Slashdot Mirror
EMI Customer Relations Tells It Like It Is
hype7 writes "The Register is running a story about the most outrageous email sent from a customer services rep at BMI in Germany to a customer who had difficulty playing a copy-protected CD in his CD player. One of the most stunning lines from the translation: "If you plan to continue protesting about future audio media releases with copy protection, forget it; copy protection is a reality, and within a matter of months more or less all audio media worldwide are copy protected. And this is a good thing for the music industry. In order to make this happen we will do anything within our power - whether you like it or not.""
You know, like programs. Would you like it if your coworker went to your boss and claimed that all the code you produced was his work and then got a raise out of it?
They definitely have an editorial slant, but that is not the same thing. In fact, it is the opposite, because by making the comparison with the Enquirer you are suggesting that they will publish anything as long as it is flashy
Many of the Register's stories tend to derive from anonymous, shadowy types, or "a guy who got it from some other guy who got it from some other guy". On this story we see them referencing "facts" that they derive from an Eric S. Raymond posting about a Microsoft document that he covertly received from some session that he didn't attend. This is par for the course for the type of Register articles that get posted here on Slashdot (I don't read it regularly, so it tends to be that I only see those "Some guy overhead a guy on the train saying that he heard that Bill Gates likes to kick puppies").
If the music industry can effectively block the transfer of information, than what's to stop countries like China from doing the same. Hell, they already do a pretty good job of it-- file-sharing networks may provide some of the best ways to circumvent those restrictions.
I'm in favor of the work being done on p2p networks because I don't believe anyone should be able to put their boot on information sharing, no matter how noble their intentions.
If piracy is the only way forward, then that's too bad.
the big record companies, the RIAA, the MPAA, DMCA, etc. guard a world that existed before the internet. they are attempting to reverse history. let them go on with their bad selves, they can't possibly win. pandora's box is already open.
;-P
we are not in gutenberg's time anymore, my german media company friend. we live in a world where information like music and books and movies is as transmuteable as water. in a way, information wants to be free. entropy naturally leads to the release and spread of information. trying to contain information is a losing game like trying to fight gravity is a losing game.
music is about nothing specifically, and is enjoyed for it's own sake. this should be free. you can steal atoms. but you can not "steal" data. you can steal a car. but you can not steal a song, or a book, or a movie. think this doesn't make sense? kazaa, etc. are NEVER GOING TO GO AWAY. think intellectual property law is pretty damn important and should be a pillar of modern society? meet the internet my living-in-denial friend. disseminating information effortlessly and freely with no chance of shutting it down IS WHAT IT WAS DESIGNED TO DO. close their servers, block their ports, do whatever you want. someone, somewhere, will circumvent. copy protect your cds. people will buy black sharpies. add a dongle, do whatever! you have to turn the info on the cd into audible music at some point. at which point, the audio signal can be captured, digitized, and distributed. there is absolutely no way to defeat this! if it can be heard, it can be copied. END OF STORY.
send armed guards out with each cd purchase to go home with you and make sure you don't copy the cd. that is all you can really do.
whether you like it or not, free music, books, movies, etc. is the way it is now. this is what the promise of the internet is all about! i mean come on people, weren't we getting excited about exactly this kind of dreamy stuff ten years ago? and now we want to put the genie back in the bottle? the internet is pandora's box, my lawyerly friend. litigate all you want, pass as many laws as you want, line as many political pockets as you want, you can't reverse the flow of time. YOU ARE FACING HISTORICAL OBSOLESCENCE NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU KICK AND SCREAM. why would we want less convenience? should we throw out all of our cds too and go back to vinyl while we are at it? these corporations and their lawyers are fighting simple, obvious progress that a kindergartner can understand.
but who will make money off of music! no one will!???
so the future is about the status quo? things change dramatically because of new, historically-ground breaking discoveries, and not always for the better of everyone. just ask the aztecs or the incans. the internet is exactly such a historical, groundbreaking discovery. the death of the information middleman is exactly the dramatic, bloody side effect that is warranted. these companies are being replaced by not a better business model, but a better DISTRIBUTION model. who said it had to make someone money!
the convenience of millions versus the fate of a few middle man music companies is an obvious choice. besides, there are always alternative models for turning a dime. someone will learn how to stand at the internet portals that tell people what they might want to listen to, and artists or the groups that represent the artists will pay them to put their name on that portal. everyone has to go somewhere to figure out what they might want to listen to, given the plethora of choices out there. there's money in that statement somewhere, and someone will figure out where.
i think radio has been handing out free music for decades, and we don't see them worrying about their economic model. nor do i see the publishing industry quaking in their boots over the existence of libraries with free books on loan. i think barnes and noble found out that if you let people sit around and browse their book selection for free, you make more money. on it's face, this is antithetical, but it is a centuries-old well-established business practice that handing out freebies leads to customers who feel obliged to patronize your wares.
no one is going to read books on a clunky, expensive ebook when they can read the paperback version for three bucks. no one is going to copy a paperback to digital when it is so much cheaper in time and convenience in the pulp wood form! a book is a BETTER TECHNOLOGY for reading than any computer version can ever hope to be: convenience, power consumption, viewing contrast, ease of use, etc. check down the list. ebooks are a dumb idea. so the publishing industry need not worry.
and i don't care how many movies you have on your hard disk. there is a reason people go to theatres when they all have tvs at home. people like the anonymous company in the darkness munching popcorn when they watch movies, movie houses our like our new churches of worship. it is human sociological thing, a group mob human principle of enjoying the emotion of a movie with the rest of the herd... it makes the movie more enjoyable. so movie houses are never going away, and can charge $9, $10, $12, $20 PER VIEWING (not per copy!) for a movie well into the future for decades. nothing on the horizon threatens this business principle. so the movie industry need not worry.
but the music industry? worry, worry, worry. they produce a product enjoyed in private, and easily copied and digitized... unlike books... unlike movies. WORRY A LOT my music industry friend.
the artisits? the artists will make money the old fashioned way, by working for it. live concerts. or they won't make money. they will do it because they love to do it. teen age boys will still try to play guitar or scratch vinyl or fiddle around with 808s even if they know they will never be millionaires... it was always about getting the chicks anyways!
ok i have ranted. LOL
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it