roachboy

the riaa was set up in the 1940s by a consortium of record labels to protect their financial interests.

the riaa exists to enforce record label property claims---across the field of copyright law that is pitched toward these interests as well (that record labels control the copyright to the actual performance released as a record, with the artists getting points--the composer (in a very traditional sense of the term--see the james newton vs the beaties boys case for an indiex of just how traditional it is) controls rights to the composition (only what is notated in conventional/19th century modes)

these arrangements have very little to do with the financial interests of the artists...under this regime, at the height of their earning power, the beatles made 6.66 cents on the dollar.
the rest of the money went...well...elsewhere.

the position of the riaa was and to a degree remains tied to particular formats for recording and the distribution systems that were developed around them.
the ways digital recording technologies have developed--and the media that disseminate them--puts these systems of production and distribution under pressure. distributors have been collapsing left and right--of course, it is experimental and/or underground forms that have taken most of the hit (the smaller distribution systems have collapsed first).

the riaa's opposition to filesharing is a last-ditch attempt by these record labels to erase the writing on the wall, to protect their financial position.

there is nothing---nothing at all--of this that involves an ethical dimension.

what you think of it depends largely on the type of music you are involved with--i think the major record labels should simply die off. they are unnecessary as dissemination media, unnecessary for production. they continue to exploit artists and gouge audiences. screw them.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite