TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Radiohead to Testify Against the RIAA

Radiohead, the band that made millions of dollars by giving away their music for free, has very little to complain about when it comes to piracy. On the contrary, in a landmark file-sharing case, Radiohead has responded positively to a request to testify against the RIAA.

Last month, Radiohead expressed its growing discomfort with record labels that abuse copyrights for their own benefit. In an attempt to take a stand against the labels, the band and several other well known artists formed the Featured Artists Coalition, a lobby group that aims to end the extortion-like practices of record labels and allow artists to gain more control over their own work.

In addition, the artists are unhappy with the fact that the labels, represented by lobby groups such as the RIAA and IFPI, are pushing for anti-piracy legislation without consulting the artists they claim to represent. Fans are unnecessarily portrayed as criminals according to some.

Now, in the case of Boston University student Joel Tenenbaum versus the RIAA, Radiohead has indicated that they will testify against the RIAA. Tenenbaum’s troubles started in 2003 when he rejected an offer to settle with the RIAA for $500. After a few more settlement attempts and legal quibbles, the case eventually went to court.

In court Joel is assisted by ‘hippy head‘ Professor Charles Nesson, and his law students. TorrentFreak contacted Tenenbaum’s legal team, who confirmed that they indeed spoke to Radiohead. “We met with Radiohead’s manager two weeks ago here at Harvard Law School. Professor Nesson walked away with the impression that their manager agreed to do so,” we were told.

Unlike the RIAA, Radiohead loves file-sharing

radiohead

Despite the criticism of Professor Charles Nesson’s work ethics and handling on the case thus far, it would be good to see well respected musicians such as Radiohead testify in favor of an accused file-sharer. Most of the time we don’t hear from the artists directly, only from their representatives, so their views are very welcome.

Recently, the effects of ‘illegal’ file-sharing on music sales were discussed during the Pirate Bay trial. Here, Professor and media researcher Roger Wallis told the court that his research has shown that there is no relationship between the decline of album sales and file-sharing. After his testimony, Wallis’ wife was overwhelmed with flowers as the public warmed to her husband and the opinion he expressed in court.

We can’t rule out the possibility that Radiohead might be after some floral tributes of its own, but even more than that they’d love to put one in the eye of the money obsessed record labels.

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • bob

    The RIAA can do nothing to stop piracy, it will only gain in strength and popularity

  • drivethemvans

    <3 raidiohead

  • Virate

    Reminds me of Scott Tenermann :D

  • NastyBedazzler

    I don’t really see how Radiohead is a credible witness in this case at all but more power to them.

    It’s always nice to see artists speak for themselves, especially big names like Radiohead who draw a lot of water.

  • bRAp

    Good.

  • Khmuprince

    Ernesto,

    I appreciate your great article on this subject. This is a great article expressing the support of the P2P from the great band artists. Keep up the great work!!! I check your site every day to read on P2P subject matter. Hope the Radiohead will kick the entertainment industry where the sun doesn’t shine and send the shock wave across the globe on the truth of P2P and the greedy RIAA.

  • Anonymous
  • grawss

    I’m not too much of a Radiohead fan, but this is awesome. Having someone up on the stand saying, “we made millions from the effects of piracy” is going to be a blow to the head of the RIAA. Unless of course the RIAA threw bribes around; ahhh, the good ol’ legal system.

  • r3loaded

    I’ll pop down to the shops now, need to find a suitable bouquet for Thom Yorke and co. :)

  • anon

    looks like there is hope yet to get rid of these so-called ‘anti-piracy’ gangs. if anything they are only using it as a cover to get money for themselves and not to the artists they represent

  • Shahee

    Awesome that Radiohead is taking a stand! Recording corps are soooo currupt! And they say “sharing” is “stealing”… ehem, but stealing involves removing it from someone’s possession. making/downloading a copy, is sharing – period.

  • http://www.10ch.org/ www.10ch.org

    @10 anon
    “looks like there is hope yet”
    If there lacked any hope in the first place, it is because people did not try to engage in political activities against the RIAA. In order to do this, unity is necessary.

    Pirates of the world, unite!

  • Pingback: randalflagg.net

  • so…ok

    $hit h0t :)

  • Pingback: Radiohead ???????????????????? RIAA | BLOG [in] TREND : ??????????? ? ??? ?????????

  • Anonymous

    Cool! I hope many others will join them. Personally I think it’s Ray Beckerman who has lost his mind attacking the few people who are helping at least someone RIAA is attacking. Beckerman’s recent rant where he was “appalled” was a disgusting read. It for sure turned me against him!

