Darth Mandelson strikes again.

[yorkie_chris]

More "Big Brother is watching" type rubbish, infringing on personal freedom and probably a mid-step toward total government control of the internet.

Welcome to soviet Britain, comrades. Where can I buy a furry hat?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1208839/Illegal-downloaders-internet-cut-new-Mandy-plan.html


Now, I don't care about your downloading habits, and I especially don't care about some pop star making money from their sound editors talents. But this is another attack on freedom.

[DarrenSV650S]

Didn't they say that like 10 years ago?

[Spiderman]

Remeber the days when you used to buy something and then lend it to any of your mates that asked for it...and all you were ever worried about was getting it back?

Clearly digitising that "thing" makes it more valuable and in need of protection does it?

The joys of globalisation :roll:

[slark01]

If you persistantly steal goods from a shop, you lose your freedom or are fined. So if you share music/video/ game files which are copywrited you should also lose your privilege of having internet access. Now tell me what is wrong in that, you break the law you get punished.
We may not like it ( I know I don't ), but at the end of the day if we did not have copywrite laws then people wouldn't bother making music/films/games and therefore we would not have such a diversity ( and in some cases ) quality in music/films/games.
Just be more careful folks and you will be alright, use Peerguardian as an example. ;-)

Ste.

[yorkie_chris]

OK bike dealers offering test rides, they don't then prosecute anybody taking a test ride.

My reckoning, you can hear it on the radio, on artists websites without repercussions. That's public domain. I can quite easily record any of this to an mp3 file myself. Why should downloading the mp3 be a crime?

Fair enough about the people nicking unreleased records... they are already breaking the law hacking.

[slark01]

My reckoning, you can hear it on the radio, on artists websites without repercussions. That's public domain. I can quite easily record any of this to an mp3 file myself. .
Actually that was done quite alot ,donkeys years ago when you would record onto tape ( Those were the days ;-) ). However it still is illegal to do that, because it is still classed as copying.

Ste.

[yorkie_chris]

But totally unenforceable. And an unenforceable law is no law at all.

[rigor]

but at the end of the day if we did not have copywrite laws then people wouldn't bother making music/films/games and therefore we would not have such a diversity ( and in some cases ) quality in music/films/games.


This is the line that the music industry and film industry would LOVE you to believe.

"We spend sooo much money on producing all this stuff for you, surely we should have total control over how you use it"

Copyright has always been for the protection of the publisher's of work (Books, music, films, etc) rather the creators of the work. It has it's history in the start of the printing trade, when books became more available to the general public. (Notice any similarities with today?)

What they seem to have lost sight of is that individual property rights still have some bearing on the matter. When it was a case of having to physically copy a CD or cassette and transport it to another person the Music and Film industries only bothered with the mass pirating operations. Now Joe public can download every piece of music ever created (pretty much), rather than work out how to change their businesses, they want to maintain the status quo. Do artists deserve $100 million dollar contracts for creating music? Is that what their product is intrinsically worth? Or is this just a proportion of what other entreprenuers can make from marketing and selling it?

Meh

[the_lone_wolf]

If you persistantly steal goods from a shop, you lose your freedom or are fined. So if you share music/video/ game files which are copywrited you should also lose your privilege of having internet access. Now tell me what is wrong in that, you break the law you get punished.
We may not like it ( I know I don't ), but at the end of the day if we did not have copywrite laws then people wouldn't bother making music/films/games and therefore we would not have such a diversity ( and in some cases ) quality in music/films/games.
Just be more careful folks and you will be alright, use Peerguardian as an example. ;-)

Ste.Peerguardian has more holes than a sieve

And the whole theft thing is a flawed analogy that they've been trying to get people to buy for years, stealing from a shop is one thing, making a digital copy of a file is nothing like stealing...

Anyone who thinks the RIAA/MPAA/BPI/etc etc are actually looking out for the artists, or anything but the record label's profits then :smt043

They took down The Pirate Bay yesterday, forced their hosting provider to remove access, less than 24hrs later it's back up with a message for the morons who think it will just disappear. "the internet" is smarter tan they are, the sooner they realise they're wasting their time trying to take down websites the sooner they can start looking at the matter they should be worrying about...

At the end of the day every technological advancement has had the copyright lobby up in arms about how they're going to go out of business, they resist and eventually adapt, the digital age will be no different, they can take mandy out for as many lunches as they want but they'll achieve nothing by criminalising ~6,000,000 of their own customers

Welcome to the future big record/picture, someday you'll catch up;)

[Jabba]

If you persistantly steal goods from a shop, you lose your freedom or are fined. So if you share music/video/ game files which are copywrited you should also lose your privilege of having internet access.

I agree with you with regard to the theft aspect - music should be treated the same as any other goods in that regard. We're talking about people's livelihoods and innovation here.

Yeah, I know that we all used to tape our mate's vinyl/CDs but at least in that case someone had paid for a least one copy. Wrong/theft, but we all did it.

Not sure about losing 'net access though - the normal route for theft of anything else in court & fine. Why shouldn't this be the same?

[yorkie_chris]

Because they can prove precisely feck all "beyond reasonable doubt" as is properly required.

So they want to be able to do this, judge, jury and executioner style.

[slark01]

This is the line that the music industry and film industry would LOVE you to believe.

