Slashdot Mirror

And they are making millions doing it. You really should try it instead of breaking the internet.

Pffbtt... Typical astroturfing I'd expect from a PRMan. No really, you can't break the internet, but you can break a monolithic business model. Pirating isn't the cause of the artists getting the short end of the stick anymore than the consumer getting it. It's the fault of all the board members, middle management, lawyers, and promoters that take a majority of the artists' profits while reducing consumer choice and the quality of the product. Downhill Battle has been faithfully uncovering the egregious excesses of the corporate owners and used to have some nice infographics breaking up the profits by percentages (I tried to find some as they don't appear to be hosted on their site, anymore). I don't know how many studies I've seen that show pirating causes more purchases and how many years, end-to-end, the music and movie industry have made record profits. Do they really expect me to believe that pirating a movie takes away from the profits (read: wages) that the set employees make? Hell no, because set employees (makeup, special effects, lighting, sound) don't get royalties! It's the worst junk propaganda I've seen in years. I find it ironic, yet fitting, that a Youtube user was blocked from displaying a MPAA Public Service Announcement on the grounds that NBC/U owns the copyright.

The Copyfight has reached a point where I only want to pay the artist, directly. I loved the idea Radiohead used for "In Rainbows" as they received all the money donated (minus PayPal or the credit gateway fees). I'd like to just give bands cash, from my hand, so they get it all..... no middle-man making money, even if it's just 2-5 percent. If anything, maybe Flattr can start gaining traction as a way to say 'thanks' to all the wonderful artists who give their work away on YouTube and Vimeo for free. Hopefully musicians aren't constrained from putting some sort of donation/appreciation link on their websites by a contract; and without giving a dime back to their publisher (of whom should be so grateful they are representing such talent!). When it comes down to it, I want to really own the music or media I purchase. I don't want to wake up to find out Amazon or Apple has deleted something from one of many devices I own (e.g., Amazon: George Orwell's "1984"; Apple: Siri app pre 4s).

I found a study ("Meh. The Irrelevance of Copyright in the Public Mind" by Brett Lunceford & Shane Lunceford) about the public's seeming irreverence to copyright (I have a feeling there are segments of the population that pirate music just to spite the corporate oligarchy). They think this indifference has existed since recording instruments were mass-produced. It's not as if people were even consciously aware they were breaking any laws back then. If anything, I bet more than a few musicians and would-be corporate overlords that had a reel-to-reel back in the 50s made illegal recordings to share with their friends. I remember a friend of my father who made copies of Laserdiscs onto VCR tapes and gave them to his friends --and he even made simple short movies taking choice scenes from movies much like I added Simpsons or Ren and Stimpy soundclips between songs on my mix-tapes. I think it's simple.... reducing the choice of the consumer to use the media they purchase reduces creativity (and commerce), overall. Until then, people will always find a way to circumvent any roadblocks; real or perceived.

http://www.boycott-riaa.com/
http://www.riaaradar.com/

[files]:
[pdf]: http://downhillbattle.org/riaa/sticker.pdf
[MS Publisher]: http://downhillbattle.org/riaa/sticker.pub
^^ the above are formatted for Avery 5160 labels, but I in no way suggest you to do anything specific with those stickers. For educational purposes only, view what others have done here http://downhillbattle.org/riaa/

http://www.boycott-riaa.com/
http://www.riaaradar.com/

[files]:
[pdf]: http://downhillbattle.org/riaa/sticker.pdf
[MS Publisher]: http://downhillbattle.org/riaa/sticker.pub
^^ the above are formatted for Avery 5160 labels, but I in no way suggest you to do anything specific with those stickers. For educational purposes only, view what others have done here http://downhillbattle.org/riaa/

http://www.boycott-riaa.com/
http://www.riaaradar.com/

[files]:
[pdf]: http://downhillbattle.org/riaa/sticker.pdf
[MS Publisher]: http://downhillbattle.org/riaa/sticker.pub
^^ the above are formatted for Avery 5160 labels, but I in no way suggest you to do anything specific with those stickers. For educational purposes only, view what others have done here http://downhillbattle.org/riaa/

No, as you see, I was modded Troll exactly like I said I would be. I've posted this sort of thread before with the exact same results. On slashdot:

1. Oppressive draconian copyright laws are generally regarded as bad. Enforcement of those laws are generally regarded as bad. Everyone loves to rip on the RIAA.
2. China is bad. They censor the media and only allow you to see what they want you to see.
3. Point out that American copyright law is censorship, just achieved by different means but with the same end result, and YOU are bad. Mod -1 Troll.

Different means, same result. Point out the uncomfortable truth and you are a troll. That's blind nationalism plain and simple.

• China made tankman disappear by removing him from all distributed media. Kids in China today have never even heard of tank man.
• "Eyes on the Prize" was buried for more than a decade by the American government. For every documentary like EOTP you hear about there are hundereds that were never made and thousands of reels of footage that are inaccessible because of copyright law.

