Slashdot Mirror
Do We Want ISPs Penalizing Music Fans?
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Noted singer songwriter Billy Bragg has written an excellent column in The Guardian, coming out against the pro-RIAA '3-strikes' legislation the big 4 record labels are trying to push through. In the article, entitled 'Do we want ISPs penalizing our fans?', Bragg writes: 'Having failed miserably in previous attempts to stamp out illicit filesharing, the record industry has now joined forces with other entertainment lobby groups to demand that the government takes action to protect their business model.' He goes on: 'Fearful of the prospect of dragging their customers though the courts, with all the attendant costs and bad publicity, members of the record industry have come up with a simple, cost-free solution to their problem: get the ISPs to do their dirty work for them. They are asking the government to force the ISPs to cut off the broadband connection of customers who persistently download unauthorized material, without any recourse to appeal in the courts.'"
Don't cut the broadband for any crime until it's proven in court.
It's not the role of the ISP to act as a police for a third party.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Do we want "justice" meted out without even the pretense of due process, with accusation equaling guilt, and control in the hands of an unaccountable mess of corporate pressure groups?
The chap from TFA seems nice enough, and it is good that he is thinking about the question; but, thing is, it isn't his call. Allowing penalties to be assessed for private gain, without any sort of judicial process, is a grotesque parody of justice. It should not be countenanced anywhere. I'm glad that there are some on the music side that are uncomfortable with the idea; but that isn't the point. The point is that "3 strikes" and its ilk are wholly unacceptable. If they agree, great, if they don't, tough.
You emitted the exact same response last time. Anyway: This isn't a "pro piracy" issue. This is a due process of law issue.
If the RIAA can just call up my ISP and demand that they disconnect me, that makes a mockery of due process. Innocent until proven guilty, remember? Or are "pirates" (and the occasional misidentified laser printer) just too evil for due process?
If they shut down Another Great Music Tracker, I'm going to law school.
If they shut down Another Great Music Tracker, it will be replaced by Two Lesser Music Trackers. Stamping out the "problem" is the worst thing they could do. As long as there is a demand, the community will supply it.
Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
Disable YRO on your browsing options.
Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
But there should be penalties for acquiring copyrighted goods without any intent to buy them. Many slashdotters complain about entitlement mentalities, and then defend copyright infringement on the part of people who either can pay for what they are getting or who have no need for it (like people who pirate a lot of software).
So what if the quality is crap? Don't buy it or find a way to sample it legally. If it doesn't work once you buy it, boycott the company that makes it, and let them know that you are doing that. When they get a lot of angry letters, and see their sales actually dropping, they'll either address the quality concerns or go out of business.
Just because copyright infringement doesn't deprive people of their original property, doesn't mean it is rendered ethically neutral or even good. There is no moral right to acquire property without the permission of the people who created it or who now own it.
Here we have two adjacent /. stories: one about ISPs being responsible for users' behavior, the other about ISPs not being responsible for users' behavior.
What is needed is a clarification, likely from SCOTUS, on whether ISPs are "common carriers" or not. If they are, then ISPs have to monitor postings and downloads (punishing people according to ... uh ... well they're not police or courts so it's really unclear how they're supposed to detect & respond re: users' behavior). If they are not, then ISPs can finally tell everyone else to take it up with the actual legally-identifiable offender.
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
... and not only that, but there is no practical way for ISPs to know what traffic is passing under your name, without intrusively inspecting the packets. That is without precedent; it is akin to asking telephone companies to listen in on your calls to determine if you are a using the telephone "improperly".
The so called 'piracy' (aka copyright infringement) is about fair use, freedom, and taking a stance (though some choose an improper form) against the draconion rules and organizations that are trying to monetize and take away our legacy. Music has always been about enjoyment and sharing. Until recently, the most common way to listen to music was to get together with friends and sing. No performance fees, no songwriter royalties, just people belting out a ditty.
Under the current situation, and the future one if RIAA has it's way, the National Anthem of the USA, that's the "Star Spangled Banner" for those who don't know, wouldn't exist under their rules. It was a (somewhat) popular piece of poetry that people started singing to a very popular piece of music. That made a fantastic hit that inspired people so much, they made it the national anthem. These days, the insane copyright lengths combined with the dubious 'enforcement groups' would have prevented any such thing from ever happening.
Have you wondered why nobody ever sings "Happy Birthday" on shows and movies anymore? Someone decided to enforce their copyright... Another piece of classic americana and culture down the tubes because of this subject. What's the next thing we'll loose? Yes, some of these people are breaking laws.
Yes, we talk about it a lot.
But you need to understand, if somebody doesn't raise a fuss and find a way to stop this, what will our children have left?
Unfortunately, the answer is not much...
You think the RIAA will apply this policy of theirs evenly and fairly? Anyone with power will be an exception to the rule.
So are we going to start prosecuting auto makers for providing get-away vehicles to criminals?
"I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
That's a very fair point and it's taken.
Godfrey v Demon, however, did have a chilling effect on Usenet provision in the UK because no ISP wants to have to police their Usenet service in such a fashion. Hosting a full Usenet service is (or at least was in those days) expensive just in hardware terms, adding people to police take-down notices is a burden too far.
Nick
Why buy no CDs at all, instead of buying from independent labels like these that don't sue people for downloading their music? And if none of those record labels have music that suits your tastes (I'll admit I lean towards hipster garbage in music taste), check RIAA Radar before you buy.
For most people on slashdot, the RIAA is just a justification to make themselves feel better about downloading instead of buying.
By what name do you wish to be mourned?
Unfortunately, the RIAA interprets your "not buying their music" as being the same as "another Internet pirate illegally downloading/sharing their music." After all, they reason, their music is vital to everyone's life and anyone who doesn't buy the minimum that the RIAA deems necessary must be pirating the rest. (This comment would be going for the Funny tag if it weren't true.)
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Your "appeal" is to sue your ISP.
This is effectively a law that defines a punishment, enforced by a private business. First off, private businesses are not police. Second, this law sentences you (disconnection from ISP service, DICTATED BY LAW) without fair hearing; that is unconstitutional.
Come on, aren't any of you lawyers?
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Unfortunately, the RIAA interprets your "not buying their music" as being the same as "another Internet pirate illegally downloading/sharing their music." After all, they reason, their music is vital to everyone's life and anyone who doesn't buy the minimum that the RIAA deems necessary must be pirating the rest. (This comment would be going for the Funny tag if it weren't true.)
Yes it is true. But I think it's really just a handful of executives. The same ones who never figured out how to make money on the internet. So to make themselves look better, they are trying to scapegoat copyright infringement. The record companies' real enemy is obsolescence.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
We need to automate the generation and production of music, and crush the music industry like a bug.
Listen to this sample. That was created with Yamaha Vocaloid. The product sells for $179.95. It's better than many singers. We're getting close.
This technology is like MIDI players, a generation later. You need the composition and instrument models. Then the player puts it all together. You can mix and match; choose a different singer or instruments. (Question: is there enough compute power in an iPhone to run this?)
If this catches on, the music industry will be crushed.
There's still a need for composers. Easy Music Composer isn't quite good enough. Yet.
Should never have any control over a citizens freedom.
Take what ye can. Give nothing back!