Posted on 08/22/2002 4:49:59 PM PDT by Lucas1
Very Interesting...so how are they going to find all of us? How will they know who is file swapping? Will they monitor all of our computers?
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2121102,00.html
Yes.
Yes, but encryption will make that useless. Maybe they'll outlaw encryption. More likely, they'll lower the bar for no-knock disk searches.
IMHO, no. You already gave.
Another way to argue about this is to note that once the songs have been played and around a lot, it is too impractical to criminalize the whole computer-using population.
Maybe a different payment model is needed. Since the artists have a right to be paid, maybe the right way is to up the royalties for the early network plays that build demand (which raises commercial prices and front ends their payment). Front end loading diminishes the need for eternal attachment to late copiers. Of course, the end user pays for it all in the end, but in a more diffuse way.
Surly you jest. The record companies are the ones getting paid the Artists get a penny or two that is all. That's why they have to go on tour it is only there that they really get paid.
In return for all this the artists get a shot at the marketplace. If they can't play in the big leagues they never should have gotten into the business.
Artists who write their own material can make good money on their first album, even if record sales don't cover production costs, due to publishing considerations...and publishing considerations are largely driving the push for the shutdown of sites like Napster. When anyone downloads copyrighted music from a site without paying for it, he's stealing someone's property. People who steal property (no matter whose property they're stealing) should face penalties.
Don't you think?
He can get a real estate license.
"The Recording Industry deserves no respect."
That's true, but they're entitled to earn a profit.
"They trample everyones rights then want more and more money while depending on the free playing of their songs on radio and Television."
They trample everyones' rights? Which rights are they trampling?
What amazes me are the Russian komp'yuterchiki I've met. Internet most places over there runs a buck an hour (five beers!), and the speeds are terrible, yet they spend ages downloading "Breetahnee Speers". Even more ridiculous, considering that the Turkish and Chinese black market CDs only run a buck or two.
I've read about the serfs in the European Onion being locked up for having mp3s are their harddrives, but so far nothing like this in the states.
Since copy-protection on disks is so easy to thwart, I imagine that soon all US-marketed computers, CD-players, etc will be hard-wired not accept the wrong kind of disk. This will mean easy money for the Chinese "specialty" electronics market.
Nobody is entitled to earn a profit -- only entitled to attempt to do so.
There are two issues here, for all the industry's attempt to hide the second behind the first:
1. Adolescents of all ages want to get stuff for free and stick it to The Man. They should be prevented (but within the constraint that the means used must not violate the fair-use rights of legitimate purchasers) and punished (to a degree commesurate with their individual offenses).
The industry's violation of the parenthetical provisos of the previous paragraph has pretty well cost them my sympathy to the point where, while I theoretically agree that it's wrong to rip them off, my concern about the problem ranks somewhere below my wish for Clowntoon to recover from a bout of laryngitis.
2. The industry's current business models (control which music is pushed via airplay and store placement, resell the same songs every decade or so on new media) are threatened by the technology of digital duplication and Internet file transfer. Like (to pick a random example) firearms, these technologies can be used for both lawful and unlawful ends, and some people have an agenda to suppress them altogether by harping upon the latter.
Washington DC - William Ford Jr., CEO of the Ford Motor Company testified before Congress about the nationwide problem of ride sharing. Ford cited ride swapping as the number one reason for the the company's declining revenue. "These 'pool pirates are depriving Ford of rightful income. Three sometimes four people are sharing rides. Less wear and tear on the cars means fewer new car purchases. That's revenue that's being robbed from Ford."
A recent study by the Gartner Group supports Ford's claims that ride sharing runs rampant across the US. The study showed showed that children under the age of 16 were the biggest offenders. Almost 99% of children in that age group said they had shared a ride in the past week. The study also showed that ride sharing had spread to the Internet in the form of "Car Pool" message boards where the "Road Robbers" set up their swaps.
Many Representatives questioned Ford's claim that consumers used ride sharing to put off purchases of new cars for 3 or even 4 years. "You're telling me that people don't receive new cars as gifts from lobbyists every year? I find that allegation preposterous," asked a Representative from Virginia.
After testimony was completed Representatives from Michigan introduced the Driving Solo Enforcement Act of 2002, which aims to curb ride sharing activities by making it illegal to have more than one person in a car at a time. The bill also attempts to stop government support of this activity by closing down car pool lanes. Persons caught sharing rides would be subject to a $2500 and up to 1 year in prison.
Other witnesses before the Transportation Committee testified that people, often foreigners, were selling rides on the street in cars called "taxis". They shared stories of how they paint their cars yellow and cruise the streets looking for potential ride sharers.
"Mr. Ford needs to wake up and smell the coffee," said Frank Wallace, an opponent of the bill. "I haven't bought a new car in 6 years! I ride with my friends, I ride with my parents. Sometimes I even walk to work. If they pass this law people are still gonna share rides. They may have to hide in the trunk, but they're still gonna do it."
Many soccer moms are worried by what this legislation may do to their hectic schedules. "It might be a bit inconvenient, but I guess I'll just have to let little Johnny drive the mini-van to soccer practice by himself," said Melissa Garrett of Concord, New Hampshire. "He can touch the pedals by himself now and I don't want to break any laws."
Exxon Mobil and the Asphalt Workers of America also testified on the importance of stopping ride swapping.
-Eric
That's true, and it's what I meant. Thank you.
I for one would hate to see new technologies quashed due to potential abuses. Perhaps the adolescents you referenced would be open to a monitoring of file-swapping sites with ASCAP and BMI as overseers, protecting the rights of the artists/songwriters and possibly charging a royalty for every download. ASCAP cannot legitimately be seen as "Big Brother," as its membership is comprised of composers, authors and publishers.
The kids should know that they're stealing their favorite artists' property...they aren't just sticking it to the man.
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.