Blind nationalism. Blind nationalism. Blind nationalism. The Germans were blind nationalists too. They sat back as their government abused, tortured, raped, murdered, and locked people up in concentration camps. They sat there like sheep and did nothing. They sat by passively and allowed the slaughter millions of people. The evidence was staring them right in the face, they watched their neighbors hauled off on cattle cars. They did nothing. They were despicable. Americans are despicable.

I loved allofmp3 :) It's not whitewashing! It was one of the few online shops with reasonably priced DRM free music! That not only convinced me but I am sure several others dropped P2P during the period.

Also if you break down the PRICE of a DRM-Free Itunes download and compare it to a former allofmp3 download you see a 1400% difference (1,70 to 0,12) how can Apple justify the difference? (Please do not pretend the difference really goes to the artist!!! We know it doesn't http://downhillbattle.org/itunes/ ).

Then you can argue that the extra money is needed by the majors to produce actual commercial music. So go on and digest one of Madonna CDs or Britey Hits... and compare against the perfectly free music composed without a major that is awayable here legally: http://www.jamendo.com/en/

So summing up: The price of allofmp3 was fair to me and is possibly enought to compensate the artists. The majors are unneeded because good music comes out of itself and jamendo is the proof.

I see no actual problem in backing up all of mp3: I see problems not for backing it up! The allerged economists at the WTO should think about enforcing free trade instead of blocking exports from Russian Websites. Several "institutions" as the DVD REGIONAL CSS are obviuosly devised to erode consumer suplus and stop trade, those should not be tolerated by the WTO but indeed they get enforced by the very same organization. By IP right enforcement the south of the world is incapacitated to produce cheap drugs for the population and the result is death.

So open your eyes, realize that copyright legislation is extremely bad, it is rotten to the bone by the lobbying of several pigopolist american corporations. Allofmp3 is just a indicator of the bad things to come and standing for it means standing for the rights of humanity against corporativity.

Enrico

I have the feeling that good artists are too many and can rise a unwanted competition to the million dollar cows that the industry feeds on.

Make a reality check here http://downhillbattle.org/ and read about some of these golden cows here:
http://www.forbes.com/2007/01/17/richest-women-ent ertainment-tech-media-cz_lg_richwomen07_0118womens tars_slide_2.html?thisSpeed=29000

If you drop your expenses in music they will increase the lobbying because any lost sale goes accounted as "lost due piracy".

If you care I suggest reading this website: http://downhillbattle.org/ they add stickers to your proposal :D

You seem to ignore that for 99% of musicians guitar, basses and drums are a HOBBY rather than a career. But for those who see it as such then comes the confrontation with something worse than a undetermined instable salary: The monopolistic experience.

Please check out this site: http://downhillbattle.org/

For a while I've wanted a bittorrent client that was completely invisable to the user.

• ...as a small torrent client exe-file that is piggy-backed with the actual torrent file and started if the user has no client. Downhill battle's Blog Torrent has such an exemple, called "Easy Download". People just click on the link and the necessary client is automagically installed.
• ...as a on-the-fly P2P-izer, that just works by pre-pending a prefix to the address (just like the Coral cache). Differ is such a system. People put dijjer.org/get/ to the beginning of links. The website will automatically send an installer if needed. This installers set ups some sort of proxy on the users computer. dijjer.org/get URLs are redirected to this local proxy and the proxy it self is in chagre of geting the file and transparently make it available in HTTP as if downloaded by conventionnal means. The good thing is, once the proxy is installed it works with anything, browser, but also media players with HTTP web-streaming.
• ...last but not least, there are browser plugins. Opera, as far as I've heard comes with one, and I'm sure one can find something on http://addons.mozilla.org/

yeah, i broke it too - burn to cd, rip to MP3. Done and done

Yeah... The quality is crap too after going from lossy AAC to cd and then back to lossy.

Personally, AAC is a horid format and OGG and MP3 are 100 times better if you are an audifile.

I will have to credit with Apple keeping the file sizes down though with AAC.

Besides the DRM and bad quality I don't buy iTunes AACs because they screw the artists.

Its still easier for me to go to my indie privatley owned local CD shop and buy the CD and then rip it at highest quality MP3. It sounds better and I feel better by giving more money to the artist and local folks.

Yes. Only it would be called EFFAid (pronounced "F Aid" like "Chief Aid" from South Park). It would be sponsored by the EFF, RIAA Radar, and Downhill Battle. It would probably be held in Austin Texas and MC'd by the members of Cult of the Dead Cow or Wierd Al.

RIAA of course whould down play it as insignificant and tell the media to not promote it until the last minite then run it into the ground with bad puns and poorly designed pop-culture references (similar to how the press made Snakes on a Plane look bad).

Agreed. As this site shows, artists may actually make slightly less per song on iTunes, the 'legal, moral' music download service, than if they sell a physical CD. Considering there's no CD case, physical disc, jacket art, or 'shrinkage' built into the price, it's pretty obvious that the big record companies (and Apple.. yes, beloved Apple) are trying to propagate the same rapacious terms forward into the new online music distribution model.

