Slashdot Mirror
Uni Students Slammed For Music Swapping
jomaree writes "The SMH Online reports that Sony, EMI and Universal will be in the Federal Court today, in an attempt to stop students using uni computers to swap music files. Michael Speck, the director of Music Industry Piracy Investigations, is quoted as follows: 'And we're not talking about one track here, one track there,' he said. 'We're talking piracy, significant examples of piracy.' By contrast, Sydney Uni says it knows of one student with a handful of files on a website, which does actually sound quite a bit like one track here, one track there."
Harsh, but preferable to some jerk putting DRM in my hardware.
Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
Seriously, people. If you're going to submit a story, please bother to spell out the words, even the long ones.
Australia's major record companies, Sony, EMI and Universal, are acting on suspicions that students, and possibly staff, are using the universities' computers to swap digital music files. The industry says the three universities have not divulged information, but that others have co-operated.
Ah, great. BSA-style enforcement that tosses the ol' "guilty until proven innocent" mythos out the window. The alarmist in me wonders how long it'll be before consumers are forced to prove their compliance with copyright, or submit to "music collection audits".
The opinions stated herein do not necessarily represent those of anybody at all. Deal with it.
Although putting the perpetrators out of business, destroying the "infrastructure of terrorism" as the Bush adiministration would say, is not without worth, if any advocate of content providers' rights has learned anything over the past few years, it is that, just as Islamic terrorism starts with the corrupt, anti-semitic arab education systems, piracy is also the result of a deeply ingrained culture, and the most effective way to stamp it out is to cut it off at the roots.
People are always arguing that piracy is somehow reasonable, because "if only there were music available at the price I WANTED to pay, I would buy it, and I wouldn't have to steal it". Try this argument at the convenience store: "I think that bottle of malt liquor is only worth 10 cents, and if you won't sell it to me for 10 cents, I'll steal it". It doesn't work that way. Over the past several hundred years we have replaced the rule of the mob with free markets, which ensure an equitable price for both buyer and seller through the natural interactions of supply and demand. The availability of free stolen products, of course, undermines this market and makes content production ultimately impossible. Some efforts of this type may be necessary initially to restore the rule of law: But remember, if you don't like this kind of intrusion, the best thing to do is stop pirating music right now, let this culture of piracy be destroyed, and allow a market-based system of online music distribution to be established. Once this has happened, heavy-handed enforcement will be unnecessary, and everyone will be able to get what they want for a fair price.
Says the president of the NSW Council for Civil Liberties:
"I don't think there is any benefit to the community in prosecuting individuals who do this as a one-off. I mean, we'd have half the students in Australia in jail."
I totally agree. As long as these students are not making money by trading this music, this seems like a real cheap shot. Before you know it, they are going to prosecute college kids for putting a quarter on a string and getting their laundry done for free.
On the other hand, SHAME ON YOU TODAY'S COLLEGE STUDENTS! If you're going to be engaged in these illicit activities, at least make a minor effort to hide your tracks. That's what college is all about ;-).
--sex
Very popular slashdot journal for adul
It's not just an issue of money. It's a question of control.
The RIAA's accountants know that their profits have increased in the past few years. The RIAA's lawyers know that their profits have increased in the past few years. But there are people out there that are not using officially sanctioned music in officially sanctioned ways at officially sanctioned times with officially sanctioned equipment. That means there are people out there who are not under the control of the company, the mythical "consumer." This cannot be tollerated.
Microsoft has been making money hand over fist for two decades. Someone installing WinME on three of their computers when they bought one copy is not doing them any harm. If anything, it means fewer copies of Win98 in use, which means less old stuff for them to support. That's good for them. But it means that there are people out there not using the product in the officially sanctioned way on the officially sanctioned number of systems. Microsoft (and Bill Gates in particular) simply cannot deal with the concept of someone not using the product on their terms.
All of that goes back to one of the fundamental flaws in the capitalist mindset: The consumer. The mythical consumer is not a person. The mythical consumer is a machine that stands on the other side of a cash register and accepts input (products) and returns output (pictures of George Washington). They can be reduced to a mathematical equation of supply and demand. They can be manipulated by marketing. They can be made to fit into nice little cells on a spreadsheet. In short, the consumer can be controlled.
It fits nicely into the whole financial theory. Passive object Consumer (C) is convinced by active object Marketing Department (M) to purchase passive object Product (P), created by passive objects Employees (E) under the employ of the active object Owner (O). Add it all up, and you get a nice tity profit (n) for the Owner.
