Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government Media Music News

Do We Want ISPs Penalizing Music Fans? 263

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Noted singer songwriter Billy Bragg has written an excellent column in The Guardian, coming out against the pro-RIAA '3-strikes' legislation the big 4 record labels are trying to push through. In the article, entitled 'Do we want ISPs penalizing our fans?', Bragg writes: 'Having failed miserably in previous attempts to stamp out illicit filesharing, the record industry has now joined forces with other entertainment lobby groups to demand that the government takes action to protect their business model.' He goes on: 'Fearful of the prospect of dragging their customers though the courts, with all the attendant costs and bad publicity, members of the record industry have come up with a simple, cost-free solution to their problem: get the ISPs to do their dirty work for them. They are asking the government to force the ISPs to cut off the broadband connection of customers who persistently download unauthorized material, without any recourse to appeal in the courts.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Do We Want ISPs Penalizing Music Fans?

Comments Filter:
  • by seanpark ( 690789 ) on Monday May 18, 2009 @01:49PM (#27999989)
    More and more of the music I get into is independent. Much of it is self-released (The Turn-Ons are a good recent example). Side note: Radiohead "self-releasing" is a joke, as they were propped up by major labels for years beforehand and had a well-established fan base. Any kind of offensive in this climate by the RIAA is just silly. They are so irrelevant. If they shut down Another Greast Music Tracker, I'm going to law school.
  • by Midnight Thunder ( 17205 ) on Monday May 18, 2009 @01:51PM (#28000023) Homepage Journal

    If the ISPs are to be considered a 'common carrier', then this is not their duty.

    Other points, if the ISPs are going to be doing this:
      - How are they to decide when something is fair use, when even the big media companies get it wrong so often?
      - Who is going to pay them to do the dirty work of the media industry?
      - This is like getting Walmart to ban you because something you are doing is not kosher in HMV.

    There are certainly other problems with this whole 'getting the ISPs' to do the dirty work, but I have a 'failure of imagination' when it comes to the other issues.

  • Re:Enough already (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 18, 2009 @01:55PM (#28000105)

    Actually, Due Process issues require state action. Comcast can do whatever it pleases with your Internet connection, including shutting you down on mere suspicion of misuse.

  • by KillerCow ( 213458 ) on Monday May 18, 2009 @01:58PM (#28000153)

    No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

  • Re:Enough already (Score:5, Informative)

    by matria ( 157464 ) on Monday May 18, 2009 @01:59PM (#28000175)
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 18, 2009 @02:00PM (#28000183)

    Cable One here is Biloxi Mississippi has started cutting off bittorrent users. They always send a nasty "you been stealing" letter to the victim. It is happening all over. Of course many of the "guilty" are just idiots that didn't secure their networks and forgot that teenagers lived next door.

  • Apostrophes (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 18, 2009 @02:07PM (#28000313)

    Most importantly, do we need these excessive apostrophes?

  • by sexconker ( 1179573 ) on Monday May 18, 2009 @02:12PM (#28000411)

    ISPs do not have common carrier status.
    Shocking I know, but the internet may have mislead you!

  • Re:Enough already (Score:3, Informative)

    by supernatendo ( 1523947 ) on Monday May 18, 2009 @02:14PM (#28000449)

    You are the type of person who would call Benjamin Franklin and Nikola Tesla, "Pirates"

    They had "radical piracy-like agendas" Touting dangerous ideas that knowledge, invention, innovation, even energy should be given away for free for the advancement of human civilization.

    The RIAA does not protect "poor artists and musicians", they protect themselves, and huge record corporations.

    This is why Jamendo and Magnatune are popular with some artists.

  • by MaskedSlacker ( 911878 ) on Monday May 18, 2009 @02:25PM (#28000665)
    When they want to make it a law that you lose your internet connection in this fashion then it is very relevant.
  • by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Monday May 18, 2009 @03:33PM (#28001759) Journal

    Then it sounds like you have nothing to worry about.

    Are you sure? The very nature of these proposals means that there is no judicial oversight. The standard of evidence required by the RIAA is much lower than that required by a court of law.

  • by BlueStrat ( 756137 ) on Monday May 18, 2009 @05:30PM (#28003451)

    And when they are beaten in the marketplace they go running to their friends in government to strongarm their competition.

    Wait. What competition? What strong-arming? As far as I can remember from reading slashdot, one of the most anti-**AA sites on the internet, the one and only drum they have been banging is the anti-piracy drum. I don't remember hearing of any government help to eliminate legitimate competition.

    I guess you missed the /. pieces about the attempt to strangle/kill internet radio, where independent artists have a chance to be heard by a wide audience?

    I guess you also missed the part where they passed a law to force the internet radio stations to pay royalties to SoundExchange for independent artists' work unless they could show a contract for each separate indy artist?

    That SoundExchange could legally keep a portion of said indy artists' royalties as "expenses" for performing the unasked-for and unwanted (by the indy artists/internet radio stations) task of grabbing royalties from internet radio stations in the name of independent artists?

    Not sure what the MPAA has done to stifle competition, as there isn't a whole lot of that in the same way there is in music. However, the RIAA has been hard at work buying laws to stifle independent artists and their distribution channels.

    Strat

  • by houstonbofh ( 602064 ) on Tuesday May 19, 2009 @12:54AM (#28007295)

    Again, you're assuming convention. ISPs do know that a lot of people will use their systems for illegal purposes, and some of the packages they sell certainly are pitched pretty obviously at file traders; one or two have even run obviously suggestive advertising campaigns to match. In any case, they've bitched about file sharing plenty here in the UK when it came time to consider upgrade costs for the hardware, and many of them seem to have no difficulty throttling all high-bandwidth users when it allows them to continue selling overlapping bandwidth, even if that traps those who are merely using the advertised package for legitimate, legal purposes.

    As do car companies. For example, the Subaru WRX STI, and the SPT performance parts from the dealer. Many people who buy these cars (and riced out Civics, and DSM Mitsus) race them on the street. Many more speed like mad men. Some race only on the track. Hard to tell who is who, and harder still to enforce without hitting a lot of innocent people. Kinda like what the RIAA wants to do. And, yes, I have a WRX.

An Ada exception is when a routine gets in trouble and says 'Beam me up, Scotty'.

Working...