by Santhosh Chandrashekar
Daily Lobo columnist
The move by the Recording Industry Association of America to file lawsuits against 16 UNM network users for illegally downloading music on the Internet raises disturbing questions about music, its commodification and the role of the Web as a carrier to distribute music. While downloading music illegally has been a cause for concern for the RIAA for quite some time now, the possibility of the association subpoenaing ITS to provide IP addresses of violators indicates a renewed focus on campuses and the strategy to involve University bodies such as ITS to crackdown on those illegally downloading music.
The RIAA has also involved Congress in its efforts to curb piracy on campuses. Five U.S. representatives have co-authored a letter sent to officials from schools receiving copyright infringement notices from the RIAA and the Motion Picture Association of America. This clearly is a move to send out a strong message against music piracy and an effort to get the government involved in the act.
The RIAA has sent four waves of pre-litigation settlement letters to several universities drawing attention to music piracy. These letters allow purported violators to settle the case by paying the stipulated amount. If they deny to do so, the case enters the court, and the settlement amount goes up.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
The absurdity of the settlement amount cannot be missed. If the case goes to court, record companies can sue for $750 to $150,000 per song. It is common knowledge that many students work more than 40 hours a week and can barely manage to make ends meet. There is no way they will pay this amount to the recording companies, which makes out-of-court settlement the only possibility. Even here, the students will be left poorer by $4,000, which could be their tuition for two semesters.
With this backdrop, it is clear that the lawsuit is also intended to send out a warning among college students that downloading music illegally will not be tolerated. At the same time, recording companies may be overlooking the fact that college students are one of their primary target groups that support the music industry. A face-off at this juncture may not be the best thing to for the record industry.
Secondly, this incident also draws attention to the reckless commercialization of music, which may have left some students with no other option but to illegally download music. Recording companies spend millions of dollars promoting artists and albums, which they need to recover by invariably increasing the price of albums. Most students are averse to being involved in lawsuits and would rather pay for the music they are downloading if the amount is within their reach. While software makers put out student editions that are competitively priced, recording companies rarely do this, which conveys insensitivity toward a primary group of consumers without deep pockets. A good step for record companies to take would be to offer a discount for students.
Subpoenaing university bodies to reveal IP addresses of network users also raises questions about confidentiality. While recording companies may be legally justified in doing so, university bodies such as ITS should think about the ramifications of this move, which could involve students underutilizing the University wireless network and emigrating elsewhere. This could also lead to the sanitization of the wireless network, which hampers free exchange of information and dialog.
While illegally downloading music cannot be condoned, the recording companies can charge students whatever it costs to legally download music along with a small fine that is within the reach of students.
An unscientific poll conducted by the Daily Lobo on music piracy reveals that the majority of the readers are against the commercialization of music. While 49 percent of those who voted feel that music should be free for all, 21 percent felt that the fines should be equal to the price of music downloaded legally. As much as 17 percent felt that only second-time offenders should be fined, whereas 14 percent felt that music piracy should be treated as a criminal offense. This hints at the trenchant opposition among college students toward criminalizing music piracy.
While recording companies are well within their rights to sue college students for downloading music illegally, the move points at a larger trend of criminalizing youths, as they are still the most problematic group that finds ways to work against capitalism. Moreover, any bad blood between college students and recording companies will only hurt the business interests of the latter in the long run.
