The RIAA spent many millions of dollars last year because of internet file trading. This loss was not due to decreased revenues attributed to individual users trading intellectual property, rather it was caused by the RIAA’s own hands in its pursuit to stem the tide of file trading through costly legal action.

These lawsuits are severely harming the RIAA. Investors and music fans alike are being overwhelmed by a grassroots public relations campaign that paints the RIAA and those whom they represent in the most unfavorable light.

What’s necessary is a radical change of course. The RIAA must adopt a plan to end these lawsuits as quickly as possible, while preserving the continued, long-term profitability of their intellectual property.

Much of the intellectual property ever digitized – Terabytes of data – exists in one form or another on personal computer hard drives numbering in the hundreds of millions around the globe. These files exist beyond the RIAA’s reach. Individual computer users will continue to copy and trade these media files free-of-charge for the foreseeable future.

They will trade these files despite the possibility of receiving a poor quality or incomplete copy of a media file. They will do this even without sure knowledge that they are in fact downloading the media file they intended to, and not a harmful computer virus from a virtually anonymous source.

Yet even so, some of these individuals maintain a collection of high-quality copies of several thousand individual media titles on their home computers. Are these individuals criminals to be brought to task, or are they certifiable points of distribution for this media?

Track for track, many individuals have more titles than some music retailers. The only difference between the two? The RIAA profits from retail music sales, but not from online file exchanges. In return for their expenditure of time, effort, and hard drive real estate – both in downloading a media file and in distributing it to others – individual computer users receive no compensation. This inequity can be rectified to the profit of all parties: The RIAA, music artists, music fans, and music retailers.

It has yet to be proven whether or not file traders will pay for secure, high-quality downloads from a subscription site. Most indications are that it would be a risky venture at best.

I propose a departure from the subscription paradigm.

Instead, servers containing digital copies of media titles comprising the complete intellectual property catalogs of the RIAA corporations must be established. These files will be available for live media stream to the public, and to institutions of instruction, via a napster-like program of RIAA approved design. The RIAA Interface Program (RIP) will be made freely available to the public just as napster-like file trading platforms are today. The media file streaming service will be free to all users.

The quality of the media stream will be less than that of a file downloaded directly to a users hard drive. However, it will be adequate for a user to determine the desirability of an individual media title – or for the purposes of music instruction – yet it will leave something to be desired. Watch any video stream from CNN, or listen to an audio stream via a net radio platform for an example of this level of quality.

The availability of individual media files would be dependent on network traffic and demand. Individual media files in high demand will receive more dedicated resources for its distribution than those not in high demand.

If a user wishes to have a “full version” of the file, they must download it – for a fee – via the searchable napster-like RIAA Interface Program. The downloaded file would then exist on the user’s hard drive. It could be played at the user’s leisure, and be recorded to other media for personal use. It would also be available to be traded with other users of the RIAA Interface Program.

A closed system such as this is doomed to failure without some incentive for users to switch from free and unchecked file trading platforms to an RIAA sponsored alternative.

To that end, when a media file is downloaded or uploaded by an individual RIAA Interface Program user, the program will track the exchange. Once per fiscal quarter, every individual who maintains an RIAA certified quality copy of a media file on their hard drive will receive payment for distribution of that file. This payment will be dependant on how many other users have used the RIAA Interface Program to purchase and download that file from the individual maintaining the file.

Users who maintain files comprising entire albums or artist catalogs will receive discounts from individual labels for the purchase of physical CDs by that artist from music retailers. Discounts on concert tickets and artist related merchandise should also be strongly considered.

Everyone who uses the RIAA Interface Program to purchase and download a media file will receive a distribution payment each fiscal quarter, provided they continue to maintain an unaltered, RIAA certified copy of the file. If they delete or alter the file, no distribution payment will be forwarded. Additionally, only file exchanges using the RIAA Interface Program will warrant such a payment. Payment options should include check, direct deposit, or credit for future media file downloads. This not only ensures file quality, but also user confidence in the media files they are exchanging.

Payment for distribution encourages users to make the file available for download only through the RIAA Interface Program. Additionally it encourages users to abandon other – unprofitable – file distribution platforms.

Users who get paid to download and distribute media files with RIAA approval will pay to download RIAA approved media files.

I sincerely hope the RIAA and those whom they represent will heed this call to end costly lawsuits, and pursue a far more enriching policy regarding the intellectual property they have worked so hard to produce and its open exchange online.

Labels: p2p, riaa