Slashdot Mirror
TechDirt's Masnick Responds To Warner's Jim Griffin On Choruss
newtley writes "TechDirt's Mike Masnick writes that the Warner Music Choruss licensing scheme amounts to a Bait-And-Switch operation. Not so, says Jim Griffin, the man charged to put it together. Masnick's story is 'factually incorrect in every respect,' he states. But Griffin 'refused to name a single factual mistake,' Masnick says, noting, 'He fails to address the key problems that we outlined: 1. Why is this program even needed when plenty of musicians are coming up with business models that work today and don't need a new mandatory license (er... 'covenant not to sue') plan? 2. Why do we need a new bureaucracy and won't that divert funds? 3. Will the industry continue to try to shut down file sharing sites? 4. Will the industry continue to push a 3 strikes plan?'"
For your analogy to be valid, music filesharing would have to be a rare incident rather than endemic. It's easily proven to be endemic, hence your analogy is wrong. How is it not evil to use obviously misleading analogies?
I would say it's more like it's glaringly evidenced beyond any doubt what so ever that enormous amounts of cola is smuggled on the road, yet the people travelling bitch and moan enough to shatter rock when Cola sends letters threatening lawsuits to those who drive transparent semitrailers with what _looks_ very much like coke cans inside.
An analogy for the covenant that Cola has proposed is that they won't send letters or care about cola smuggling on that specific road if everyone who drives on it pays a small sum. The analogy shows that you would expect more people than before to smuggle cola, because everyone who used to do so will, and the large or small number who were deterred will also.