Bono Hopes Content Tracking Will Help Media Moguls 569
Khalid Baheyeldin writes "In his New York Times op-ed column, Irish singer Bono, otherwise noted for his humanitarian efforts expressed dismay at losses music artists incur from internet downloads. He notes that 'we know from America's noble effort to stop child pornography, not to mention China's ignoble effort to suppress online dissent, that it's perfectly possible to track content.' He then goes on to wonder 'perhaps movie moguls will succeed where musicians and their moguls have failed so far, and rally America to defend the most creative economy in the world, where music, film, TV and video games help to account for nearly 4 percent of gross domestic product.'"
Sorry (Score:5, Insightful)
From an Irish Slashdotter, I think it's only fair to say. I apologise most unreservedly to the world for not flushing this floater when we had the chance.
But.. but... think of the children! (Score:5, Funny)
If you steal music, these gentlemen couldn't afford to be charitable because they couldn't buy the fifth plane or sports car.
So, next time you steal music or movie, think of the children you take the food away.
Re:But.. but... think of the children! (Score:5, Funny)
South Park (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
From an Irish Slashdotter, I think it's only fair to say. I apologise most unreservedly to the world for not flushing this floater when we had the chance.
Don't worry buddy, it's not your fault. Every nation has its black sheep and fuckups.
For those not aware what kind of a hypocritical scumbag Bono really is, here is some good reading:
Jesus Loves U 2 [corrupt.org]
Philanthropy and hypocrisy [corrupt.org]
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Insightful)
That first link was interesting to me, right till I read:
Oh bravo! By saving the lives of children you contribute to the problem... so how to solve this? cull the population down to a more manageable size. Now there's a solution [wikipedia.org] that's not been tried before!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That first link was interesting to me, right till I read:
Oh bravo! By saving the lives of children you contribute to the problem... so how to solve this? cull the population down to a more manageable size. Now there's a solution [wikipedia.org] that's not been tried before!
I merely suggested the reading and never stated I fully agree with those articles.
But still, the fact is that all efforts to feed hungry people, in Africa and elsewhere, leave only even more hungry people. Obviously many of them insist on mindless breeding even while starving. How would you exactly address this problem humanely?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, they aren't even human beings to you are they. You only view this as more of an animal control problem, right?
I hate this despicable viewpoint where people like you think that helping a hungry person will only make the problem continue, so the most 'humane' thing to do is to allow them to starve. Bono is a fucking prick. I have no doubt about that. But people like you don't have 1/100th the human decency that he has.
Re:Sorry (Score:4, Insightful)
They are human beings and you are melodramatic. By your reasoning slaughtering ten children to feed other ten would put me above critics...
Food aid is usually paid by international funds to western corporations so that the money never really leaves the developed world. In turn the corporations like Nestlè send to the starving countries their exceedings that are usually poor quality or expired. This way they make a net profit on the good will of others, and simultaneously undermine the foreign country economy.
This is simply to say that how you help someone is of the utmost importance. Failing to see the consequences makes you an idiot, ignoring them makes you an evil prick.
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Informative)
Don't be put off by the kind of do-gooders who have a heart but no brain. They are in fact the ones who are responsible for creating the whole mess. But just for their edification:
It is well-recognized now that "foreign aid" in the form of shipping food, medicine, etc. to starving populations has done little but exacerbate the problem. As the guy stated (and this is a fact, which has no respect for whether you feel it should be true), those traditional forms of foreign aid did in fact do exactly what he stated. This is nothing more than a real-world example of the old saying, "Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach him to fish and he eats for a lifetime." Except what really happened is a slight modification of that: "Give a man a fish and since he is now healthy he fathers a child he can't feed by himself either..."
It doesn't matter whether you people like that situation or not. It exists. And doing more of the same will just get you more of the same.
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Funny)
Another corollary:
Give a man a fish today, and tomorrow he demands, "Where's my fuckin' fish??"
Meanwhile, his nets rot on the beach.
Re:Sorry (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't be put off by the kind of do-gooders who have a heart but no brain. They are in fact the ones who are responsible for creating the whole mess. But just for their edification: It is well-recognized now that "foreign aid" in the form of shipping food, medicine, etc. to starving populations has done little but exacerbate the problem. As the guy stated (and this is a fact, which has no respect for whether you feel it should be true), those traditional forms of foreign aid did in fact do exactly what he stated. This is nothing more than a real-world example of the old saying, "Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach him to fish and he eats for a lifetime." Except what really happened is a slight modification of that: "Give a man a fish and since he is now healthy he fathers a child he can't feed by himself either..." It doesn't matter whether you people like that situation or not. It exists. And doing more of the same will just get you more of the same.
