Slashdot Mirror
EU Proposes Online Music System
jefu writes "According to a story in the Globe and Mail, the European Commission has proposed a unified online music licensing (and copyright) system. The article says that one of the points of doing this is to get copyright and license fees to the artists and to simplify the maze of copyright regulations that cover Europe."
EU proposes system for on-line music
Thursday, July 7, 2005 Updated at 2:44 PM EDT
Associated Press
BRUSSELS, Belgium -- The European Commission on Thursday proposed a single Europe-wide copyright and licensing system for on-line music, to boost the European Union's music business.
EU Internal Market Commissioner Charlie McCreevy said European on-line services had to be improved to make copyrights cheaper for artists to obtain.
"We have to improve the licensing of music copyright on the Internet," McCreevy said, adding such a system would ensure "Europe's creative community will get the lion's share in revenues achieved on-line."
Currently artists have to secure copyrights in each of the EU's 25 member nations, with each country requiring separate copyrights for the right to transmit songs over the Internet, a complex and expensive process the EU head office said.
Advertisements
As a result of these costs, on-line music sales in Europe have lagged behind those in the United States. Last year, the U.S. had an estimated $248-million (U.S.) in on-line music sales compared with Europe's $32.5-million.
Musicians make money from their music after registering copyrights with collective rights managers. Those managers then license songs to on-line services, radio stations, dance clubs and other outlets. All these registrations are complex and costs artists a lot of money.
The EU head office said a single system governing music rights would save money.
"The most effective model for achieving this is to enable right-holders to authorize a collecting society of their choice to manage their works across the entire EU," said the Commission in a statement, adding such a system would "considerably enhance" earnings for artists.
Léa Gris
If you want details there are plenty available!!!
h t/management/management_en.htm
http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/copyrig
As far as I understand it, what is being proposed is that artist will be able to contract a single authority to distribute the music throughout the EU, rather than having to contract the appropriate authority in each state separately.
This means that (or so it is expected) the existing copyright monopolists (typically there is one authority which has exclusive rights in a state) will be forced to compete with one another. I believe that to be a Good Thing...from 25 monopolists to 25 companies, each having a pretty small market share.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
Instead of the well-spun press-release why has noone bothered to read the f report the commision released today?
h t/docs/management/study-collectivemgmt_en.pdf
http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/copyrig
Am I the only person here that is angered by this news item - and the way it's served to us?
First of all, everywhere in the article, we get excerpts saying "the artists pay too much money", "it costs the artists too much". Which is of course, totally BS, because the labels pay for these, as the artists don't own the copyright!
In other words:
The EU is spending our (I'm a EU citizen) money (all these procedures cost money), so that the record labels spend less trying to restrict us, while at the same time we are going to get the same price for the BS records they serve us?
You'll be seeing me again in a record store buying a CD in...2078. Because no way in Hell am I going to download a drm'ed version from an online store!
When I worked in one it did part production on a Pink Floyd album and all of a Def Leppard album. The day figures were above the 5k I quoted. It had 8 engineers. I doubt you could get 3 engineers for 500 a day. It quoted by the half hour.
A major part of Trusted Computing is indeed about establishing an "open DRM system". In fact the entire system can be open source, or even GPL. Trusted Computing defeats the GPL. Trusted Computing makes the source code useless. If you attempt to modify the software then (1) the chip broadcasts that fact to anyone you connect to, and (2) the chip then prohibits you from reading the data files.
If you want more details or have any questions, just ask. I'm a programmer, I've read the Trusted Computing technical specifications (several hundred pages), and I have been researching and following the subject in depth.
The primary development work on an open DRM system is being done by OASIS. I've read some of their technical specification documents as well. In particular they are developing an open XML DRM Rights Language standard.
An interesting point is that OASIS never mentions Trusted Computing. It seems to me that they are deliberately careful about the language they use. They just so happen to use the exact same terms as the Trusted Computing documentation, and their system and features and requirements just so happens to exactly match up with the those of Trusted Computing, and they explicitly state that their standard can only function on top of a hardware security support system. So they are creating an open DRM system that will work with "any" open hardware security support system that happens to be exactly identical to the Trusted Computing Group's system.
Oh, and just a reminder... Microsoft's own website documents that the Security Support Component (SSC) of Longhorn (the operating system formerly known as Palladium)... that the chip *IS* the Trusted Computing Group's TPM security chip.
Oh, and anpther thing... Intel's LaGrande CPU security system... and AMD's Presidio CPU security system... and Transmeta's TSX CPU security system... well those all just so happen to be the Trusted Computing Group's TPM chip embedded into the CPU itself. And Intel's and AMD's Memory Virtualization systems... they just so happen to be Palladium's memory compartmentalization system to secure DRM software and DRM data against other software and to even protect them against the operating system itself.
You're right that open DRM systems are not possible with current computer systems. That is what they want CPUs themselves to be DRM enforcers, and why they want to ship DRM enforcement standard inside every single new computer sold, and why these chips will be boobytrapped and self destructing if you attempt to open them or read them or alter them.
Oh, and HP and IBM and Dell and pretty much every other major computer seller... they are already selling systems with this security chip embedded. In fact Samsung has announced that they will no longer manufacture ANY computers that are not Trusted equipped. The entire industry is gearing up for full-out Trusted Computing hardware deployment for the Microsoft Longhorn release in summer 2006. No one will realistic buy or sell a PC that is not Certified Windows Compatible. Any PC not so equipped will not fully function, and when you complain to Microsoft they will answer that it's because you have INCOMPATIBLE hardware and that it is your hardware manufacturer's fault.
Oh, and even more fun... the Tursted Computing group has announced a Trusted Network Connect project that would deny you an internet connection unless you are running a Trusted Compliant machine. In fact Microsoft has already announced that they are implementing that system under their own name... Network Access Protection.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.