(C + M) + P(E) = O(n)
(A very efficent method, eh?)
There's just one problem: Not all human beings are passive objects C. Humans are not a mathematical equation. The equation works when it is not possible for a person to function otherwise. You force them into playing the role of C or E, and the equation comes out nicely. Everying is predictable, profitable, and controllable.
But as soon as something comes along that threatens the stability and controllability of that equation, panic mode sets in. The printed book would be the death of learning. TV would be the death of radio. VCRs would be the death of movies. DAT would be the death of radio. Cable would be the death of movies. E-books will be the death of learning. The Internet will be the death of civilization. And so on. A little control slips away, and the end is nigh, defend the System to the last lawyer.
No one likes uncertainty (except possibly Shrodinger), and no one likes surprises (except at birthdays). It's not your money that the RIAA or the MPAA or Microsoft want. It's your passivity. They want to know that you can be controlled, not because they want power or greed or world domination but because then you are predictable, and they can wrap their minds around something predictable. Everyone likes things to be predictable. Everyone likes knowing where their next meal is coming from.
So what do we do? Don't be a consumer. Don't be passive. Don't be swayed by marketing. Don't be a part of a machine, however well intentioned and genuinely useful it is (and it is). Most importantly: Don't take your business elsewhere. That doesn't work, it only makes your life more difficult. Saying "we'll just use open source software" doesn't do anything about the continued growth of draconian attempts at regaining control with their collateral damage. Turn and take the issue head on, at its core level: The law.
Slashdot 's editors are dickheads
Should read:
By contrast, Sydney Uni says it knows of one student with a handful of files on a website...
Are you trying to imply that unauthorized file sharing almost never occurs at universities? Don't make me laugh! At least in the United States there are uncounted gigabytes devoted to this activity. Many universities have had problems with network bandwidth due to file sharing. It's a lot more than "one student with a handful of files"! How credible do you hope to be when you make claims like this?
Not to troll, but if you're losing money because of these pirates, wouldn't it be easier to go out and get a real job where you are guaranteed to make money, rather then having people steal your music everytime you release it, or wasting massive amounts of cash on lawyers to help prosecute them?
;)
Just think, if most artists today did this, then there'd be nothing left to pirate and we wouldn't be in this position.
what i don't understand is why so many people are using their considerable talents and intellect to create arguments FOR, and technology TO rip off some of the most harmless people in this country- musicians. Way to go, guys, hurt a group of people who do no harm to the environment or society, and have done nothing but enhance your lives.
I can't believe the demonization of the musicians in general, so everyone can not only feel not guilty about music piracy, but you can convince yourself that you're doing a valuable public service as well.
so let me ask you, MP3 traders, you who are so socially conscious, do you know who is really ripping you off for their own diabolical ends? Why aren't you going after who's really in control of money and powerin our country? What are you doing to thwart them?
it's been proven that when the music industry rips people off intelligent, comitted people can make them pay for it. That's how you do it, that's how you make a real change.
when you're done with the record industry what are you going to do steal from the 'real' man? oh that's right- nothing...that would take effort and commitment, and let's face it, making a REAL change in this world just isn't as fun as watching your downloads complete.
Warez by any other name...
College students by nature dont have much money. A poor college student wasnt going to buy the cd anyways, so their are no lost royalties.
This oft-repeated argument has got to be the biggest pile of steaming dung that I have heard. Poor, starving students sitting in their $5,000 dorm rooms, sharing music on their $2,000 computers, all the while ignoring their $10,000 education, are always complaining about the price of $15 CDs.
I, for one, am not afraid to admit it. I have pretty much stopped buying CDs, not because of file sharing but because I already have 300 or so. I reckon I bought half of those -- 150 frigging CDs -- while I was in university. A lot of those I bought used. A lot of them were Christmas gifts. Some of them were purchased with money I earned by working. Yes, WORKING!!!
And you know what? The money I paid for those 150 CDs still doesn't compare to the cost of one semester of tution.
If I hadn't been an honest person, the music industry would have lost out on over $1,500 during my college days. Please don't ignore the fact that a lot of people don't particularly like concerts. They tend to be expensive, the sound quality is usually poor, and the musicianship is often inferior to the album. I have spent much more on CDs than I ever would on concerts.
-a