Not to sound melodramatic, but this is probably the most terrifying sentiment I've heard on /., and it disturbs me that I'm hearing it more often. The problem is that government-run foreign aid is done in an inefficient/unsustainable manner. You are arguing that because of this, nothing should be done at all. I would argue a different approach to the problem:
You should know that most of the places we are talking about are farming villages and were sustainable until *someone* fucked up their water supply. Manpower is required in order for the village to sustain itself, which requires workers. The easiest way to get new workers is to make babies and raise them, so the argument for eugenics is not only unethical/immoral, it is also economically unproductive. I know you probably don't believe in eugenics, I am just noting it for those who do, but I digress. In many cases, the problem comes down to providing a clean source of water. This is why my church sends engineers, not money, not water bottles, to places like these in order to dig and install wells that produce clean, drinkable water. In 2007, they dug 11 wells in Liberia (sometimes hundreds of feet deep), helping an estimated 8,000 people http://www.adventconspiracy.org/water/2007_projects/ [adventconspiracy.org] The result has been that the children have stopped dying and these villages can actually prosper. Try as I might, I'm having trouble finding reasons why this was a bad idea, but feel free to educate me.
While this effort happened to be run by a religious organization, I do not believe efforts like this have to be faith based. I am simply saying that there are cheaper and more efficient ways of helping people. It should be the job of governments to find such solutions. Since governments are very good at finding the least efficient ways of solving a problem and there are often not enough short-term profits for private companies to get involved, it seems that a purely altruistic approach can be effective, at least in this case.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
While this effort happened to be run by a religious organization, I do not believe efforts like this have to be faith based.
What this world needs is a good secular church, small groups of like-minded people with branches everywhere. All the community, all the good works, but without the need to posture to some anthropomorphic personification of the universe, a bearded thunderbolt-hurler, or any involvement with volcanoes.
Although I believe that Sturgeon's Law applies to all religions, I think the small charity-oriented churches that followed the development of Western civilisation worked well in filling the gap between family
Why do you hate Xenu? (Score:3, Funny)
All the community, all the good works, but without [...] any involvement with volcanoes.
Why do you hate xenu so much? :(
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If EWB didn't place arbitrary age restrictions on its volunteers, it might be more effective. I'm an engineer, but I'm too old to participate in their projects. I'm not even 30 yet.
Re:Sorry (Score:4, Interesting)
In 2007, they dug 11 wells in Liberia (sometimes hundreds of feet deep), (...) Try as I might, I'm having trouble finding reasons why this was a bad idea, but feel free to educate me.
Very simple: The old wells dried up because ground water levels are dropping. These are dropping due to overuse, which in turn is caused by inefficient irrigation systems, unsustainable large cattle herds, etc.
The solution "Build deeper wells" is no solution at all, especially if it allows the villages to "prosper" in the old ways and consume even more water.
Caveat: I know that this is true for most Countries neighboring the Sahara desert, but am not familiar with the situation in Liberia itself - I hope for those villages that it is different.
Re:Sorry (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to sound melodramatic, but this is probably the most terrifying sentiment I've heard on /., and it disturbs me that I'm hearing it more often.
If you're hearing it more often, it might be because more people are starting to realize it's true. [independent.ie]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Feed and clothe the starving orphans in Africa so they are healthy enough to be recruited into military factions to repeat the cycle.
Profit!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If that's a fact, let's seem some evidence.
To quote a meme I created:
[citation needed]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Insightful)
The sad part is, that a lot of farmers that could have feed their communities are pushed out of business by cheap subsidized food produced by the same western countries that then also have to send food aid once local farming has collapsed completely.
Everybody looses, except the big industrial food companies.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In Zimbabwe since 2002 they've been engaging in an innovative agriculture program: seizing [nytimes.com] farms owned by white farmers and turning them over to military lackeys who know nothing about agriculture. Surprisingly, yields [guardian.co.uk] are down [tulsaworld.com].
Zimbabwe was once a major food exporter to southern Africa. Now they can't even feed themselves.