Say no to 'legal' download services like iTunes, Napster and this new Kazaa, unless they can prove that artists get substantially larger cuts of sales. There are lots of other distro models which give much bigger cuts, like cdbaby.com.

The folks at Downhill Battle have been saying this for a few years now:
http://www.downhillbattle.org/itunes/

You mean Apple's digital downloads aren't also locked down, too expensive (and jeezus, $2 for a single music video or SNL skit?!), and a pain in the ass for everyone involved? That's news to me!

Both you and the author have mistaken computers and media for free markets. The author tells us:

Clearly, despite DRM's widely discussed inadequacies and regular aggravations, more than a few consumers are willing to put up with it when the price is right. That's just basic free-market economics. ... [customers will flock] -- to non-DRM competitors such as eMusic, perhaps, or even to plain old-fashioned CDs. For DRM to fail in the entertainment industry, all that needs to happen is for customers to choose not to buy it, which in turn should convince artists not to use it.

The immediate threat is DMCA style laws which mandate DRM. It should be obvious to you and Neil that no one will have a choice if that happens. You should also realize that it will happen if you smugly tell people they will still have choices and be comfortable when such laws are passed. The infamous "broadcast flag" is the tip of the iceburg which must be fought now so you and I will continue to have free hardware in the future. Technological restrictions and bad laws gave us a world where three music publishers had a monopoly on public broadcast. DRM will be much worse than that.

Even without further rotten laws, the computer market is not free as the Microsoft anti-trust trial so magnificently proved. Not much has changed since then. Google and Dell are making a few daring deals that like a Netscape deja vu. Rather than showing freedom, this only shows how locked in the vendors really are. The M$ tax is firmly entrenched and has even been pushed out onto universities and schools through student fees - those with the time to avoid it are often taxed twice!

No one wants DRM. He touts iTunes as evidence that people can live with DRM and at the same time boasts about the nascent creative commons and free media movements. He fails to mention WMP, which shows that people really want nothing to do with the terms the RIAA would like to force on you. CC and free music should be a clue to him that artists and customers crave a choice. The artists are willing to take risks to have that choice. Customers are eating it up. It's really what people want.

Vista will sneak in far more than people know. XP and WMP are already less than people want. Vista will be worse and it will extend that sorry lack of choice out by hardware. That's what this protest was all about. There's nothing wrong with the FSF saying that DRM is bad and that no one but big publishers really want it. They are right as usual.

If the market is to work, people have to be informed. That's not going to happen if we sit on our asses and listen to our iPods and think that everything is OK. At it's best, it's not OK. People are not stupid. Given the right information, they will indeed avoid Vista and DRM.

I won't be buying Apple products (especially those based on Intel hardware) because they includes draconian Digital Restrictions Management (DRM). Apple and Intel have sold out their users to the entertainment cartel made up by the RIAA, MPAA and other leaches.

Why would anyone buy DRM-crippled hardware from Apple when there are so many Linux and Free Software friendly manufacturers that sell desktops and laptops pre-loaded with the GNU/Linux operating system and the KDE desktop environment?

Don't buy RIAA member CDs, make music mixes for friends and support the indie scene. If someone chides you about filesharing, tell them to get stuffed.

http://www.downhillbattle.org/ http://www.eff.org/ http://www.riaaradar.com/

At last count, the breakdown of where that $.99 goes is (on average):
Apple - $.35
Label - $.53
Artist - $.11
And thats only after the label reclaims whatever they claim they spent in production costs.
See http://www.downhillbattle.org/itunes/ for details.

No. it's not exactly razor-thin.

According to DownhillBattle, Apple takes a $0.35 cut from every song. The labels take a whopping $0.53, and the artists get a paltry $0.11.

A 35% profit is pretty good in any book.

Intel is pushing a technology called Treacherous Computing, which will prevent unsigned code from running on their hardware. So even if you have the source code, if you try to remove the DRM restrictions, the hardware will refuse to run the modified binary.

The Free Software Foundation admits that the anti-DRM provisions in the GPLv3 will not be enough on their own to prevent the nightmare scenario where users can't trust their own computers.

People who understand the dangers of Digital Restrictions Management at a technical level (ie.Free and Open Source software developers) should warn the general public to avoid buying DRM-crippled hardware. Consumers should know about the great variety of DRM-free computers and accessories built specifically to work with Linux, the KDE desktop, and other Free and Open Source applications.

On the music side, there are plenty of websites that legally sell DRM-free, RIAA-free music by independent artists. Consumers can use an iTunes-like application called Songbird to easily download songs from these sites.

As for movies, building a Linux media center works better than the DRM-crippled offering from M$FT. Just download MythTV and run it on a computer equipped with the pcHDTV HD-3000 card and the PVR-350 card -- these will capture both standard definition (NTSC) and Digital/Hi-Definition (ATSC/HDTV) signals.

