boycott-riaa.com - Article: How the RIAA expands its membership

How the RIAA expands its membership

Posted by Jon Newton on August 25, 2003 at 4:50 PM (printer friendly)

A while back, Boycott-RIAA.com founder Bill Evans updated his list of RIAA companies from the RIAA website run-down and then, "Someone notified me that Matador Records was listed, but wasn't an RIAA member," says Evans.

"That rang a bell and I remembered I'd been through this once before and a quick email to Matador's Patrick Armory confirmed that it's still not an RIAA member.

"Patrick went on to say, 'Yes, the RIAA added us to their list again. I've now sent them three [count them] emails demanding that we be removed! But to no avail.'

Evans says he contacted Amy Weiss, the RIAA PR flak, and former Clinton deputy press secretary from back when the DMCA was passed, and asked her why, after three request from Patrick to remove the company from the RIAA's list, it was still there."

Within 48 hours, it had been removed and the confusion cleared up, Evans continues ........ "Or so we thought, because a short while later, I had an email from Lookout Records wanting to know why they were on our list.

"Christopher Appelgren told us in no uncertain terms that they are not a member of the RIAA, amd never have been and that in fact, they support many of Boycott-RIAA positions, as do their artists."

So why does the RIAA insist on adding non-RIAA labels to the list of members? Go to the RIAA site (if it hasn't been hacked again) and you'll see joining the association is a pretty elaborate process.

Word has it that there are other labels out there in the same boat and Evans has once again written to Amy Weiss asking how this can be - how does a company that isn't a member get on the RIAA get on list?

Inquiring minds want to know.

User Comments (These do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of this site)


IFeelFree	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 5:24 PM The answer is obvious - the RIAA wants to thwart the RIAA boycott. When consumers want to purchase non-RIAA music they have a hard time determining which artists are not RIAA-affiliated. The consumer may erroneously abstain from purchasing a particular CD because he thinks the label is an RIAA member. Either it's deliberate deception, or they have some damn lazy accountants.

directive	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 5:44 PM This is just as wierd and crazy as the RIAA when they say: "The music industry is falling apart and we used to be an industry at 40 billion but were at 32 billion now." Very deceptive language if you ask me.

directive	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 5:45 PM The music industry is not the RIAA only, though they want the public to think so.

gdZiemann	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 5:58 PM There isn't anything honest about the RIAA at all. My new interpretation of the acronym is Refutable Information Again and Again.

CodeWarrior	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 6:18 PM Uh, subjecting an innocent company to being listed as a member when they are not, is making a fraudulent misrepresentation. I would urge any label which is being represented as being an RIAA member, if it not, to send a certified, return receipt requested letter to Cary -Sue Sherman, and advise him that the listing is a fraudulent misrepresentation, and to the extent this might interfere with a label's income, as being listed as a company against which there is a boycott, this may be seen as tortious business interference, and demand that the list be corrected within ten (10 business days) or they may face a lawsuit for damages. ~code

directive	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 6:47 PM code you make a great point, and george, i enjoy all of what you have to say. :)

otech	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 6:51 PM More information about this at http://www.magnetbox.com/riaa/news.asp

mtekk	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 7:15 PM But if the RIAA is adding these record laybols' names that are not members on their members list, isn't that stealing the laybol's name, therefore illegal? if so the RIAA is about to get dragged into the biggest fist fight that has ever occured in court.

Spica	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 8:20 PM I say, we suspend human rights for a day, have all RIAA affiliates round up and shot, forget it ever happened, and never speak of it again. what a headache those guys are with their collapsing money-making scheme.

sharefile	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 8:21 PM i would recommend that any future emails from labels stating that they are being misrepresented as RIAA members should be sent an email informing them of thier legal right to sue over it and force thier name to be removed and compensated for lost earnings

Idontcareican	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 8:27 PM Seeing how many people including myself are removing RIAA music from our share and now promoting non RIAA music and bands, I can see how the RIAA wants to add other non members to the list. Sure the RIAA thinks that downloading music hurts their bottom line but they also know that there still is a reality that when people get music they never would have had the money to buy they still can become a fan and buy other non cd items from the band and also buy tickets and request the music on radio (doubtful they'll play it but...anyway) Like I said its the RIAAs loss that I�m now not using my Connection and Computer as a platform to promote their music and any other forgotten bands the RIAA threw out with the trash after they got done with them.

wabbitman	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 8:46 PM AMEN , Idontcareican . Code , Great point , as usual . George , that interpretation of their acronym is hysterical , may I use it ? and Spica I'd supply the ammo . -BOYCOTT IT ALL !!!!!!!!!!!- WABBITMAN

AverageConsumer	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 9:23 PM Maybe it's wishful thinking on the RIAA's part. They want to rule the music industry in fantasy, if not reality. So they just add names to the list to make their little feudal society look bigger. I think they really ARE afraid of the boycott, since we're picking up steam. Why else would they work so hard to thwart it? Keep it up. Don't buy, don't download, don't use the music.

