Rosen Floats ISP Fee Idea -- Charge Everybody! 701
iconian writes "Hillary Rosen of RIAA wants to impose a type of fee to ISPs which in turn will be passed to all their customers indiscriminately to recoup supposed damages done by file-sharing. The RIAA considers downloading music illegally over the Internet to be the moral equivalence of stealing. I wonder then what is the moral equivalence of the RIAA taking realized cash from people who do not download music?"
I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:5, Interesting)
Imho, this sort of thing just makes me doubly motivated to go out and download all the music I want. If I'm going to be paying a markup for it, might as well take advantage of it.
Oh, and I haven't bought a single music CD in the last 3 years. And I'm proud of it. Once a system is in place to pay money to artists directly, I'll put some money in towards the artists I like. Until then, I ain't paying squat.
Daniel
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:3, Interesting)
and ths makes me triply motivated to rip and put up my CDs for download. until now I used to allow only 1 user at a time to download from me, but now I will make it 10. look for kazaa user oggfan.
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:4, Informative)
Time to put your money where your mouth is? [fairtunes.com]
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:5, Interesting)
The way I see it, if they charge me like that, then I'm paying for a service. They're basically saying "It's all okay". So yes, I agree with you, I'd take advantage with it.
What really irks me is that they've provided 0 way of legitimizing any MP3s we all have. They don't acknowledge that if you have a CD of a song that you're a legitimate user. They don't give you a way of purchasing a certificate or license for a digital copy of a song or CD. And if you delete your collection, they don't do anything to subtract that from their 'piracy' reports.
So yeah I'd love to pay a small fee for this, they'd have little room to bitch afterwards.
Too bad they won't try to make money by giving people an opportunity to legitimize what they have.
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:5, Insightful)
As for the markup, what would you argue? That people should pay the RIAA markup on CD-Rs and then pay again for the CDs at full cost, a price which is illegally fixed at an artificially high level as has been proven in a recent court case? You really think there's something wrong with downloading music for free when you already paid for it by purchasing blank CD-Rs which you need to backup your software?
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:3, Interesting)
As for the so-called artists à la Britney Spears that the RIAA does expend a lot of effort on, to get them in my face whether I want to hear about them or not, those can go rot in hell. If they all go bankrupt I'll be happy. Finally the airwaves will be free for the types of artists which don't need multi-million dollar marketting campaigns to be listened to. And there's plenty of those, believe you me.
Anyway, in answer to you and the AC before, you, on the theft thing: Theft would be for my benefit - I'm doing this to do my bit to help the RIAA go bankrupt. I'm not making any financial gains by letting other people download my music, so if I'm stealing, where's it going? Huh?
Daniel
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is only true if you are only interested in mainstream acts (and even then, it doesn't need to be true). None of the music I listen to has anything to do with the RIAA. In fact, I don't think I've listened to an act on an RIAA-backed label in years. I don't need the RIAA to tell me what to listen to; especially considering that they and their lackey labels are complete morons and wouldn't know interesting and artistic music if it came up and bit them on the ass.
Ultimately, that's what the RIAA cares about much more than people copying CDs. They've enjoyed decades of dictating what people get to listen to. Now, their uselessness is becoming clear. There are plenty of ways to find music that you like (All Music, Ptichfork, mp3.com, etc.) and you don't need the RIAA for any of them. In fact, you just might find that your musical interests are invigorated by getting away from all that mind-numbing, mainstream crack.
The internet, and particularly p2p, has irrevocably changed the way I listened to music and exponentially expanded my musical options. If the establishment wants to brand me a criminal for that, so be it. Just look out, cuz once I'm already a criminal, who knows what I might do. ;o)
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:5, Insightful)
i agree with you... it's like saying "grocery prices are outrageous... to show my malcontent i'll go rob a grocery store". the legal way to show malcontent is to not purchase the product. if enough ppl do this, things change.
however, i don't think that'll work in this case. if, say, 25% of American music lovers stopped buying CDs published by companies in bed with the RIAA and everyone stopped pirating music... it is my guess the RIAA would still blame bad sales on piracy. it's an easy excuse that execs can use instead of sticking their necks out and going "maybe things need to change."
file swapping will continue to be the RIAA's excuse because it's easier than the truth.
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:5, Insightful)
Brilliant example. If grocery prices were being artificially jacked up by a marketing cartel, farmers were being paid shit wages, and there was a 'tax' on gardening tools and fertiliser that went to the same cartel to cover loss of profits due to home gardening. even if you were only using the tools and fertiliser to grow roses and not vegetables. That's about where we're at.
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:5, Insightful)
That's right, and it's also why this is such an incredibly stupid idea. The biggest reason it's so stupid is that it a) penalizes people that have nothing to do with piracy, and b) creates a revenue stream that is based on nothing but speculation- it completely distorts important issues like market demand. If this is going to be the new game in town, then why don't banks ask for an special tax on cars, since they're often used as a means to escape after a robbery. Dumb, dumb, dumb.
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:3, Interesting)
No, that's still not the same.
When you steal the groceries from the shop behind the corner, you take it from the owner of the shop and he loses money spent on it. When you take someone's car, you take away his posession. When you photocopy a dollar bill and circulate it, you take away a bit of value from every single dollar bill on this planet.
