Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Warner Music Pushing Music Tax For Universities

Posted by timothy on from the randian-villains dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Warner Music is pitching the idea of a 'music tax' for various top universities. The idea is that students would be free to file share, but the university needs to monitor and track everything, create a pool of money, hand it over to a recording industry entity that promises to distribute the proceeds fairly. In exchange, the university gets a 'covenant not to sue' from the music labels. It's not a full license, just a basic promise that they won't sue. It's also claimed that this is 'voluntary' but the Warner Music guy says that they need to include all universities and all ISPs to really make it work. It's basically a music tax, where the recording industry gets to sit back and collect money."

14 of 375 comments (clear)

  1. Indie by Rinisari · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'll allow it only if I can sign up as an indie artists and get some of the money, too.

    (read: this is ludicrous and will never happen)

    --
    Colin Dean Go a year without DRM
    1. Re:Indie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      slide 7 also claims that this approach is supported by the EFF and Public Knowledge. Is this true?

      Perhaps. The argument is that the average American spends something like $50/yr on copies of movies/music so if we funded that indirectly through taxes then downloads would be legal. (I'm not an American, I'm a New Zealander, but I believe that's what they say).

      Richard Stallman advocates for a similar thing, a music tax on ISP connections or blank media. Like a radio station that pays an annual fee and and just reports back what they played so that the artists who were broadcasted get their cut.

      The problem of course is that these music companies are the middlemen (they're not the artists themselves) and yet they want the majority of the money. In most cases these music companies expect artists to turn up with premastered CDs, so basically these companies are just advertisers and distribution channels. The internet can do some of that.

      Any agreement that goes via these middlemen will probably mean that artists will continue to get the same bum deal except now it's institutionalized. And you just know that the amount will increase every year. And what if the university wants to leave the agreement after 5 years... now what? they get sued because they don't have legal safe harbour? Fuck that. These universities are just conduits or common carriers for what the students do. They can't monitor every bit of traffic. If they sign up to this Warner scheme they're taking responsibility for piracy and that threat will never end. I don't see why the university needs to do this as a whole... why not optionally, per-student?

      More to the point, Madonna showed that the big money is in touring (she ditched her record label and went with a touring company, and the touring company now release her CD). Madonna doesn't like piracy (presumably) but for her the CD is a promotional tool for the concerts so piracy can actually work for her. Until these music companies turn into touring companies (which is where they should be going) they'll continue to try and force their outdated business model on the world.

      So while I'm generally in support for an artistic tax (of perhaps $50/yr on an internet connection) this is more like a ongoing threat. This Warner scheme seems to be quite different.

      I would hope that the EFF and Public Knowledge would support a scheme that gives artists a fair share, not one that propagates this music industry.

      [*] there are some musicians who don't tour, sure, but for the majority it's where they currently earn their money.

    2. Re:Indie by Psychotria · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And what about people like me who don't listen to music? Why the hell should I (indirectly through the university) pay their stupid "tax" (it's not a tax... I don't think anyone but governments can create a tax)?

    3. Re:Indie by malv · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's basically a mob "protection" fee. Rather than break your legs and burn your business down they do the economic equivalent, sue you with high priced lawyers.

    4. Re:Indie by lysergic.acid · · Score: 5, Informative

      the sad thing is, this sort of music tax is already in effect. BMI and ASCAP already collect royalties from any public venue that has a jukebox or plays CDs/radio over a PA system. basically, if you operate a bar or club you have to pay them a yearly licensing fee, regardless of what kind of music you play or don't play. they have their own auditors that they send out regularly to check up on venues and operate in a similar fashion to the IRS.

      even if you play international music that is in the public domain, or music by indie artists that aren't members of their organization (meaning don't pay them a membership fee and thus don't receive their royalties), you still have to pay them. unfortunately, this system removes any incentive a venue owner might have to play music by indie musicians who actually want their music played in public for as many people to hear as possible. i don't know what gives them the right to collect royalties on music they don't hold the rights to (or have the copyright holder's permission to collect royalties on), but most bar/club owners just pay the licensing fee to avoid legal repercussions.

