In the wake of the recent lawsuits filed by the RIAA, many people have voiced their opinions about the soundness of the decision. After trying to avoid doing this myself, I just could not resist adding my own opinions of disgust to this act.
 
     I really have to question the business practices of the RIAA after filing all of the lawsuits against potential customers, many of whom are just teenagers. By filing these lawsuits they may have permanently alienated a large segment of the market. Do you really think these kids will want to buy CDs after being sued for hundreds of dollars by the company profiting from CD sales? Many of those sharing and downloading large amounts of music online are true music fans. It seemed, in many cases, that those who were sued also own large CD collections. By suing them, all they have done is force music fans to take a stand against the already high costs of CDs. Being the owner of a large music collection (I own over 300 CDs), I have decided to take a stand against the RIAA and no longer buy music. While this is an annoyance to me, because I truly love music, it is perhaps the only way to get the RIAA to listen to the cries for lower prices from the consumers.
 
     While it does seem likely file sharing helped contribute to the decline in CD sales the RIAA is trying to prevent with lawsuits, they should have concentrated on easier and more efficient ways to use file sharing to their advantage, instead of lashing out at the consumers. Selling MP3s is a start to an easier way of marketing, but paying a dollar for a computer file still seems a bit expensive. Perhaps the best possibility overlooked by the RIAA is to allow some songs to be free. By allowing certain songs to be exchanged freely it allows them to reach a wide audience and can even attract people to pay for more songs by the same artist. In many ways it would be similar to radio. The people do not pay to listen to songs on the radio. They are free for the public. (Although radio stations must pay to play a song, which seems ridiculous to me. Why should the RIAA make money from radio stations for playing their songs? The RIAA profits from this arrangement more than the stations, because the radio stations are paying to market the RIAA’s wares.) This exposes them to an artist’s music and even encourages them to purchase an artist’s CD. This system seems to have worked in the past, and it should still be able to work today.
 
     The RIAA needs to rethink their practices. If they continue with the lawsuits, there may not be much desire left in consumers to purchase music in America.