When you copy music you don't do any of this. You don't deprieve original of its value, you don't take the money spent on its creation. There is very questionable point of lost revenue, but thats just it: it's questionable.
Go figure...
Robert
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:4, Interesting)
Except he was justifying copyright infringement, not shoplifting and/or robbery.
Copying music is legally wrong. It is probably morally and ethically wrong. It is, however, not the same sort of wrong as theft. The problem is complex enough already: nobody needs your loaded analogies muddying the waters.
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:4, Informative)
s/music/my webpage/g
s/music/a book/g
Copying music is not wrong: it is your intent of what you do with that copy that is the issue. In the US, it has been deemed a person can make an archival copy of items (music, software).. but if you then distribute that copy you have suddenly crossed the line into illegality.
(and for what its worth, I think the RIAA proposal is bullshit.. but if some people keep trying to justify p2p transferring of copyrighted works then you only give them more ammo.)
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:3, Insightful)
If I give them compensation then I obviously expect something in return.
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:5, Insightful)
Rationalizing theft. I probably won't win anyone over by arguing about that, so I won't bother.
A fail to see why it's theft to do what I've paid to do. If I pay admission to a theme park, it's not theft when I get on the rides. If I pay for cable, it's not theft if I watch it. So, if I pay for downloading mp3s...
By the same token, it IS theft if the theme park charges me admission and then won't let me ride, and it IS theft if the cable company charges me for cable and then won't give me a signal. So if the RIAA charges me to download mp3s and then tries to stop me...
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:3, Interesting)
I might be atypical, as I appreciate my TV consumption is well below the average, but the following comment holds as true before and after I made that particular change in my life; I never learnt about artists because 'the members of the RIAA paid a shitload of money'. Generally, I almost always find new artists I like - in order - by word-of-mouth from friends, by chance (eg. turning up at a random gig or other and discovering I like it), by poking around the record store, or, recently, by internet.
Occasionally, I do find new artists I like off the radio or television - very occasionally - but really, if the RIAA are PAYING significant $ to get their acts on advertising-sponsored radio then I think they're doing something wrong (or, more likely, are victims of the payola they almost certainly imposed on themselves).
One thing that I know for sure is that at least in Europe, the idea that a musical act has to pay radio stations - especially small, local advertising sponsored stations of the few-hundred-thousand-listener variety - should by all logic be laughable. Like local newspapers, most local institutions
The point of all this being that, frankly, your RIAA - advertising - economics theory is part wishful thinking and partly true, but much of what makes it true is fall-out from the bad behaviour of the RIAA and its European cousins.
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure it does.
That money is going directly to the people the artists are allowing to represent them.
Its the artists fault for choosing thieving scum to represent them in the first place. If the artists would stop doing this, the whole situation would get better.
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:5, Insightful)
And consumer backlash about bad files, worms, etc? P2P is mainstream. Knowledge of what the **AAs are doing is not mainstream. I got some no-RIAA [thinkgeek.com] and no-MPAA [thinkgeek.com] stickers from ThinkGeek awhile back. Every single one of my friends (who all use P2P programs) had to ask what those 2 organizations stood for. Very few people who use P2P know about the **AAs and what they're doing, so how can they be pissed about it?
All the RIAA must do is (Score:3, Insightful)
Release their OWN ISP, which allows a user to connect to THEIR networks to download music based on a subscription model.
Say I am fans of certain musicians and I'm subcribed to AOL Time Warner RIAA ISP, well, I subscribe to the musicians and they get paid.
The reason I dont want the RIAA to do this accross the board however is it doesnt help musicians it only helps the RIAA.
Look, I wouldnt mind if musicians made me pay a $10 a year subscription fee and I get a song each month in the same way I get magazines.
I just want to be able to do this straight to the musician and not through the RIAA.
Also the RIAA can call it stealing all they want, they dont have a monopoly on morals. In my opinion stealing can only occur with physical objects, I dont believe someone can steal an idea, I do believe the right to profit off of that idea can be exclusive, I just dont believe anyone can strictly own an idea.
I dont care what your idea is, why should you be able to prevent people from freely exchanging it if no money is involved?
If your idea was worth a damn, people would be selling it, and then you should have the right to sue. With music, I think a musician should have the exclusive right to profit from their idea, but if people are sharing music this has nothing to do with capitalism or business, the demand goes down when the supply goes up, when the supply is infinite, well musicians and record companies just have to accept the fact that now we have the internet, we dont need record companies to provide supply, we have endless supply now, so our demands are different now.
Before they could release crap and charge $15, now they have to release stuff we the fans WANT.
I do buy music, I purchased the crydamoure CD waves, most americans dont listen to french house music, I didnt even know what it was until the internet, and its the only music that I'd pay money for each copy.
Why? Because they are released on vinyl, extremely high quality, perfect for mixing. I dont want a cheap low quality mp3 copy of my favorite songs, I want the highest quality that exists.
Just like people dont want a copied VHS tape of their favorite movie, they have to go to the theaters to see it.
This is how the music industry can survive, by providing what the fans want, in a much higher quality than Mp3 can handle. Mp3, or even Wav can never fully recreate vinyl in quality! So people will PAY MONEY for this.
People will also pay money if they have the right to mix or play with anything they buy, this means we should be able to remix any music we get and share it with others as long as its not sold.