  2. Geez...just like 47th street in Brooklyn by cybscryb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ya see...ya just pay us a little somethin' each week and nothin' bad'll happen to ya. It's extortion and I imagine lots of universities will sign up in hopes they won't get sued. And they won't, as long as they pay the yearly protection money. The worst part is that even after the music business finally goes out of business from their horrific management, these protection scams will remain viable assets for legal firms to purchase and manage.

  3. great timing! by theodicey · · Score: 5, Informative

    Now that the cost of higher education is falling and endowments are growing, universities will have lots of money to spend on music taxes!

    Alternatively, they could just give every student a free copy of PeerGuardian.

    1. Re:great timing! by Loadmaster · · Score: 5, Informative

      Check his links. The one linked from "growing" has the title "Harvard's Endowment Plunges 8 Billion." I think you've just restated his point.

  4. Dear Warner Music by mwbay · · Score: 5, Funny

    You and your fellow record labels are dying dinosaurs. Someday, people will dig up your bones and declare that you used to rule the world. And then it all came to a sudden, catastrophic end. All caused by a comet called the Internet.

    Goodbye, so long, and thanks for all the fish.

    --
    M.
  5. Re:They can kiss my ass by timmarhy · · Score: 5, Informative
    "who trade in thousands of dollars of goods deserve to be charged (criminally) as thieves"

    wrong. there aren't any goods being stolen or traded. bits are not goods, they are a copy of other bits, which means they are infringing on a copyright. that is a civil matter not criminal. so unless you really believe government money,your tax money, should be spent fighting someone elses private court battles you are serioulsy misunderstanding the situtation.

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
  6. Yeah, your cheque's in the mail by hyades1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The last time somebody did a full-scale audit on one of the record companies, they found that they'd underpaid royalties to over 90% of the artists under contract to them. The idea that this pack of thieves could be trusted within a hundred miles of anybody's money is ludicrous.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  7. Re:Yes, indies can be included by multimediavt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why on God's green Earth would you want to be complicit with this nonsense that's going to create more work for you with no additional pay? Why on Earth would any university condone the use of university personnel, facilities, etc. to do the work of someone else for free? This is extortion and racketeering, almost by definition folks. The RIAA can blow it out their ear. I'd rather they tried to sue and then get hit for malicious and wrongful prosecution than deal with this utterly ridiculous racket.

    I'm sorry, I'm someone who loves music, makes music, and last year recorded an independent album that the RIAA can suck on for all I care. We don't need them nor the crappy music they push at us on a daily basis, nor the ridiculous racket of enforcement they are trying to dupe us into believing is their right. It's not and if you believe it is you better educate yourself before you get on the wrong side of a very messy battle that's just beginning to start. I believe in the rights of artists as individuals, not in the rights of unions, guilds, corporations or other corrupt bureaucracies that have only their own self interests in mind.

    Don't be that guy/girl! Tell them to shove it and see them in court! The whole point of being "independent" is you are not at the mercy of the RIAA nor any label. You don't need them! WAKE UP!

  8. Creative Commons music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The two classic counterexamples to your curmudgeonly and frankly unbelievable assertion (seriously, who doesn't listen to music?)

    You must have been living under a rock for half a decade to think that there is only commercial music.

    I listen to music all day long ... and every single album is Creative Commons licensed, either from Jamendo (14,000 albums) or from Archive.org (300,000 recordings), so I will never exhaust those catalogues in my lifetime. What's more, the albums are vastly better and more diverse than the charts crap.

    And your comparison with public services is irrelevant. Music is not a public service, it's entertainment, so my subsidizing someone else's choice of commercial entertainment is completely without basis.

  9. Re:Yes, indies can be included by k-macjapan · · Score: 5, Funny

    /I work at UMass Amherst and I'm trying to get this implemented

    /I work for the RIAA and I'm full of shit...

    Is this what you meant to say?