|
|
File sharing illegal, helpful to local artists Music industry and some artists' opinions vary on 'stealing' mp3s Published Dec. 6, 2006 The perceived invincibility of youth clouds the minds of many college students like Joanna Szablewiski. Though IU explains its policy regarding illegal music downloading to incoming students at orientation, the 22-year-old Szablewiski believed the university would not take the threatened
legal action for something as "harmless" as downloading music. Surely, she thought, the university has bigger problems to worry about. However, when the dean of students sent her an e-mail in October 2003 regarding her illegal downloading of licensed property, Szablewiski dealt with the reality. The e-mail identified the exact Weezer song traced to her computer, cited the copyright infringements, and informed her of possible punishments, such as jail time. “I don’t equate it with stealing,” said Szablewiski. “Technically it is, but it’s so available and it doesn’t seem like anyone is cracking down.” But as with all technological advancements, opinions vary on the proper use of the medium. While artists and record labels want to make money on their art, listeners want to enjoy the art affordably. With the rise of file sharing through peer-to-peer networking software like Napster, Kazaa, and Limewire, the music industry took action to protect its intellectual property (IP).
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) began to shut down such file-sharing programs in December 1999, first targeting Napster. RIAA claimed the software “encouraged and facilitated the illegal copying and distribution of copyrighted music,” as reported by Wired News in March 2000. However, RIAA further attempted to “send a message” to consumers of illegally downloaded digital music by filing a lawsuit against four college students. Claiming copyright infringements, RIAA sought $150,000, according to CBS news. While illegal downloading had corporate giants of the industry panicing to protect its IP, some smaller bands found downloading songs a beneficial way to gain new fans. “Just having anyone listen to my music is enough of a compliment,” said Bob Nugent, bassist and vocalist for Bloomington-based band Shoot Coward. For techno-savvy people, such as Nugent, online music available for purchased downloads seem like the natural progression. “I have absolutely no problem whatsoever,” he said, regarding illegal downloading of music. “But eventually
the music labels will only support the technology if they’re able to make money. So they’ll just continue to shut down the sites that allow illegal file sharing because they’re not making money. It all comes down to money.” Illegal downloaders disregard the theft. They view the lawsuits as giant record labels being greedy and realize the artists don’t make significant money through record distribution. “A band makes way more money touring than off of record sales,” said Nugent. “There’s a reason that Lynard Skynard still tours when they’ve got a dead lead singer and a dead guitar player. It’s because they still pull in so much money.” Band manager for local artists, Laura Hamlett, agrees. “I just don’t have a whole lot of sympathy for the big record labels,” she said. “Artists see barely any money from record sales. They’d get a few cents on the dollar in royalties after all the recording costs are covered. But it’s a double-edged sword because they have access to all the distribution and promotion channels too, so artists have an advantage signing.” While the music industry and the fans remain torn over the retail value of art, the prosecution of individuals to reclaim royalties from copyright infringements hasn’t had the desired behavior-altering affects. The threat from IU on impending legal action lasted less than two years. “Senior year I started downloading music illegally again," said Szablewiski. "I used Limewire instead of Kazaa, which is the program I’d used freshman year. But I downloaded less frequently than before. ”
|