Enemy of the people... (Score:3, Insightful)
I hope so.
What they don't get is fighting fire with fire will only make more fire. They need to put on a more people friendly focus... And make it easier to buy music from them than to download it. (I don't know how they'd do that...) The thing is they need to realize americans are lazy. If they can get music by typing it in and clicking the mouse a few times, they will. Moral shmorals. Don't ask for capitalist morality in a world where everything is just pixels on a monitor... Hell, don't ask for morality on the internet at all! (especially when dealing with the RIAA!)
Why We Need Them To Win (Score:3, Insightful)
So I say good luck RIAA, I hope you win this one, 'cause it may well be your last if you do.
Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they. (Score:4, Interesting)
When I pulled my copy out of the mailbox, the image of the Hindenburg accompied by the headlines (THE FALL OF THE MUSIC INDUSTRY and HILARY ROSEN: THE MOST HATED NAME IN MUSIC) certainly piqued my interest.
After reading the article on Hilary, I'm almost sympathetic with her plight. She is the punching bag, with asshole anal-retentive CEOs of the big 5 labels on one side, and all of us
None of this is any defense for Hilary, though. While her ability to withstand being beaten up from two sides (including death threats...shame on any asshole that sent her a death threat!) is admirable, it doesn't change the fact that she's on the wrong side of the issue. Her contract expires this year. It will be interesting to see if she's willing press on as a $1 million per year punching bag.
Slightly offtopic, but in this same issue of Wired there's an article that encourages companies to embrace hackers rather than persecute them. Just thought I'd mention that. (And no, I don't work for Wired.)
--K.
un-be-frickin-lievable. (Score:2)
Nothing new (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nothing new (Score:5, Informative)
These had an extra $1.00 per disc or so added to the retail price compared to similar CD-R's sold at the time. Since they only held music not data the RIAA assumed (that word again!) that they would ONLY be used to record pirated musical content, so the surcharge whent through unchallenged.
Re:Nothing new (Score:4, Interesting)
Normal "Music" CD-Rs do cost you some extra money which goes to the RIAA, some of which supposedly goes to artists but I suspect that means it goes to the label and a tiny fraction of it goes to artists. Either way it's wrong to take my money when I buy CD-R media so I NEVER EVER buy so-called music CD-Rs. Interestingly, non-geek people I explain the situation to say that they will also never buy them, with very little prompting. This is how much the common man hates the music industry. It doesn't stop people from buying music but it does lead them away from it.
Re:Nothing new (Score:3, Interesting)
There's a stack of 5 of them sitting on my damn shelf right now in front of me; my older Yamaha CDR100 will NOT burn to them - it rejects them as invalid media, even trying to do a red-book audio CD type of burn. It simply refuses to recognize the discs as valid blank CD-R media. Since I don't own a consumer CD-writer, I never could use them, and my roommate that bought them by accident had since lost the receipt, so I couldn't return them either. And there they sit; a monument to CD-Audio-R format or whatever the hell they called it.
I very recently purchased a brand-new whizz-bang 48x16x48 CDRW drive, so perhaps it might be able to do something with them, but I can assure you 100% that they are NOT ordinary CD-R media with a "Music" label and hefty surcharge attached.
Re:Nothing new (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Nothing new (Score:5, Informative)
They got a double-whammy on that one; people who run small recording studios have to pay these royalties, so their competition winds up paying them a levee for competing with them.
Re:Nothing new (Score:5, Insightful)
Call me cynical, but IMHO the RIAA will collect their ISP Fee from those users who download, and those who do not, and they will still press to have the likes of Kazaa and Napster illegalised (sp?). My problem with big corporations and organisations is that they generally want their cake and eat it.
Maybe I'm wrong: maybe we'll have our Internet tax and the RIAA will be happy. For some reason, I think not.
Tim
Re:Nothing new (Score:3, Insightful)
You could consider that because the levy goes to pay for loss due to piracy, they can't claim that piracy is costing them as much as they say. Also, since I've paid the levy, I have, in a way, paid a licensing fee, and have tacit approval for any copying I may do.
OTOH, not for one second do I believe this will prevent the RIAA from trying the same antics in Canada as they are in the US, once they have built up a series of wins. Nor do I believe that the levy will protect Canadian's interests once RIAA approved (copy inhibited) CD players begin shipping into the US. Canada is a little market compared to the US, so we'll just get the same restricted hardware that they get, and everyone will ignore the fact that this hardware is supposed to prevent copying, which we are already paying a levy to compensate for copying.
elsilver.
Re:Nothing new (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, you understate your position. From The Copyright Act, Part VII [justice.gc.ca] (Copyright Board and Collective Administration of Copyright):
Basically, what this means is that it is legal to copy music for your own personal use. Too many Canadians say 'well, if I'm paying for copying, shouldn't I be able to copy?' The government says yes.
--Dan
What's next? (Score:5, Funny)
We had to burn the village to rape it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:We had to burn the village to rape it... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:We had to burn the village to rape it... (Score:3, Insightful)
-Mark
Re:We had to burn the village to rape it... (Score:3, Insightful)
But they're hanging on... tough buggers. We're gonna have to think of something more effective to get rid of them.
Daniel
Re:We had to burn the village to rape it... (Score:3, Insightful)
The difference is my taxes support a prison system which (theoretically) provides a safer society.