I watched a Frontline special on PBS online regarding media censorship on the internet in China. They made a point of fingering Yahoo/Google/Cisco/Microsoft and American companies in general for making this possible. Very interesting/insightful/informative. They selected four freshmen from Beijing University and not one of them recognized the "Tank Man" photo from Tiananmen Square in 1989 due to this censorship. The ironic part? After railing on Chinese online censorship for the better part of an hour, you get to part six of the video and a portion of the PBS online video is censored by American law. The screen goes black, and all you get is white text which you must read quickly. Censorship is being used in the United States to wipe out historical events while recorded evidence rots away in locked vaults. In China, we call the end result censorship. In the United States, we call it copyright law...

The link that the summary included about leaving a lot to be desired dates back to October 2003. Many of the issues have since been taken care of in the 2-1/2 years of software revisions and updates. The first few issues that the article states are really hardware problems related to the Titanium powerbook, which is even older.

The second link the submitter uses (desired) links to a long rant about how the iTunes Music Store gyps artists out of their due and is a poor choice for end users because you pay too much for lossily-compressed music.

And yet, the submission is about Rockbox, which is a replacement for the firmware inside of an iPod (and some other music players). The open-source firmware allows you to change the look and feel of the user interface and supports some other music codecs. This allows the iPod, its users, and independent artists to be freed from the tyranny of iTunes and iTMS [some sarcasm added].

The relevant link to Tim Lord's article at Newsforge is missing from the summary entirely, although its existence is alluded to.

Do I dare to use the term non sequitur here? Changing the firmware on your iPod will only change how you interact with music you already have now. It won't change how iTMS or iTunes work. I would argue that it doesn't do much to help out independent artists, either. If you want to support artists directly, you aren't going to be buying label-backed music from iTMS anyway. How many independent artists release their materials solely using Ogg Vorbis? I'll note that, until this past year, iTMS didn't even break even.

Don't get me wrong - Rockbox is really cool. I think having a customizable interface for the iPod is a neat thing to tinker with. I would agree that the iPod should support more formats than it currently does. But trying to introduce people to Rockbox by using old links and feeding on barely-related resentment for the iTMS model, while forgetting the relevant link at NewsForge, is a strange way to go about it.

It's tough for me to see things from the layman's perspective since I'm relatively more informed, but I think there are some foibles of the iPod that are universally unsavoury:

- The whole battery fiasco was ridiculous. We've all heard horror stories of $120-odd battery replacements that can only be done by Apple by mail. I admit I haven't paid attention to whether or how Apple has remedied this.

- Maybe I'm alone on this one but I don't see any benefit for the average person to carry any more than 5 gigs of music with them at any one time (and 5 gigs is a VERY generous round-up). Unless you work 40-hour shifts in a coal mine what's stopping you from deleting some songs and putting on some new ones? Even a 20-gig device is swatting a fly with an ICBM.

- I think the nano is a huge ripoff for the features\price, and I don't get the shuffle at all - calling a shortcoming a feature is pure marketing tripe.

- A friend of mine who owns an iPod is furious because he was forced to format his computer and he can't copy his music from his iPod back to the hard drive because Apple assumes he stole it. He found a free ITMS alternative, but as you say, he didn't buy an iPod to muddle with third-party software.

- The iTunes software might be nice on Mac but on Windows it's atrocious. Some of the drag-and-drop functionality is pretty innovative, but the whole design is so nonstandard in the Windows world that it has a steeper learning curve and creates inaccurate expectations about UI in Windows. Having a fullscreen audio player makes no sense either. Also, requiring Quicktime to be resident in memory at all times is ludicrous.

- Steve Jobs is arguing against tiered pricing per song. Wee. The douche charges $10 for an album encoded in a locked-in file format. Not an album, for that would mean to me some kind of displayable medium and maybe some liner notes; $10 buys you a couple of bits. I'm more in favour of a site like www.allofmp3.com which charges (fairly) by the megabyte.

- Despite the leaner distribution model, artists see no gain in profits. ITMS is proven to be no better for indie artists in any capacity other than scope of distribution. The store was forced to remove from their website the claim that they are fair to artists.

- Any complaints I make about how solid the unit is physically have been done to death so I'll leave it at that. As an admittadly clumsy individual I could never trust myself with a HDD-based portable device, which summarizes most of the iPod lineup.

I bought a no-name solid state MP3 player last year and I couldn't be happier with it. It's a tiny thing with a fold-out USB plug - just stick it into a WinXP machine and copy files (MP3, OGG, WMA, or store any computer files\folders) into the drive folder that automagically opens. The thing has a microphone, a line-in jack, an AM\FM radio that can be recorded to MP3 immediately or set like a VCR, and even a little penlight! Plus it came with power and audio cables, earbuds (worthless), a faux-leather case, and a printed manual. It runs about 40 hours on a single AA, and even longer if I listen to the radio. Considering the price I was totally astounded at the features, ease-of-use, and engineering behind this tiny behemoth. Plus, (uber geek alert) when I backed up the entire file structure and formatted it I ran Tom's Root Boot off of it, though it has enough storage for Knoppix!

