That doesn't seem 100% accurate. For example I always thought Fat Wreck Chords was an independent label, but the RIAA lists them on their site, and RIAA radar say their albums are safe.EDIT: I know this may come as a shock to you, but the RIAA is often wrong. Please check the "Disputed Claims Department" sidebar on our help page. It mentions several labels that alot of people ask about (and have conflicting information on), and also notes several labels that are incorrectly listed in the official RIAA membership list. (<a class="user" href="http://www.magnetbox.com/riaa/submit.asp)">http://www.magnetbox.com/riaa/submit.asp)</a>
The only reason the RIAA exists is because of people downloading music for free. It seems to me that the people who steal the music by downloading it for free are the same ones who want to boycott the RIAA. If that is the case than your boycott means nothing because you are the problem.Out of all the posts on this thread I have yet to see a positive reason why i should boycott the RIAA and what's the point?. If I like an artist I'm going to BUY there album I could care less what label there on. It looks to me like the whole reason people want to boycott the RIAA is because they don't want to pay for music. Artists put allot of time and energy into making and recording the music they make and there's no reason why people shouldn't have to pay for it. It's legal to download music in Canada where I'm from, but I still don't because I don't feel that it's fair to the recording artist.Link to article about the Canadian DLing law<a class="user" href="http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/applications/0,39020384,39118537,00.htm">http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/applications/0,39020384,39118537,00.htm</a>If this was against the FCC on the other-hand I would totally agree... down with censorship.
i am musician. i want to boycot them too, because copy = culture. you can't live any culture without having copied elements... and music is culture for sure.the RIAA is NOT existant because of people's downloading. it is... because a row of labels pay them to sue people. it is one of the industries arms that are financed by the profit made of selling music. and so are all the stupid ads telling P2PUsers are murders and what not.i boycot the RIAA because it is NOT ensuring the will of the creator, but of the ones that extortet about 80% of the profit. they are not the legal owners, but they are bold enough to know where they are. copying music is not the problem... the problem is paying the original artists.so if you boycot the RIAA ... go and spent your money on indie's. but dont digg the story just because you dont have money for the musicians at all. both is lame, extorting the musicians for giving away their rights for more than their lifetime and giving nothing back to any of the artists you enjoy.
I think its up to the bands to decide who they are on and fully look into their contracts before signing them.. so if they choose to associate with RIAA then they should also understand what goes along with that and who will boycott them in the process of boycotting RIAA. I am an artist myself and I take that into consideration. Signing something as life influencing as a record contract should be a process of intense consideration in my opinion, part of that is knowing what you intend to be a part of during your hard work of producing music.
@t0ny:Or use your cameraphone to take a picture of the barcode to get product information. Neomedia uses this process for mobile marketing: www.paperclick.com
That false sense of need for these products is why the free market is losing its power.You don't need to own a copy of those songs. You don't need to listen to those songs. Your life would be fine if you didn't own any music, let alone just music produced by an RIAA label.Equivalent, arguably better, music could make it into more light were it not for the RIAA, and without the side effect of things like the recent civil case resulting in $US 1.92 million (or, $80,000 per song, or more than this woman will likely make in a lifetime) against a mother of 4 ( <a class="user" href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/jammie-thomas-retrial-verdict.ars">http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/ja ...</a> ) nor heavily funded lobbying to stack the legal cards more heavily in their own favor. The RIAA and anyone contributing to their existence doesn't deserve a dime from an of us, and I, for one, will do my part.But if it's more important to you that you own your very own copy of these over-marketed, fundamentally useless, dime-a-dozen tracks (and don't get me wrong, I do think there are some great artists who have unfortunately signed under an RIAA-label, but they're still useless and not so unique in the entire talent pool of the world) than to show some modicum of consumer responsibility, then may I be the first to say: f**k you, you inconsiderate selfish bastard.
cduquetteMar 5, 2006
That doesn't seem 100% accurate. For example I always thought Fat Wreck Chords was an independent label, but the RIAA lists them on their site, and RIAA radar say their albums are safe.EDIT: I know this may come as a shock to you, but the RIAA is often wrong. Please check the "Disputed Claims Department" sidebar on our help page. It mentions several labels that alot of people ask about (and have conflicting information on), and also notes several labels that are incorrectly listed in the official RIAA membership list. (<a class="user" href="http://www.magnetbox.com/riaa/submit.asp)">http://www.magnetbox.com/riaa/submit.asp)</a>
nnonixMar 6, 2006
I'm going out and buying music from everyone on the list JUST because I'm sick of hearing the same old RIAA stories.
