|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.126.191.219
July 1, or according to some sources, July 12 (tomorrow) is when the major US ISPs start to police subscribers engaged in illegal downloads of music, movies or software.This looks like yet another anti-piracy measure that will be pretty easy to circumvent. But I like it as a step forward towards the inevitable resolution of the illegal pirating/downloading/file sharing issue. The ISPs are making big money selling internet access and bandwidth and need to accurately charge for it and compensate the copyright holders who put content on the 'net and bring business to the ISPs.
In theory it isn't too great a leap from penalizing subscribers who make illegal downloads by limiting their internet access (which is apparently about to happen) to making downloading subscribers pay for their bandwidth use and in turn compensating the copyright holders. Something similar is already in effect under the Audio Home Recording Act, under which the music industry gets royalties from the sale of CD and DVD recorders and blank media, which it apparently uses to hire lots of lawyers.
Any opinions from the inmates on this?
Edits: 07/11/12Follow Ups:
As a visitor to your beautiful country some things strike me which may not be obvious to those who live here. Among them, the desire of those who own property to extend their rent-collecting powers, using the organs of the state to assist where possible.
Hence, the co-option of the criminal law to indirectly enforce the grossly extended intellectual property laws which currently prevail, as in the case of Briton Richard O'Dwyer, who has not actually violated any private right.
In the long run, I do not believe that moves like this are in the interests of US society, since the fragmentation and "ownership" of ideas for long periods coupled with a willing legal profession and system to enforce them stifle the creativity which has historically been such a great source of the US' strength. But such a view sits ill with the interests of those who can currently claim some monopoly right, and wish their exploitation of it to continue to the crack of doom.
All sounds very nice, until you look at the reality -- the content creators work their butts off, and then their stuff gets stolen. How would you feel if most of your paycheck went to some Internet pirate?
for sure.
On the other hand, were I Robert Johnson or Buster Keaton I'd no longer be caring.
I'm not against strong copyright for the lifetimes of artistic creators, and a bit over: say 20 years, to enable the family to benefit some.
But 95 year copyrights for works "created" by corporations (as if that ever occurred) are gratuitous rent seeking by the lazy and greedy, I think. And those who have the gall to patent naturally occurring phenomena (such as parts of the human genome) and then stifle potentially valuable* research by demanding rents from others engaged in the field are, in my view, despicable.
*By valuable I mean "of value to humans", not "capable of commanding a price".
Your distinction of two different meanings of "value" is telling. Back in the golden age of the music industry, record companies took the work of a musician, which might be of great aesthetic or intrinsic "value", though that is subjective of course, and made it valuable in the sense of commanding a price on a nationwide or even worldwide market. And the musicians typically received only a small percentage of the resulting profits.
Today, the internet makes marketing music much cheaper and replicating and distributing it almost free. And I'm told even the recording itself is easier and cheaper than it used to be. So, record company profits are disappearing, though they still aren't going to the musicians, who continue to make not very much. Using piracy as an excuse to increase copyright protection isn't going to change any of that substantially, but it does make legitimate innovative work more expensive to do.
.
We Americans are always hard at work defending our "turf", and trying to expand it. Litigation and lobbying efforts are both fundamental parts of that. The Victor Talking Machine Company was named in honor of its victory in litigation against its main would-be competitor, in fine American tradition.
The problem with the music industry at the moment is that technology advanced too quickly in the past 10-15 years, leaving them behind. The extensions of copyright law they have won are nowhere near as great as they have sought, and while harmful, IMO will do little in the long run to delay the end of an obsolete economic structure. The run-off will be more profitable for them, but they will continue to die, fade into irrelevance, or transform, as they have begun to do. That is the strength and weakness of American culture: we cast off our old traditions without sentiment or hesitation.
"That is the strength and weakness of American culture: we cast off our old traditions without sentiment or hesitation."
The American Republican Party is the antithesis of "casting off old traditions without sentiment or hesitation", as clinging to the "good all days" is their bread n butter. They're still coming to terms with the "little lady" not being at home with the dirty dishes and kids.
I guess my comments were not of as much relevance to the music industry as to other fields of endeavour. I do think it is absurd, though, that all mashups are regarded as infringing. Once the source ceases to be recognisable (whether by way of speed, direction, frequency or other effect alterations) I'm of a mind that something new has been created.
Not that I listen to such things ...
I don't really care too much about the subject, except to note that it is
yet another invasion of our privacy ... or perhaps I still labor under
the illusion that there should even be privacy on the internet. I do
know that big brother scans everything we do and takes note of what he
wishes to take note of, so I am relatively cautious of what I say on
the web ...
It's interesting to me how so much copyrighted material finds its way
to the web for people to download illegally. Can the copyright owners
not police the web for illegal downloads?
"Can the copyright owners not police the web for illegal downloads?"
Well, no, and if the music is made available from outside the owner's country there's not much that could be done anyway.
Once something is on the internet, it's very hard to control where it goes. And getting full international cooperation on copyright enforcement hasn't been easy either, despite decades of trying. Those are two major reasons we're seeing the developments I mentioned.
I think whether ISPs come to an agreement on royalty contributions or not I don't expect it to make much difference. A few pennies here or there wil not change the equation terribly. Of course I'd prefer if they would...
I take it you are a jazz trumpet player based in NY. I hope you get more than "a few pennies" for your work on record, but I agree the outlook is bleak.
Even when the record industry was at its peak, though, I doubt many musicians made much from it. Even the most famous ones, from Ella to Rachmaninov, had to stick to brutally heavy schedules of live gigs to pay the rent. And those live gigs began to dry up the day talkies replaced the silent movies.
I saw there was a new BJU record....it is on my list!
Thanks, editor's pick this month at Downbeat..I've been pleased. Stay well.
I must have it! I was just talking to a friend about you yesterday. Can't get enough of your stuff....
The music industry wants to shift the large cost of policing illegal downloads to someone else. That's the goal of most of it's litigation and lobbying efforts. They've succeeded in tilting U.S. copyright law much further in their favor than ever before, without really achieving their goal.
In the end, I think we'll get regulation of the internet, which was rejected by Congress this time around. A piece of the fees we pay for internet access will be used to compensate copyright holders for the free downloads.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: