Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UK Record Industry Sues 'Major Filesharers'

Posted by michael on from the look-out-granny dept.

Joel Rowbottom writes "The British Phonographic Institute has warned that it is about to engage in a round of legal action against file-sharing users, following in the footsteps of the RIAA. Apparently they are 'safeguarding the future of music' - don't you just feel so secure and cuddly knowing that?" Their statement is available.

4 of 477 comments (clear)

  1. It will be interesting... by Sanity · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ...to see how the British public reacts to this, there is something about huge multinational corporations suing kids that I can't see sitting well with the British way of thinking.

    I know a young single mother in the US who got sued and had to use her kid's college fund to pay the RIAA. Sorry, but piracy or no piracy, that simply isn't right, and I am surprised that there hasn't been more public revulsion in the US over this. Hopefully there will in the UK.

  2. safeguarding the future of music? by radpole · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Music, musicians, even paid entertainers existed long, long before the RIAA and other similar entities existed and musicians will be better off when the middle persons are gone! Hopefully.

  3. Re:Dammit by sneezinglion · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The porn industry is not worried about DRM, and here is why. 1. low costs of production. The cost of producting "Hoes on Hoes" or "Bratman" is painfully small, the small cost of a video camera, a tape and serveral people willing to have sex for money. 2. The porn industry has already been moving to the internet model, lower overhead. 3. Piracy HELPS media companies. You see if a friend gives me a video on my computer with Jenna Jameson in it and I like it then I will probably look for a tape starring her next time I go and look for a good porno tape. Just my 2 sense.....

  4. Re:Now might be the time for ANts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    -Downloading music from the net that you don't have permission to download is not ethical.
    -Uploading music to the net that you don't have permission to distribute is not ethical.

    Why?

    Noone really addresses why it isnt ethical. Illegal does not mean unethical, just like legal doesnt mean ethical.

    Frankly, since the other side so corrupted the "deal" that is copyright, I see no reason to continue my part of said deal.

    Right now we are on the hub of the largest creative library in the history of mankind. The only thing keeping us back are greedy corperations and corrupt government. This would result in a massive explosion of new creative work, as has every other serious media breakthrough. You can already see this trend with sites such as homestarrunner.com and newgrounds.com. Free creative works, some of which are of incredible quality. (alien hominid.. which, consequentially, is available for free online, but is coming out for home consoles soon. I expect sales to be brisk.)

    In the process, it would also completly disrupt the methodology and "business" of music. Music would no longer be as commoditized as it is. CDs would still be available for sale, I assure you. Fans would WANT the super-high-quality sound recordings.

    Also, there is the "ITS FUCKING REALITY" argument.

    People are going to distribute your music without your permission, regardless of its legality. So why fight it? Its obviously benificial in a worldwide social sense. Why lock up/fine/punish people for sharing culture?