RIAA Angst

Why is there so much anxiety about the RIAA? In the 24 hours since Jammie Thomas was found to have infringed on some copyright laws there have been several articles that seem to insinuate that the RIAA and the major record labels are trying to mandate how a music enthusiast can listen to his or her purchased music. For example, some believe they are trying to prevent music enthusiasts that have purchased and downloaded music from playing it on multiple devices like an iPod, laptop or car stereo. That's just not the case. What they are saying is that if you want to listen to music that you do not own, then you must pay for it, and not download it from places like free P2P sites, or rip it from a friend. What's wrong with that? If you built, created, painted, developed or engineered something to sell to the general public, wouldn't you want to be compensated for your work? Hardworking people created the music you listen to, and most artists want to be compensated for their efforts, even if it is just a few bucks a month. I don't understand why some post-modern consumers feel as if they are entitled to free music, but I'm open to hearing the reasons why.

Please note, I do believe Jammie Thomas' judgment was far too harsh, and I do hope she is able to work out a monetary agreement far less than what the jury awarded. If not, than the RIAA and the labels will be making an unfair example out of her.

I am also aware that there are some musicians and bands that do not want to charge for their music, as they believe by not charging they will actually develop a larger audience. That's a bit misguided, as 1) people are willing to pay for quality music and 2) poorly written free music does not equal a larger fan base. However, there's a simple solution for these individuals - give your music away for free. That is your prerogative. No one is making you sell your music not even the RIAA, but for the musicians that do want to sell their music, it seems only fair to have some systems in place that help prevent widespread free sharing and royalty-free distribution of their music.

Now, I too am not a fan of DRM in its present form, but there has to be some kind of middle ground where musicians can be fairly compensated and their music protected from royalty-free sharing and distribution, while at the same time providing listeners with the flexibility to play music they have purchased in any non-commercial way they desire. We can't have an "us vs. them" mentality.

As always, I welcome your comments as I really would like to hear your thoughts on this subject.

Peace.