Slashdot Mirror
Universal Sends DMCA Takedown On 1980 Report
An anonymous reader writes "For many, many years, every time some new technology has come along, the music industry has insisted that it's going to "kill" the industry. The player piano was supposed to kill live music. So was the radio. And, of course, every time this happens the press is willing to take the industry's word at face value. In 1980, the news program 20/20 posted a report all about how "home taping is killing music," with various recording industry execs insisting the industry was on its last legs unless something was done. Someone posted that 20/20 episode to YouTube a few years back, where it sat in obscurity until people noticed it a couple weeks ago. And suddenly, Universal Music issued a takedown notice for the show. Universal Music does not own 20/20, and there were only brief clips of music in the show. It appears the only reason for Universal to issue the takedown is that it doesn't want you seeing how badly it overreacted in the past."
double plus good say I.
The script for the cease-and-desist letter is part of the submit button
I noticed a bunch of home-filmed performances of amateur pianists playing various Mozart stuff had been taken down, because some random publishing company claimed ownership, just to plaster them with ads -- and the company gets the ad revenue.
Anybody with a brain would realize that the work is hundreds of years old, and the performance in question is owned by the poster (the guy sitting at the piano), but apparently forcing your ads onto other peoples youtube vids in this manner has become a trendy revenue stream for cocksuckers. Almost as trendy as the sucking of the cock in the first place.
Or maybe sending take down notices to ALL videos on youtube is just a way to cover up the ones they REALLY want to take down.
We're through the looking glass, people.
The actual program in question:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Vz7Z42Fl9s
Only it won't work. I just learned about the Streisand effect from the recent article about officer Bubble, and I already have a situation in which to apply it. That's convenient.
There is always something that is putting the music industry on its "last leg". As technology advances, they just continue bitching and it obviously has not stopped today. I do not think the music industry is hurting too bad. Have you seen an episode of MTV cribs lately where they have musicians on there? The musicians don't seem like they are very poor (except for Redman, but nobody can predict Redman, that guy is crazy).
When you have an indoor pool and an outdoor pool, I highly doubt you are hurting from money. If the musicians are getting enough money to afford that, just think of how much is going to the company seeing as the musician only takes a small cut of what the industry makes (that is, of course the musician gets endorsements from Nike and Wheaties and stuff).
Seriously, after mp3's and torrents have faded out and the new technology has come into play, the music industry will bitch and moan again about how they are, again, on their last leg, but then we get to see the newest episode of MTV Cribs where artists show off their new Benz and Ferraris
The world is how you make it
Seriously this isn't news, this is happening everyday to lots of people from lots of companies
The fact that somebody else shits my underwear while I'm not looking is interesting to me.
The fact that you keep changing your underwear and chose to not care who shits in it is is, indeed, of little relevance to me.
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
Or maybe sending take down notices to ALL videos on youtube is just a way to cover up the ones they REALLY want to take down.
That wouldn't be the best strategy for Universal Music. It has previously been hit with a lawsuit in the Northern District of California, Lenz v. Universal , in which Judge Fogel held that OCILLA requires a copyright owner to make a fair use analysis in good faith before submitting a notice and that Universal may not have made such an analysis.
... the Carriers Of Milk In Cities (COMIC) today lashed out at refrigerator manufacturers and cardboard container manufacturers for "killing the milk industry".
Ferb Nordquist, the head of COMIC said in a statement that was hand carried to every major news outlet, "We, the milk carriers, bring milk to the masses. Without us, there would be no milk. The refrigerator and cardboard manufacturers are putting a stake in the heart of the milk industry. This is really the beginning of the end for milk."
No cows were available for comment.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
It is perjury (a criminal act) to issue a DMCA takedown request when the requester is not the rights holder or their designated agent.
So what content are they saying they are a rights holder/agent of?
C//
There's no 'cover up' because there's no truth the the summary's statement that " In 1980, the news program 20/20 posted a report all about how "home taping is killing music," with various recording industry execs insisting the industry was on its last legs unless something was done."
I watched the video and it does no such thing. It mentions home taping once and mentions that sales had 'levelled' but the substance of the programme is the new development of video and music, specifically laser discs, and the music industy's hopes that this would allow them to gain ever greater profits.
This is a bogus /. story. I wish I could say it was the first. Utterly misleading and a waste of your time, dear reader.
RTA?
The video posted in the article is the 'first half' of the 20/20 piece. The second half was no longer available when the author went to view it a second time.
The video that was DMCA'd down was the 2nd half of a 20/20 news segment about the issues befalling the music industry back in the 1980s.
