International Music Industry Amps Up Anti-P2P War 312
newtley writes to mention a BBC article discussing a new initiative against file-sharers by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry. This international version of the MPAA is breathing down the necks of 8,000 users of file-sharing software. From the article: "The new cases cover file sharers in 17 different countries who have been allegedly using sites including BitTorrent, eDonkey, SoulSeek and WinMX. For the first time legal action is being taken in Brazil, Mexico and Poland. The IFPI said the actions affect a wide-variety of people: a laboratory assistant has been charged in Finland, while a parson has been served with action in Germany."
In Other News (Score:4, Funny)
This international version of 'everybody but the MPAA' is opening new cases against people & their sites that are allegedly attempting to sell digital copies of music that they themselves did not write or perform. The chair and spokesman of PISS, Mr. Blackbeard, said, "Aye, PISS is pissed. Digital music should be provided on the cheap--a utility the likes of water or that magic electricity
These lawsuits will affect a wide-variety of people: a programmer who coded a few lines of the Windows DRM algorithm, while Steve Jobs is facing seven life sentences in the gulags and is considered to be armed [theepochtimes.com] and advertising.
Re:In Other News (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What Organization? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What Organization? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What Organization? (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously. This is the first format we've ever had that actually had the possibility of being constant quality for the indefinite future, with lossless transference between devices. I mean records got scratched, or degraded in quality over time, magnetic tape stretches, and is super prone to mechanical defects, cd's oxidize and have the alumnium fall off, but digital audio files, not being tied to a player, are a real threat.
Buy the White Album on CD and rip it to the format of your choice, and you'll never have to buy it again (assuming you back up your data). There is no way people will go back to the old "Tied to a chunk of physical stuff" method of information distribution. I just wish they would hurry up and realize this, instead of trying so hard to wish it true.
Re: (Score:2)
So they'd want everyone to still be on wax spools, but they want everyone to buy things in new formats. That makes no sense.
You do realise the RIAA etc have nothing against digital distribution, just so long as the record labels and artists that they represent get paid for what people download, don't y
Re:What Organization? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The point is not the format. The point is the control of distribution and the perishable nature of the media. They've come to depend on contant obsolesence as a part of their revenue stream, and now that's pretty much shot. They depended on CD sales continuing to inc
They'd really prefer wax. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's the electronics industry, not the music industry, that has driven new formats. The music industries go along with it because they make a lot of money in the short term, but they're rarely the drivers of new formats. In fact they tend to discourage their adoption more than anything else.
The music industry has been okay with the last few format transitions and hasn't fought the electronics companies too hard, because they've occured more rapidly than the old medium would have worn out. Thus, they made more money off of getting people to "buy up" to CDs than if they had waited around for vinyl records to all wear out and need replacement. Only now, they're starting to realize that they may have eaten the goose that could have laid a lot of golden eggs -- by forcing an 'upgrade' to CDs from vinyl, they made a lot of money in the short term, but they also gave people a format that doesn't wear out and is easily transferable to computers, where it can be replicated losslessly and endlessly, forever.
I'm betting they wished they had stuck with wax.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Most industries would love that. They would cream their pants if such a thing were possible. It's not limited to the RIAA.
Re: (Score:2)
I subscribe to EMusic.com, that sells non-DRM MP3s. Why is the catalog so limited? There are many things that I could buy, but they are not offered in EMusic, and I'm not spending € 18,00 for some stupid copy-protected CD, so their strategy is shoting their own foot. The so called "labels and the artists they represent" are actually preventing me from being the
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The RIAA are against any and all forms of music distribution which they don't understand. Read 'Control'!
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, duh. How are the 'industries supposed to charge for replacements if their goods can nev
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What Organization? (Score:5, Funny)
I read it that way, too. Furthermore, I realized if the Porn Industry did fight back against P2P Networks, the internet may very well just stop.
Re:What Organization? (Score:4, Funny)
Don't you mean that it would get it's tubes tied?
Re:What Organization? (Score:4, Insightful)
No, someone makes the same joke every time they're mentioned. Eg http://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=19124 0&cid=15721315 [slashdot.org]
And amazingly enough, they often also get +5 funny. The mods must be goldfish.
