Why Only Music? · Slashdot Mirror

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?"

1 of 255 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

How can this be lega.? by Hugh+George+Asm · 2003-10-07 08:58 · Score: 5, Insightful

It'd ludicrous to think of paying in advance a "tax" to the RIAA for blank media because we might use it to copy their music. Applying that logic to other areas, why not stipulate brief jailtime for anyone buying a knife, because they might use it to kill somebody?