There's enough time between the "failure of the music industry's disdain for the player piano and the radio" as to make points on both sides moot.
But, a DMCA notice to take down something that occurred in the 80s which pinpoints the exact same reasoning we have today for the alleged destruction of the music industry is telling. This segment wasn't even owned by the music industry, it was owned by 20/20 the news magazine. The content within clearly falls within the fair use doctrine, which, should be considered the default rather than the exception--meaning we should make them prove that it isn't fair use before they can prevail with a DMCA or in court, rather than the way it is now where fair use has to prove itself.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
I recently came across an old copy of Modern Recording magazine from early 1981. There is an article about how cassette decks are evil and home taping is hurting the record industry and the RIAA commissioned a study that that they hoped to take to congress as proof that new laws were need.
But a funny thing happened. The report was shelved when it revealed that people who owned home recording equipment spent 75% more money buying music than people who didn't own an evil cassette deck.
Then you'd see first hand from the late Mortimer I. Luddite III with his frantic pleas to stop those infernal horseless carriages from destroying his buggy-whip business he made just days before being struck down and killed by a Model T going a whopping 10 miles an hour through the town square.
Innovation and progress is only good so long as the established powers that be profit by it.
There is always something that is putting the music industry on its "last leg". As technology advances, they just continue bitching and it obviously has not stopped today.
And the retarded thing? Advancing technology makes them money.
Consider the 90s, which they seem to conveniently peg as their baseline for normal. Putting their cries of poverty from today and the 80s together, they've been going out of business constantly from 1985 until now, except for the mid 90s. What happened then? The CD came out. And people replaced a helluvalot of vinyl and tapes with CDs. People did that because the product was significantly superior in nearly every way (with apologies to audiophiles who love vinyl).
So what's different now? Well, they've been fighting digital distribution tooth and nail to combat privacy (ostensibly), preferring to stamp out piracy even if it means killing themselves. As a result they've made a lot less money than they could have, and have allowed a robust black market to blossom. That's bad for them, not just because of the lost revenue (let's concede they lose some money for the sake of argument), but they also lose control over distribution. This is completely different from their mistakes before.. Previously, people bootlegged tapes to make illegal tapes, but it was an inferior product to the legit copies, and probably made little dent in sales. Now, people can bootleg CDs to make digital copies, shifting media as well as creating a potentially superior product. The black market can now fill a market they've chosen not to compete in. Bad news for them.
So what's the upshot? If they want to make money like in the 90s, they need to give people a reason to re-buy music. That will be very hard since the last iteration was digital and easily turned into other media - how do you improve on that? They need some way of adding actual value to the product that people bought or shared/stole. Otherwise, the level of sales growth seen now and in the 80s is the norm, and we shouldn't expect anything different.
the Streisand effect
Well, that's just great. If you hadn't said anything, this phenomenon could have remained in relative obscurity. However, because you brought it up, now everyone's gonna know about the Streisand effect. Way to go.
Let q be a radix > 1. I am in ur base-q, killing 10 d00ds.
Radio is canned music. You cant ask the radio disc jockey to change the key, because you are a baritone instead of a tenor.
That is what OP meant by "Live" music. That it is played live, by a living person, for you, in real time. And yes, the player piano did a grand job of putting corner store pianists out of business. By the same token, the tractor put many farm hands out of business. Technology does that. It reduces the amount of labor invested, and makes things easier; the downside is that it also puts people out of work in the process-- the people that did the jobs the technology replaced. Computers put whole accounting firms under, or at least resulted in huge reductions in the numbers of humans working for those firms.
The tired "Buggy whip" trope used on /. is very apt here.
Download and mirror!
Keep your eyes to the sky.
As they say, hindsight is ... *gets shot*
(Okay, the recording industry could be right... they claimed back then that "something MUST be done", but they never claimed that something "is NOT currently being done". After all, thirty years later, we now have all these stupid copyright laws...)
Pet peeve: Profane people propagating perfunctory pedantry.
...was to cover up the HORRIBLE taste in clothing of all of the record execs in 1980. Just wow.
My interesting idea is to go ahead and share music, never paying a cent until the music industry is very actually teats up.
Musicians will once again be able to make a living playing music. Give it away and charge for performance. It really is the only realistic way for music to even work. Give it away and charge for performance. Music will thrive with actual musicians rather than office flunkies controlling it.
Yes, kill the industry completely f**king dead. We don't need them, never have, and would've ALWAYS been better off without them.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!