From /., Eric_the_Awful posts:
“It is refreshing to see that P2P United is acknowledging that their members should be more active in educating their users about the consequences of illegal file sharing that is rampant on their networks as well as the other risks these networks pose to personal privacy and security,” Amy Weiss, senior vice president of communications for RIAA, said in a statement. “But, let’s face it, they need to do a whole lot more before they can claim to be legitimate businesses.”
So for the P2P United businesses to become quote legitimate businesses end quote, they should act like the RIAA and the RIAA’s constituents.
- Sue their own customers.
- “Offer” their artists (perhaps the programmers in this case?) unconscionable contracts along the line of “You agree to assign the authorship rights of your work to us. You will bear the entire financial risk of the marketing and reproduction of your work. In most cases we will receive the vast majority of the benefits of your work.”
- “Cook” their books so that any profits generated by their artists/programmers appear in the vaguest possible terms, again avoiding any requirement to actually pay the artists/programmers.
- Control their customer’s access to new and old works. Make it difficult/impossible for their customers to legally obtain works that aren’t on the “top 40.”
- Accuse anyone who complains (or offers an alternative) of profound moral sins such as stealing from the artists.
- Spend profits purchasing lobbying power to protect the above system.
- Attack any organization or entity that appears to offer alternatives to the customers or artists.
- Require the artists under threat of financial ruin to use the above system.
Wow. That’s a great way to run a business. I’m sure that the P2P networks would be loved by everyone if they adopted to above “business plans.”
I’ve got a few other words for Amy Weiss, but they are not fit for printing.