  • Pingback: Radiohead To Testify Against The RIAA — The Ripcord

  • Andrew

    Radiohead: the band of the people.

  • Murgatroyd

    @NastyBedazzler

    Radiohead has first-hand knowledge of the direct correlation between the free downloading of music, and the artists’ positive profit therefrom.

    There can be no more credible witness than a group who understood these facts going in, and then rigorously proved them in practice by putting their own “intellectual property” on the line.

    So let’s turn the page on this “downloading is stealing” myth, and listen to what Radiohead has to say.

  • TheFuzzball

    It is done.

  • The Laugher

    Tee hee hee

  • Fin

    Guys, could people please stop scoring awesome and wrecking hits on the MPAA, by rapid prototyper can’t keep up with the demand for Kamina Shades….

  • Anonymous

    “Radiohead has first-hand knowledge of the direct correlation between the free downloading of music, and the artists’ positive profit therefrom.”

    …after a DECADE of big label marketing and muscle (capitol records, USA). forgot that little tidbit did you?

    and the vast majority of people that downloaded “in rainbows” didn’t pay anything. not one penny. not a single, solitary, cent.

    also, they’ve never gone on record saying how much they actually made during their little experiment. funny, that…

  • Pingback: Radiohead getuigt tegen RIAA: downloaders niet per definitie crimineel | NieuweMedia

  • MM

    good music should not be kept down by the man…

  • Aniki

    ROW ROW

    FIGHT DA POWAH

  • Hacker/pirates of the world UNITE

    ask jack oneil said upon becoming a general, to run the SGC,
    all my life i been stickin it to the man, i don’t think i can be the man.

    GOOD DOWN WIT DA MAN

  • CCC

    “In addition, the artists are unhappy with the fact that the labels, represented by lobby groups such as the RIAA and IFPI, are pushing for anti-piracy legislation without consulting the artists they claim to represent”

    wrong. the RIAA/IFPI represent label not artists. they done it well

  • mjr

    I talk a bit about it being wise for the artists to disassociate them from the industry groups in my ol’ blog article from December; glad to see people actually doing it.

    http://mjr.iki.fi/blog/index.php?/archives/31-EU-copyright-regime-drops-pretense-of-democracy.html

  • asshole-licker

    I know you’re smart… but the url is radiohead and not “raiohead”

  • d

    whether or not they are a credible witness, and whether or not you like them, at least they are somewhat taking a stand

  • p0rk

    Spot on.

  • Anonymous

    @24 – While,as you say, it is true the RIAA/IFPI do represent the labels, but often times when in public or pushing for legislation, they “claim” that everything they are doing is to protect the artists.

  • joel’s legal team

    we did not confirm that radiohead will testify. we only confirmed that we met with their manager.

  • Incredulous

    Notwithstanding that I like the guys in Radiohead and like the sound, but I just don’t see how the jury is going to take anything seriously from a guy who sings, “I’m a creep. I’m a weirdo.”

  • Pingback: Intoxicated Saturday Night Links « Killer Bologna

  • Pingback: Radiohead to Testify Against the RIAA - Tweak3D.Net

  • Pingback: Radiohead to Testify Against RIAA, Both Ironically and Unironically | LinkManDX.com

  • BruceLD

    I’ve always loved Radiohead. Their ability to write and performs songs of melancholy and angst, then turning their work into art that is both harmoneous and beautiful. True artists indeed.

    Good luck to them. May they sow the seeds that can force the greed machines into evolving and adapting to a digital world that has no boundaries, limitations and can never be confined.

    There’s no closing pandoras box. All artists from all around the world have yet to see how they can change our world.

  • somedork

    to #20 – you act like the major labels were doing anything more than using their monopoly to drive Radiohead Sales. The vast majority of ALL media (news, teleivision, radio, music, movies) is owned by a group of people small enough that could could cram them into a large SUV.

    The labels don’t like the internet/filesharing for one major reason – it takes THEM out of the loop completely. Eliminate every major record label tomorrow, and there will still be a ton of great bands out there. In fact, you will probably hear about a lot more of them because you wouldn’t be forced to listen to the latest 50 cent single every 22.5 minutes on every station all day long.

    The internet allows artists to market directly with their audience – no need to pay for the record label exec’s coke binge, $5000 a night hookers, or their ferarri. The media execs are pretty much all a bunch of greedy —s (anyone with a brain knows).

