If any version of the Induce Act is ever passed, there is a good chance that the makers of MP3 players will be among the first to be targeted in lawsuits. I think most people would accept the statement that 90% of all MP3 players ever sold have at one point (or even on a regular basis) been used to break copyright laws.
Sony has an interesting position in the MP3/P2p/Music Industry battle. Sony makes movies. Sony makes music. And now, Sony has recently released their first MP3 player.
Is this confusing to anyone else but me? Sony (I'm sure) knows that most MP3 players would never be sold unless P2P filesharing existed. So, which side does Sony support? If they really believe that P2P filesharing is wrong (i.e. steeling from the artists which they represent), why would they promote it with their new hardware? I'm curious what AC/DC, Cypress Hill, Billy Ray Cyrus, or Destiny's Child thinks of Sony's new MP3 player and the mixed messages Sony is packaging with it.
If the RIAA (representing Sony) eventually decides to sue MP3 player makers (Sony again), what will Sony do? They began as a technology company so we can only hope that they defend their roots and try to save the world of MP3's. Hey, if they lose, at least a portion of the money they pay will go straight back to themselves.
Comments