Record Industry Takes the Offensive

In that case, responded Sherman, if the parent "would prefer the lawsuit would be amended to name the kid, we could do that."

Playing the heavy, indeed.

While continuing a parallel legal effort to shut down the companies, starting with Napster, whose software has enabled peer-to-peer sharing, the record industry has found itself unable to convince people that unauthorized file-sharing is wrong. Consumers remain unpersuaded so far that file-sharing is something other than a victimless crime.

But why? Perhaps too many "Behind the Music" episodes on VH-1 offering stories of recording artists spat out by the music industry. Or perhaps, as songwriter Hugh Prestwood said on the call, the media have done a "rotten" job of explaining how file-sharing has inflicted harm on individuals involved in the music industry.

Whatever the reason, the music industry, despite trotting out quotes from supporting players in the business, is now pursuing a strategy that's less carrot-and-stick than stick-or-no-stick.

The stick, of course, is the lawsuits. The absence-of-stick approach is the RIAA's willingness to settle with people whose identity it has learned from subpoenas, or whom it has already sued.

The RIAA indicates it has already reached settlements with potential copyright infringers whose identities it has learned via subpoena, at a cost of about $3,000 to each potential violator. The RIAA also said Monday it would offer amnesty to those who weren't already on its radar screen, as long as people promised to erase offending files from their hard drives and promised not to share music illegally again.

>To order reprints of this article, click here: Reprints