  • alex jacobson

    “also, they’ve never gone on record saying how much they actually made during their little experiment. funny, that…”

    They’ve stated in a few interviews that they made more money from the “Pay what you want” scheme than they did on their previous albums which were released by a major record label.

    Also if you acknowledge the band hasn’t released any figures on sales for In Rainbows where do you get the information behind this statement: “and the vast majority of people that downloaded “in rainbows” didn’t pay anything. not one penny. not a single, solitary, cent.”

  • Anonymous

    radio is simply the best

  • aikanae

    It’s about time. You can’t tell me it’s about the money when people are paying several hundred dollars for music players and thousands on home entertainment theaters.

    No college student has ever paid for a substantial amount of music and certainly they don’t with tuition fees. Younger kids are more interested in games. Both the labels and studios can kiss that market goodbye. It doesn’t take a crystal ball to figure out that the majority of downloaders are between the ages of 30-60 based on what’s popular. RIAA can’t even give their music away to that market.

    They want to end competition. That’s what DRM and DCMA is all about anymore. Congress are the only ones gullible enough to buy into that crap (or be sold on it is more probably more appropiate). Even changing the law to mirror gestapo-like tactics and RIAA still can’t win a single case.

    It seems like fans have been shouldering more than their share of the battle for too long now. It’s about time.

    Now where’s NIN? Marillion? Janis Ian? And all the others that have been screwed over?

    Good reporting TF. The fact that stories (that are relevant to daily life) never get mentioned in the news is most likely the reason traditional news media has gone the way of the radio- dead. Another causality of monopolies. They just don’t work well.

  • Anonymous

    Well if the artists don’t like the labels why do they keep signing with them? Do what Radiohead has done, go out on your own and don’t sell your music rights to them. It’s that simple.

  • Pingback: Radiohead to Testify Against RIAA in File-Sharing Case : joemillerjd

  • aikanae

    This is what the RIAA want to do to the internet:

    “A 2006 Future of Music Coalition (FMC) study found that just 15 formats describe three-quarters of all commercial radio. While the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) counts “rock” and “arena rock” as distinctly separate music categories, lauding the diversity of the airwaves, FMC notes that much of the music is the same. Indeed, up to 80 percent of songs in those “different” categories are overlap. Radio playlists are hot commodities for major labels that pay for inclusion.”

    “Clear Channel, for example, now owns almost 1,200 radio stations, effectively controlling the rock market.”
    http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081117/low_power

  • commonman

    hmm………radiohead gotto listen to em now, for being more fan friendly.

  • Pingback: overflowlegal.com

  • Jaosn WOods

    I am truly surprised that someone has not taken out the RIAA yet!

    RT
    http://www.anon-tools.cz.tc

  • Johnny Greenwood /.

    Yes, we will be testifying against the RIAA.

  • Jim

    There just pissed because bands will soon see they can just sell advertising on their own band site to create revenue, thus cutting out the lawyers, middle men and other non-value producers. The lawsuits and pirating crap are just the battle cry of people who produce no values.

    This band sees that very fact and have been smart about dealing with reality as it is, not as they wish it to be.

    Other bands are going to follow this same model, the labels don’t like it because they are cut out of the picture.

  • Murgatroyd

    > …after a DECADE of big label marketing and
    > muscle (capitol records, USA). forgot that
    > little tidbit did you?

    Certainly not.

    That only makes their testimony all the more meaningful, since they’ve seen both sides of the coin, and are painfully familiar with the realities of the music marketplace, and the muscle which dominates it.

    > and the vast majority of people that
    > downloaded “in rainbows” didn’t pay
    > anything. not one penny. not a single,
    > solitary, cent.

    But that’s really the point, isn’t it? Free downloads, whether sanctioned or not, correlate positively with paid music sales.

    > also, they’ve never gone on record saying
    > how much they actually made during their
    > little experiment. funny, that.

    Makes sense to me. Why mess with something that works?

    If you were running an ongoing charity appeal, which was continuing to generate funds, would you advertise it if you had met your goal? That’d be pretty dumb, wouldn’t it?

    They’ve made it known that it was a great success, and that’s really all we need to know.

    I’m sure we’ll hear specifics in due time. Meanwhile, let them run their business as they wish.

  • Murgatroyd

    The RIAA would have us believe that every song downloaded for free corresponds to a lost sale is patently false, and Radiohead is fully capable of debunking such a myth.

