Slashdot Mirror
Berkman Center Releases Digital Media Policy Paper
Copyfighter writes "Last year marked another messy chapter in the music and movie industries' transitions online. Legitimate offerings multiplied while the RIAA and MPAA continued their lawsuits against P2P systems and users, even as P2P traffic reached new heights. How -- if at all -- should policymakers attempt to resolve emerging digital media conflicts? The Berkman Center's Digital Media Project today released a new research study examining options for government action and how it could affect four different business models for the distribution of digital media. The authors caution that government intervention is currently premature because it is unlikely to strike an appropriate balance between the many competing interests at stake."
Too much... stop it... this is starting to get excessive... Stop doing studies and wasting energy on this...
The simple solution is to let the people decide what they want... no amount of government intervention will stop the inevitable... It might slow it down for a few years, or even decades... but eventually the people will revolt in such huge numbers the government can't do anything about it...
Isn't our business model 'The strong survive, the weak parish?'
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
Approximately 500,000 to 1,000,000 CD copies must be sold before these costs are covered
No wonder 'artists' like britney spears whore theirselves out so much.
Young technophiles (slashdotters) want free exchange. Content execs want everything locked down. I think the general public justs wants content at a reasonable price that they can use in multiple areas of their lives. It's gonna be tough to pass any balanced legislation until we have balanced discussions.
In the case of music, the DCMA hasn't "screwed things up." The intent of copyright law has always been to prevent activity such as the file sharing that many on this forum seem to see as some kind of inalienable right.
The reason why this discussion is irrelevant is that congress will do what their constituents want.
Realities don't matter. They never have.
The only remaining question is who congress' constituents are: Is it those pesky damn voters, or is it the ones who made the biggest campaign contributions?
If you were in congress and wanted to remain there (like they all do), to whom would you pledge your allegiance?
There is not nearly enough love in the world, but there is far too much trust.
There is a sad level of redundancy that wasn't needed in the DMCA.
Copyright law as it was covered the copying of music just fine. What it did was give content providers a rather unfair whip to threaten people without due process. THAT'S why the DMCA is evil. It's not the feeling that I have an inalienable right to "arr matey's shiver me timbers" when it comes to music (or any media for that matter), it's that I have a right to due process, and I have pretty clear rights when it comes to copyright law.
The DMCA is bad on both counts.
Karma: Chameleon (mostly due to the fact that you come and go).