Would "Truth" commercials like the anti-cigarette adds work against the RIAA?

[vi edit]

I know, everyone hates the truth and jel adds against the cigarette companies, but you have to admit, they do get your attention and at least spread a little bit of word about what's going on.

Would a mass campaign explaining all the BS crap the RIAA and MPAA is trying to pull be effective, or at the least, heard?

Sure we get lots of posts on internet forums, but it doesn't really get out to a large percentage of the buying community about how they are being dicked over by these people. Many people also aren't aware of how intrusive and invasive into our privacy these organizations would like to be if permitted.

Two important questions I guess would be for starters, could you even air them or would you be prohibited, and secondly, would people even care?

 

[guyver01]

Originally posted by: vi_edit
would people even care?

i doubt it... it's not like the RIAA is saying "listening to burned CD's won't cause cancer" or something like that...

the TRUTH ads are about the lies big tobacco have when it comes to the addictive and carcinogenic properties of cigarettes.

 

[Zugzwang152]

good luck getting the financial support for TV ads and such. tabacco actually kills people, hence why the big health not for profits cough up money. the most the RIAA and MPAA can do is piss us the fvck off :|...

 

[majewski9]

I dont think the RIAA or the MPAA has the power to stop pirating of movies or music. There is too many people out there who do it. Dont they make enough money????

 

[Tab]

Heh, the Anti-Mary Jane adds are the worst. What do you think most gun deaths and car accidents are caused by? People are so stupid. I have alot of friends who were stupid and started smoking at 14 and now are totally addicited at 16. They tons of bullshit for it, was it their fault? Yes, but should they get treated like crap? No. I personally think we need truth adds targeted at the idiotic anti-war protesters.

 

[XZeroII]

What is the truth? They are a business (or collection of business') and their goal is to make money. Pirators are theives. What's the so gray about that?

 

[tcsenter]

Would "Truth" commercials like the anti-cigarette adds work against the RIAA?

Yes, but only if they were as notoriously dishonest and deliberately inflammatory as the The Truth campaign ads. That should not be a problem, given the screech levels routinely found among the anti-RIAA rhetoric. i.e. "This is an outrage, how am I supposed to pay for my insatiable appetite for music and accumulate more albums than a radio station in four years time at $14.99 a piece?"

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Would "Truth" commercials like the anti-cigarette adds work against the RIAA?

Yes, but only if they were as notoriously dishonest and deliberately inflammatory as the The Truth campaign ads. That should not be a problem, given the screech levels routinely found among the anti-RIAA rhetoric. i.e. "This is an outrage, how am I supposed to pay for my insatiable appetite for music and accumulate more albums than a radio station in four years time at $14.99 a piece?"

I was thinking more along the lines of

- shoddy copy protection that prohibits the use of the CD in many cd players and nearly all computer CDROMs
- the heavy pressure put on hardware manufacturers to start using intrusive copy protection
- the heavy pressure put on internet providor to monitor users
- the absolutely ridiculous amounts that they wanted to charge online music stations
- the bullsh!t laws they put on radio stations (can't play more than 3 songs off one album in a 2 hour time frame, can't play more than two songs off one albulm in a row, ect)
- the desire of the RIAA to actually sobotage the computers of file sharers (in effect hacking)
- the pressure put on software designers to handicap or hinder their functionality
- the increasing difficulty to copy a cd FOR MY OWN USE

among others...

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
What is the truth? They are a business (or collection of business') and their goal is to make money. Pirators are theives. What's the so gray about that?

That's fine. But when they start screaming about how "Those Damn Kids" are destroying the music industry with their "InterWeb" and "Kazaam" instead of thinking "you know what, we don't have the commitment to the artist we used to twenty years ago, and the cheap single of the early 90s has gone the way of the dinosaur so we can throw two good songs on an album then pressure the artist to release more CRAP to fill up the 74 minutes so we can slap a $18.99 pricetag on it!"

Anti-RIAA, nah. Anti-RIAA's BS - yes, please. 😀

- M4H

 

[BillGates]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Would "Truth" commercials like the anti-cigarette adds work against the RIAA?

Yes, but only if they were as notoriously dishonest and deliberately inflammatory as the The Truth campaign ads. That should not be a problem, given the screech levels routinely found among the anti-RIAA rhetoric. i.e. "This is an outrage, how am I supposed to pay for my insatiable appetite for music and accumulate more albums than a radio station in four years time at $14.99 a piece?"

I was thinking more along the lines of

- shoddy copy protection that prohibits the use of the CD in many cd players and nearly all computer CDROMs
- the heavy pressure put on hardware manufacturers to start using intrusive copy protection
- the heavy pressure put on internet providor to monitor users
- the absolutely ridiculous amounts that they wanted to charge online music stations
- the bullsh!t laws they put on radio stations (can't play more than 3 songs off one album in a 2 hour time frame, can't play more than two songs off one albulm in a row, ect)
- the desire of the RIAA to actually sobotage the computers of file sharers (in effect hacking)
- the pressure put on software designers to handicap or hinder their functionality
- the increasing difficulty to copy a cd FOR MY OWN USE

among others...