So yeah, the sad part is that lot of farmers that could have feed their communities are pushed out of business by thugs who then don't know what to do with the land.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I have a link for Zambia's textile industry collapsing as it can't "compete" with donations: here [bbc.co.uk]. It's from 2000, and I've seen more recent articles, but I don't have time to look right now.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's well understood that raising the standard of living in a country brings down its population growth rate.
I don't know (Score:3, Insightful)
Welfare has worked rather well for US corporations.
Re:Sorry (Score:4, Interesting)
However, welfare has never increased anyone's standard of living over the long haul, as both the billions poured into foreign aid in Africa and our own welfare states can attest.
Are you seriously claiming here that the standard of living in European states before introduction of welfare net was higher than it is now?..
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
He is. It's the same sort of argument I'm seeing come from America where they say that having a national health provider will cause people to be lazy and not look after themselves. Of course, they don't look at countries like Australia that does have a national health scheme but people are by and large not lazy.
It's not just the free food, it's distribution (Score:4, Insightful)
Not only does dumping free food depress the prices the farmers can get for what they do grow, thus making it not worth their while to try and feed themselves, but it doesn't address the problem they have without free food of getting what they do grow to market and storing it for bad times.
We not only do harm by discouraging them from growing anything by undercutting their prices, what little good we otherwise do does not help them distribute what they would grow if we weren't discouraging them.
It's a double whammy, the ultimate do-gooder example of the law of unintended consequences.
Re:Sorry (Score:4, Funny)
Spoken like someone who has never been starving.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I know! Just the other day I saw a small child on the news in Dafur, starving. I immediately thought to myself "You little fucker, competing for valuable oxygen!"
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Funny)
The problem is that U2's music is being pirated a lot. With every GNU/Linux distribution you download, you are also downloading all of U2's MP3s.
To listen to them, just do cat /proc/kcore > /dev/dsp. The sound it makes is virtually identical to bono's inconsolable screaming.
I'm sure he can sue us all and demand we pay $ 699 for each GNU/Linux install. Do we have a new SCO in town?
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Sorry (Score:4, Insightful)
S'alrite, I don't recognize him as Irish. I recognize him as an industry baby suckling at the teat of big money. He will say and do anything to get himself noticed ( insert himself in foreign politics without a clue or thought and fulfill Voltaires premise that " anything too stupid to be said is sung", but then say it anyway.) ,like a good little industry attention whore.
He owes the industry big for all the $ that went toward promoting his mediocrity as starstuff, so they probably pissed in his ear the volume of his spew.
No I don't see him as an Irish problem, he is all our problem. We could start a charity to prevent the spread of U2 amongst the young, who still have a chance to live a full life free from music industry/ socialist blather. Won't you give? We can save the world. Help prevent U2 in our lifetime.
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Funny)
Hey. I watched Letterman last night and Robin Williams was being interviewed. He told a story about this floater that he was brought back down to earth in Scotland. Basically Bono started clapping and during the clapping he said "Every time I clap another whale dies". From the back of the auditorium came "Well then, fucking stop clapping!".
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Informative)
Mr. Williams should read up on his stories.
http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/bono.asp [snopes.com]
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Insightful)
Mr. Yacoob should read up on what Mr. Williams does for a living and why he was on Mr. Letterman's show.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Robin Williams 'recycles' other people's jokes. The people he steals from don't seem to mind much, maybe because he does it better than Mencia.
We are better off without such charitable people (Score:5, Insightful)
such kind of people harm society in multitudes of ways than they support it with their charities. imagine - this guy practically wants everyone to be tracked. totally oblivious to the danger that any and all governments or private interests can use tracking technology to suppress online dissent, any kind of dissent, even himself, expressing opinion that would conflict with the government in future. put this risk on the other side of the counter opposite of his charity ... a huge imbalance.
no sir. we are better off without such 'charitable' people. go fucking die in a corner, bono. you are little different than a charitable frenchmen advocating absolute monarchy in 1789.
Re:We are better off without such charitable peopl (Score:5, Insightful)
It's hard to argue against control of the internet without appearing pro-piracy, and worst, pro-child pornography.
And that is just what governments want, because the internet is our best tool so far, for keeping government in check.
Once the mechanisms of control are in place, everything is screwed. I just wish the internet had had a few less single points of failure, and a lot more encryption built it; but then who could see that far ahead.
Government not the enemy (Score:4, Insightful)
That is wrong. The enemy is not the government but industry think thanks and public relations organizations.
Re:We are better off without such charitable peopl (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually "once the mechanisms of control are in place" we'll just work around them.