  • Stuffn

    “money obsessed record labels”… LOL. Yeah, wouldn’t that be weird if a company was focused on making money?

    Let’s not forget that corporate sponsoring is what MADE Radiohead. Without the help of people with money they’d just be a garage band. And I don’t see the members of Radiohead giving up the millions they made from touring and CD sales (how are they NOT “money obsessed?”

    Although, I haven’t heard their side of it, and I like their music so I hope they aren’t playing the “they just want money” game. That would be F’n retarded.

  • Murgatroyd

    In fact, the record companies spend quite a bit to get people to hear music for free, knowing fully that this translates directly into sales.

    What’s really at stake here is control over what prospective music buyers hear. The RIAA member companies own and/or control radio stations. This is tremendous marketing leverage. Whatever gets airtime sells.

    Its the same with the internet. Whatever people hear for free sells. (Would you buy music you’ve never heard? ) But if people start listening to the internet instead of the traditional media, the RIAA stand to lose the market dominance which they have spent decades building, and have come to rely on.

    The Internet is more than a disruptive technology. In terms of content delivery, it is a decentralizing, revolutionary technology.

    The RIAA do know this. What they don’t know is what to do about it. Since the content delivery medium changing in a way which is not under their control, their very business model is therefore facing obsolescence, and they have lacked the knowledge, the creativity or foresight to effectively adapt.

    Instead of blowing so much money on payola and coke, they ought to have been investing in innovation.

    What inevitably happens to such companies which rest on their laurels for far too long is, they lose what they had and are replaced by new players in a radically changed market.

    They can try to get laws passed in their favor all over the world, but the fact remains that no court can save a globally stagnating business model from the inexorable tide of new technology.

    A new generation, intimately familiar with technology, knows with first-hand certainty that no matter what the laws say, duplication is not the same as theft.

    Call me an optimist, but I believe that any laws which run contrary to reality are certain to be short-lived; and any industry which would depend on such laws doubly so.

  • cjack

    and metallica says, hind sight is 20/20: don’t buy fauxtallica guitar hero, and if you do, you better not let your friends play–you could end up like kobe and friends; look out, they’re at it again.

  • 4l13ndud3

    Just for this, I’m gonna buy more Radiohead CD’s! I’ve already downloaded the tracks, but I support those who believe in pro-filesharing. =D

  • Pingback: Radiohead vs. RIAA | Genzel.ca - Generation Zel! Radio

  • Zwartbaard

    So! Just ordered all of Radiohead’s albums!

  • Sean

    Considering that Radio Head hasn’t released any numbers on the “in Rainbows” experiment, the premise of this discussion is in question. To say that piracy has no effect on sales is absurd – among the people I know I am the only person who’s mp3 playlist represents their album collection – every other person i’ve encountered have only purchased 10-20% of their music, the rest having been downloaded illegally. While this is not a scientific test by any imagination – I find it doubtful that my experience is the exception to the rule.

    “File Sharing” advocates treat the situation as “black and white” as the RIAA. It’s not. The music industry needs to change but “lolz free muzak” is not the answer. Piracy, or “file sharing without the consent of the copywrite holders/artists” is still wrong, still a crime, and still inexcusable.

    Still, the Music Industry needs to change – and Radiohead is awesome – I really hope their testimony promotes change in the industry – but this does not excuse the defendant of acts that are considered criminal under current law.

  • Pingback: Radiohead to Testify Against the RIAA - What’s the Word!?

  • Pingback: Family Holloway » Blog Archive » Radiohead to testify against RIAA

  • Linjo

    Fucking ace. Shit is just starting to hit the fan. I hope this is just the beginning of a slow and painful death of RIAA.

  • Paul

    Well done Radiohead. You’ve gained another fan. I wasn’t much into your music, (generational gap :) , although, mark my words, I will support you next time you tour in the area. I’ll be buying some tickets to see you guys live.

  • Anonymous

    “NastyBedazzler

    I don’t really see how Radiohead is a credible witness in this case at all but more power to them.

