This Makes My Blood Boil
When asked by the RIAA's lead counsel whether it was wrong for consumers to make copies of CDs they have purchased, Jennifer Pariser replied in the negative. "When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song," said Pariser. Making "a copy" of a song you own is just "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy'," according to Pariser.News flash old men destroying the music industry, I listen to music two ways, on my iPod and on my computer. If I can not do that legally by buying a CD then why the fuck would I want to buy a CD? Am I supposed to pay for the same songs twice? Do they actully believe that consumers will chose old CD players over their computers and iPods?
Does this make sense to anyone under 90? I thought the goal of the RIAA was to encourage people to buy more CDs not make up new arguments why people should not. I can just not grasp the stupidity of this position. It really makes no sense at all. It makes so little sense that it is contradictory to the arguments that the RIAA made itself in the 2005 MGM vs. Grokster (a case they won), where they argued that making digital copies of music for personal use was protected.
----
RIAA: Those CD rips of yours are still "unauthorized" [Article]


The LA Weekly this week published an article on a batch of new indie labels the common thread other than being extremely DIY is that they are all run by prominent Bloggers. Two of my favorite Blogger-turned-label owners are mentioned 

Right now and for the next week at 


Fat Records has 
I just saw on 