All the internet has done for piracy is to make "content" accessible to more people, more convenient to use and easier to detect and monitor. Imagine for a second a world where all content was tightly controlled and their was no internet piracy, what do you think would happen? Would piracy stop? Would illicit information/data cease to flow? Nope, sorry, it would just move to higher bandwidth channel such as post and courier ("never underestimate the bandwidth of an envelope of microSD cards") and still move around the "user communities" in the same way it did 10-20 years ago.
And even then, new technologies would spring up bringing us an "undernet", but one with lessons learned. Consider for a second just what the rather silent "wireless revolution" would mean if someone dropped something into the stack to attempt to route data via wireless networks only, and queue transmission in a similar manner to UUCP of years past...
As they say, necessity is the mother of invention, perhaps the 21st centuries problem is going to be that we will *need* for so little but want so much...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And that's bad, because...? Fuck it, people, stop being scaredy-cats. Say it out loud: I do support piracy! I do support unbridled copying! In the deal of copyrights, we the people have been screwed real bad. It was supposed to be an incentive, to enrich the public domain. But nothing goes to the public domain anymore. Why play the game clean when they have the dice loaded against you?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because the majority of the people who make that content depend on it for their livelihoods and don't make much money. So while your argument might make sense when talking about a Disney movie from the 1920s, it makes almost no sense when referring to anything made within the last decade, which I have a hunch is the time period most people are pirating.
I don't hear a lot of calls to go after people pirating Gershwin tunes.
Re:We are better off without such charitable peopl (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not sure the short-sightedness was political in this case. Rather who knew what the internet would become, or that 640k was not enough for everyone.
You could argue that the problem is political/social vs technical, but there are some interesting overlay network topographies that I wish were standard.
Imagine if, due to encryption and cryptographic addressing, the internet was all or nothing for any given nation. All that ever passed your ISP was an encrypted data stream.
Oh how those in power would squirm.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:We are better off without such charitable peopl (Score:5, Funny)
Don't forget that he is equating downloading and listening to a U2 album with child pornography. One is a horrible abuse that I wouldn't wish on any child, and the other is child pornography. (sorry. poor taste). Bono is despicable, greedy douchebag for invoking child porn in order to fatten his wallet.
Re:We are better off without such charitable peopl (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, now... if Bono wants to compare the music industry with Child Pornographers and the RIAA with a tyrannical Government, who are we to argue with him?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
yea. and how many future artists, and artists who havent made it big yet are going to make it big, in the future, if the current system of monopolized distribution continues ?
they want to turn internet into a cable tv clone. please tell me how many budding young artists cable tv helped to make a break, or make a living, out of millions.
Re:Second that. (Score:5, Insightful)
If he was seriously talking about future artists or the small time artists that are trying to break into the musical big leagues, he would look far more seriously at why competitions like "American Idol" or "Pop Idol" have to be created in order to find the talent for tomorrow's music.
There is something seriously broken in the music industry, and it isn't the "illegal music pirates" on the internet that is the problem. There really isn't a reasonable farm system any more for getting young and promising talent to move up without going outside of the system. Recording contracts are absolutely hideous and filled with clauses that keep any aspiring musician from being able to become a genuinely professional musician.
Furthermore, there is a problem with groups like the RIAA, ASCAP, and other groups who supposedly are accepting licensing fees on behalf of these small time artists to actually pay up and get some money, any money, to this new and rising generation of musicians. The current royalty collection system only works for artists like Bono who are at the top of the game, and it is the little guys that get squeezed out in the process.
I'll also want to respond to this statement:
Last time I checked, a typical op-ed column or even an entire newspaper edition is an order of magnitude smaller than a MP3 file. If you add pictures and put it in a PDF file, it might be of comparable size.... to a single music file. I don't see the comparison here either. There is copyrighted on-line content that has subscribers, and those models work... as does advertising-based publications as well.
The problem with the music industry isn't the freeloaders, but rather with venues for new musicians where the up and coming artists will actually get paid at all in the first place. Even if you "unmake" the internet, these new musicians won't be paid by the major record labels no matter how hard the new musicians work or try to find customers/listeners.
No, those who it hurts the most are the recording studio executives who no longer have a gravy train ride to profits, and somehow have to work to earn a living now. The old business models are broken and no longer work... because the world has changed. If you are creative, people will pay for music. They want to pay for good music, and there are many people who are actively looking for new musicians to support. The days that a recording executive in Hollywood might be able to cherry pick some random slob from an inner city ghetto and bring them to stardom through payola and graft with radio stations is over. They want to make their money off of vinyl or optical discs, and the world has moved on to other media.