I stand behind my claims. iPod is the champion of the uninformed. There are sturdier, more accessible, "open" devices that are more versatile and economical.

But just the same, our arguments are congruent. I don't think iPod should have to change its device or business model for any reason. Apple has every right to make the products they make, however they choose to make them. There's no shortage of competition that meets the French government's criteria.

Then again, rereading

Intel is pushing a technology called Treacherous Computing, which will prevent unsigned code from running on their hardware. So even if you have the source code, if you try to remove the DRM restrictions, the hardware will refuse to run the modified binary.

The Free Software Foundation admits that the anti-DRM provisions in the GPLv3 will not be enough on their own to prevent the nightmare scenario where users can't trust their own computers.

People who understand the dangers of Digital Restrictions Management at a technical level (ie.Free and Open Source software developers) should warn the general public to avoid buying DRM-crippled hardware. Consumers should know about the great variety of DRM-free computers and accessories built specifically to work with Linux, the KDE desktop, and other Free and Open Source applications.

On the music side, there are plenty of websites that legally sell DRM-free, RIAA-free music by independent artists. Consumers can use a cross-platform, iTunes-like application called Songbird to easily download songs from these sites.

As for movies, building a Linux media center works just as well as the DRM-crippled offering from M$FT. Just download MythTV and run it on a computer equipped with the pcHDTV HD-3000 card and the PVR-350 card -- these will capture both standard definition (NTSC) and Digital/Hi-Definition (ATSC/HDTV) signals.

Ever since a company called Fluendo joined the GNOME Foundation's Advisory Board, GNOME is obligated to use GStreamer (a software product sponsored by Fluendo) as its audio and video backend. This wouldn't be bad, if it weren't for the fact that GStreamer uses Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) to handcuff users and leave them at the mercy of the entertainment cartel. In order to do this, GStreamer is denying its developers the right to license their constribution under the GPL, so that Fluendo can sell closed-source, proprietary DRM plugins that let the MPAA and RIAA control the users' viewing habits.

GStreamer has hurt the multimedia effort on Linux and the Free Desktop because they stole talented developers from mature mutimedia projects such as Xine, MPlayer, and VideoLAN, all of which were started before GStreamer and all of which have strong copyleft protection by being licensed under the GPL. In other words, GStreamer further fragmented the Linux multimedia developer base purely for the selfish, immoral purpose of ramming DRM down Linux users' throats.

Ximian, a company instrumental in founding GNOME, sold out to big business in 2002 by switching Mono's license from the GPL to the weaker MIT X11 license. Instead of helping out the myriad of established multimedia apps such as Kaffeine, AmaroK, and KMPlayer, Ximian started a whole new app called Banshee, whose only claim to fame is that its license (MIT X11) allows linking to proprietary DRM plugins.

These are just some example of an increasing problem GNOME is experiencing: it is pandering (and in some cases outright selling out) to companies that don't necessarily have the users' best interest in mind. One can say that the whole reason GNOME was started was to allow proprietary software (including draconian DRM) to use the hard work of open source developers.

KDE, on the other hand, is licensed solely under the GPL because the toolkit it is based on (Qt) is also GPL. KDE is also committed to preventing DRM from infesting their user's computers: for KDE4, they are building a multimedia framework called Phonon that does not depend on GStreamer, but which can use any number of backends, including DRM-free ones.

if I wanted to get music while screwing the artist out of any money...then buy it from iTunes
http://www.downhillbattle.org/itunes/

This will fill you in :0]

Don't fight DRM itself

DRM is an insult to human dignity, and it WILL be abused, funneling money to the abusers so that they can bribe politicians, so that they can abuse some more. The buck has got to stop, and by raising this issue to the forefront of the computer user community, we just might be able to pull it off.

Closed-source software is not always bad, but its obscurity lends itself to being used in DRM schemes that enslave users. As a developer of Free and Open Source Software, I don't want Hollywood bosses to hijack my software in order to handcuff users and rip them off. I care about my users' rights and about my own, and I certainly don't want my work to make the RIAA's life any easier.

That's why I don't waste my time on GStreamer. Helping out multimedia apps licensed under the GPL (such as Xine and VideoLAN) is much better use of my time.

There is no reason why anyone would buy DRM-infested music from iTunes isBogus when there is such a wide selection of DRM-Free music by independent artists.

This is especially true with the release of Songbird, which not only has many more features than iTunes, but also downloads songs from a greater variety of sites. All DRM-free and legal!

GStreamer, the official audio backend for GNOME, will include DRM plugins developed by a company called Fluendo, which hopes to make money by restricting the users' rights and turning GNOME/Linux/"the Free Desktop System" into a Vista-like nightmare controlled by the entertainment cartel. Why? Because Fluendo is on the GNOME Foundation's Advisory Board. I can't believe I've been so stupid to actually give them money, so that they can turn around and stab Free Software in the back! Never again will I trust the GNOME Foundation after they sold out the community like this.