The proposed **AA tax would prop up a business model. Hardly a benefit to civil society.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Hey man, I'm all for it! (Score:2)
THEN they'll buy up all the [cable|dialup] modem manufactures and put bugs into the firmware so that you get disconnected every three minutes.
Hey, you never know what could happen...
-Mark
Re:Hey man, I'm all for it! (Score:5, Insightful)
The RIAA could be shooting themselves in the foot with this one
Re:Hey man, I'm all for it! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Hey man, I'm all for it! (Score:3, Interesting)
See here [neil.eton.ca] for more info.
Re:Hey man, I'm all for it! (Score:3, Insightful)
It happened before, and was just as stupid then (Score:5, Insightful)
But, put that aside, one can argue this Piracy Tax with logic.
If the RIAA wants to impose a levy on ISPs because of possible file sharing, then shouldn't software companies be allowed to impose a similar levy? And if the RIAA can impose it, what about indie labels? Their music gets stolen too. What about artists who put their graphics online? What about font designers whose fonts get ripped off on alt.binaries.fonts? Surely they should all get a cut?
Logic shows this whole idea is stupid. But will logic be enough to stop the courts? I doubt it. Aristotle said 'The law is reason from my passion'. Not in 2002 it ain't.
If they collect the money (Score:5, Informative)
Taking. (Score:5, Insightful)
This will never happen. (Score:3, Interesting)
oh.
Wait a sec.
Government, Inc. (Score:5, Insightful)
Just when you thought that the corporate-owned government couldn't screw us in a more blatant, shameless and imaginative way, along comes Hillary...
Let's See If I Understand Correctly... (Score:3, Insightful)
Hilary Rosen, congratulations. You will no doubt be the first against the wall. I sincerely and wholeheartedly extend this "Fuck you" into your general direction.
Re:Let's See If I Understand Correctly... (Score:5, Interesting)
I own a car - but I don't go randomly running over people or property.
I own serveral fireamrs, but I have never killed anyone or anyting with them. (Except for some out of date Coca Cola)
I own a camera, but I don't go kidnap little girls and make kiddie porn
I own several knives but I have never cut anyone but myself with them...
Yet if I own a computer, a cd burner, cd-r discs and have an internet connection I am automatically a music pirate? (Or worse?!)
If I pay for downloading pirated music (Score:2, Interesting)
But if they make me pay an ISP fee to download pirated music, and they reap profits from that, isn't that the same as selling me the right to download said music? As far as I'm concerned, it is.
In Other News... (Score:3, Funny)
The RIAA charges NJ Transit because apparently, some people from NJ are going to Tower Records in NY to steal CDs... but the thing is... They're using NJ Transit to do it!!! Bastards!
Heh... so... is that the appropriate analogy here? Any other fun analogies out there?
Guess they REALLY need that 6% back huh? heh.
If they get this how will it change? (Score:2)
Sounds like Saddam... (Score:4, Insightful)
The RIAA needs to be killed off, it is bad for the people. It is no longer about music, not even in the least. Those of you who are allowed to vote in the states, make sure you vote for people who don't support the RIAA...
Re:Sounds like Saddam... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, this is exactly where we are going. Corporations will be our new governments; passing laws, collecting taxes, and running our lives (for their benefit). You can't vote, and you won't even be able to vote with your dollar. The marketplace will be ruled by cartels (-or industry associations, the name is your preference). It will be a sort of multi-feudalism, with many kings, each having control over a different aspect of your life. It's funny how at the extreme end capitalism and communism look quite similiar, at least in how they're implemented.
Great (Score:2)
Just a minute... (Score:2, Insightful)
They're going to milk this whole "sales going to be down 6%" junk for all it's worth. I bet we'll see it in every related article until 2004.
Hey... (Score:2, Interesting)
Let's let them do it! Would you pay $10 a month for a year if it made the RIAA drown in their own stupidity?
How will this change? (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Complain about piracy
2. Lets charge per tape because we have our music pirated.
3. ??
4. Profit!!
5. Complain about piracy
6. Lets collect tax from ISP because we have our music pirated.
7. ??
8. Profit!!
9. Complain about piracy
10. ??
11. ??
12. Profit!!
A few thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)
1) The name Hillary has serious connotations to it. I immediately think of annoying, overzealous, stuck-up bitches like Ms. Clinton and Ms. Rosen.
2) Every CD-R disc that you buy is taxed and portions of the money you pay are given to the RIAA and similar organizations. So don't tax my Internet bill as well, and don't take my portable MP3 player either. Some of us actually use our own bought music to listen to.
3) With every new inane law or result of a lawsuit that I hear, I get one step closer to leaving the United States. It's becoming a bloody corporate rape scene here in the States and I for one am just about at the end of my rope.
4) Corporations should not control the government. We need to run the country, it's supposed to be our government. Let's let the citizens reign free and make America the best country it's ever been but without excessive taxation for wanting to listen to music or chat on the Intranet.
Re:A few thoughts (Score:3, Insightful)
Three words, Boston Tea Party. Remember what Thomas Jefferson said, "A government that is large enough to supply everything you need is large enough to take everything you have."
We are at that point. The people have lost their rights to our government. The United States are now a network of corporate states, that control a select few group of individuals.