I'd much rather support some new and aspiring artist than folks like Bono. Unfortunately, when the government gets into the act, it is the old dinosaurs that get all of the money and they keep it from going to the new and upcoming musicians.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Music sales are half of what they were in 1999, and still on a major decline. Here's a chart: http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2009/the-death-of-the-music-industry/ [informatio...utiful.net]
Fuck the revolution (Score:3, Interesting)
There were very few Irishman with the balls to publicly denounce the IRA during the 80's. At a concert in Boston, he went into a rant about "irishmen who hadn't been home in 20yrs enthusiatically asking about the revolution" and ended the
This came after... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This came after... (Score:5, Insightful)
Whenever I think about Bono, the first thing that comes to mind is South Park's portrayal of him as a 5'10" walking, talking turd.
Bono is proof positive that it's easy to be a renowned global humanitarian when you are richer than God. I wonder how much attention he'd have paid to world hunger, charity, global climate change, etc etc if he hadn't been lucky enough to meet Brian Eno and Daniel Lanois and he'd ended up as an Irish bricklayer playing weekends in a Duran Duran cover band.
I mean, good for him for trying to do something he thinks is good, but when he starts crying about losses of income from people downloading music, you realize he's just another bloated celebrity who thinks he's special in the eyes of god for winning the pop-star lottery.
I'm gonna go back and watch that South Park episode right now, where Randy goes for the record for the biggest bowel movement, and goes up against...well, I won't spoil it for you. And, since apparently Comedy Central seems to have learned what Bono has not, I can do it legally, and for free, at SouthParkStudios.com.
Idea-expression divide (Score:3, Interesting)
if that was the case then people would probably contribute music for free, in much the same way they contribute to Wikipedia for free.
There's a difference between ideas and expression [wikipedia.org]. Wikipedia is made of facts, and it's fairly easy to produce your own original, Free wording of a given fact. It's also easy to use Google's full-text web search to find phrases that a contributor inadvertently or deliberately plagiarized. Music, on the other hand, is more pure expression, and any attempt to produce Free music will end up with some contributor accidentally inserting a sequence of notes that happens to match the hook of a non-free song. (See
From Wikipedia (Score:5, Insightful)
"Bono lives in Killiney in south County Dublin, Ireland, with his family and shares a villa in Èze in the Alpes-Maritimes in the south of France with The Edge, as well as an apartment at The San Remo in Manhattan and a small house in the quiet village of Middleton Cheney, England."
Yep. He's really hurting.
Re:From Wikipedia (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:From Wikipedia (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, look at the chart in this article [timesonline.co.uk]. It clearly shows that revenue from live acts is increasing, which goes directly to artists. Couple that to the second chart that shows that revenues to actual artists in the UK are increasing, you can safely make the conclusions that the ones who are suffering under the internet are the labels, who are (were) the distributors of content, NOT the artists.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, at least that part of your comment is true.
Do you really believe that the reason "young, fledgling songwriters" can't make ends meet is because too many people are downloading their music?
Son, there was a time before you could download music online. There was a time before you could copy CDs. There was a time before you use a cassette recorder to tape songs off the radio. There was even a time before you could xerox a piece of sheet music.
And you know what? Even way b
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Similar to how home taping killed the television industry after VCRs came out. Good to see such a prominent musician rallying us all to the banner of anti-piracy by any means necessary.
Let's be realistic, okay? (Score:5, Insightful)
Bono is thinking about the future artist.
Bono wants that future artist to be able to turn a profit by selling the rights to their artistic creations to a large corporation which will have absolute control of those rights indefinitely.
And the only cost will be the "outing" of every political dissident anywhere in the world.
Fuck you, Bono.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Copyrights are protected by law, but that is endangered if the community decides that to ignore it en masse.
And? The government can only act legitimately with the consent of its people, is only empowered by us to grant copyrights in order to promote the progress of science, and should generally conform to the desires of its people unless there is an adequately important reason to do otherwise.
If the community decides to ignore copyright en masse, then we shouldn't have copyright, or at least should reform c
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If a law is respected, though occasionally broken, there's no problem, e.g. murder being a crime.
If a law is widely broken, yet even those breaking it agree that it is worthwhile, then that's not great, but it is acceptable, e.g. speed limits.