I hope KDE is smart enough to avoid DRM by choosing a multimedia backend that is GPL. This will ensure that users can change the code of any plugin, remove the DRM, and be left with a functional product. Xine would be an excellent choice for a multimedia backend, since it is light-weight, works with more codecs that Gstreamer (not to mention better) and can be included as a library in any program, like Kaffeine and Amarok have already done.

The goal of gambling is generally to maximize your positive expectation (this means positive outcome. Cf. writers like David Sklansky). While I encountered this statement in a book about poker, I believe it applies pretty well to business and other aspects of life. And the cartels probably understand this more than the genie metaphor.

So if they understand their precipice of a business model, and they are trying to maximize profits (positive outcome), then why are they not trying to really "embrace" alternate distribution? My take on this is that they've done the research and concluded that they can make more money through DRM, scare tactics (lawsuits), and FUD.

DRM is really a temporary solution. It makes copying harder, so it works on the non-technical. Coupled with the DMCA, it creates an end-run around fair use rights as they can sue anyone who releases information about how to bypass the restrictions. It can't last forever, as there are those who want to copy media, and stopping human communication is not possible.

The scare tactics (lawsuits) and FUD could be considered a temporary solution, or you could compare it to any authority asserting power over the peasants. These work (at least in the US, I don't know about other places) because the average person here doesn't research or apply any logic to the corporate nightly news they watch, often owned or affiliated with the same corporations who hold massive copyright interests (ABC, NBC, CBS, WB, FOX, etc). When the lawsuits started, the average person had probably seen or read two things about file-sharing: "peer-to-peer makes copying easy" and then, a bit later "file-sharers go to court". The FUD works in basically the same way.

I believe that public opinion is really key here. Sure, there are those who buy the FUD and learn a distorted view of copyright. And there are those who favor abolishing copyright altogether. But I think that the majority of people are somewhere in the middle. These are the techies who see the ridiculousness of the propositions made by the cartels (in terms of technology), or the soccer moms who want to copy that DVD so Timmy doesn't ruin the original.

This is where we have to step in. The great thing about this point in time is that most people don't understand much about the situation. I found this out when I was home during Christmas/New Years. I consider my dad to be smarter than average, yet he thought DVD burners might be illegal (he has one in his 2-year-old iMac), and I don't think he really understood me when I didn't want to go to the movies unless there was something I really wanted to see (he asked why, I said "unethical business practices").

So what should we do? Well, we have a situation where public opinion is important and the same public does not understand the issues very well. This means those who want to tame the feudal-style trade groups (cf. Guilds) should find some way to raise awareness about these issues.

There are organizations like Free Culture and Downhill Battle who are trying to do this. They are a great resource for the many slashdot (and similar) types who complain about the copyright situation, yet maybe don't

remember downhillbattle and EFF. They are fighting for your rights.

10. Give the gift of Linux this holiday season. If a few burned CDs are too cheap for you, buy a Linux book that comes with the CDs.

10a) How many of us have nerd families that would appreciate this?

9. Refer all charity organizations and any group strapped for cash to Linux. Every year when my kid's school does parent-teacher conferences, I never fail to bring up open-source after the teachers mention school budget cutbacks. (there's always a good opportunity to work that in when the teachers apologize for not getting the reports printed out because XP crashed - again!)

9a) Not bad, but the teachers are clueluess in general. Your crusade falls on deaf ears. Else they wouldn't be working at a primary school. Those who can do, those who can't teach.

8. Drop IE-compatibility from your websites. Use this: http://www.stopie.com/stopie/home/ which will refer viewers to download Firefox. Aren't you tired of having to make your website botched up just to work for the lamest browser on the web, anyway?

8a) Yeah, that's realistic. Do you have a job?

7. Earn money by referring people to Firefox with Google toolbar while you're at it: http://downhillbattle.org/node/view/554 Who *says* there's no money in free software?

7a) I agree.

6. Go to the Ubuntu site - the page where you can order an Ubuntu disk sent to you for free - and fill in RANDOM ADDRESSES. Mystery gifts from the software fairy.

6a) Yes, adding useless costs to free software projects is helping the cause. They don't mind paying to send those CDs out because it earns a new user. When you send out 1000 and 2 people install them, that's not helping.

5. Anybody with a CD burner and a Linux fetish will have old Linux CDs they don't use anymore - like when you've updated to the new version. Take these CDs with you to the library, and tuck them into the Windows books in the computer books section.

5a) Um, yeah. People stick random CDs into their computer. Then get confused when Windows won't run the installer. Case closed.

4. While you're in the library, be sure to fill out those request/suggestion forms for new books to buy with the latest Linux books you're just dying to check out - and hasn't "DOS for Dummies" and "Windows 3.1 - the complete reference" gotten old, anyway?

