Why Only Music?

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by michael on Tuesday October 7, 2003 @08:36AM from the don't-try-to-use-logic-against-me dept.

The Importance of writes "Last week, Slashdot readers provided a number of answers to the question "What is Music?" in the context of compulsory licensing. Now LawMeme asks another question about compulsory licenses: Why Only Music? Many compulsory licensing schemes have been proposed to cover music alone, but most of the arguments in favor of a compulsory license for music apply equally as well to other media types. Millions share movies, P2P can't be stopped, the MPAA hasn't provided legitimate alternatives for what consumers want, etc. If music should have a compulsory license, why shouldn't movies, software, ebooks and other media also be covered by compulsory licenses?"

8 of 255 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

The moment.... by Kedisar · 2003-10-07 08:37 · Score: 5, Funny

I open up a brand new paperback and see a EULA, is the moment I destroy the human race. =/
1. Re:The moment.... by BabyDave · 2003-10-07 08:47 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Sadly, I have to inform you that as you've just made a wild and stupid-sounding threat that you'll never follow through on, you have violated the 'Intellectual Property' of SCO. The invoice is in the mail.
Re:Because by Firehawke · 2003-10-07 08:41 · Score: 3, Funny

Well, I don't know about you, but I'd sure feel sheepish...
why buy only music by doggkruse · 2003-10-07 08:44 · Score: 2, Funny

The title of this article made me think that is was about the fact that only music can be purchased online. Why not movies (too much bandwidth) textbooks, magazines, photos etc. What about physical objects that you could print out? Imagine buying a new computer online and having it ten minutes later after you print it star trek style. Then you get to the real question: how do you keep the user from printing the computer again?
Governing bodies? by r_glen · 2003-10-07 08:45 · Score: 2, Funny

There's no governing body (a la RIAA, MPAA) looking over software, so one company will have to step up for everyone.

The only one with enough money to do this would rather watch everyone suffer, since they can take the hit. Besides that, if you pirate Windows, having to use it is punishment enough.
Re:Hey by Anonymous Coward · 2003-10-07 08:55 · Score: 1, Funny

Of course that won't happen, because the reality is that there won't be any "it" to have for free without copyrights.

Yes, apparently these people don't realise that there was no music until copyrights were introduced or that without copyrights all the recordings that have been created will just cease to exist. Makes you wonder what they ARE teaching in schools.
Re:Because by neglige · 2003-10-07 08:59 · Score: 2, Funny

Yeah, it was baaaaa-d!

LMAO

--
My cats ate my karma. They also wrote this comment.
Why RIAA wants compulsory licenses for music... by Dave21212 · 2003-10-07 09:00 · Score: 2, Funny

So that hearing-impaired people can hate them too...

(Sorry, had to be done ;)

--
"Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin