Slashdot Mirror
Music Industry 'trying to hijack EU data laws'
sebFlyte writes "The recording industry is trying to hijack the EU's data retention directive, which is being brought in to fight terrorism, to try and get their copyright battles fought for them. As previously reported, the EU may be making copyright infringement a criminal offence, and the Creative Media Business Alliance is lobbying hard to stop the European laws on data retention being restricted to cover terrorism and organized crime (as is currently proposed). In essence, they want to be able to get police to search through newly extended records from ISPs to look for evidence of illegal filesharing. In the words of the executive director of the Open Rights group, 'the music industry's attempt to hijack this legislation is a travesty and a gross affront to civil liberties and human rights.'"
You call "reasonable" breaking customer's computers by stealthily installing crippling software?
You call "reasonable" (sic) levying a special tax on blank media, "just in case" the media is used to "pirate" music?
You call "reasonable" blackmailing people who MIGHT have shared music into paying multi-thousand dollars "settlements" without any proof of wrongdoing?
You call "reasonable" (I'm not making this up!) trying to force all society to use specially-designed hard-disks that will check whether the data they are writing is copyrighted?
You call "reasonable" treating your customers like criminals?
You call all the abovementionned **ARROGANCE** "reasonable"?
I'd hate to see what you call "unreasonable"...
don't buy their content!
But you will, won't you. You attention-deficit, attention-seeking, aspirational, apple-loving, consumer media whores.
Also, in case the message wasn't clear, don't steal/borrow/"share" it either.
You wouldn't eat battery farmed eggs, even if they were free, would you! (would you? urgh).
Go back to riding your litle silver scooters, ipods and turtle-necks. You people make me sick.
In the spirit of the story topic, I'm gonna hijack this first post to make my point. Governments are concerned with politics and their constituents. The MP/RIAA are natural enemies to a lot of tax paying voters, plus they've made some major screw ups. For example, the recent Sony screw-up of course, and those false-positives in sending out mass subpoenas. I see governments, particularly on the local level (where there's less lobbying), siding with the people (IE the pirates).
the industry bullies tech companies (who oddly enough make as much money in a day as the RIAA makes in a week) and keeps down and/or lockes any new tech innovations and somehoe gets to dictate exactly how they work.
The RIAA could litteraly stop all analog radio, CD sales, net streaming, napser, itunes and so on, and offer a propriatery DRM as the ONLY way to get music, and the consumers would just take it accept for the 2% that go rouge, one of which will get a 60 minutes interview from prison just to scare the rest.
We have NO power as long as consumers continue to suck the Industry conglomerates' collective tits, and as long as they are the only place to get the milk...
You say that as if Hollywood is the first group ever to suffer persecution, and then turn around and do it to someone else.
Copying music is not always stealing. For instance, here in Canada it's perfectly legal. In many countries, it's perfectly legal to copy music for your own use, for the car, to a media server etc.
Copying music just to avoid paying for it, is illegal in many countries, however.
Whatever the rights and wrong of copying music, some of the "solutions" are worse crimes than the problem - ie, crippling people's computers and making them open to hackers, or taking away people's privacy.
Of course, piracy, is not schoolyard copying, but commercial copying of music, and of course, that is illegal everywhere, and could be stamped out as soon as enough effort is put into it. Commercial piracy needs pressing plants, needs sales outlets and you can track these places down and shut them down.
-- oldthinkers unbellyfeel ingsoc
I think this this really insightful comment (from the thread about DMCA Abuse) sums it up.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Sounds odd but that's where I think they're headed.
The music industry needs new artists to keep making money but how to promote this new talent? Spitzer and other AGs are watching over their payola schemes making it harder to get radio airtime. Concerts are good, but getting to be very expensive undertakings. So how does the public get to hear the next great bands?
One way, even though they don't want to admit it, is by P2P networks. It is easy to listen to a song by some new artist you heard about. Very few people have enough money to just go out and buy CDs all the time and the risk of a lot of duds is too great, but downloading has much less adjusted risk, even with the much-publicized lawsuits.
There is a balance that must be achieved: all P2P downloading and no buying means no income for the publishers and artists, yet no downloading cuts off a very vital marketing channel.
With draconian copyright laws it is becomming a more serious offense to make a digital copy than to steal the CD from a store. Worse yet, governments seem all too willing to abdicate enforcement and police powers to these corporations. When the government and RIAA/MPAA have control of our computers and own all our data, it will be too late, the battle will have been lost, and we will enter a new historical period of information slavery.
