Hope you lot are ok with me replying digest style...
quoted 4 lines From: ben gill <gillette_foamy@yahoo.com>
>From: ben gill <gillette_foamy@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: [idm] Life after SoulSeek
>Message-ID: <20030209222103.32133.qmail@web41505.mail.yahoo.com>
>
<>
quoted 7 lines Huh? My arg is basically:
>Huh? My arg is basically:
>
>1. there is no inherently correct way to distribute
>music
>
>2. therefore, no one way is "necessary," or the
>correct way.
You can distribute music any way you like of course if you composed it.
However, society has decided to create a mechanism for the distribution of
music and make it universally available. It is absolutely not 'inherent' -
it is artificial, but it exists and it has been popular and successful.
<>
quoted 4 lines points). As for working to relax the copyright law,
>points). As for working to relax the copyright law,
>since I don't care about how d/l mp3s infriges on it
>in the first place, I find it a slim probability that
>you'll find me wasting my time there.
whether or not you agree, you are still subject to the law. Perhaps the
reason you say this is because you think the chances of the mp3 police
knocking on your door are extremely slim - so that it has become an
optional, moral decision. But look at what happened in Denmark already -
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/28325.html. If you don't want
to face these kinds of possibility then maybe you should take an interest in
the law before it ends up taking an interest in you.
<>
quoted 20 lines 2. There is a cause/effect relationship between
>2. There is a cause/effect relationship between
>breaking copyright law and dwindling sales/the decline
>of record labels.
>
>I'd say point 2 is the more interesting, less moral
>question--and more susceptible to a few prods. Muffin
>didn't take this one on, for good reason--it's
>impossible to prove. There are too many factors for
>financial decline, it's just as easy to argue that
>p2p's brilliant virus-like spreading combats the
>financial decline of record labels by encouraging
>people to get the "real thing" down at the
>shop/through mail order. Some people buy the cds,
>some people don't. But is it the case that person X,
>who downloaded album Y, would have bought it if
>downloading weren't an option? Uncertain. I think
>that's just as likely a scenario as the obvious
>"leech" syndrome that everyone's so concerned about,
>and it does sweet F.A. to a record company's bottom
>line.
Yes it's an interesting question to think about (I think many of us have for
quite a while). You are quite correct to say that that any claimed loss in
sales is pretty much incalculable (though I think it's worth noting that
sales have gone right down at the same time that cd ripping, broadband and
p2p have become widely available and relatively cheap). However, this misses
the point that once you accept freedling as a legitimate practise, you are
necessarily throwing copyright away - they are completely incompatible.
Since the recording industry is founded on copyright you can't try to fudge
this by suggesting that they tweak their business model and adapt it to the
new terrain - their business model begins and end with copyright and there
is no middle ground for them. They may adapt the new environment to suit
themselves if necessary...
quoted 22 lines As for "the proponents of freedownloading are not
>As for "the proponents of freedownloading are not
>making a serious argument here and are just inviting
>all kinds of invasive tollgate-type
>technology..."--there's no argument to be made. P2p
>exists, and it'll keep going. Is it right? What will
>labels do? Neither of those questions requires an
>argument to be made to justify freedownloading. As
>for the tollgate thing, if you're saying that labels,
>due to declining sales/desperation/conniving are going
>to do away with all physically tangible music products
>and replace that with a public database, I highly
>doubt it. People will continue to make tangible music
>products because that's the tradition we've become
>used to. Djing will support vinyl. CDs are still
>incredibly popular. Some tollgate type thing might be
>instituted alongside the physical products as a new
>gimmick, but that doesn't preclude the idea of other
>p2p networks. Who the fuck wants to use a public
>database like the one you describe, when all it takes
>is one person to upload a given file into a program
>like soulseek and viola!, instant sharing. The
>alternatives will always exist.
Looking more unlikely every day. p2p is not particularly robust as a
distribution mechanism; it just took one independent artist to shut down
slsk for over a week with a simple complaint to their host. If hosts can't
be shut down, p2ps can be poisoned or ISPs can be persuaded or obligated to
block/filter traffic. It also sounds like maybe you haven't heard of schemes
like DRM or Palladium. Basically, largely due to p2p, there is now a lot of
pressure on hardware manufacturers to build copyright protection into the
hardware itself. What this could mean in practise is that your hard drive,
router, cpu, soundcard, headphones, sound system, tv etc could reject
'unauthorised' material/programs or they might log to a remote database so
that you can be charged per play (or prosecuted). You are also going to
start to see appliance-type audio download/streaming devices which will be
completely controlled environments - I can imagine if these reach critical
mass, the labels will abandon physical product since selling below a certain
threshold is just not worth it. This is not some sci-fi fantasy, these
schemes are being specified right now.
quoted 8 lines From: andrij <andrij@misrule.org>
>From: andrij <andrij@misrule.org>
>Subject: Re: [idm] Life after SoulSeek
>Message-ID: <k6hgvfe60ulruu1.100220031527@drij>
>
>If copyright law was designed to allow for a business structure
>such as the current music industry to exist, copyright law is
>seriously flawed and should be wholely rethought from the
>ground up.
Since there seems to be a pretty decent consensus on this I agree
wholeheartedly. The law seems to be out of step with what people want and
the measures suggested so far to keep it enforceable are appalling.
quoted 19 lines From: Brandon Tallent <djresonance@yahoo.com>
>From: Brandon Tallent <djresonance@yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: [idm] Life after SoulSeek
>Message-ID: <20030210202958.64721.qmail@web41306.mail.yahoo.com>
>
>Here's an apropos quote:
>
>There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in
>this country the notion that because a man or a
>corporation has made a profit out of the public for a
>number of years , the government and the courts are
>charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in
>the future, even in the face of changing circumstances
>and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is
>not supported by statute nor common law. Neither
>individuals nor corporations have any right to come
>into court and ask that the clock of history be
>stopped ,or turned back, for their private benefit.
>
>-- Life-Line, Robert Heinlein
In the case of copyright, it is supported by law of course so this wouldn't
exactly apply. But I think it still expresses how a lot of people view this.
However, it's not how things really work; governments apply all kinds of
measures to suit various corporations, industry sectors and interest
groups - some good, some bad. So we have licensing for tv and radio
frequencies, speed limits on our roads or the DMCA for example. Also the
record industry is not (just) 5 fat guys smoking hand-rolled cigars and
drinking champagne from their shoes - we are talking about a lot of
employees paying taxes with families, mortgages, votes. The only way I can
see that p2p will be allowed to flourish is if it doesn't affect the
existing industry _and they recognise this_ or if it spawns an equally large
market - both unlikely with the current model. Let's enjoy it while we can
;)
--
ed
http://www.noiseloop.com
- now voting best album 02
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org