Why Downhill Battle doesn't know what they're talking about.

There are 5 major problems with Downhill Battle a site Jordan posted. The problems are as follows: their goal is idealist, they justify their means with their end, they disreguard the needs of anyone but themselves, they promote services that are not in the customers interests and criticize services that make progress toward achieving a viable solution to the mp3 dispute.

First, the goal of DH is to cause a "downward spiral: CD sales fall, CD stores close, buying CDs becomes harder and harder, CDs sales fall some more, more stores close, and so on." This isn't going to happen. There are plenty of people out there who buy and like CDs. The market is huge, I don't care if they dropped 11%, they still have 89% of a huge market. CDs will not disappear.

Second, they're using feigned concerns for the artists to justify stealing music. Their logic is flawed. Here is their argument.
P: We want the artists to get more of the money we spend
P: We will stop buying records, thus giving the artists less money than they got before
C: The artists will benefit and get more money.
The flaw is a false premise: "We will stop buying records, thus giving the artists less money than they got before." Not buying CDs will not give the artists more money, it will give them less. It can be argued that this will result in them getting more money later. However that argument assumes that once a solution is agreed upon, everyone will delete all of their MP3s and go out and buy the CDs they had MP3s of, giving the artists the money they deserve. I say, "fat chance." No one will delete their MP3s and go buy CDs. In the end the artists have been stolen from. This organization does not care for the artists, it cares about excuses to download free music.

Thirdly, the downward spiral mentioned earlier is a self centered goal. The goal of eliminating CDs is not only improbable but unnecessary also. There is a reason so many CDs are sold; there is a demand for them. Not everyone wants to get their music online and should not be forced to. Many people like CDs, for example: those without computers or computer knowledge, those in areas where internet connections are slow or non-existant and those who prefer the quality of purchased CDs over CDRs. To attempt to eliminate CDs altogether is to completely ignore the needs of anyone who does not share the same preference as you. Eliminating CDs is as selfish as it is improbable.

Fourth, Downhill Battle promotes file sharing software called "Weed." The concept behind Weed is that you use a very Kazaa-like process only you pay yourself (this makes no sense to me either) 20%, the person you are downloading from 10%, the person they downloaded from 5%, Weed 15%, and the artist 50%. This might seem agreeable at first glance, the artist recieves 50%, not bad. But, as always, the devil is in the details. You are essentially paying to do something that is just as illegal as Kazaa. Why is it illegal? Because the record company owns part of the copyright, therefore by cutting out the company and only paying the artist you have violated copyright law just like you did with Kazaa. You might feel better because you paid the artist, but try telling a judge that while RIAA is prosecuting you. Also, Weed is taking 15%. More than the person providing the file to download is. For what? Other services that charge you provide you with a quick, stable download and an assurance of quality. With Weed you get jack. Oh yeah and Weed is going to take 15% for sitting on their hands. Clearly, if Downhill Battle had any clue they wouldn't be supporting this software.

Lastly, after praising Weed for their new system, Downhill Battle bashes the new Kazaa 2.0. As I mentioned in the previous argument, Napster 2 provides a stable, quick download and the assurance of quality. It is also LEGAL. There won't be a RIAA lawyer hauling you to court for using this. The artists get their traditional miniscule cut, which admittedly is not much compared to Weed's 50%, but it's a lot more than the artists are getting with Downhill Battle's "boycott." Also, Roxio, owner of Napster 2.0 is actually doing something for the cut they're taking from the profit. They are providing a download that: won't be "terminated" because the other party signs off, it won't be the wrong file, won't be full of static and most importantly, is completely legal. Bad-mouthing this software and promoting Weed at the same time is evidence of the ignorance of Downhill Battle.

Downhill Battle doesn't have a clue. Their goals aren't going to be achieved because they're working toward the wrong things for the wrong reasons. Their means are actually more detrimental than helpful to the artists they claim to care so much about. They haven't considered the effect of their goal on anyone but themselves. To top it off they provide software reccomendations to their supporters that are no good for anyone but the makers of the software, who are just as concerned with themselves as Downhill Battle is. It is a travestly that this organization remains on the web, influencing the opinions and actions of those less informed. If I ever saw one of Downhill Battle's flyers hanging on the wall, even though I support progress toward a solution to the MP3 problem, I would probably write n00b on it with the biggest marker I could find, tear it into tiny pieces, and recycle it while asking God to have mercy on the souls of the people who put it there.


**Sorry to spam the blog, but a fervent interest in mp3 issues and an 8 hr. shift in the computer lab == that---^