4a) I like this, around '97 when I first tried Linux it was frustrating there were no books at the library. (I was 13, then.)

3. Never pass a computer store without walking in and asking for software titles that run on Linux. The idea is to make them aware that Linux users *would* spend *some* money, if only anybody cared to do business with us.

3a) You're the Jehovah's Witness of Linux. Neat.

2. Teach your kids Linux. This is the easiest - kids will absorb Linux like little sponges, all you have to do is install it and stand back.

2a) This is a huge disservice, unless your kids already know Windows. They're going to need Windows for school and job skills, not Linux. Sorry.

1. Go to second-hand stores such as Salvation Army and Goodwill. Find a used computer on sale plugged in and running. Stick Knoppix on it. Reboot it. Walk away whistling. Trust me, I've spoken to employee and customer alike at these places - nobody would ever know the difference!

1a) Interesting, but who's going to know what it was running? From my experience when people don't recognize Windows and see a GUI they assume its a Mac, since thats all they know.

10. Give the gift of Linux this holiday season. If a few burned CDs are too cheap for you, buy a Linux book that comes with the CDs. 10a) How many of us have nerd families that would appreciate this? 9. Refer all charity organizations and any group strapped for cash to Linux. Every year when my kid's school does parent-teacher conferences, I never fail to bring up open-source after the teachers mention school budget cutbacks. (there's always a good opportunity to work that in when the teachers apologize for not getting the reports printed out because XP crashed - again!) 9a) Not bad, but the teachers are clueluess in general. Your crusade falls on deaf ears. Else they wouldn't be working at a primary school. Those who can do, those who can't teach. 8. Drop IE-compatibility from your websites. Use this: http://www.stopie.com/stopie/home/ which will refer viewers to download Firefox. Aren't you tired of having to make your website botched up just to work for the lamest browser on the web, anyway? 8a) Yeah, that's realistic. Do you have a job? 7. Earn money by referring people to Firefox with Google toolbar while you're at it: http://downhillbattle.org/node/view/554 Who *says* there's no money in free software? 7a) I agree. 6. Go to the Ubuntu site - the page where you can order an Ubuntu disk sent to you for free - and fill in RANDOM ADDRESSES. Mystery gifts from the software fairy. 6a) Yes, adding useless costs to free software projects is helping the cause. They don't mind paying to send those CDs out because it earns a new user. When you send out 1000 and 2 people install them, that's not helping. 5. Anybody with a CD burner and a Linux fetish will have old Linux CDs they don't use anymore - like when you've updated to the new version. Take these CDs with you to the library, and tuck them into the Windows books in the computer books section. 5a) Um, yeah. People stick random CDs into their computer. Then get confused when Windows won't run the installer. Case closed. 4. While you're in the library, be sure to fill out those request/suggestion forms for new books to buy with the latest Linux books you're just dying to check out - and hasn't "DOS for Dummies" and "Windows 3.1 - the complete reference" gotten old, anyway? 4a) I like this, around '97 when I first tried Linux it was frustrating there were no books at the library. (I was 13, then.) 3. Never pass a computer store without walking in and asking for software titles that run on Linux. The idea is to make them aware that Linux users *would* spend *some* money, if only anybody cared to do business with us. 3a) You're the Jehovah's Witness of Linux. Neat. 2. Teach your kids Linux. This is the easiest - kids will absorb Linux like little sponges, all you have to do is install it and stand back. 2a) This is a huge disservice, unless your kids already know Windows. They're going to need Windows for school and job skills, not Linux. Sorry. 1. Go to second-hand stores such as Salvation Army and Goodwill. Find a used computer on sale plugged in and running. Stick Knoppix on it. Reboot it. Walk away whistling. Trust me, I've spoken to employee and customer alike at these places - nobody would ever know the difference! 1a) Interesting, but who's going to know what it was running? From my experience when people don't recognize Windows and see a GUI they assume its a Mac, since thats all they know.

9. Refer all charity organizations and any group strapped for cash to Linux. Every year when my kid's school does parent-teacher conferences, I never fail to bring up open-source after the teachers mention school budget cutbacks. (there's always a good opportunity to work that in when the teachers apologize for not getting the reports printed out because XP crashed - again!)

8. Drop IE-compatibility from your websites. Use this: http://www.stopie.com/stopie/home/ which will refer viewers to download Firefox. Aren't you tired of having to make your website botched up just to work for the lamest browser on the web, anyway?

7. Earn money by referring people to Firefox with Google toolbar while you're at it: http://downhillbattle.org/node/view/554 Who *says* there's no money in free software?

6. Go to the Ubuntu site - the page where you can order an Ubuntu disk sent to you for free - and fill in RANDOM ADDRESSES. Mystery gifts from the software fairy.

5. Anybody with a CD burner and a Linux fetish will have old Linux CDs they don't use anymore - like when you've updated to the new version. Take these CDs with you to the library, and tuck them into the Windows books in the computer books section.

