Rosen Floats ISP Fee Idea -- Charge Everybody!

iconian writes "Hillary Rosen of RIAA wants to impose a type of fee to ISPs which in turn will be passed to all their customers indiscriminately to recoup supposed damages done by file-sharing. The RIAA considers downloading music illegally over the Internet to be the moral equivalence of stealing. I wonder then what is the moral equivalence of the RIAA taking realized cash from people who do not download music?"

Comments

If they collect the money

[Wolfier]

Then it certainly means swapping music will become legal, right?

If a woman blabs and nobody's there to hear it...

[LostCluster]

This isn't a new law.
This isn't a bill that's on the president's desk.
This isn't a bill that has passed the House.
This isn't a bill that has passed the Senate.
This isn't waiting in committee.
This hasn't even been proposed in either branch.
Hillary cannot propose it in either branch, she hasn't been elected.
Hillary isn't even running for office.

This is so far away from being a law, it isn't even funny. Nobody with the power to make this a law has come forward supporting it. If Fritz Hollings picks it up, then we can be a bit concerned, yet he still needs to convnice a lot of other people this is a good idea before it goes anywhere.

Let's not get too worked up on this one. Keep it on the radar, sure... but there are a lot of other bad ideas that have gotten further in the assembly line than this one, and those are the ones that need our attention.

Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they.

[NewtonsLaw]

Once a system is in place to pay money to artists directly, I'll put some money in towards the artists I like. Until then, I ain't paying squat

Time to put your money where your mouth is?

Re:I can't believe the ideas the RIAA thinks they.

[uncleFester]

Copying music is legally wrong. It is probably morally and ethically wrong. It is, however, not the same sort of wrong as theft. The problem is complex enough already: nobody needs your loaded analogies muddying the waters.

s/music/my webpage/g

s/music/a book/g

.. so, what part of All rights reserved. Unathorized duplication is a violation of applicable laws is unclear?

Copying music is not wrong: it is your intent of what you do with that copy that is the issue. In the US, it has been deemed a person can make an archival copy of items (music, software).. but if you then distribute that copy you have suddenly crossed the line into illegality.

(and for what its worth, I think the RIAA proposal is bullshit.. but if some people keep trying to justify p2p transferring of copyrighted works then you only give them more ammo.)