Gizmodo declares March “Boycott RIAA” month

Posted by: Brian

This is probably long overdue, but the folks at Gizmodo have decided to take on the Recording Industry Association of America by declaring March “Boycott the RIAA” month.

Putting Our Money Where Our Mouths Are: Boycott the RIAA in March

Alright, we’ve been following the RIAA’s increasingly frequent affronts to privacy and free speech lately, and it’s about time we stopped merely bitching and moaning and did something about it. The RIAA has the power to shift public policy and to alter the direction of technology and the Internet for one reason and one reason alone: it’s totally loaded. Without their millions of dollars to throw at lawyers, the RIAA is toothless. They get their money from us, the consumers, and if we don’t like the way they’re behaving, we can let them know with our wallets.

With that in mind, Gizmodo is declaring the month of March Boycott the RIAA month. We want to get the word out to as many people as humanly possible that we can all send a message by refusing to buy any album put out by an RIAA label.

C0ntinue reading…

Gizmodo goes on to say that you can continue supporting RIAA-backed artists during March by still going to see them perform live and buying t-shirts and other merchandise. Also, Gizmodo suggests turning your attention to the many great independent music artists out there.

Those of you who listen to our podcasts are well aware of our feelings toward the RIAA. For those who don’t know our positions, well, we pretty much feel the RIAA is an organized crime syndicate.

So I would like to extend my support to Gizmodo’s “Boycott the RIAA” month and promise not to buy any CDs or music released by an RIAA-backed label during March.

3 thoughts on “Gizmodo declares March “Boycott RIAA” month

  1. The RIAA was established to help musicians collect royalties from others profiting from their works. A radio station profits from the play of music by charging for advertisements – if a radio station plays popular music and is widely listened to, the more it charges for its ads. Music appears in commercials, in video games, in movies, on TV, on phones, on watches, on the Web, etc. How is a recording artist expected to make sure his/her work is not being used illegally or without permission? It would be very difficult for a single person to track all media for such apparent use.

    Enter the RIAA. The RIAA exists to help musicians who make a living from their creative works. No, you don’t own the creative work when you buy it. You’ve been given permission to use it in a specific format. Times have changed. The record and cassette were dominant platforms for years, but technology usually increases exponentially. Today, there exists a plethora of media file formats and playback devices. Just because something is digital, it doesn’t mean you have the right to copy it to any format that you want without first asking permission from the artist? Every time you rip a CD, do you contact the artist and ask “mind if I copy YOUR work to another format on MY hardware?” I doubt it. The RIAA tries to establish such guidelines so you don’t have to.

    If your issue is with the way the RIAA handles its royalty payment collection, then make this a topic of discussion, not solely DRM. Otherwise, you’re blasting an organization that was created to actually help musicians. I definitely think you need to examine and discuss this topic from both the business, artist, and consumer perspective, not just from the consumer perspective.


  2. Pingback: Some more thoughts on the RIAA « T&A: Technology and the Arts

Comments are closed.