Copyright Alliance Says Fair Use Not a Consumer Right

KingSkippus writes "In response to a complaint to the FCC filed by the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) to change copyright warnings before movies and sporting events, Executive Director Patrick Ross of the Copyright Alliance tells us in an editorial that 'fair use is not a consumer right.' The Copyright Alliance is backed by such heavy-hitters as the MPAA, RIAA, Disney, Business Software Alliance, and perhaps most interestingly, Microsoft, who is also backing the CCIA's complaint."

Comments

Consumer vs citizen rights... huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm kind of worried about the sort of language being used nowadays. In the media, and by corporations, people are increasingly being referred to as 'consumers', whereas in the past they were more referred to as 'citizens'. I think this kind of language subtly displays a sort of attempted disassociation of people with their rights through getting them to think of themselves not as citizens, with all their inalienable and somewhat inconvenient (for corporations) rights, but mere consumers of products with somewhat more alienable "consumer rights", belittling them in the process. Merely using the term "consumer rights" implies that they are somehow separate from "citizens rights". This has shades of the somewhat fascist book "Starship Troopers" IMHO, with its distinction of citizens and civilians.

music is evolving

[circletimessquare]

movies aren't. the movie house business is going gang busters, but the dvd after market will fizzle (which evolved from the vhs aftermarket, which these same morons fought with the same rationalizations you hear now, 30 years ago, lost, and came to embrace the vcr as a cash cow. nice foresight, x2)

music will become something people only pay for to go to live concerts. all other music will be freely traded, and musicians will make money from advertising and abovementioned concerts. no, it's not jayz money. as if that was ever a prerequisite for the desire to make music

the only people who are losing are the economic middle men. all we hear are the cries of their death throes. zzz

let them lock up their copyrighted works with all of the advanced tools of copyright protection they want. #1: it's easily defeated anyway. #2: much like newspapers have learned, it's all about accessibility. so let the morons make their product inaccessible, and reap the fruits of that genius strategy in a new world with new rules

all we hear are from idiots in media companies who don't understand what the internet means to their business, or desperate men who do understand what the internet means to their business: it's killing it

oh well, who cares. sucks to be on the losing side of history

Re:Depends on what you mean by "right".

[OECD]

I do not really think that a "no copyright" world is the right way to go...

I'm not quite there (yet,) but the thing that I can't figure is:

The Founding Fathers (if I ever do a superhero spoof, that's the one) figured that fourteen years was enough.

In the interim, We figured out how to do printing much faster (that's my industry, so trust me on this one)

On top of that we figured out how to get copies out to potentially unlimited individuals (c.f., SPAM.)

So, why is copyright now longer (and more inclusive) than it was when the country was founded?