179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← archive index

[idm] copyright thoughts, some speculation...

1 message · 1 participant · spans 1 day · search this subject
2000-04-15 18:04Alex Reynolds [idm] copyright thoughts, some speculation...
expand allcollapse allclick any summary to toggle that message
2000-04-15 18:04Alex Reynolds>Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 16:56:14 -0700 (PDT) >To: idm@hyperreal.org >From: g m <noedig@yah
From:
Alex Reynolds
To:
Date:
Sat, 15 Apr 2000 14:04:18 -0400
Subject:
[idm] copyright thoughts, some speculation...
permalink · <l0313031bb51e5f2c68c9@[130.91.128.171]>
quoted 15 lines Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 16:56:14 -0700 (PDT)>Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 16:56:14 -0700 (PDT) >To: idm@hyperreal.org >From: g m <noedig@yahoo.com> > >... >[Metallica] have every right to sue Napster and anyone else >who chooses to break copyright laws. Napster may seem >cool, and yeah, wow, you now have a bunch of mp3 files >and you didn't have to pay a dime... but what about >the art? The artist? > >I congratulate Metallica on their decision to retain >ownership of their music and attempting to put an end >to this downward spiral of Web injected freeloader >anarchy...
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
quoted 7 lines Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 19:20:41 -0700>Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 19:20:41 -0700 >To: "idm" <idm@hyperreal.org> >From: "Colin King-Bailey" <ckingbai@ucsd.edu> > >...also, a group of record companies is suing napster, seeking $100,000 per >song traded on napster. napster does not reap any profit. they do not even >have advertisers yet....
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Jordan Pollack's interview on Slashdot (http://www.slashdot.org/) earlier this week offers a fresh and very interesting take on larger copyright issues, going beyond copying MP3s from machine to machine: Q: Do you consider the economics of the market to be a greater concern than individual freedom? A: This is a beautiful question, thank you. My book is exactly about freedom and rights: The freedom to sell a copy of a book you are done reading. The freedom to share in the rewards when something you design or write is in demand by millions of people. The right to own what you buy. I see an inexorable movement towards dispossessionism, both coming from the "right," with UCITA, secured digital rights, anti-crypto-tampering in the DMCA, and ASP subscription models, and coming from the "left", with ideas that we should give our writing up into free collectivist projects. The Internet is the beginning of Goldstein's "celestial jukebox," the encyclopedia of everything anyone has ever written, every episode of every TV show, and every song by every band. It sounds wonderful until you realize that you will have to pay per view! Bill Gates now has the money to deploy satellites which will force you to rent his word processor for $1/hour, the same rate for renting a movie. The laws on theft of satellite programs, unfortunately, as legal doctrine goes, considers decoding satellite broadcasts as theft of cable services, rather than as protected first amendment rights to receive radio broadcasts. Once secure distribution of programs on a rental basis is established, all content publishing will move inexorably into that mode to maximize profits. No more books, no more records. No more ownership. Dispossession. The Free software movement, League for Programming Freedom, Open Source Software, on the other hand, talk idealistic young individuals out of their writing. "Contribute it towards a greater good." Be rewarded by occasiona e-mails of thanks from your peers. The Free Music movement, or "let's RIP our CD's and trade MP3s through Napster" isn't as politically as economically motivated, but is also making musicians contribute their work for the greater good, at least of dormitories! Dispossession. Fascism and Communism, while they have philosophical appeal for their mimetic simplicity, have proven themselves consistently the enemies of freedom, enterprise and creativity. Ordinary people are "dispossessed" of their property, which ends up, not surprisingly, in the pockets of the promoters of the simple philosophy. My purpose in writing License to Bill is to begin a discussion not only on a societal remedy to the microsoft problem, but to secure, as a human right, the right to own information properties I buy, rather than just being able to rent them. I especially want the right to own and sell copies of my own creations, and to own a library of other's creations, reasonably priced based on supply and demand, without fear that a change in technology will render my investments worthless... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Imagine a world not so far into the future. Governments go bankrupt from loan maintenance payments, or are so heavily laden with PACs and lobbyists that they are bought out by the few multinationals that are left after vertical after vertical merger, all of which control pieces of the global information market: news media (Reuters Group, AP, etc.), music (Sony, Time Warner), art (Getty, Corbis). The new bosses enact laws that outlaw the use of any information reproduction technology by the hoi polloi -- no more tape decks, no more inkjet printers, no more CD-Rs. Corporatist culture concentrates on technologies that deliver "perishable", rentable, non-reproducible information that in -- a twist of irony -- is protected with free, open-source, heavy crypto. Only a minority rebel, forming an underground "copyright" culture that is determined to reclaim the "right to copy", the right of "fair use". Most of these "criminals" are brutally crushed with cruel law enforcement technologies; the rest -- with creative stuff that can be repackaged and sold up the line -- "sell out", are assimilated into one corporate bund or another. It's clear that the MP3 system provides the means to easily steal from musicians. It seems the number of MP3s distributed legally, *by the artist*, is such a small percentage as to be negligible. Perhaps Napster and related distribution methods aren't such a good way to fight the Man, since free source code can be coopted to also allow corporations to easily deliver media products with an expiration date. Maybe "good" technology should be focused on protecting creative artists from both ends of the criminal spectrum, from corporate lawyers gobbling up those of innovation and creativity to 14 year olds with access to their parent's DSL line. Why is MP3 currently the best means to this end? -a. Alex Reynolds SAS Computing / Biology University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA 19104-6228 V +1 215 573.2818 / F +1 215 898.8780 http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~reynolda/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org