately, the uncertainly principle kicks in when you take a close look . . .

Hollywood Accounting

When the RIAA discovered that they had some money left over after paying the lawyers, they needed some time. They have their best accountants working on it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting [wikipedia.org].

Once they are done with the proper accounting procedures, they will make sure to give the token penny or two to the "poor, starving artists".

share? why?

At what point did the RIAA claim that they were going through all these lawsuits on behalf of the artists? Uh... okay... those were the words in the broadside. Hmm.

Let's try again. At what point did they claim they were doing this to pay the arts for "lost profits"? There, that's it.

Re:share? why?

I find this all incredibly amusing. Here you have these pricks like Gene Simmons and Metallica out there fighting the good fight for the record companies, and now, suddenly, they all wake up and realize "Waitta minute! Those fuckers in the boardrooms are still crooks!"

Here's a bit of a friendly nod to all those artists who were retarded enough to believe the record industry was somehow looking out for them:

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

On the plus side...

.. it means Metallica aren't getting a share. I bet they'e kicking themselves now..

Heh, excellent point!

Can I kick them instead :-)

Strategy

I dont quite understand the strategy of the RIAA, is this even a profitable strategy. You first need to collect evidence, then you need to file the lawsuit, and finally the defendant has to pay, that is if he or she is found in guilt. So now you to pay for the collection of evidence, then the lawyers, and then you have to hope the defendant has money to pay you to recoup the loss.

So I guess they have internal lawyers but as the cases grow in numbers you need to hire out law firms which is not cheap. I don't know who they pay to collect the evidence, or to tell if someone is infringing but they have to monitor the P2P networks and I guess the torrents.

So by the end of the case lets say the defendant is given a infringement cost of $10,000 or something. They still have to pay it up.

What person in their right mind thought this was a good plan. Theres so many parties to deal with, so much time that needs to paid for. In the end all I see happening is a loss plus tarnishing the name of the RIAA. Hell, if the defendant wins then the RIAA might have to pay them. This seems like a strategy proposed from old-school business into a new-business world.

Why would they?

I believe it works this way. The record companies pay artists royalties and they pay the RIAA as well. I don't think the artists pay the RIAA. It seems to me that IF the RIAA is going to pay anyone it is going to be the record companies. If that happens will the record companies kick any money back to the artists? I doubt it.

RIAA and PR

I wonder how hard it would be to support a decentralized publicity campaign to directly tie these lawsuits, via the RIAA, to the agencies and artists the RIAA supports?

At present, it's largely a free lunch for the record companies - who have a vicious attack dog that uses tactics that shouldn't be legal. The bad PR doesn't do a very good job of reflecting back on them.

If the masses begin to associate these lawsuits with the music they're buying, that's when the pressure would mount.

Imagine all the problems...

Imagine all the problems RIAA's gonna have dividing the profits once it gets the $1.65 trillion from Allofmp3.com! They'll need to rent dump trucks just to deliver checks to the artists.

Re:Oh come on now

And that's why other countries don't have punitive damages. Somehow civil matters got all mixed up in the USA. I guess greed does that.