If a law is disrespected by those who should follow it, and it is not agreed that it is worthwhile (whether at all, or at least in its present form), then it should be repealed or modified so that it is more acceptable, lest disrespect for that law spread, e.g. Prohibi
Poor Starving Moguls (Score:2, Funny)
Bono is an idiot... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Does he not see that these treaties signed with underdeveloped nations to help them "defend" American businesses against "piracy" and patent infringement is exactly what is keeping them behind?
Really? You don't think it's the lack of education, lack of infrastructure, over-reliance on subsistence farming, and the general lack of business knowledge? Try to find a CEO in El Salvador with experience in streamlining a production pipeline, or find a CFO in Burundi who knows how to smooth out a cash flow. Running a developed economy is tricky business, and it takes a while to develop enough expertise, an experienced workforce, and a good infrastructure.
Not being able to get pirated songs isn't what'
Bono... your math is wrong... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think independent artists and creativity have flourished in recent years. The overproduced and overhyped "chosen" artists by the "Moguls" are mainly what's suffering. Madonna and Bono can kiss my ass if they think they are being "hurt" by downloads. They have made many times over the money they deserve for their media machines.
If you are a good artist, people will pay to see you live.
Let's go with a great band like Pink Floyd. I have bought about 10+ albums from them over the past 20 years. Millions of other people have as well. I work my ass off for $50K/year. They work their ass off too, and I would say that I am happy to give them a salary of $150K/year per band member. How much money would we as fans have to spend to make that happen. I can assure you it would be a FRACTION of what we have paid out of our pockets... and where does all that money go? Lining the pokets of those who had nothing to do with the art or us listening to it.
Bono has lost touh with reality and his fans... as he gets older I don't expect him to get more clue.
Is there anyone left on this planet ... (Score:5, Insightful)
... who doesn't yet think that Bono is a sanctimonious hypocritical, posturing, corporate shill who is always willing to suck up to any big businessman or politician he can grab a photo opportunity with, no matter how venal?
Just askin'
Bono wishes his music was good enough to pirate (Score:4, Funny)
Seriously. I wouldn't even waste my neighbors free bandwidth to download anything U2 has put out in over a decade...
Sigh ... copyright does not encourage creativity (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure Bono, and for the alternative perspective, how about Janis Ian's? "The Internet, and downloading, are here to stay... Anyone who thinks otherwise should prepare themselves to end up on the slagheap of history." ~ http://www.janisian.com/article-internet_debacle.html [janisian.com]
Personally, I wonder how much music has been lost and locked up bu the music industry? Or how many musicians don't own their own songs? Or how many CDs were never cut, remain unreleased or are locked up in out of print limbo land? How many fat cat executives live it up while new talent can't pay the rent? and so on and so...
Note to Bono: (Score:5, Insightful)
Note to Bono: EAT A DICK.
The process of doing so will further require that you remove your head from your ass, so that should improve your ability to perceive reality at the same time.
The biggest problem facing most "small independent artists" is not people downloading their songs - it's NOBODY downloading the songs. Most (95%) of the 100k+ albums released every year sell less than a hundred copies; the problem for most of these artists is that many of the traditional ways of discovering new music (radio, CD stores) have been bought up and monopolized by the majors. While the new media channels are available to everybody, getting "eyeballs" (OK, "ears") is still the hardest part.
Put another way: most "small independent artists" would love it if enough people were interested in their music to upload a torrent to TPB - at least then, *somebody* is listening.
Artists are actually making more money... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Legal alternatives have also helped. (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't mind paying for music. I don't even mind paying for music if the money goes to some rich asshole like Bono... he wrote it, he deserves to make a buck. All the music I've gotten during the past 10 years or so is from legal sources. Why? Not because I suddenly grew a conscience, but because the legal alternative is now almost as good
Re:Artists are actually making more money... (Score:5, Insightful)
Artists are actually doing much better since the dawn of the Internet because of increased ticket sales from live performances
What if they don't want to perform live?
If they don't want to be performers, they can become accountants, or whatever other profession they choose.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not, but it's probably also tilting at windmills to complain about it.
And in regards to not just complaining, but pushing for legal changes, why is it perfectly acceptable to treat everyone, including the innocent, as a criminal in order to protect an outdated business model?
Re:Artists are actually making more money... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Artists are actually making more money... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Artists are actually making more money... (Score:4, Insightful)
And as you've probably noticed, enforcement is really difficult so some other financing regime for performers will eventually surface. Hopefully, it's a good one.