With every new inane law or result of a lawsuit that I hear, I get one step closer to leaving the United States. It's becoming a bloody corporate rape scene here in the States and I for one am just about at the end of my rope.
It used to be that when someone was fed up, they rallied support and changed the system. Now, those who value an independant culture must choose exile. You said it, "Let the citizens reign free" but how can that happen when most citizens let go of the very reigns that made them free in the first place?
Education, this is the key. Inform those people of their lost rights. Unfortunately, I don't think many care because they're happy in their complacent white picket fence lives.
"The income tax created more criminals than any other single act of government." - Barry Goldwater, almost U.S. President
"It is not from top to bottom that societies die; it is from bottom to top." - Henry George
"When the President does it, that means it is not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon, U.S. President and attorney
Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is force. And, like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." - George Washington, U.S. President
Re:A few thoughts (Score:3, Insightful)
Careful to label this attitude as "Western" -- the corporatism that spreads has no place in the world aside from the countries that implement the same practices as the US. You don't see Canada working it's way towards removing citizens rights by way of tax levies, instead they get socialized health care.
As long as the vast majority of the population are comfy and view people who want to disrupt the current system as unpatriotic, dangerous oddballs (a characterzation that will be happily portrayed by big media), we have no hope of going back.
As long as they have their 2.3 kids, white picket fence, and a dog named spot, these people are the enemies of the American dream. Yes, they are living it but at what cost? They do not want anybody to disrupt their dream so that others may obtain it.
It's good that such a clown as George Bush is in office, lest resistence may actually be countered using the same pie-in-the-sky promises as made to North Korea. A deluge of education must flood the streets of the United States, uniting the people once more, and restoring to the states the power in which they slowly let slip away into the hands of those willing to pay campaign contributions.
Regardless of my opinion that it is futile, I will also continue to educate. I would very much like it to be proven that I was wrong about how things will go, and I will do what I can to help.
That had hundreds of thousands of people protesting today for the salvation of a country in the middle east that most Americans couldn't locate on a map. With the proper backing, that strength could be turned towards revitalizing the American ideology forgotten a hundred years ago. Unfortunately, it will not happen because the people who organize and are respected by the masses are also getting their paychecks in the same manner as the puppet politicians.
Re:A few thoughts (Score:3, Insightful)
Wow...let the anger go. Repeat after me. Strong women are NOT a threat to my manhood. Hillary's only fault in life was no being born a man. That way instead of being seen as an agresssive "bitch", she would have been seen as a man who "speaks his mind". Of course after all those years of conservitives bashing her relentlessly on the radio and T.V., I guess I'm not surprised the brainwashing still influences people.
This is the information I have to go on? (Score:3, Interesting)
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-981281.html
In it, HR's more sane suggestion is to urge
"major music labels, which include Sony Music, Warner Music, EMI, Universal Music and Bertelsmann's BMG, to ease licensing restrictions, develop digital copyright protections for music and invest more in promoting subscription download services."
Sounds like a good plan to me.
The only thing she forgot was the "oh and offer music at a fair price"
Sometimes it seems paraphrasing is the main source of news on Slashdot.
Yo Grark
Canadian Bred with American Buttering
The will go over well in Canada (Score:5, Interesting)
It's already 21 cents per CD, and is going up to 59 cents soon. There's also a fee of 21 cents/megabyte for digital camera memory and tiny HDs because they can also be used in mp3 players.
Taxing ISPs is probably just the next logical step up here
Jason
ProfQuotes [profquotes.com]
best for last (Score:5, Interesting)
"It's clear to me these companies are profiting to the tune of millions and millions of dollars. They must be held accountable," Rosen said.
When did I give Kazaa money again...?
Re:best for last (Score:4, Interesting)
Kazaa is infested with all sorts of tag-along programs which are spyware and adware. Remember the famous one that stole Amazon.com affiliate program links so that Kazaa always got the credit?... yeah, that's stealing from Joe Webmaster... but Kazaa doesn't care.
Percentage of legit file sharing? .00005? (Score:3, Informative)
When I go in to a company and check a network out, top to bottom, server to workstation. I 99.9 percent of the time gigs of mp3's, pirated applications, and everyone has Kazaa. And for the next week everyone hates me cause I disable downloads, remove kazaa, block ports, and lock down the network. Not to mention find that some savvy employee is running an ftp server, or using company bandwidth to sell his wifes beanie babies.
I also am an on call tech for Dell. Usually this is installing new systems, doing data transfers. In short making the new system mirror the old one in software and data.
I have yet to hear someone say" Yeah all those mp3 are from CD's I own" "Here is my original copy of office xp" I get handed burned CD's and hear things like "dude you can get all the music and software you want off the internet." And this is not teenies nor young adults. But people into their 50's. I will not install anyting from a burned copy and a scribbled down serial number. They get burned, they are gonna point the finger at me.
I love my work. But if I had a dollar for everyime some client calls me to fix something, install something and then teach them how to download(steal) music and software. I would be a rich man.
I download music. I can remember the last time I bought a CD.2 years ago. I can always claim that all the Cure, Bill Idol, 80's hits, on my hard drives that I did once on the LP(probably in moms attic) so I am entitled. I gess if I wear out my copy of Nueromance, I can just go take a new one, free.