    It’s always nice to see artists speak for themselves, especially big names like Radiohead who draw a lot of water.”

    they put out their last album “in rainbows” for free online before a record label put it out. all they did was sell the album for x amount of money by donation. they’re credible because they legitimately made money doing this, and they’ve probably had a lot of record company issues over the years…

  • the bits of a few exabytes

    i hosted Brett Gaylor the producer of the documentary Rip which is basically about Girl Talk. The doc was produced by the National Film Board of Canada, so as a Canadian I invested in it. All that aside, the doc discusses sampling and has Larry Lessig, Corey Doctorow and Mark Hosler from Negativeland in it. In our 45 minute interview, i was pretty tired, none the less, one good point was made, in that I mentioned that a mash up in a networked environment could with some legal and network innovation become an artvertisment/business plan benefiting both the artist and the content owners.

    the link doesn’t work now but when it does goto

    ckuw.ca

    Program Schedule/Frida/6pm/Stendahl Syndrom

  • Pingback: meneame.net

  • Pingback: MS Chat Thread Vol. 2: Tha Trill Edition - Page 2693 - Muzik Supremacy

  • Anonymous

    @Sean
    “every other person i’ve encountered have only purchased 10-20% of their music, the rest having been downloaded illegally”

    And?

    Would they have purchased the other 80-90% if filesharing didn’t exist, or is that a question you neglected to ask?

    @Sean
    “The music industry needs to change but “lolz free muzak” is not the answer.”

    Muzak? Oh God. Who the Hell would willingly listen to muzak!? Not the answer? No kidding.

    Now, free music, on the otherhand…

  • Pingback: » Am Krankenbett der Musikindustrie | 78s - Das Magazin für bessere Musik

  • Anonymous

    why a british band and american like NIN surely they should be fighting ASS-HOLES like PRS,IFPI,FACT,BPI.

    Thats not say i am not happy with this.

  • kos

    a lot people swapping their music via dvd discs full of mp3s not over the net so they cant be tracked RIAA and IFPI are never going to stop it all people are doing is shift it of the net lol

  • Pingback: The Gads of Koroo » Clash of the Titans

  • Pingback: Radiohead - Page 13 - Avril Lavigne Bandaids: The Best Damn Avril Lavigne Fansite

  • Pingback: Radiohead getuigt tegen de RIAA - Zwartbaard

  • $hadow

    THEY CAN’T MONITOR BLUETOOTH OR IV MEDIA TRANSFERS!!! AHAHAH i win -.-

  • DigitalBliss

    The fact of the matter is that the industry has been through this before and has seem to forget. First it was casset tapes then vhs. We all know what happened in the end. With that said technology is ever changing and the business models of these companies never keep up with it. When all is said and done these organizations like the RIAA need to be disbanded because they hinder creativity.
    On another note I have always been a fan of Raidohead and will continue to buy their albums not just because of this but the fact that their music is truly artistic.

  • DigitalBliss

    The fact of the matter is that the industry has been through this before and has seem to forget. First it was cassette tapes then vhs. We all know what happened in the end. With that said technology is ever changing and the business models of these companies never keep up with it. When all is said and done these organizations like the RIAA need to be disbanded because they hinder creativity.
    On another note I have always been a fan of Raidohead and will continue to buy their albums not just because of this but the fact that their music is truly artistic.

  • Dan

    “Tenenbaum’s troubles started in 2003 when he rejected an offer to settle with the RIAA for $500.”

    The $500 dollar offer was made by Tenenbaum to the RIAA as a settlement, not the other way around {as stated]. It was probably based an actual damages, in Tenenbaum’s opinion. The RIAA rejected it, of course.

  • Pingback: Media Illiterate » Blog Archive » Radiohead to Testify Against the RIAA

  • rockhospital.com

    i think that bands only gain more fans by doing like radiohead. a band shouldnt have their fans against them, and radiohead is a good example on how a band should act, in favor of their fans. makes sense?

  • Anonymous

    someone should have the mpaa riaa and friends disbanded by a court order

  • johannesfaust

    mpaa riaa are just paranoid androyds…radio head kick ass!

  • Cato

    The whole story about going after filesharers is much more sinister than it seems on the surface. Governments want to control the net, they like power, they love 1984 and they know that if they can reign in the net, they can turn us all into Wintson Smith. We, the people on the ground cannot allow any central power over the internet, the stakes are too high. The net should be anarchy, it should reflect the human soul, it should not be controlled. If they continue shenanigans, they will find stronger and stronger resistance to their legitimacy of existing as entities governing us at all.

  • Pingback: Personal Finance Resource Links 04-05-09 — Hobby Cash: Make Cash Blogging About the Things You Love

  • ElKaMiNo

    Hell, since they did that, I might even download an album and try them out. Never wanted to but heck, I might now! Go RH!

