 jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA | reply to ZZink
Re: Money? I wonder about what is behind the voluntary compliance from many of the ISP's. In the situation with the ISP in Ireland, they were forced to comply as part of a deal that was made after losing a decision in the courts about providing user information to the RIAA.
I suspect that perhaps there has been discussion about providing exclusive content of the RIAA's copyrighted material to the ISP's. The ISP's are always looking for ways to offer content so they don't simply become a dumb pipe provider. It's my opinion that keeping the content creators separate from the content distributors is in the consumer's best interest.
It's the same thing we see with any media distributor. For TV, the people that make the shows own the stations, and the magazines, and the newspapers, and the books. Perhaps the ISP's are simply looking for a way to beef-up their portals. This might be the first step in a relationship that will ultimately result in Comcast and AT&T being able to provide music from the RIAA's extensive library as part of their service. Naturally the cost would be included in every customer's bill. And this is ultimately what the RIAA has admittedly said that they are trying to accomplish. A money train that acts like a value-added gift on the surface, but is more of an extortion fee in reality. |
 badtripI heart the East BayPremium
join:2004-03-20
Albany, CA | Ive said it before and I'll say it again. I'd bet that the RIAA has pays a sum to the ISP on a per-user disconnected basis.
I would guess that the sum the RIAA pays the ISPs is roughly the cost to process the cancellation of the user as well as some money to compensate the ISP for "lost income due to the cancellation".
Corporations do not do each other favors, period. |