Either he doesn't get it, or he doesn't care... (Score:5, Informative)
Kiddie porn: A terrible analogy for online copyright infringement. Child pornography, possession or production, is always illegal. No "fair use", no parodies, no commentaries, no educational purposes, etc. Plus, it isn't all that popular. Online violation of copyright law is probably about as popular as ordinary pornography, not some obscure niche thing. In terms of police resources per unit kiddie porn, the porn is vastly more heavily policed(and, given the number of times that a computer search of somebody suspected for other reasons will discover some kiddie porn, it looks like our "content tracking" efforts aren't actually doing so well).
Great Firewall of China: Chinese "content tracking" is a huge(and probably fairly expensive) initiative, encompassing a substantial state censorship apparatus, a large amount of technical infrastructure, huge market distortions(notably, the enthusiasm for self-censorship among web companies that is created by the state's ability to just eliminate access to any of them, at any time, without comment or justification), and substantial support from private-citizen snitches.
Either Bono is just a fucktard, and hasn't really though this through, or he is willing to go to some very unpleasant places to protect his precious "content".
Re:Either he doesn't get it, or he doesn't care... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe we should use this unthinking, reactionary behavior against the enemies of society instead?
"DRM is like kiddie porn. No one in their right mind would want it on their movies and music if they knew what it was, and despicable old men in suits get off on it. Just say 'NO' to DRM."
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why are we always in defense ? (Score:5, Insightful)
why are we waiting for a lackey of the copyright industry to make a shitty comment or release a dubious 'research' in order to take any action ? Why arent eff and similar organizations taking the initiative and producing research, education and publicity in regard to new ways of the digital age ?
its just stupid. we are just waiting. some idiot lays an egg, and we all go after to cleanse the resulting shit. instead we should be moving forward.
What is it about the "Bono" name? (Score:4, Funny)
Tell him to go skiing, really fast.
fundraiser! (Score:3, Funny)
Hypocrites (Score:4, Insightful)
Everytime U2 are on the verge of releasing an album, they leak it online so they can have a story about their album being 'stolen' before its released and get a brick load of free publicity from the subsequent news stories. Its amazing how they're able to use the internet to their advantage while still being able to call it a disgrace!
Bono supports totalitarianism (Score:5, Insightful)
So, Bono would like to turn the US and Europe into totalitarian states in order to make sure people like himself can keep making millions with unreasonable copyright terms and restrictions.
Some humanitarian!
If this is what it takes to save music... (Score:5, Insightful)
...then I guess we should let music die. Music and other entertainment is not important enough by far to trade away privacy and freedom. I don't care for piracy, but I recognize that only by having complete control of what people communicate and hence their freedom of expression would it be possible to quell piracy. I hope most thinking humans would agree that this is too high a price to preserve the profitability of music.
This sounds familiar (Score:3, Insightful)
We had to destroy the village to save it.
By the numbers (Score:5, Informative)
I really wish that newspapers would cite their information so we could understand what they're basing their claims on.
Looking at the US government's Bureau of Economic Analysis Numbers, they seem to paint a very different picture than what he suggests:
http://www.bea.gov/industry/gpotables/gpo_action.cfm?anon=343982&table_id=24753&format_type=0 [bea.gov] [bea.gov]
The line for Motion picture and sound recording industries has been constant from 2003-2007 (with information from 2008 still not entered) at 0.3%.
Bono claims, "music, film, TV and video games help to account for nearly 4 percent of gross domestic product". Assuming no tectonic shift in profits, that would suggest that video games are producing nearly 3.7% of GDP, but the line for all Publishing industries (includes software) floats at around 1% of GDP. So even including "real" software like Windows as well as books, we're not even close to 4%.
Another factor which he neglects to consider is the scale of damage that would be done, both in terms of freedoms as well as innovation. Even if America and all of its best buddies were to enact this type of draconian censorship regime he advocates, I doubt that America's enemies would be as eager to join in. That would suggest a net effect of simply forcing innovation to move abroad to places that don't sign on or enforce. One of the few areas where America is truly a global leader still seems to be in Internet services. If foreign Internet services provide more to consumers that they want than American services, I don't doubt that American services on the Internet would be abandoned in a flash. While I don't discount the importance of the export of America's pop culture abroad, the price to protect outdated business models seems like a weighty one. Bono talks a lot, but I wonder how much depth he really puts into his thinking.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apparently, Bono learned math from Verzion [blogspot.com].