  • Pingback: Radiohead ?????? RIAA « CopyrightMachines.org

  • Pingback: Linkpost | 4.5.2009

  • Pingback: CK4U.COM | Everything Can Be The News » Blog Archive » Radiohead ???????????????????? RIAA

  • kdsde

    Ernesto

    Could it be you have it wrong?

    If I remember correctly what I read was that Joel offered $500 and the MAFIAA was the one that refused since they wanted their “regular” $4500 “settlement”.

    Some times later when they were NOT going away, he even offered $5k but now they wanted ~$10000 which was the time that he said “now it’s enough, I fight you [Please watch your language]“

  • wheatus

    There is no room for lamprey middle men any more… the RIAA must die.

    Artist, meet music lover…

    Music lover, pay if you think it’s good enough.

    business model.

    bbb
    wheatus.com

  • Anonymous

    “I’m not too much of a Radiohead fan, but this is awesome. Having someone up on the stand saying, “we made millions from the effects of piracy” is going to be a blow to the head of the RIAA.”

    That argument won’t hold up though seeing as they were already a huge band making millions before they gave away an album. If they were an unknown band that gave away music and made millions from it then that would hold some weight.

  • Pingback: Finance Geek » Radiohead To Testify Against RIAA

  • nicholaspaul

    Let’s make this simple.
    I make something I want to sell.
    You want it, but you don’t want to pay.
    TOO BAD!
    Owning something without paying IS stealing, and there IS ownership involved in music. It is NOT owned by the people. It’s owned by the artist, who could NOT do what he does without involvement from companies with the ability to distribute. Ask Kurt Cobain (another artist-as-hypocrite, biting the hand that feeds them).

    Your ‘rights’ to own something do not override my rights to make a living from my creation.

    Only cheap skate, selfish, what-about-me kids complain about spending sixteen measly dollars on a product that took weeks/months to build.

  • Pingback: links for 2009-04-05 - Kevin Bondelli’s Youth Vote Blog

  • Musicians

    Piracy is not the problem < it is the product and the fan base. Understand? Radiohead is not the problem. I love their music so much I bought their cds.

  • Nietzsche

    A note to all:

    Using the language devices of the opposition only detracts from your arguments.

    Do not refer to yourself as pirates. Doing so is implicit compliance with their classification.

    The RIAA and MPAA et al do not refer to themselves as “us money hungry mongres” do they?

    Create an effective diction and fight.

  • Anonymous

    @nicholaspaul:

    Way to ignore the details and make a generalized assumption that couldn’t hold water if you molded it out of glass.

    A. THE RECORD LABEL KEEPS MOST OF THE PROFIT MADE BY THE SALES. So you’re paying one person for a product created by someone else. Not to say they don’t pay the artist, but the problem at had is that they don’t pay the artist [i]enough, if at all[/i]. In comparison to the product value, what they get back is pretty much pennies of the effort they put into the songs in the first place. Hell, there are a lot of different events in which the labels strike deals and completely leave the artists and bands that wrote the songs out of the loop at all.

    B. The RIAA is acting like they own [b]ALL[/b] rights to the songs produced. They completely misrepresent the artists, and authorize actions, suing and attacking it’s consumers without any input from the artists that created the songs. They essentially don’t give more than one crap about the artists, as long as they get [i]their[/i] money for a product that, when it comes down to it, [i]isn’t entirely theirs to begin with[/i].

  • Anonymous
  • Pingback: The Self-Congratulationary Radiohead Thread (rock, quote, band, Computer) - Music Banter

  • Anonymous

    @nicholaspaul
    “Owning something without paying IS stealing”

    ROFL.

    Owning something without paying for it is stealing?

    Put down the crackpipe, please.

    “Owning something without paying for it” describes, among many other things, the entire concept of gift giving. I’d love to see you on Christmas day. “What?! You’re giving me a new computer? BUT I DIDN’T PAY FOR IT!! OH GOD! THIS IS STEALING! HOW COULD YOU!? YOU’VE TURNED ME INTO A THIEF!! DAMN YOU, BASTARDS! DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!!!”.

    Get a grip.

  • Pingback: Leftovers: Freddy Kruger, Iron Man, Karate Kid, and Leno | Pop Culture Will Eat Itself

  • Pingback: Radiohead to testify against RIAA - Muzik Supremacy

  • Pingback: Twitter Weekly Updates for 2009-04-06

  • Fiend Angelical

    This is all well and good. But inevitably, our beloved interwebz will go the way of radio and television. Sooner or later, the internet is going to be owned by the corporate ‘content owners’ that artists like Thom Yorke and Trent Reznor are fighting against.