korvarasMar 8, 2006
This is why I like Indie.
xmuskratMar 8, 2006
You should also list the artists that are signed by those record companies.
rubberbootsMar 9, 2006
The only reason the RIAA exists is because of people downloading music for free. It seems to me that the people who steal the music by downloading it for free are the same ones who want to boycott the RIAA. If that is the case than your boycott means nothing because you are the problem.Out of all the posts on this thread I have yet to see a positive reason why i should boycott the RIAA and what's the point?. If I like an artist I'm going to BUY there album I could care less what label there on. It looks to me like the whole reason people want to boycott the RIAA is because they don't want to pay for music. Artists put allot of time and energy into making and recording the music they make and there's no reason why people shouldn't have to pay for it. It's legal to download music in Canada where I'm from, but I still don't because I don't feel that it's fair to the recording artist.Link to article about the Canadian DLing law<a class="user" href="http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/applications/0,39020384,39118537,00.htm">http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/applications/0,39020384,39118537,00.htm</a>If this was against the FCC on the other-hand I would totally agree... down with censorship.
minitechnikMar 9, 2006
i am musician. i want to boycot them too, because copy = culture. you can't live any culture without having copied elements... and music is culture for sure.the RIAA is NOT existant because of people's downloading. it is... because a row of labels pay them to sue people. it is one of the industries arms that are financed by the profit made of selling music. and so are all the stupid ads telling P2PUsers are murders and what not.i boycot the RIAA because it is NOT ensuring the will of the creator, but of the ones that extortet about 80% of the profit. they are not the legal owners, but they are bold enough to know where they are. copying music is not the problem... the problem is paying the original artists.so if you boycot the RIAA ... go and spent your money on indie's. but dont digg the story just because you dont have money for the musicians at all. both is lame, extorting the musicians for giving away their rights for more than their lifetime and giving nothing back to any of the artists you enjoy.
mistressroninsAug 9, 2006
I think its up to the bands to decide who they are on and fully look into their contracts before signing them.. so if they choose to associate with RIAA then they should also understand what goes along with that and who will boycott them in the process of boycotting RIAA. I am an artist myself and I take that into consideration. Signing something as life influencing as a record contract should be a process of intense consideration in my opinion, part of that is knowing what you intend to be a part of during your hard work of producing music.
runlikethewindDec 9, 2006
@t0ny:Or use your cameraphone to take a picture of the barcode to get product information. Neomedia uses this process for mobile marketing: www.paperclick.com
Closed AccountMar 13, 2007
"Submitted: 1 year 8 days ago, made popular 1 year 8 days 7 hours 43 minutes ago"WTF?
funkdabJul 29, 2008
Hahaha... This one made my day!!!
brokenhertzJun 18, 2009
How convenient, the RIAA removed that page from their site.
ozydingoJun 19, 2009
That false sense of need for these products is why the free market is losing its power.You don't need to own a copy of those songs. You don't need to listen to those songs. Your life would be fine if you didn't own any music, let alone just music produced by an RIAA label.Equivalent, arguably better, music could make it into more light were it not for the RIAA, and without the side effect of things like the recent civil case resulting in $US 1.92 million (or, $80,000 per song, or more than this woman will likely make in a lifetime) against a mother of 4 ( <a class="user" href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/jammie-thomas-retrial-verdict.ars">http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/06/ja ...</a> ) nor heavily funded lobbying to stack the legal cards more heavily in their own favor. The RIAA and anyone contributing to their existence doesn't deserve a dime from an of us, and I, for one, will do my part.But if it's more important to you that you own your very own copy of these over-marketed, fundamentally useless, dime-a-dozen tracks (and don't get me wrong, I do think there are some great artists who have unfortunately signed under an RIAA-label, but they're still useless and not so unique in the entire talent pool of the world) than to show some modicum of consumer responsibility, then may I be the first to say: f**k you, you inconsiderate selfish bastard.