Music industry partners with software industry group to curb piracy

From: Russell McOrmond <russell _-at-_ flora.ca>
To: info (at) itbusiness.ca, <pdelnibletto (at) itbusiness.ca>, Shane Schick <sschick (at) itbusiness.ca>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 13:33:38 -0500 (EST)

In reply to:

"Music industry partners with software industry group to curb piracy"
http://www.itbusiness.ca/index.asp?theaction=61&sid=51183

  and

"Copying collective pays its dues"
http://www.itbusiness.ca/index.asp?theaction=61&sid=51203


---cut---


  Why does this alliance not surprise me?  They both represent
intermediaries at a time when artists/programmers and their
audiences/users/fans are looking into ways to cut out intermediaries.  
Check out http://www.creativecommons.org/ as an example of how such
relationships may work.

  The recording industry and BSA/CAAST also use bogus statistics to try to
justify their existence and/or make levy payments.  I have sent in letters
to the editor previously about CAAST misinformation in how they estimate
their claimed lost sales.  The article "Copying collective pays its dues"
also tells us what bogus statistics the CPCC will be using:  "without
knowing exactly what kind of music is being copied, the CPCC has to use a
proxy system that analyzes airplay and sales data."

  More bogus estimates to keep money in the pockets of the intermediaries.

  Sales data is related to those people who purchase the CD's directly
from the intermediaries, not who acquired the music via other means
including directly from artists not signed up to the big labels.  Airplay
is also not based on the popularity of the music, but recording industry
market manipulation.  In some cases artists pay promotion fees to the
radio stations to play songs more often, and the bias is always in favor
of those artists signed with the big labels.


  I believe the fact that there is no legitimate way to determine which
artists have their music shared under private copying should be reason
enough to simply not collect the levies.  Rather than paying to use
airplay to promote sales that might include some small amount of private
copying, why not use legalized (without a levy) private copying to promote
sales and airplay?  Take the promotional fees currently sent to the
intermediaries and instead promote via peer-to-peer file sharing and
private copying.

  I believe that the real risk that the recording and proprietary software
industries are fighting against are the cases where they, the
intermediaries, are being bypassed by artists/programmers and their fans.




BTW: If you want to see an example of what companies can do merging Open
Source software and independent musicians, see LindowsOS MP3.com EDITION

http://www.lindows.com/lindows_michaelsminutes_archives.php?id=48
http://info.lindows.com/mp3edition/

---
 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
 Any 'hardware assist' for communications, whether it be eye-glasses, 
 VCR's, or personal computers, must be under the control of the citizen 
 and not a third party.   -- http://www.flora.ca/russell/

--
For (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other related sites please see http://www.digital-copyright.ca