He's a singer.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do people expect singers and guitar players to have a unique view on life for all of us to share?
Imagine that a football player gave his view on copyright and innovation. You'd laugh. But a guy sings a song on the radio, and all the sudden his utterances appear in the NY Times?
Crazy.
wow, Bono has no idea what he is in for (Score:3, Insightful)
Tracking DNW; false positives. (Score:5, Informative)
Regardless, google/youtube flagged the audio and the dispute has been open for a month. In the dispute filing, I pasted the relevant text from the license and linked to it.
The video itself clearly has a link to the artists site at magnatune (as required). So if any person were to intelligently go to the site and read the license or just read the dispute data I filed, the problem would cleary seen to be valid and legal.
But I'm still waiting to hear back from WMG. The point I have is that Bono's technical suggestion to track everything will not work. In a very closed and controlled environment like youtube, the false positives are so numerous that legal content cannot be cleared and shared.
Here's the license from magnatune (from link above).
.
You're no expert, Bono (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't recall you having any basis in study for your uttering. Just because you got rich hopping around on a stage wailing into a microphone doesn't make you an expert in everything.
No, all you have done now is discredited the good work you *did* manage to do.
I do not steal music, but I am just as likely to be dragged into court as anyone else because the detection methods used by the RIAA are (a) flawed and (b) irrelevant - they are not interested in the conviction per se, but the chilling effect. Well, they have chilled two things: (1) my respect for the legal system, as I have seen it abused in many ways over the last 8 years and (2) my enthusiasm for buying music - I switched to web radio instead. In the last 5 years I have bought ONE (1) CD, and I know I'm far from the only one.
You see, the RIAA idiots forget two things. Firstly, those they sue now would have been their future customers. Instead, by manipulating the amount of fines they will be denied a future. So, no future sales. Secondly, we age, which means what we like now is old tomorrow but we'll hang on to those records. Again, no new sales.
Last but not least, there is another chilling effect. For someone who is so-called "creative" you appear to have a short memory, or maybe that has been bought by the RIAA as well? Any creativity has roots, has examples. I have seen fantastic new ways in which music has developed based on examples people grew up with and experimented with.
What the RIAA is doing is chilling the experimental, the new growth. That leaves only the manufactured bands, with a few exceptions (when the singers accidentally have talent too) - and that is on the decline because it's unoriginal crap which requires (costly) marketing to sell. You could get a computer to make that stuff, and most sounds like it too.
So it's not just a child that dies every time you clap your hands (did you stop clapping?) - it's also the market that gave you the money to change from a moderately interesting singer to an idiot used by politicians and sales droids, and I haven't failed to notice that quite a few things you have been promoted involved making more money for the parties involved (like "RED" - buy our stuff and we'll give a -small- percentage to the cause). Yes, money ruins a lot - U2, it seems..
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's satire. Bono's tongue is so deep in his cheek he's practically gnawing it off. Go read the piece in question.
Er, no, it's really not satirical.
Bono's trying to be witty, that's true, but what results is something the Flying Karamazov Brothers [fkb.com] like to call a 'Joke-Like Phrase': It has all the elements of a joke, but it's just not funny.
I'll accept that there's a fine line between making a mockery of oneself and actual satire, but in this case, Bono has managed to take a strong stand alongside the idiots.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No, we older people pay for content because it's the right thing to do. We also would rather not have home-made videos on youtube represent the highest quality entertainment available.
Enjoy films like Avatar while you can. If your theory is correct, you won't be seeing anything on the cutting edge once the "old folks" stop paying for it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Whatever happened to live performances and the "work ethic" of the tour? If singers and entertainers want to get paid, then they have to get out there and entertain."
Apparently only the artists are required to be ethical, not their fans. What is the ethical argument for listening to music on a recording instead of paying to attend a live performance?
Yes, we know young people don't have much cash but still like to enjoy music. It's OK. Just man-up and don't try to hide behind the skirt of a phony ethics iss
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The movie moguls of yesteryear were equally interested in swindling their artists (which equates to actors, writers, etc.) out of their fair share. A few got rich but most were lucky to get paid at all. Studios have ALWAYS been creative at getting out of paying royalties, no matter the venue.
It seems to be the nature of the industry, all the way back to the earliest productions (I remember reading something from Shakespeare's era about how when a play was put on the actors always got the shaft, and I doubt