"We spend sooo much money on producing all this stuff for you, surely we should have total control over how you use it"

Copyright has always been for the protection of the publisher's of work (Books, music, films, etc) rather the creators of the work. It has it's history in the start of the printing trade, when books became more available to the general public. (Notice any similarities with today?)

What they seem to have lost sight of is that individual property rights still have some bearing on the matter. When it was a case of having to physically copy a CD or cassette and transport it to another person the Music and Film industries only bothered with the mass pirating operations. Now Joe public can download every piece of music ever created (pretty much), rather than work out how to change their businesses, they want to maintain the status quo. Do artists deserve $100 million dollar contracts for creating music? Is that what their product is intrinsically worth? Or is this just a proportion of what other entreprenuers can make from marketing and selling it?

Meh

I agree!
Just being the devils advocate :-)
Ste.

[Spiderman]

I think the main reason why no one cares about the artists involved is that mainly they earn way, way too much anyway and so do the reocrd companies. If CDs were £2 to buy then no one would waste time downloading stuff.
Thats a huge reason behind it imho.

[rigor]

I agree with you with regard to the theft aspect - music should be treated the same as any other goods in that regard. We're talking about people's livelihoods and innovation here.

Yeah, I know that we all used to tape our mate's vinyl/CDs but at least in that case someone had paid for a least one copy. Wrong/theft, but we all did it.

Not sure about losing 'net access though - the normal route for theft of anything else in court & fine. Why shouldn't this be the same?

Precisely because copying isn't stealing. You're not taking anyone's property, or depriving them of the use of it, or even stopping them selling it. You'd be hard pushed to argue that if I copied something I actually would have bought it if I couldn't copy it and therefore had deprive someone of the revenue (Which is how the RIAA comes up with it billions of dollars lost to copyright "theft")

[yorkie_chris]

And also, if you're a music artist, or even a music "artist" then even if you don't earn a penny from CD sales, then you're still going to draw a few bob from TV programs wanting to talk to you etc etc.

Has anyone seen the South Park episode taking the pith out of this?

[the_lone_wolf]

I think the main reason why no one cares about the artists involved is that mainly they earn way, way too much anyway and so do the reocrd companies. If CDs were £2 to buy then no one would waste time downloading stuff.
Thats a huge reason behind it imho.

You should see how much of what you pay in the stores or when you use the iTunes store actually goes to the artists, it's pathetic...

I care about the artists, just not the record labels that exploit them for gross profit. Artists don't need to rely on the record labels so much now that they can distribute their music digitally for almost nothing, and the farmer's always going to look worried when the cows he's been milking for years start to disappear...

[slark01]

and the farmer's always going to look worried when the cows he's been milking for years start to disappear...
LMFAO!

Ste.

[squirrel_hunter]

OK bike dealers offering test rides, they don't then prosecute anybody taking a test ride.


Thankfully, or my days would be numbered.

[the_runt69]

why do you have to pay for a crap album when you only want 1 maybe 2 tracks off it ?

[Spiderman]

You should see how much of what you pay in the stores or when you use the iTunes store actually goes to the artists, it's pathetic...

I care about the artists, just not the record labels that exploit them for gross profit. Artists don't need to rely on the record labels so much now that they can distribute their music digitally for almost nothing, and the farmer's always going to look worried when the cows he's been milking for years start to disappear...

Oh yeh, i know. A friend was in a new band and they got a 3 record deal from Sony. Basically they didnt get paid a penny till they proved they could write and sell enough of those 3 to make it viable for Sony and even then it wasn't much.
It scum like simon cowell and his cohorts who cream off all the money for themselves.
I mean the big established artists, like U2 as a random name. They are all loaded and could easily sell their stuff themselves for next to nothing.

[the_lone_wolf]

Oh yeh, i know. A friend was in a new band and they got a 3 record deal from Sony. Basically they didnt get paid a penny till they proved they could write and sell enough of those 3 to make it viable for Sony and even then it wasn't much.
It scum like simon cowell and his cohorts who cream off all the money for themselves.
I mean the big established artists, like U2 as a random name. They are all loaded and could easily sell their stuff themselves for next to nothing.

Radiohead did, they released an album and asked people to donate what they wanted, from zero up

Ironically the big acts are the ones who are able to throw their weight around and get a larger %age of the profit written into their contracts, but all artists make more from tours and merchandise than they do from actual record sales, so if you love your bands go see them live or buy a hoodie, 'cause buying one of their CDs will net them pennies, not pounds:(

[Spiderman]

yeh, shame i;m not into radiohead cos i so supported that act of defiance. Viva la revolution.
But then look at George Michael, he simply refused to record anything even remotely sellable just to get out of his contract. But as you say its the big names that can play that game.

Problem is you'll probably buy a dodgy coppied hoody or Tshrt off some git looking to make a few quid for himself outside the venue, lol.

I saw a band called The Bhagdaddies at the south bank festival a few years back and they sold their own CDs after the set, thats the way i prefer to spend my money. I;d never download their stuff if i found it on the net tho, out of resect for the way they do their thang.

[timwilky]

Stupid, unenforceable, ill conceived, Mandleson caves into the requests of vested interests. He is so bent I am surprised he can stand up.

Still no chance of becoming law, this lot will be out before this pettiness can make it to the statute book.


However, it is about time they stopped this unelected bureaucrat from going abroad and making agreements with people over the dinner table.