Musicians Oppose Anti-Piracy Measures In the UK

BluePeppers writes "The Guardian has a story, primarily about a deal that allows YouTube to broadcast music videos again, but also covering a coalition of artist unions that are opposing new legislation in the UK that would punish file sharers more severely. From the article: 'A coalition of bodies representing a range of stars including Sir Paul McCartney, Sir Elton John, and Damon Albarn attacks the proposals as expensive, illogical and "extraordinarily negative." The Featured Artists Coalition, the British Academy of Songwriters, Composers and Authors, and the Music Producers Guild have joined forces to oppose the proposals to reintroduce the threat of disconnection for persistent file sharers, which was ruled out in the government's Digital Britain report in June.""

Comments

I love British humor

[BadAnalogyGuy]

Unlike American humor which smashes you over your watermelon-like head like Gallagher's Sledge-o-matic, British humor relies on subtlety and odd juxtaposition to tell a joke.

FTS: Sir Paul McCartney, Sir Elton John, and Damon Albarn

A Fab, a Fag, and now for something completely different.

HILARIOUS! <insert laughtrack>

What is the reasoning behind this kind of tough law? It's one thing to punish filesharers for violating copyrights, but to put them in the poorhouse for it is just reprehensible. Sure, fine them a couple thousand pounds, but it's not a crime worth destroying someone's whole life for.

Re:reasons for piracy?

[Knara]

1. I can't afford a Mercedes, I guess it's okay if I take one without paying for it, then?
2. Artist "get" their full share, *but* keep in mind that music at any level that isn't in your bedroom is also a business. As such the vast majority of folks who "aren't making any money" even though they're huge selling artists (usually on their first album or so), are in that situation because they were loaned huge amounts of money for production and promotion -- two things that are necessary to *become* a huge selling artist (and many of them blow the rest of trivial things like drugs and women) -- it's no different than the advance an author gets on their book. Once that money is paid back, the artists (assuming they have good management and agents) start getting their royalties in full (also assuming no malfeasance, but that's life)
3. I hate this too, but I don't think it entitles me to see the movie for free.
4. So wait until the DVDs come out?
5. You hate "the Man" but want the "stuff" that "the Man" produces. Slight amount of cognitive dissonance there, perhaps?