All attempts to equate P2P with international terrorism must be soundly rebuffed. A threat to failing business models is *NOT* the same as the threat of killing innocent people. How bad to these proposals have to get before the RIAA/MPAA are kicked the hell out of these legal processes?
I beg to differ RIAA Radar will help music listeners Find out if a band or artist Should be boycotted or bought and supported ;)
so instead of just boycotting the artists of the lobbying group formed by profiteering labels.
you can do Much better if you Acutally Support smaller artists who don't want to have anything to do with those evil profiteering exploitative labels.
That way musicians can continue to sing, people can continue to enjoy music, and only the fools who believed they were entitled to the ears and pocketbooks of everyone in the world will suffer..
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
This may sound a little off topic but whenever some other country is trying to manipulate your laws or your reputation and have sent liaison/lawyers/hijackers to make you see things their way, don't back down! Get up and fight!
The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
50% of the population can't support the other 50% in prison.
This is nothing more than an opinion. Period. Factually, piracy is not stealing, but either infringement of copyrights or the sea related kind, which I am too arsed to pull up right now. Piracy = copyright infringement = COPYING and DUPLICATING against the wishes of the copyright holder copyrighted works. Unless you can prove otherwise through coherent reasoning and logical arguments, you are only a RIAA parroting troll.
Hmmm... talk about black and white reasoning... so by your logic, if I pirate something and then buy it later (Don't give me the "buy why would you buy it if you have it for free already..." Fuck you I bought it anyways, sorry it bursts your narrow RIAA logic... ^_^), I am not a consumer by definition just because of the pirating? I consumed the product, so how am I not a sconsumer given the example of what I do?P>
You are only saying this and haven't backed it up with reasoning... you are starting to sound like a troll, and I think you should go to back up your opinion with reasoning right about now.
I don't even know how to properly rebute this one it is quite lame (granted my attempted rebute would be even lamer). Take VS copy arguments anybody? Especially since you apply physically limitative statements to "objects: (1's and 0's, DATA) that can be copied infinitely without property loss to that person.
Not only do you make parritive statements that are unbacked up by fact or otherwise wrong, but you also make sweeping statements that don't accurately portray a good proportion of those posting in this topic. I do not think that most people (except for the DIE-HARDS) think that all copyrights should be abolished.. As for your reasoning about it happening to those who don't live in your fantacy world... How does copying something illegally strip somebody of their rights when they have the powers ("rights") to stop it or try to control it? If you ask me, it is those who are sitting on their asses whining that are loosing their rights because they are not using them.
If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
As usual (like all the other steps RIAA/MPAA has taken in the US and abroad) most people won't give a crap, it'll be under-publicized, and politicians will keep worrying about their job as opposed to the will of the people.
Want to find other gamers to play board and role playing game
"Just remember how reasonable you think they are when they come knocking on your door for downloading a study of Mars called "The Red Planet" or a treatise on metamorphisis called "The Butterfly Effect"."
"I guess I didn't make myself clear: I don't download any movies or music from P2P or any other networks. When I want to watch something (on my computer, since I have no TV,) I'll buy it on DVD."
Roman, I think he's referring to infringement notices filed against people who had downloaded or possessed files with names identical or similar to popular movie and music titles for which the RIAA/MPAA are on the lookout for. This has already happened, though I don't have a link handy to the slashdot article where this was discussed.
If you wish to continue being able to watch DVDs on your computer, let's hope others that have an interest in preventing you watching DVDs on your computer aren't able to influence lawmakers who share your blind self-interest.
If you think the music industries' actions are reasonable, let me make you a reasonable proposal: I'm a musician, and I have a CD of my work. I'll give it to you for free. Unlike Sony, I will tell you I'll be installing a rootkit on your computer.
Do you trust I'll not take advantage of anything I might learn from all your data and communications, or not turn your computer to perform unethical or illegal tasks? Are you ok with having an open door for any script-kiddie or other more evil-intentioned person to do the same?
If not, why should we be ok with the same deal? Minus of course, the notice I gave, and oh yeah..Sony would have you pay for the priveledge of being "0wn3d".