    Praise be to Radiohead, but this is a Sisyphean battle in the face of the threat to net neutrality.

  • NKA

    I can’t believe they offered to settle at a meager $500 and this guy turned it down. Regardless of the outcome, that was a bad move.

  • Pingback: Vitaminic

  • Now if only…

    2010 FTW

  • B

    The artists aren’t making any money off of these lawsuits. It’s all going straight into the record labels’ pockets. Radiohead is the first band to have the balls to stand up and lay claim on their music.

  • Pingback: 0.2 » I Radiohead testimonieranno contro la RIAA

  • Pingback: Radiohead testificará en juicio | Radiohead Chile

  • Pingback: Radiohead pode depor a favor de usuário que baixou músicas « Luciano Fadel

  • Jon Randelman

    First of all thank you for the heads up that this was coming in the near future. If there ever were a band in position to take a stand against the RIAA it would have to be Radiohead. Not only are they a band with a big following that is no longer a part of any record label, as your subtitle says, the are a band that made money by giving their music away for free to their consumers. The RIAA should be very worried if this testimony comes to pass what was just another peer to peer lawsuit against a college student will be receiving much more attention from the population and by proxy, scrutiny as well. I have to wonder if the RIAA lawyers are considering dropping the charges because there is no positive endgame for them here, not there ever has been for them, but especially so in this case. A major band saying that filesharing has helped them make money, combined with expert witnesses in the Pirate Bay trial saying that their research has not been able to show that there is a definite link between the illegal downloading of music and the decline of cd sales certainly makes it seem like the RIAA is desperately grasping at straws in a dying business model.

    I have to wonder, what exactly do you think the RIAA is getting out of these lawsuits? I guarantee that the lawyer fees themselves are more costly than the damages that are being sued for so it is not like anyone is gaining net profit from these suits. If anything, it seems like the RIAA is helping to create a generation of people that will do anything in their power to not buy music from record labels, as they have been so poorly treated as consumers in the past. What Radiohead has shown, and what the record labels do not seem to understand at all, is that the customer is always right. That and suing the same people who are needed support your company is not very good business sense.

  • Pingback: Links 06/04/2009: More Schools Move to GNU/Linux, Debian Gains Architectures | Boycott Novell

  • Pingback: McColley.net » Blog Archive » Remains of the Day: Google Gets Serious about Local Search Edition [For What It's Worth]

  • Pingback: Remains of the Day: Google Gets Serious about Local Search Edition [For What It's Worth] · TechBlogger

  • Pingback: Radiohead Set to Battle RIAA in Court | RIAA SUCKS

  • Pingback: Radiohead to Testify Against the RIAA | A Consumer

  • Bjørn Snoen

    I absolutely love everything about this case. I love how Joel has been fighting the RIAA for 9 years over a $500 ticket, I love the moral outrage over the methods of the music industry, I love how Radiohead has the audacity to testify against the RIAA, and above all I love how Radiohead is proving the music industry wrong on every account, while getting rich off of it! It is nothing short of brilliant.

    Now imagine what happens if the Pirate Bay wins the case in Sweden, and Joel wins in the US. With the Featured Artists Coalition, the record industry will be completely dumbstruck! How could this happen? They were on the aggressive everywhere! Attacking in every corner of the world! Even the google service in China is just a gateway drug into the darkest pits of the record labels! So how could they possibly find themselves so utterly defeated? Not even the artists are on their side! To me, that would be the ultimate prize, to buy me some fresh Radiohead while the industry looks like idiots, wondering what hit them. I can’t wait for this to happen.

    On the flipside of things, if Joel and the Pirate Bay lose, what happens? We have a strengthened industry, but will it matter? Will any of us seriously consider ceasing our acts of piracy? No, we won’t, we always knew it was borderline illegal, and we didn’t care, because hardly anyone ever gets confronted with this stuff. And then there’s still the Coalition. This is a struggle that the music industry can not win, ever. Technological advances can never be restricted by the corporate world for long, and file sharing will simply find a new fort. And then there’s the very nifty clouds, like torrentz and Gpirate, which are doing absolutely nothing illegal, and can not even be charged with hosting the torrent-files!

    There will be a day of reckoning, my friends. It is close at hand, and we stand on the right side in this battle. Whether we win or not is not even relevant, even if the music industry rolls out tanks they will not be able to keep people from listening to the music that they want to. Just remember to pay the bands that are deserving, for we are, after all, the Robin Hood of this post-broadband world, eh?