Recently I did a an 8 station wireless network in a wealthy mans house. Plus two laptops. The house is a Kazaa nightmare. Guy can afford CD's but he doesnt buy them.
I think the government shouldn't regulate or charge for info, but I think we on the internet have proven that we pirate and steal like crazy. I am a 33 year old admin, old fart in the business. I have many colleagues, and we pass warez around like crazy, and giggle about it. But we admit it. We do not try and take the moral high ground.
I am tired of hearing about all this bitching about our rights are being impugned. Why dont we all petition our ISPS to block all file sharing services? Doesn't take much CPU to rip a CD. We were doing it on P
Jeez, maybe I am getting old. But Kazaa is a pirates playground, edonkey, gnutella, and others.
Puto
If a woman blabs and nobody's there to hear it... (Score:5, Informative)
This isn't a bill that's on the president's desk.
This isn't a bill that has passed the House.
This isn't a bill that has passed the Senate.
This isn't waiting in committee.
This hasn't even been proposed in either branch.
Hillary cannot propose it in either branch, she hasn't been elected.
Hillary isn't even running for office.
This is so far away from being a law, it isn't even funny. Nobody with the power to make this a law has come forward supporting it. If Fritz Hollings picks it up, then we can be a bit concerned, yet he still needs to convnice a lot of other people this is a good idea before it goes anywhere.
Let's not get too worked up on this one. Keep it on the radar, sure... but there are a lot of other bad ideas that have gotten further in the assembly line than this one, and those are the ones that need our attention.
Re:If a woman blabs and nobody's there to hear it. (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree with you -- but just one question. Is the blank CD tax a law? When did it pass? How? I would be concerned that this one can follow the same path.
Piracy isn't the problem - price is (Score:5, Interesting)
My mother, a standard consumer with nearly no knowledge of how to go about pirating music or burning CDs, pointed out something very simple to me. She said that the price of CDs was the big problem, not the economy so much, and not piracy.
She pointed out how when Wal-Mart or K-Mart or Target have sales on CDs where the price drops quite low, say $10/CD, they sell out of the popular CDs. She also pointed out that in order for everyone to get paid reasonably, the cost to produce a CD would be about $5.
So, when you spend that incredible $20/CD, what are you spending that money on? Padding the pockets of shareholders and paying lawyers chasing "piracy".
My suggestion? When the CDs go on sale, buy 'em. Buy when they're low to show that you WOULD buy them if the were reasonably priced. Of course, getting the CDs you want may be tough then. Additionally, buy used CDs. Buy whenever the music hits a price you consider reasonable. Continue to support your favourite artists by buying t-shirts and going to concerts.
They should really teaching these marketing people some real economics courses. Supply and demand aren't just a simple cross on a chart when you add in alternative methods of obtaining materials. Sometimes crime does pay. Maybe we should have politicians look at it too.
"People are inherently selfish, but still they like to look morally upstanding in others' eyes. No one wants to be the bad guy." -me
CD prices (Score:3, Interesting)
If I go into a place like Circuit City or Best Buy, wander over to the CD section, and buy the soundtrack for a movie such as The Fellowship of the Ring, I can expect to pay about $17.99 USD. Yet I can now wander over to the DVD section and pick up the DVD for that same movie for $19.99 USD -- and there I get the whole movie plus commentary tracks, deleted scenes, documentaries, etc. The soundtrack is only a couple of bucks less and all I get is the soundtrack.
And yet Hillary Rosen and her goose-stepping Gestapo at the RIAA complain about falling CD sales figures and they have the nerve to act surprised. What's that you say, Hillary? CD sales are off? No shit, Sherlock.
The fact of that matter is that 90% of what the RIAA puts out is complete garbage and 100% of it is overpriced. They're well aware of this fact, but really don't care; they're more concerned about preserving their ancient sales model and revenue stream than they are about putting out a high-quality product for a good value. Perhaps that's why DVD sales are skyrocketing and CD sales are flat. DVD movies are cheap, high quality, and offer a lot of bang for the buck.
The fact that DVDs are outselling $20 CDs that only have one or two decent tracks on them should come as a surprise to nobody.
In Canada, We Have A Fee... (Score:4, Insightful)
21 cents per blank cd, 29 cents per audio cassette, and 77 cents per minidisc.
And the Recording industry wants it increased (a 181% increase for CDs), and wants it added to additional media (flash memory cards and DVDs) as well as to MP3 players.
Ironically, none of the money has been paid out to any artists.
1) It's legal to have an mp3 if you've paid for the music
2) CDs are used for things other than music
3) Flash memory cards are used in dozens of things; I have a digital camera that uses them.
The last time the levy was raised (Jan, 2001 I believe) I wrote letters to various Members of Parliment hoping to get it shut down.
This time, even the retailers [londondrugs.com] are getting involved.
The music industry is a dinosaur. I believe artists should be paid for their work, but the cost of a CD is ridiculous; that money is disappearing into music executives pockets; the artist gets next to nothing [salon.com]. I would pay 30 cents per MP3 to download. No shipping, no retail costs, no packaging. That should be fair.
This could be good if we shoot the RIAA first (Score:5, Insightful)
You'd have something like the nielsens, which would figure out what people were downloading (by sniffing random packets or whatever - I'm sure the slashdot crowd can come up with a method that would work) and then reimburse whoever owned the copyright to a particular work preportionally out of the general fund.