Re:What Organization? (Score:5, Funny)
Personal boycott (Score:3, Insightful)
Wait! (Score:2)
Same here. (Score:2)
1. Why buy music when you only want one song on an album. Itunes has solved this (too bad I really don't care about most music any more)
2. The music I wanted was not legal to get in my country, so the only option was the import at pretty hefty expense or get what ever had been brought over no matter the quality? New American music just sucks. Especially all the pop crap.
But also I don't pirate because like I said most music is pure crap so it would be like stealing
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
We are putting together a MP3 website to sell songs through PayPal just because otherwise we'd hav eto deal with Apple's DRM and most of don't like the idea of giving Newscorporation any money through Myspace.
Phono-nono! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I must be getting old...
Re: (Score:2)
Best...Word...Ever
Second Best! (Score:2)
(feeble coattail-ridiing attempt. Or is F word + footwear a patented method/concept/algorithm?
MPAA != RIAA (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong organizations (Score:5, Informative)
MAFIAA (Score:2)
True, but does it matter? MPAA and RIAA, are both Music And Film Industry Associations [mafiaa.org]. Besides, Sony (of rootkit notoriety) is in both, and so were Warner and Universal until recently.
Canadian levies (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Canadian levies (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Canadian levies (Score:5, Informative)
Are you sure about that? [com.com]
Really really sure? [harvard.edu]
No doubt about it? [umontreal.ca]
Re: (Score:2)
So unless Copyright does not have a future in Canada, yes, I'm sure.
Re: (Score:2)
In theory, it's legal here in the US, too (although it's a bit murkier). However, whether it's legal or not has been made irrelevant - bypassing DRM is illegal, and the goal is to make sure that you need to bypass DRM in order to make a personal copy. So you can't legally do it without breaking the law.
"There is no excuse" (Score:3, Interesting)
Pardon me, but in some countries it just might be legal to download for your own use. Like it used to be in Finland, before Tanja ex-Karpela now-Saarela, Jukka Liedes and the Gramex mafia sold out to the media biz.
And all those trained monkeys in the Parliament just keep on pushing the button as they are told by the party.
We might as well replace the "elected representatives" with remote-controlled robots. I bet they would be cheaper, too.
Yes, nowadays you can buy and download legally, IF the record label or rights holder in question has authorized your country to be the one who can download that specific track you want.
Re:"There is no excuse" (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Pardon me, but the article says they targeted uploaders, not downloaders. That is, people that is sharing the music for others. Wether it is legal or not to download is completely irellevant.
Whales (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Whales (Score:4, Funny)
And I continue not to buy music (Score:4, Insightful)
Or make your own music. That's the best of all.
Since the RIAA began their suicidal jihad, I taught myself to play the guitar. I'm no virtuoso or even very good by any objective measure, but there's about 100 times the satisfaction and enjoyment in playing the 10 tunes I know than in just listening to any song I've ever heard.
So, in a way, thank you RIAA for showing me that doing my own thing is far more amazing than giving you money for the garbage you laughingly, mockingly call 'art.'
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You can support bands by buying concert tickets or t-shirts, if you don't mind support other evil monopolies (Clear Channel and Ticketmaster).
music in perspective (Score:5, Insightful)
However, the arguments which come out of anti-DRM people et al really come across as being pathetic at times. There is a pervading sense that fundamental human rights are being trampled on, when we are talking about entertainment product. Nobody needs the latest hit singles. Nobody needs box sets, DVD extras, or music libraries of 10,000 songs. We want them.
The entertainment industry, as in any other area of business, relies on supply and demand, and (as I have commented on before in
Anyone who argues against DRM or says the entertainment industry is somehow ripping off "the people", yet fights this through anti-DRM software, or some sort of piracy, or other means of getting the industry product they want on their own terms, they lose some respect from me.
I say, put up or shut up. If you don't like what the RIAA does, if you think labels only offer music that sucks, if DVDs are overpriced or you don't like the "new release-newer release with extras" cycle, don't respond by taking their product on your own terms. That just says that you do indeed value that product and are willing to pay for it, just not in upfront cash - you are confirming the demand for the product.
If you really mean what you say, respond by not accepting their product on any terms. Remove the demand entirely, and the market will react.