  • Pingback: Remains of the Day: Google Gets Serious about Local Search Edition [For What It's Worth] | Reviews Manual

  • Stu

    To be honest, I’m very cynical about this one until Radiohead or their manager makes a statement. Until then, it’s just Nesson saying ‘Oh yeah, Radiohead are testifying…’, so it sounds a bit like a publicity stunt..

  • Pingback: chimptron.com » Blog Archive » Hooray for Radiohead

  • Pingback: Anton Olsen.com » Blog Archive » Bookmarks for April 6th

  • Eruaran

    Radiohead = Great band.

    RIAA = Criminally insane Luddites.

  • Pingback: Links 06/04/2009: More Schools Move to GNU/Linux, Debian Gains Architectures | All about MICROSOFT

  • Pingback: Radiohead to testify against the RIAA « Blind Jefferson’s Blog

  • Pingback: Radiohead przeciwko RIAA | P2P.INFO.PL - Centrum informacyjne technologii P2P

  • Pingback: » Mass Appeal! | Matt Cameron’s Appellate Blog

  • 1986

    ZAPPA for PRESIDENT!!

  • Pingback: Radiohead vittnar för fildelare | Kulturbloggen

  • Pingback: Meneados que llegaron a portada | NOVEDADES Y ULTIMAS TECNOLOGIAS

  • Pingback: The people of power is loosing control | varande.com

  • Pingback: StereoactiveNYC » Blog Archive » StereoactiveNYC on Tumblr

  • Pingback: Radiohead testificarán en contra de la RIAA | Agregador de Musica

  • Pingback: Pink Floyd Comics @ Cute Funny Pictures

  • Gustav

    Radiohead never said how much money they made on pay-what-you-want. They also never said they’d do it again.

    Copying an artists recording without their permission is still illegal.

  • Z

    Great article. The industry is just smoke screening, they realise they have an outdated product for a new generation. They need to get with the times and make the music a sensible price or distribute it in a different way, Radiohead proved that.

  • dmango3

    one thing people need to realize is that back in 1974 a lp with 5 songs was 2 to 3 dollars, in today’s money that’s roughly 1.49 per song. to say that music is “too expensive” to buy is a bunch of bullshit and people just say it to make themselves feel better for stealing.

    if record labels take too much from the artists is another issue, but stealing is stealing so stop fucking making it sound like your advocating the artists by not paying for their music. fuckin retarded cheapass hipsters, living off your parents money…the only money you need to save is for going out any buying booze before you get that 500-1000 dollar check from mommy or daddy every other week. grow up assholes

  • AvangionQ

    More good reasons to hate the Music Industry and the RIAA, yet better reasons to support the artists and to hope to see more releases from independent labels …

  • Pingback: P2P Fight Club » Blog Archive » The War Goes On

  • Pingback: Du mouvement chez les musiciens | LE GLOB DE BARGEO

  • HJ

    “Radiohead, the band that made millions of dollars by giving away their music for free”

    Huh? I thought they never revealed how much profit they made by making their album available online.

  • Pingback: Drew Leahy | Leading The Music Revolution

  • max tannone

    jaydiohead :: jay-z x radiohead
    free download

    http://www.jaydiohead.com

    radiohead approved.

  • Pingback: Helvetica vs. Times » Radiohead to Testify Against RIAA?:

  • Pingback: meneameland episodio 30 - agapornis | meneameland

  • Pingback: The Stuff That Interests Me - My Top 5 Radiohead Songs

  • Pingback: Zaskoda » On The Pirate Bay Sentenced

  • bennymex

    piracy is getting SO much press around the world that the goverments have only accelerated their growth..

    before it was a friend tells a friend and he tells another friend and so on… (ie. 1>2>3>4>5>6>7>8>9>10)

    now you could say its growing exponentially as a group of friends and family might discuss the issue more as a group.. (now ie. 1>2>4>8>16>32>64)

    I bet if you could hack into senators computers or home computers you’ll find some form of file infringement… HOW would i love to send the hole government to jail :). considering even a powerpoint presentation with a copyrighted picture or background music(probablly copyrighted) would be jail worthy now days.

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

  • Pirates Can Be Identified Despite Sharing IP Addresses, ISP Claims

    Carrier-Grade Network Address Translation is a network mechanism through which many Internet subscribers can share the...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.