The PROBLEM is that groups like the RIAA would see to it that the rules were stacked in their favor, so that they got all this money.
Does anyone know how much of the casette surcharge goes to artists? To artists who are not actually affiliated with the RIAA? I can't find an exact figure, but it's not frigging much!
I'd like to see a direct compensation scheme of the good sort in place, since it would allow people to make a living providing culture (which is good) and maximise the VALUE of that culture to society (since anyone could have as much culture as they wanted for a flat rate.)
Unfortunately, the blood suckers at the RIAA have both the power and position to suck such a scheme dry of blood.
While I was looking for a specific breakdown of how the 2%/$2 surcharge on blank CDs/CD burners is disbursed (I can't find it) I did find this interesting article which is worth a read. [whoarethepirates.com]
The author has very much my take on the economics of the affair, although I disagree that piracy is "basically wrong."
Not that I agree but... (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't want to see this happen either, but ther is precedent for it.
Counteroffer to the industry (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe we're not taking socialism seriously enough. Here's a proposal: If the various labels want to impose a tax and distribute it amongst themselves (an entirely inappropriate and possibly unconstitutional thing for the gov't to be doing, redistributing for a private "good"), why not go whole hog and socialize the music industry. Then they'll get their tax, and we, through Congress, can decide how much of the take they get. No profits, of course.
Symmetry? Everyone happy? No one happy? Well, that's the point.
Doing the same to the RIAA and MPAA (Score:5, Funny)
IBM owns the songs "2" through "9" and "A" through "F" and "SmileyFace", Bell Labs owns "-128" through "-1", "*", "#", and "13" through "127", the CCITT owns "128" through "255", Control Data owns "Negative 0". Digital Equipment owns "-32768"-"-129" and "256"-"32767", except that John Draper seems to have aquired performance rights for "2600" and somebody scribbled on the documentation on "31337", IBM owns "32768-65535", and by now that's covered all the songs you can play on CD. If they're thinking about using other standards, remember that the IEEE currently has all the floating point numbers, plus and minus infinity, and "Not A Number", so there's no place for the RIAA to hide except back in Analog Land.
And, surely if the music industry can tax us for possible downloads, we should be able to tax them for showing computers in their movies and using "computer hackers" in their plots, because they MIGhT NOT HAVE paid the Cyberspace Society of Computer Programmers, Hackers, and Stereotyped Nerdy Teenagers for using them. The tax obviously ought to be paid in movie downloads.
Besides, as a spokesperson for the Cable TV industry (I own about a 3-millionth of Comcast) it's important to remind the RIAA that most of the Cable Modem companies have strict policies against copyright violation, so our users would never do anything like that and she therefore can't tax us for it, and most of them also have strict policies running anything server-like, including file sharing software, which is bizarrely and suicidally clueless (Duhh, why do you think people buy broadband?) but also means that none of *our* users are doing this. However, we do know that the record labels and their "agents" often use the telephone to talk to their artists, so the telephone companies are as much a part of the music production process as the RIAA is, and we'd like our cut now, please.
What's 'Moral Equivalence' Got To Do With It? (Score:3, Interesting)
I dunno, but so what? Feelings of moral superiority, by themselves, seldom carry the day.
Seems to me this is just an attempt to scare big ISP's into doing the RIAA's dirty work for them. At that, there'd certainly be a few challenges in court that would gum up the works for at least a while.
Rosen has it Backwards (Score:3, Interesting)
Protest Ideas (Score:4, Interesting)
Another idea, less likely than the last: Follow Rosen around, and figure out some way to screw with the prices at grocery stores and gas pumps. See how many people are in her car and multiply the cost of gas by that much (when its charged). Ideally you'd add a little message to the end of the receipt: "Since this gas will be used by 3 people, we had to charge you 3 times as much". Options would be to use the max capacity of her car ("You MIGHT have 5 people in your car so we had to multiply by 5) or if she drives alone, multiply by two: "You are driving with BIN LADEN"
Yet another idea: Write to your congressman and tell them that you are tired of paying the RIAA tax. Tell them that if you continue to have to pay RIAA to support their dying way of life, then you will have no choice but to copy music, so that the money you have spent on them for the right to pirate music isn't wasted. After all, in the absense of any other agreement to the contrary, you must assume that paying the "tax" whose stated purpose is to pay for piracy must give you a license to pirate music.
One good thing to do...... (Score:4, Interesting)
I believe that they are just throwing around ideas on how to stop piracy even the stupid ones... I really don't see something like this that would ever pass. They really haven't had any real good plans to stop piracy, well incentive to buy would be my best bet.. today i bought Foo Fighters ($11.99) and The Crystal Method ($6.99) price wasn't too bad and they are both pretty good records. But an ISP tax is something I'm not ever going to pay for.. I already pay $44 and that is enough. Anyway someone call Fugazi and tell that record industry is all fucked up again!
A New Approach.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Their current business model pretty much rests on bribery, extortion, fraud, theft, computer network tampering, price gouging, and price fixing.
If there is no such movement, perhaps we need someone to organize a website where we can weigh in on this. Instead of debating the theoretical and philosophical aspects of the issues, let's start going on the offensive. Let's begin exposing the RIAA for what it is. Letter and email writing to congresscritters and media types would be a good beginning. If a single major media outlet were to give coverage to the necessary topics, it would be a great boost to the cause. For once in the 20 years of corrupt business practices within the major media companies, let's put them on the defensive and make them justify their own theft.
