Brazil Considering Legalizing File Sharing 233
An anonymous reader writes "It looks like Brazil may be the country to watch if you're interested in much more consumer-friendly copyright laws (assuming US diplomatic pressure doesn't interfere). As that country goes through a copyright reform process, among the proposals is one that would create fines not just for infringing, but also for hindering fair use and the public domain. Also, there is a big push underway, with widespread support — even from some artists groups — to legalize file sharing in exchange for a small levy (~$1.74/month) on your broadband connection. Of course, one reason why Brazil may be doing it this way is because of the massive success the Brazilian musical genre technobrega has had by embracing file sharing as a way to promote new works, and making money (often lots of it) through other avenues, like live shows."
Re:Who would have thought (Score:3, Insightful)
Well the Beatles and Rolling Stones made hundreds of millions more than the Grateful Dead by not making their music free.
They might not had made hundreds of millions of dollars if not for insane copyright law.
File sharing is already legal (Score:4, Insightful)
Please don't confuse file sharing with illegal distribution of copyrighted material on peer-to-peer networks.
Re:Who would have thought (Score:4, Insightful)
Well the Beatles and Rolling Stones made hundreds of millions more than the Grateful Dead by not making their music free.
Or they were just more mainstream and thus had a bigger audience.
Re: Levy (Score:3, Insightful)
Paying companies who may or may not represent the artists I listen to, and may or may not have a oppressive contract with the artists I listen to, seems like a perfect example of rent seeking. IMO, it is extortion. Especially since you are paying it to avoid legal hassle. Maybe we should all incorporate as Music Labels and get a slice of the pie.
Really though, it comes down to ease of use and lack of DRM -- aka providing a superior experience. I have discovered that, I don't feel the need to pirate games or music now that Steam* and Amazon are around.
I'm in no hurry to legalize file sharing though, unless there's a good proposal for making sure artists actually get paid.
Also, who buys CDs anymore?
* Yes Steam has DRM, but it succeeds in the ease of use and superior experience categories at least, offering hosted (I hate the word cloud but it fits here) flexibility in exchange for the DRM.
Re:Who would have thought (Score:1, Insightful)
Oh right, being paid for their art is just insane!
Re:Who would have thought (Score:5, Insightful)
And demanding hundreds of thousands of dollars per "infringed" song isn't insane?
Re:Who would have thought (Score:4, Insightful)
Well the Beatles and Rolling Stones made hundreds of millions more than the Grateful Dead by not making their music free.
They might not had made hundreds of millions of dollars if not for insane copyright law.
Sure they would have. Because copyright law was largely irrelevant as far as pirating music back then. Tape recorders were crude, and there was no way to make quality reproductions of songs for the average listener. If you wanted the record, you had to buy it from the store. Even into the 80's and early 90's, your best option was recording an album from cassette to cassette, and even with some higher end tape decks, you still didn't get sound quality as good as the original. Computer technology is what changed things, not copyright law. Now, suddenly any schmuck can make a perfect copy of a CD and distribute it to millions of his closest friends on the Internet.
Re:Who would have thought (Score:5, Insightful)
That's a terrible system, because there's less music being made that way, and people are spoon-fed only what the labels want them to listen to.
Today things are changing, because the labels' promotional machine is being overridden by more open distribution systems. So--- today it's not about making millions, it's about making a fair living (fairer distribution of wealth, and a level playing field) and having a chance to fame based on the quality of your work rather than dumb luck of getting picked up by a bunch of professional marketeers.
I think Brazil has the right idea, and I'll really really hate it when the big WIPO/ACTA/TRIPPS bullies shit their usual brick.
Re:Gee, what a concept (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words, only musicians who play the kind of music that you like to listen to should make a living at their music. Those of us who like to listen to music that cannot be easily or cheaply played at live performances should be out of luck.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well the problem (Score:2, Insightful)
It is not, which is why 90% of commercial movies, bands, software, etc in the mainstream suck so bad.
To your video game example. How about interlaced advertising as a model? Works for TV.
My argument against copyright laws is this: if they disappeared overnight, movies would still be shot; musicians would still make music; software would still be written by programmers; and yes, video games would still be created. Because all of these things are fun to someone, somewhere. Those people tend to be the true artists, and will make these things, even if the cash incentive was removed completely. Which it does not need to be, but it could easily be *reduced*.
The only question then - are we willing to slash the amount of money? For me, the answer is yes - because I'm damn sick of this blockbuster mentality that pervades most of my entertainment. Give me the work product of an artist vs the work product of a corporation any day.
Re:Gee, what a concept (Score:5, Insightful)
Its only in the last 200 years or so that we have had the idea that musicians should make money for a recording of their performance. Perhaps that was the real mistaken concept, and filesharing/easily created copies of musical recordings are merely bringing things back to normal.
In other words, only musicians who play the kind of music that you like to listen to should make a living at their music. Those of us who like to listen to music that cannot be easily or cheaply played at live performances should be out of luck.
Yep. Sounds like he's saying that if your music isn't that popular and the musicians can't make a living at it, maybe they should just play anyway because they love it. Music, for many of us, is a hobby - a passion.
Re:Who would have thought (Score:2, Insightful)
How exactly does that apply to the discussion of whether or not the beetles made millions of dollars SELLING their music and not giving it away free? The discussion wasn't about the merits of current law.
"US Diplomatic Pressure" (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It's FUCKING Brazi!! Hole in the ground piss po (Score:1, Insightful)
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20015493-261.html [cnet.com]
has more weight than you. Will they go to jail, or prison? Thay may wish they had just
stolen" stuff. As it is, they are in for a world of hurt. They can't hude anymore. Maybe you're on list. Or maybe this time you got lucky. Do you really want to argue it's not stealing then? You'll be crying to mama before it's over, and yes, your life being a living hell is the point.
Re:What is this, really? (Score:3, Insightful)
Yet another poster asserting that everything that has happened in the War on Piracy is the fault of p2p users, and by implication, that the big media corporations and various governments are blameless. They don't exactly have a gun held to their heads in the matter- all the crap they pull is their choice, and therefore their fault.