Posted on 01/27/2010 10:51:52 AM PST by a fool in paradise
...The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) says that global government legislation is essential to the sector's survival.
It cited Spain as an example of a country which does not have laws in place to prevent illegal downloads.
The sales of albums by local artists there have fallen by 65% in five years.
Federation chairman John Kennedy said the situation in Spain is now "almost irreversible".
"Spain runs the risk of turning into a cultural desert," commented Rob Wells, Senior Vice President, Digital, at Universal Music Group.... "Drastic action needs to be taken in order to save the Spanish music industry."
In a market that is "rigged by piracy" it is non-English language music which suffers the most when the music industry tightens its belt added Mr Kennedy.
This is because global stars such as Lady Gaga, who topped the digital download chart of 2009 with 9.8m downloads for her single Poker Face, are regarded as more secure investments.
"...If there is a risk of kids losing their internet connection, they will stop," said Mr Kennedy.
He described the loss of the recent court case against BitTorrent website Oink as "a terrible disappointment" and an indication that current laws in the UK are "out of touch with where life is".
He expressed support for the bill's controversial clause 17, which would give the Secretary of State power to make changes to copyright laws.
"I hope they won't throw clause 17 overboard," he said. "We want this to be futureproof..."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...
IP needs to be protected otherwise the economic incentive for the business becomes destroyed.
Make something worth something and people will buy it. It isn't taxpayers' fault that a particular industry's product isn't worth what a given industry says it is.
Ever hear of live shows?
Who other than the government do you look to to prevent stealing?
He described the loss of the recent court case against BitTorrent website Oink as "a terrible disappointment" and an indication that current laws in the UK are "out of touch with where life is".He expressed support for the bill's controversial clause 17, which would give the Secretary of State power to make changes to copyright laws.
"I hope they won't throw clause 17 overboard," he said. "We want this to be futureproof..."
What do we need legislators for? We have Democrats in control of government and can secure Big Media's monopoly on recorded audio/visual history since the beginning of the 20th century. "screw fair use" and "public domain" or hundreds of years of legal precedence and constitutional intent.
They outright stole ownership on song publishing (even from the Beatles and Rolling Stones) and even when artists retained ownership, they did not pay them the money owed (send in an auditor and you'll always find unpaid money).
How much internet snooping permission are you willing to give to Big Media to make sure you are doing “the right thing”?
>>Ever hear of live shows?<<
Precisely. What did these poor people do in 1901? Oh yeah, they performed live.
Like my bands do.
If their worst fears are realized, it would be like professional sports not paying people much money to play baseball and football.
Gosh. Oh the humanity!
I think those people would crush the independent bands in a second if they got a dollar more to do it.
This is because global stars such as Lady Gaga, who topped the digital download chart of 2009 with 9.8m downloads for her single Poker Face, are regarded as more secure investments.
What investment? A garage band or a local touring band can create a CD pretty cheaply and there are places like CD Baby which will sell it and digital downloads even if you can't get onto iTunes for some reason. So producing and distributing a song doesn't take much investment. The only investment I can think of is in publicity, and that (in an ideal world) would be fore bands with quality music, not just the latest mass produced band which the idustry seems to like.
The industry has been known to sign artists to contract merely to park their careers and keep them from competing against another artist.
They aren’t always after “money” or advancing the musical landscape.
They don’t have to snoop on individuals other than to see if they are actually running a bittorrent site. I think having several large servers. That is who they should be going after. But that will take a lot of work since most are in countries with rather lax copyright laws. But it goes beyond libertarianism to say your right to privacy goes beyond someone else’s right to their property.
They sold sheet music. 50cents a copy. Big money in 1900.
If you sang the song onstage or even on record, you did not pay the songwriter.
Laws were changed to force this as records became more available.
EU to assess piracy detection software
BBC News ^ | Page last updated at 12:40 GMT, Tuesday, 26 January 2010 | no byline
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2438619/posts
Privacy International has concerns about the software, designed by monitoring firm Detica.
It utilises so-called deep packet inspection, which means that it can identify actual file-names, making it possible to accurately find out what content is legal and what is not.
According to Alexander Hanff, head of ethical networks at Privacy International, use of such software is in breach of current UK law.
“Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa) intercepting communications is a criminal offence regardless of what you do with the data,” he said.
Mr Hanff said he would file a criminal complaint if Virgin Media deployed CView.
So when the RIAA goon squad comes knocking on your door to look through your CD collection, you won't say "show me a judge's order"? They want snooping privileges.
And words like "futureproof" scare me. The Democrats want Obamacare to be unrepealable as well. But they won't make it a Constitutional amendment (which can be repealed, by the way).
As I said, it isn’t the individuals they should go after. It is the people actually in control of the servers at Oink or Waffles or Pirate Bay. That is how to stop the problem on a large scale.
I respect the artist’s rights first and foremost and yes, the record companies are Satan’s minions but the principle holds true.
I go see live shows now more than ever and bands are using their albums to support their shows...imagine that. I’ve bought several Cds that I wouldn’t have normally bought, directly after seeing a live show.
I’m not talking about writers. I’m talking about performers.
How much did Frank Sinatra write?
I consider them two separate skill sets. Like airplane designers and airplane pilots, though some do both. (Randy Newman, Carol King, Debby Gibson, Taylor Swift, etc.).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.