You think you dislike this idea? (Score:5, Insightful)
Tax all transport! (Score:3, Insightful)
This Routine is Getting Too Predictable (Score:3)
Public: "Shut the fuck up."
Congressman Lapdog duJour: "Let's step into my office..."
Slashdot: "Senate/House Extends Copyrights 5000 Years, Creates RIAA Tax, Mandatory Death Penalty for DMCA Violations"
Public: "Dammit. Whoa -- Look at Britney's tits!"
Only Fair (Score:4, Funny)
Therefore, it is proposed that middle-level management and above in all music-related fields be taxed at 4% of income, for the express purpose of using said money to fund such worthy prehab programs as Raves, House Parties, Bashes, Shindigs, Galas, Grateful Dead tribute concerts, and the city of Berkeley, California. In such a fashion, artists and music would be supported by those who have so far stolen their work without returning their fair share.
This levy would, of course, be void for any executive that could prove solidarity with the plight of the musicians through nosebleeds, swollen arteries, ADHD, or the propensity to use the word "Dude" as if it were insightful.
Fuck them. (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a sorry reflection on the legal system today that such criminals can hide behind the laws whenever they're being hurt. D:
Re:What a silly argument (Score:3, Insightful)
Fuck that.
Re:What a silly argument (Score:5, Insightful)
Brother, I think the question is, where has the music GONE?
There was a time when an artist expected to get paid for his performances of music, and there were many artists, and most of them played regionally. Some of them made a living, most of them didn't. The ones that didn't just enjoyed playing.
Well, these days, some artists make a living, and most of them don't. They tour internationally and expect to get paid for their performances. The only difference now is that the industry (not the artists) take such a large cut, that for an artist to hope for a profit, he must sell in the millions or be worthless.
Where has the music gone? It has gone from being of the people and by the people to being cut up and served from a few mega-stars to the masses who will never have any personal connection to the music they listen to.
In my opinion, therefore, they death of the RIAA *would* be the end of the music world as we know it, and I feel fine. Bring on the new and creative talent!
Re:What a silly argument (Score:3, Interesting)
2.) A large portion of the money you pay when buying a CD goes directly to RIAA. Now RIAA is proposing that ISPs force their users to pay a fee, however indirectly, to RIAA. So, you the user are being forced to pay twice for products you've already bought. To follow your "taxation analogy," this would be called "double-taxation," which is illegal. Again, your "taxation analogy" fails.
3.) RIAA is not accountable to the tax-paying public, because they are a private company. You and I have no voice in how RIAA performs its functions, yet they are demanding the right to "tax" us for merely using the Internet, which -- I might add -- they had no hand in creating or maintaining. Once more, following your "taxation analogy," this would be called "taxation without representation." Your analogy falls flat on its face, mortally wounded.
4.) You state in your argument that, for your taxes paid, you get a set of services in return provided by the government. True. This is the balance of taxation. However, you get nothing from RIAA in return for the fee they propose to force upon you. That is not taxation; that's theft. So, once more, your "taxation analogy" is bogus.
Re:Cover Charge (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Suing (Score:3, Informative)
This is the RIAA we're talking about, so...
Artist payout = $1
RIAA keeps for itself = [Total revenue from blank media tax] - $1
But seriously...hasn't Courtney Love shown righteous indignation at not receiving her 'fair share' from any of these taxes yet? As an insider, she is calling the RIAA's bluff -- she knows damn well that the RIAA isn't there for the artists, it's there for itself.
Re:Do All These Lamers... (Score:3, Interesting)
No, I don't want free music. I want reasonably-priced good music.
Last time I bought a CD, it cost me $25 canadian. That's WAY too much for a college student (one of the largest CD consuming groups) to be paying. If the RIAA is trying to price-gouge a group of people who have no money, that's just nuts.
If CD's were $10 CDN, I'd buy much more music, even if I only like 1 or 2 songs on the CD. Since they cost so much, unless I like the whole CD, I'm not buying it.
And that's another thing. If a CD sucks, I can't return it to the store, I'm stuck with a Frisbee/coaster/arrow target/whatever. The CD's that I have bought, I had on MP3 before I bought them. I bought the CD 1) so I can get better mp3 rips and 2) for cover/liner art.
Re:Do All These Lamers... (Score:3, Interesting)
Making sweeping statements about the average slashdotter and using your generalization to judge on their morality makes as much sense as assuming broadband users are a bunch of 'pirates' and using your generalization to charge them money.
I have never, repeat never, downloaded any mp3 that wasn't clearly licensed by the artist allowing me to do so. The RIAA is charging me, with every blank CD-R I buy, for acts of copyright infringement I have never committed, and are now suggesting a scheme which if it passed would likely have me pay a monthly maintenance fee for those same acts which I have never committed.
Hell YES I have the moral high ground!
no... (Score:3, Funny)
You'd get a nasty fine and have to clean it up. There'd also probably be a civil suit from a group of local fishermen who want damages. The tea company that happens to make the brand you used will also take you to court for some sort of defamation. Last - once this hit the press, PETA would picket your house/place of business for abusing fish.