Buy a guitar, a piano, an accordian or whatever, and learn how to play it. Go see a play in a local theatre instead of a major corporate Broadway tour. Don't initiate your kids into the corporate entertainment addiction by buying them cross-branded toys. Stop feeding the monkey on your back and turn off your fricking television. Entertain yourself and those around you instead of relying on someone else (corporations) to provide your escapism for you. You will probably find yourself living a more rewarding life.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:But that isn't the spirt of copyright (Score:3, Interesting)
Let me remind you of what the spirit of copyright is according to the US Constitution
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
What if I do value the product? I like listening to music. I play guitar as well, and I li
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:music in perspective (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know about you, but in my case it's that I only want to pay in upfront cash. I don't want to hit any region codes (I've got DVDs from three regions now and not going back), I don't want any unskippable ads, I don't want to buy a new monitor because my perfectly capable one doesn't support HDCP, I want to put them on my HTPC, I don't want to buy a new if it gets scratched (it's a 10 cent disk with a 10 dollar movie - it's like finding out you can't replace wear parts on your car). I want to be able to put in a CD and burn an MP3 CD for use in my car, or copy to my MP3 player.
I want to buy a copy that I can then watch the way I want, no matter what format or medium or playback device I choose to use including making fair use copies to achieve that. My copy is mine and I can view it, lend it, sell it or whatever else I choose to do with it as long as all fair use copies go with it or is destroyed. That right is not contingent on any activation, authorization, transfer or revocation service from the copyright holder, it is inherent and inalienably stored in my copy. That I can't make copies for sale, public performance and so on is fair enough.
You might of course say that is unreasonable and that I have no right to dictate what terms they should sell copies under, even though they affect my use of it in ways that has nothing do to with the copyright holder's law, but you are wrong. Courts have upheld rights that the copyright holder doesn't want to grant, it is not an absolute right. The fact that everything is now licensed, not sold is another symptom of this disease, in which they both legally and technologically go into my living room and tell me what I can and can't do.
People "confirm demand" because they are demand. And I will get my supply from those who provide the superior product. In that sense, it seems awfully stupid make your product artificially inferior, but what do I know. I'm only a consumer.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But, on topic... It seems that most articles, of the type linked to on the BBC, seem to focus on file sharing, not on proliferation of copied music files. File sharing unto itself is a wonderful thing. I constantly share out/send out music files (mine, not stuff copied from others' works) using file sharing software. P2P is also great for lots of legitimate things, such as large high-res photography files,
Re:And I continue not to buy music (Score:4, Interesting)
Support artists who don't bow down before the RIAA. There are people, like me, that only publish under Creative Commons and won't ever sign a record contract. Find them, listen to them, support them. Odds are they sound better than anything you'll find on the radio.
Above all, stop buying the music! Most music is not worth the cartel's price of $20 a CD. Hell, I could get three weeks of gas to commute to university and work for $20. The RIAA is still making roughly $40 billion a year. Maybe you working alone can't make a difference. That's fine. There's more than just a few of us. We are already clear enough on our position and large enough in numbers that it is scaring the shit out of these fat-cat businessmen, and forcing them to react in a rather panicked manner.
They aren't suing people for the hell of it, and they aren't suing people to recoup money. They're doing it to instill fear. Show them that you aren't afraid to defy them.
Re: (Score:2)
Support artists who don't bow down before the RIAA. There are people, like me, that only publish under Creative Commons and won't ever sign a record contract. Find them, listen to them, support them. Odds are they sound better than anything you'll find on the radio.
In theory, this seems the best way to go. The problem is that the majority of people need to be weaned off of the nipple of mainstream music. Where can people go to get such music? Part of evangilizing a boycott is helping people find an a
Money to the musicians (Score:2)
If the majority of musi
Subconscious plagiarism? (Score:2)
George Harrison and Michael Bolton tried this but still got sued and lost. See Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music and Three Boys Music v. Michael Bolton. What the cases had in common was that the defendants had subconsciously plagiarized an existing copyrighted musical work. In fact, is it even possible not to [slashdot.org]?
Re: (Score:2)
and the bastards are running a "Jihad" against the tab sharing sites... alledgedly, someone sharing their personal interpretation of the notes being played is a copyright violation...