Tinker36	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 10:08 PM Not pertaining to this topic, but I was wondering with all the great info that people post here, is anyone assembling it into a packet for reference for the folks being raped by the RIAA? Most people see a legal document and panic. Seems people here have a whole lot of insight and see the angles that would make useful ammo come trial time. As to the topic, I'd like to think it's oversight on some clerk's part, but seeing how the RIAA is full of major BS, AverageConsumer's take on it seems about right. Could it be that they are truely as overinflated as a balloon? Anyone got a pin?

thumbtack	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 10:46 PM otech, Thanks for the link...I've updated our list to reflect Magnetbox lists...

ShawnE3386	Date: August 25, 2003 @ 11:22 PM Spica's on to something. All we have to do now is wait for George Carlin's plan for legal murder once a month to kick in and we're golden. On a side note, some associates of mine have started a label. In case it should ever come up, Random Noise Records, based out of Alton, IL, IS NOT an RIAA member.

r0dr0ddy	Date: August 26, 2003 @ 1:49 AM Lookout records NOT and RIAA member?? Does this mean early Green Day recordings CAN be shared guilt-free? Maybe not, but we'll all be shocked if Lookout goes after individual p2p users. Excellent news, I've put my vintage Green Day back up on gnutella. ShawnE3386- I always try to support local labels. What kind of music does random noise promote?

CodeWarrior	Date: August 26, 2003 @ 8:09 AM Does anyone know of a site that maintains CURRENT statistics on record sales? It would be great feedback to chart sales for the month of May,June,July, and thus far in August. Also, off topic, but I still am fuzzy about what regulations there are for ISPs as far as who mandates they keep logs of customers activities, what law makes them do that, does the FCC mandate this, how long are logs kept, etc. From what I know of this "collection" process, the toadies of the RIAA download suspect copyrighted material from users, and index the contents of their shared folder. They come up with a paper document that says username XYZ, at IP address 127.0.0.0 had files x,y, an z for download. And then they have the filed they "allegedly downloaded". OK, so much for their evidence. They then subpoena the ISP to get the name associated with that IP address. But, anyone using notepad could generate a document purporting to show files found, and also, it's possible to generate fake packet sniffing logs, i.e., all it is a document with technical crap. How specific are the ISP logs, I mean they can show when you go to a specific website, but as far as who connected to you on what port, is an ISP log going to show that kind of thing? Sorry for so many questions, I was just throwing out some questions on how good the evidence could be against these folks, and also, the general question about why (besides billing) do ISPs even keep logs past a week. thanks in advance for any info on any of the issues raised. ~code

CodeWarrior	Date: August 26, 2003 @ 8:13 AM sorry for double post, I've had a lot of problems getting an error page when I make a post, so in advance, sorry, didn't mean to do that.

CriticalError	Date: August 26, 2003 @ 11:28 AM np, code. and you do bring up an interesting point. I would thing that the courts would, or a lawyer could, insist on the original log files, not condensed cuts that could be forged. I could �produce� a copy of my firewall logs that showed they were attacking me constantly if I wanted but I couldn�t create the original log file. Maybe they want everyone to just trust them�lol

IWANTMYMP3	Date: August 26, 2003 @ 2:10 PM The RIAA wnats everyone to believe they have rights to all the music ever made.... they would tax the air we breathe and say they made it from high mountain tops if they could. If this were any other business going around using their gorilla like weight to catch butterflies the govt would be all over them..... i guess if you sleep in the right beds you can get away with anything.

Remye	Date: August 27, 2003 @ 6:07 AM they started this thing. Might be an eye opener smirk on the other hand, ever notice how an artist (not just music either) gets REALLY noticed when he/she dies.. either as a martyr or a "victim of a senseless shooting" ala 2Pa(r)c?? ttmmm

shinkaide	Date: August 27, 2003 @ 8:55 AM Somebody should make a shirt that says = "RIAA = pure evil" and sell it for a buck each to millions of people out there. I'm gonna buy a hundred and give em away for free.

bluerhythmjo...	Date: September 10, 2003 @ 7:08 PM I propose that we punish the RIAA by killing one of its affiliates. With all due apologies to Christina Aguilera, Kelly Clarkson, Trapt, etc., I say we kill BMG. How, you ask? Well, no one will buy their records if every song on every album they put out is available... elsewhere. Their complete album list is on their website, www.bmg.com under Artists. Why BMG, you ask? Because a) we know they really are an RIAA outfit; b) in my opinion, they specialize in marketing dreck anyway, and c) eh, f*** them.