I agree with those points.... Most average computer users have no clue that this stuff is happening.... Of course, they're the same ones who get busted for sharing a 43MB rip of LOTR II on Kazaa and think they're hot stuff, but it doesn't matter.... Their rights are equal to everybody else's. Education and an increase of awareness wouldn't be a bad thing.

Heck, the RIAA probably hasn't even realized how many people despise them yet and think their homepage is always changing due to software bugs or something 😉

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: vi_edit
I was thinking more along the lines of

- shoddy copy protection that prohibits the use of the CD in many cd players and nearly all computer CDROMs
- the heavy pressure put on hardware manufacturers to start using intrusive copy protection
- the heavy pressure put on internet providor to monitor users
- the absolutely ridiculous amounts that they wanted to charge online music stations
- the bullsh!t laws they put on radio stations (can't play more than 3 songs off one album in a 2 hour time frame, can't play more than two songs off one albulm in a row, ect)
- the desire of the RIAA to actually sobotage the computers of file sharers (in effect hacking)
- the pressure put on software designers to handicap or hinder their functionality
- the increasing difficulty to copy a cd FOR MY OWN USE

among others...

😕 damn, that's gold.

/grabs the 8mm Handycam and starts writing script

That's so annoying. Half the damn CDs and a lot of DVDs out there start some autoinstaller of spyware when you stick em in a PC.

OT - roofles @ vi_edit's sig. 😀

- M4H

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: XZeroII
What is the truth? They are a business (or collection of business') and their goal is to make money. Pirators are theives. What's the so gray about that?

That's fine. But when they start screaming about how "Those Damn Kids" are destroying the music industry with their "InterWeb" and "Kazaam" instead of thinking "you know what, we don't have the commitment to the artist we used to twenty years ago, and the cheap single of the early 90s has gone the way of the dinosaur so we can throw two good songs on an album then pressure the artist to release more CRAP to fill up the 74 minutes so we can slap a $18.99 pricetag on it!"

Anti-RIAA, nah. Anti-RIAA's BS - yes, please. 😀

- M4H

Very true, but these are totally different issues. I am talking about copy protection, and you are talking about customer loyalty. I don't think that this file sharing is hurting them that much, but it is a little and they have every right to try to protect their investments. If all artists were to band together and boycott their record labels, there may be a change. That's how you get stuff done. That's what they can do if they feel their labels arn't doing enough for them. As for you and I, just don't buy CD's. And your comment about putting 2 good songs on a CD, then filling the rest with crap is oppinion. Maybe you should listen to a different style of music. I listen to Country (yea, get a good laugh) and I enjoy, on average, 75% of the songs on a CD. Maybe the groups you listen to just plain suck.

 

[tcsenter]

Very true, but these are totally different issues. I am talking about copy protection, and you are talking about customer loyalty. I don't think that this file sharing is hurting them that much, but it is a little and they have every right to try to protect their investments.

I have no idea how you could say 'a little'. Look, I have lots of friends, nephews, cousins, neices, neighbors, etc. When I was working, lots of co-workers. And I seem to have some how become the computer service man for all of them, which invariably means I get to peak on their computers from time to time, or discuss technology with them, not to mention I owned a computer-oriented business for a few years.

While the argument that 'file trading might cause people to buy more music' seems a rather popular argument in defense of file-trading, I do not know a single person who says this is true in their own case. One in particular, the most flagrant and flamboyant file-trader of them all, often resorts to this argument as a counter to the recording industry's plight of falling sales. Yet, when you press him on the issue, even he confesses it isn't true in his case, "but, but I can see how it might cause someone to buy more music....just not me."

Nobody and I mean nobody I know is buying more or as much music since the popular advent of file-trading and their access to it. They will admit when pressed on the subject, some reluctantly, some rather proudly, they buy FAR less music, and the same reason for all of them, without exception, is 'why in the hell would you buy ANYTHING you can get for free and do so without risk?'

Now it is possible that I'm living in some bizarre area of the country, and all of the hundreds of people I have made friends or acquaintances with are mutants, or there is just something in the water here which makes all these people non-representative of the rest of the music buying population, or the formerly music buying population I should say, but I seriously doubt that.

Not hurting them 'that much'. Come on man!

 

[OS]

It might not matter much at all. Younger generations from middle/affluent classes basically grew up with the internet and broadband. Some of these kids/young adults have been downloading music for as long as they can remember, they don't see anything wrong with it. Parents don't really care either because it's not a big problem compared against other youth problems. These are the future consumers of music, but given the direction they're headed, the recording industry can look forward to a long, rough, downhill ride.