The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is at it again, gearing up for a crackdown aimed at stopping music piracy.
This "spring offensive," as it has been called, seeks to end illegal downloading on college campuses once and for all.
Sadly, the RIAA's efforts are almost certain to fail and will only serve to intimidate a few students.
At the core of these potential lawsuits is a fundamental disagreement over how to distribute media in a digital age.
The public and the industry have never concurred on just how freely media should be shared, and at what price (if any) the distribution should be. CTRAX, Ruckus and other legal sharing programs are not sufficient answers to this problem.
Until this fundamental disagreement is resolved, the cycle of crackdowns, followed by more downloading, followed by more settlements, will continue indefinitely.
Moreover, these settlements and potential lawsuits only highlight the recording industry's desperate attachment to an outmoded theory of media sharing. The industry does not understand that the days of buying entire, overpriced albums are mostly finished.
No matter how many vacant record stores dot the landscape and prove this point, the RIAA doesn't seem to get the picture.
More RIAA action is simply an ineffective bandage on a problem that has been hemorrhaging for quite some time and in more than one media.
For example, Viacom's $1 billion lawsuit against YouTube for posting unauthorized videos may make a nice headline and generate fat legal fees, but, like the RIAA's latest round, will ultimately do little to address the problem. These are just punitive actions with no practical justification to discourage illegal media sharing in the future or through different methods.
In hearing of the RIAA's new plans, one can't help but get the feeling we've been down this road before. Just like the industry's former strategy involving so called "John Doe" lawsuits in the past, no steps are being taken to ensure that illegal downloading will cease once the RIAA moves on from this particular offensive.
RIAA's strategy only works if students and other consumers fear its future wrath. The very fact that the RIAA is having a second go around at these lawsuits shows not enough people fear the industry and are willing to continue downloading unabatedly. Lacking a comprehensive strategy for reform, the RIAA's latest tactics are simply another attempt to return to a time that has already passed.
Rather than spend its time fighting illegal downloading, the RIAA would best be served by creating a new culture of responsible file sharing. Their current occupation with settlements rather than relevant and sustainable solutions is fatally flawed.
Closer to home, though, these latest developments show the tough spot universities find themselves in on this issue.
By all but forcing colleges to reveal names, universities are needlessly placed between student media pirates and the industry's lawyers.
It seems two questions concerning colleges' relationships with their students will be answered as a result of the RIAA's actions: Will the RIAA sue a university if it refuses to hand over the name on a particular student IP (Internet Protocol) address?
And more importantly, to what extent will colleges protect students from lawsuits? The eventual answers to these quandaries will demonstrate the willingness of each group involved to stand up and fight this issue.
Finally, like a parent spanking a child without doing anything to prevent the offending behavior from reoccurring, the RIAA's newest slate of legal action does nothing to educate students on why piracy is not in anyone's interest, or to provide a realistic alternative to download music legally.
Absent these critical elements, the RIAA's actions are nothing more than a futile intimidation ploy fully deserving of the militant description of a "spring offensive."
