An official RIAA training video has been leaked that is every bit as humorous as you'd expect it to be. The same group of uber intellectuals that brought you raids and lawsuits against grandmothers, college students, kids, disabled veterans, and even the deceased has made produced a training video for law enforcement that truly baffles the mind.
The first question given in the video clip below is why music piracy should be addressed in the first place. A respondent replies that because it "affects the quality of life in a DA's district" and that "it's a link to a lot of other crimes." According to her it can be used to "get into a drug house that you couldn't get in before" and that it can even "have links to terrorists organizations for those Federal prosecutors out there."
Just when you though they'd completely lost it, she then says that some people even sell guns and drugs with bootleg CDs. I know I've never heard of a "Pearl Jam & Pot special" and I'm sure that I'm not alone.
The other person on the panel even furthers these incredulous claims with his story of how in some places people actually ask if "'Would you like it WITH or WITHOUT?' The 'with' is a CD enclosing a piece of crack or whatever the case may be."
Honestly, has anybody ever even heard of this nonsense? I mean are drug dealers really savvy enough or have the time to download and burn pirated music?
Drugs as a whole would make you more money and at a faster rate than a lame bootleg copy of the new Britney Spears could ever fetch. So it's almost insulting to hear them try to make their point with a straight face.
When EMI, Universal Music and Warner music reached settlement agreements with the likes of Napster, KaZaA and Bolt, they collected hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation - money that was supposed to go to artists whose rights had been allegedly infringed upon when the networks were operating with unlicensed music.
Now, according to an article, the managers of some major artists are getting very impatient, as it appears the very people who were supposed to be compensated - the artists - haven’t received anything from the massive settlements. They say the cash - estimated to be as much as $400m - hasn’t filtered through to their clients and understandably they’re getting very impatient.
Lawyer John Branca, who has represented the likes of The Rolling Stones and Korn, said: “Artist managers and lawyers have been wondering for months when their artists will see money from the copyright settlements and how it will be accounted for.”
Indicating the levels of impatience with the big labels holding the money he added: “Some of them are even talking about filing lawsuits if they don’t get paid soon.”
Of course, EMI, Universal and Warner have a different take on the delay, with sources suggesting that it’s down to the difficulties in deciding who gets what money, based on the levels of copyright infringement for each individual group or artist.
A recording industry on the back foot having spent most of its time fighting the digital revolution rather than becoming part of it, is clearly trying to hang on to every penny, even when it comes to compensating the artists who they claim they were defending by taking legal action in the first place.
Irving Azoff, who manages Christina Aguilera, The Eagles, Van Halen, REO Speedwagon and Seal (amongst others) says it’s hard for artists to get what they deserve from the labels: “They will play hide and seek, but eventually will be forced to pay something,” he said. “The record companies have even tried to credit unrecouped accounts. It’s never easy for an artist to get paid their fair share.”
Typically, the labels see it a different way. An EMI spokeperson said that it was “sharing proceeds from the Napster and Kazaa settlements with artists and writers whose work was infringed upon” while Warner’s said the label is “sharing the Napster settlement with its recording artists and songwriters, and at this stage nearly all settlement monies have been disbursed.”
The Universal spokesman spoke only of the label’s ‘policy’ of sharing “its portion of various settlements with its artists, regardless of whether their contracts require it” with no mention of whether it had actually done this or not.
But typically, when money is involved, things start to get murky. The same sources who suggested the reasons for the delay in making payments are also suggesting that there might not be much money to even give to the artists.
It’s being claimed that after legal bills were subtracted from the hundreds of millions in settlements, there wasn’t much left over to hand out.
Bravenet Blog 
Blog Community
Get a Free Blog
Manage your Blog
bravenet.com