Slashdot Mirror
JWZ On Music Over The Internet
kchayer writes "JWZ [?] 's current obsession includes an audio webcast. Recently he added to the site a description of what it takes to broadcast music over the Internet. Makes for an interesting read, and a good summary of the DPRA, DMCA, their relationship with the RIAA, and other issues involving music copyright and the recording industry in general. His summary at the end says it best: "What's going on here is that the music industry establishment are absolutely terrified of the internet...and are trying to [?] force things to continue to be done as if turn-of-the-century technology was all we had to work with.""
Streaming over the internet is even easier...
- my first server went something like this...
soundcard -> mp3encoder -> file.mp3
then in my cgi-bin directory I had
#!/bin/sh
echo "Content-Type: audio/mpeg"
echo
tail -f file.mp3
Unfortunately, unless congress passes leglislation that prohibits the restrictions quickly being imposed on the internet by entertainment industries (limit( 1/x: x -> infinity)), our civil society will let the Music industry do whatever they want with their copyrights and licenses.
:) Key point, keep a low profile. I can't believe that slashdot hasn't been flagged yet (with varoius posters submitting 'illegal' links, or saying 'naughty' things).
The law is on their side. The record company's had all the artists first borns signed over, and the atrotious "what if's" can scare enough business people (across most industries) to support legislation that enhances copyright restriction in the new digital age.
On the one hand we have the Wild Wild Web, which is still lawless, and vandels can run around anonymously producing whatever mischivousness (or lawlessness) that they desire. For example: Kiddi pr0n, nuclear bomb blue prints, pirated software (including music), DOS attacks, generally accessible objectionable material by minors...
The average person, when faced with these might get a little scared and say, "oh yeah, we should try and stop those". In the next decade or two, we're going to see the Internet infultrate our lives, which will require it's regulation. Sadly, we, the techni's, will be a minority influence on what we will and will not be allowed to do on the global network. Most likely, there will be licenses, jailable laws, monitors at every node, etc.
The regulations involving copyrighted music distribution on the net are really too soon to see the outcome. On the one hand, hands off government (aside from contractual enforcement), will allow the music industry to keep their cash cow. I don't think the general public is all too concerned if one industry looses revenue, but as with the above, I think the general public is concerned with autonomy and security on the internet - They'll vote on what-ever they have to.. Or whatever they're made to believe that they have to.
History would suggest that the net is going to become beurocratic to the point of unproductivity. The "Free lunch" we've been given will be abused and spoiled for the whole lot of us. Industry will win, resistance will be futile, you know, the whole bit. Might as well enjoy it while it lasts.
Can we form an anti-corporate party yet? Or is it too soon?
-Michael
-Michael
The real threat to the record megacorps lies not in users downloading songs instead of buying CD's.
It lies in artists bypassing the record companies.
A studio can be rented for a resonable amount of money, distribution can be done over the net.
The only remaining service that the record companies provide is promotion.
There are a lot of ways to promote your band without a record company, Even if you are a world-scale artist, it might be better to hire a PR-firm rather than a record company.
All opinions are my own - until criticized
I think you want to say "trade" in place of property, because notions of ownership certainly are bovious in nature, while bartering is not (although a symbiotic relationship might approach this in one sense).
For example, most tribal societies didn't believe in the idea of owning land.
The overwhelming fact often ignored when discussing North American tribal societies is that the incredible abundance of resources made most notions of ownership unnecessay.
Were these same tribes to exist in a place like ancient Britain, where resources and land were more scarce, they would have certainly developed a notion of traded property.
Before the Industrial Revolution, the idea of somebody else owning the tools that they didn't use personally was also a bit counterintuitive.
Ever heard of the feudal system?