4. While you're in the library, be sure to fill out those request/suggestion forms for new books to buy with the latest Linux books you're just dying to check out - and hasn't "DOS for Dummies" and "Windows 3.1 - the complete reference" gotten old, anyway?

3. Never pass a computer store without walking in and asking for software titles that run on Linux. The idea is to make them aware that Linux users *would* spend *some* money, if only anybody cared to do business with us.

2. Teach your kids Linux. This is the easiest - kids will absorb Linux like little sponges, all you have to do is install it and stand back.

1. Go to second-hand stores such as Salvation Army and Goodwill. Find a used computer on sale plugged in and running. Stick Knoppix on it. Reboot it. Walk away whistling. Trust me, I've spoken to employee and customer alike at these places - nobody would ever know the difference!

> At least apple gives somthing back to the people who write and perform the music.

You do realise Apple give less than four cents in the dollar to any artists on the iTunes Music Store.

Hardly a step up from allofmp3 at all.

And don't forget to send donations to downhillbattle and EFF.

"Apple says iTunes is "better than free" because it's "fair to the artists and record labels." That's simply not true. First of all, Apple gets 3 times as much money as musicians from each sale. Apple takes a 35% cut from every song and every album sold, a huge amount considering how little they have to do. Record labels receive the other 65% of each sale. Of this, major label artists will end up with only 8 to 14 cents per song, depending on their contract. Many of them will never Artists Get Ripped Off. even see this paltry share because they have to pay for producers and recording costs, both of which can be enormous. Until the musician "recoups" these costs, when you buy an iTunes song, the label gives them nothing. (Sources: major label musician's cut Apple's cut For a thorough explanation of how recouping screws musicians, see Confessions of a Record Producer by Moses Avalon)"
http://www.downhillbattle.org/itunes/

35% is a huge cut for a distributor. Best Buy doesn't take 35% cut off of each cd sale, not even close! You can fact check the numbers but, apple's percentage is widely known.

They're grossing $.35/song - If it costs $.35 to run a service to select and download 4mb of data, Slashdot should have gone bankrupt LONG ago.

If you believe what this guy is saying. $0.30 a song. Labels take 53 cents and musicians get 11.

Start voting with your dollars

Pray tell me how we're supposed to do that when the very first people who get their grubby paws on our dollars, via taxes, are the people who are writing blatantly plutocratic laws.

If you are only using blank media for legitimate purposes, then a)good on you, and b)you are in the minority.

Whilst legitimate use is entirely possible, you cannot tell me that you seriously believe that all the buyers of blank media are only using it for good not evil (feel free to invert the 'good' and 'evil' based on your beliefs).

I personally believe that media cartels are unnecessary, evil organisations that should be wiped out. They give nothing to the artist and the give nothing to the fans. They are parasites. Anything that aids their demise (ie. filesharing, etc.) is alright by me. See here for some good reasons they should go.

Just FYI: iTunes still gives just as much money to the "bloated corporate entities that overcharge for music while they screw the artists". See Downhill Battle for an admittedly biased perspective (that nonetheless gets the facts right in terms of where the money goes).

Also, I agree with your perspective that the money you spend is a vote; but while it is a vote for the band, it is also a vote for the System. Buying merchandise or going to a concert (if you live in an area that bands actually go to; i.e., not where I live) is one way you could vote for the band, but not the RIAA, with your dollars.

http://www.downhillbattle.org/itunes/

Since we're on the subject of remixes, I think it's important to point out that many remixes are not legal. The folks at http://www.downhillbattle.org/ are working to let mixers into the ballgame, so to speak.

Also from the folks at downhillbattle.org comes http://bannedmusic.org/ which distributes some music that has been banned for copyright reasons (mixes and sampling). Included are the Double Black Album (Metallica's black album mixed with Jay-Z's black album) and the Grey Album (Beatle's white album mixed with Jay-Z's black album). There is much more stuff there, too, so check it out if you're into music advocacy.

http://www.downhillbattle.org/ is an extraordinary organization that does just that.

That's fine...I don't use iTunes anyway...

Wow. You not only compare copyright infringment to genocide, but then justify that statement by stating that the "Slashbots" are an oppressive group denying struggling songwriters their fair share due to P2P distribution? If there was an award for hyperbole, you'd get 1st prize (The biggest award ever awarded ever in the world!).

The reason any major label performers are struggling is not because of P2P, it is because of the outdated, completely feudal methods of distribution and compensation that exist in the music industry. Many artists are figuring out that they can make good money by allowing their music to be distributed for free! Go look at http://downhillbattle.org/ where there are already artists and activists trying to change the totally obsolete big label distribution system. It seems that most of the anti-P2P FUD I see comes from the **AA's and the industry themselves and not the artists.

Of course I'm sure they'd NEVER stoop to astroturfing a site like Slashdot, now would they?

You provided the perfect in to plug a group that thinks they way you do:

http://www.downhillbattle.org/

In particular click the "Learn more" link and read the "Read before you leave" links.

Kind Regards