OStatic

Two federal judges, one in Boston and one in New York each came to different conclusions regarding the legality of using file sharing services on the same day. The judge in Boston was hearing a case brought by the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) against a number of Boston University students. In that case, the judge ruled that simply making a file available for download is not a violation of the copyright until someone actually downloads it.

This judgment could severely impact the RIAA’s ability to bring new cases against downloaders because it would require they prove that others are actively infringing on the copyright by downloading the file. Hard to do without the voluntary cooperation of an ISP.

In a case in New York, a federal judge ruled that simply placing a file in a shared folder was tantamount to illegal publication. These two contradictory rulings come just as momentum is picking up in the music industry to abandon their old business model and try to adopt an ISP levied surcharge on consumers for an β€œall you can eat” model.

Β A couple of weeks ago at the SXSW (South by South West) music/tech festival, during a panel session entitled β€œMobility, Ubiquity and Monetizing Music” Jim Griffin put forward his proposal to levy a charge on Internet users that would then be divvied up and distributed to artists and rights holders as compensation. This is essentially the same scheme currently used around the world as compensation for radio play. Canada has a similar system in place for recordable media such as blank CDs and DVDs.

In the days following SXSW, the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) published an article titled β€œMonetizing File Sharing” that further discussed and refined some of Griffin’s proposal. Just days later, Warner Music Group hired Griffin on a three year contract to flesh out a model of the system he has been proposing.

The amount of talk and buzz from corporate financial types in the entertainment industry certainly seems to indicate that the idea of a levy, be it an opt-in surcharge or an Internet β€œtax”, is being discussed seriously for the first time since the RIAA’s initial rejection of a similar scheme proposed the EFF in 2004. The truth of the matter is that it may be the recording industry’s last, best hope for profitability.

Would you be willing to pay an extra $5/month for legal P2P file sharing?

• P2P
• File sharing
• Internet tax
• RIAA