It doesn't help their sales when the professiona
Didn't see this coming (Score:3, Funny)
Oh my god! Our safe haven is compromised! *flees to sweden*
Not the MPAA (Score:2)
The more you tighten your grip.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Except they don't really care. (Score:2)
Actually I think that the MPAA and RIAA are very profitable, it's just that you have their ultimate goals wrong. They exist to make money, and to this end they need to appear to try to prevent piracy, and thus take in cash from various record companies in exchange for this "service." Whether or not they actually do anything is immaterial; if they happen to be effective it's just because th
"...while a parson has been served with action..." (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Intimidation ? (Score:3, Insightful)
But the owners of commercial content ... Star Wars DVDs, if you like ... are going round intimidating people away from doing things that they have a perfect right to do, such as putting recordings of them singing songs they have written themselves on their own web sites for distribution to anyone in the world who cares to take them.
There should be some sanction against a cartel intimidaring someone into paying when no money is due. Is there any such sanction ? Jail time for fraud, maybe ?
Re: (Score:2)
How soon before Tor incorporated into FS nets? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd love to see the RIAA try to shut down a beowulf cluster of those babies.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There's an angle I didn't consider (Score:2)
I like it. It's catchy, people will fear you. Seriously.
Greed and Creativity (Score:5, Interesting)
Music is not a commodity, it is an art. It is not meant to be sold, it is meant to be heard and played. It is meant to be shared and it will be. Try as it may, the corporate music industry cannot stop this movement. I look forward to its rapture.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What century did you walk out of? Music has hardly ever been about art. It's always been about leeching much from sponsors. Usually they were rich nobles, merchants, or priests. You know what. This all really started about copyright over song lyrics and sheet music.
Legal Alternatives (Score:2, Insightful)
How 'bout providing some legal alternatives that HAVEN"T been crippled with the infestation known as DRM (I call it the Devil's Recording Medium)
This I CAN agree with:
"Critics of the IFPI's policy argue that the music industry is targetting its natural audience and that the real causes of CD sales declining are DVD sales, computer games sales and pricing."
Another reason
Links (Score:2)
No excuse (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually I can think of a few excuses:
Some of them may be less acceptable than others, but the notion that the simple existence of a legal music service in a country means that there isn't any excuse for downloading music there is, in my opinion, extremely short-sighted.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, there is; here's one - http://www.ion-audio.com/ittusb.php [ion-audio.com]. There are probably more.
Re:Vinyl to mp3 converter? (Score:5, Interesting)
As for P2P, I can't use it anymore. My ISP politely asked me to stop, as it was really killing their ability to service their other customers.
I'm serious; they didn't threaten to throttle me, kick me off, or sue me, they very politely requested that I cut back as much as possible.
Which sucks, in a way. if they were assholes, i would have just circumvented whatever they tried. Now I have to play nice.
Grrr.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You can do it with a scanner... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/~springer/ [huji.ac.il]
However that was extremely experimental and not what anyone would call even medium quality.
Of more interest is the research being done by the library of congress and the Berkeley physics department.
http://www.primidi.com/2004/04/19.html [primidi.com]
They discovered you can use the same methods used in the discovery of the Higgs Boson particle to scan cylinder recordings which are too brittle to be played by traditional means. The results of those experiments are p
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. They're the money monkeys for the record industry. How many cents of the CD you buy do you think reach the artist, hmm?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
"If I can provide to everyone all goods of intellectual value or beauty, for the same price that I can provide the first copy of those works to anyone, why is it ever moral to exclude anyone from anything? If you could feed everyone on earth at the cost of baking one loaf and pressing a button, what would be the moral case for charging more for bread than some people could afford to pay?"
I agree wholeheartedly. The record industry is struggling to keep alive a system that
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Do you think that producers work for free? Do you think CD duplication plants duplicate CDs for free? Do you seriously think that it's the "poor and underprivileged" who download, considering that one of the requirements for downloading music is a broadband connection and PC, and that people who aren't poor and underprivileged are very likely to download as well? Do you really think you're making any kind of useful point, playing the pirate-semantics game, like always happens wh
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
1) Royalties have to go to everyone involved in making and selling an album, which (if the artist wishes to delegate) may not be just the artist and his or her band.
2) Recording contracts are voluntary. Artists join them mainly in order to delegate, so the business types do business and the musicy types (the artist) can do music.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
They do have a way of making profit; it's called "selling copies of songs". They did it admirably until people worked out how to get songs for free. Just because it's possible to get songs for free, at the complete cost of those who financed and facilitated their production, does not mean that is something the record industry should "adjust" to. Frankly, I think a lot
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
a far more amusing typo would have been Recronying Industry Assoc, since its clear the RIAA is a bunch of thieving cronies!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)