Failure to grasp larger, longer-term implications of short-sighted self-interest is self-defeating to an individual or buisiness, and harmful to society as a whole.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
If you have the means to produce and self-promote, then what is holding you back? As far as I know, the RIAA and other music cartels around the world have not yet made it illegal for independent artists to do it themselves. Go for it, and make it happen. I, for one would love to see more indie artists take the initiative, make use of the tools at their disposal, and make a name for themselves, thereby giving the RIAA the finger.
This space unintentionally left blank.
What's more, the european commission and the council of the EU are considering to make patent infringement a criminal offense, too.
Since the european patents office granted 173000 applications last year, it means we basically get 474 new laws each day. This does not take into account the national patent offices.
"But ... a group of media companies .. has lobbied the EU to allow this data to be used to investigate all crimes, not just serious offences such as terrorism."
... Oh look, we can use it to enforce parking tickets too, let's make it. standard operating procedure".
Yes, that seems about right: "We need this extreme measure to fight terrorism. OK, you agreed to that out of fear.
Can you say "erosion of liberty"?
My Karma: ran over your Dogma
StrawberryFrog
As far as I know, the RIAA and other music cartels around the world have not yet made it illegal for independent artists to do it themselves.
It might as well be illegal. So many indie artists would use filesharing ("legally") to spread their stuff to the world. The RIAA wants to bring all file-sharing down because it is "illegal" or "unethical". It's a load of cold, hard crap. Consider this: indie artists get very little (if any at all) air-time on radio. Even the artists who do get air-time are made to pay for it (the studios subtract the fees against the artists' profits). Now let's say someone wants to create an indie radio station. Too bad, gotta go through the FCC, pay fees, and yada yada. And what about playing indie music on regular radio stations? Not gonna happen. The radio stations are put under the fingers of each studio. The (RI/MP)AA have this sick, twisted, and tyrannical view of art, science, and media. They infest the masses with this idea that an abstract idea or representation can be copyrighted. They have this idea that "to benefit artists" the exclusive right to copy, play, or use the song/art/media is given to the "artists" ::cough cough::ahem, studios::cough cough::. Anyone with good experience with the Constitution should cringe at this. For those blessed souls who do not have a baboon as president, the US Constitution provides that copyright exists a) for limited periods of time and b) exists only to be used for the progress of art or science. NOT for the benefit of just the "artists"...er...studios. Since the Constitution supercedes all US Law, much (if not all) of the US Copyright Law is unconstitutional and therefore illegal.
These facts haven't stopped the (MP/RI)AA from spreading their propaganda and their lies. The Media is allied with these cartels, and the sad state of American media has a) led to indoctrination and b) led to crackpot journalism. "News" with little analysis, incorrect analysis, or the complete lack thereof is rampant in American mass media. The news networks present these stories about "illegal file-swapping" or "filesharing bandits" which are completely one-sided. When I was younger and had no idea about the truth, I believed what they said about Napster. It sounded like some sort of evil plot. Until I learned the truth. I learned that the truth truly does set one free. I learned that the Media (as any group with power) only wants more power. They think the world would be a better place if everyone just did everything the way the media wanted. Most likely, this would only benefit the media. That is the state of things now. The Media is on this self-appointed crusade. Yet now they have experienced the bulk of their power. The news relics of the cold-war are no longer adequate. People are actually becoming disgusted with the media. Movie viewership is far below projected estimates this year. The MP/RIAA claims that this is the underhanded dealing of filesharing "pirates". Since these cartels have so much influence, they dance about unchecked, weilding lawsuits, subpoenas, and red tape. I hold the opinion that the MP/RIAA hold much less wealth than we are led to believe, and that is why they have begun these attacks. They are desperate, and they know that copyright provides enough leverage for the MP/RIAA to become some state-sponsored thing. They'll get their money (somehow they'd get it; energy research is willingly cut out of the budget, but the MP/RIAA must get their new subsidy) and they'll be happy...at individuals' expense. Their rights end where ours begin.
To those filthy corporate bastards: Sorry, we left our eyepatches at home. Cartels are much more piratical than we. We the consumers are being alienated. Why not make something that we like? Capitalism is founded on the principle that competition forces innovation. Capitalism does not induce bitching about consumers. F^** you!
ASSOCIATION = Appropriate recording industry association, such as RIAA, BPI, IFPI, SDMI, ARIA, ETC.
Indies need to label their albums specifically stating that they are not $ASSOCIATION members.
This sort of labeling was done in the US in the early 20th century to indicate non-membership in the various Trusts and cartels of the era.