I would agree this is about control, strangely this is not spoken to with any frequency. The labels stand to lose most if not all of their control in the event there is a major distribution shift in music product. There was a major shift and there is no turning back now. Reminds me of prohibition in some ways. That is the battle lines the RIAA has drawn. Work to outlaw something the larger community wants to engage in.
Allow me to take this up another level.
To paraphrase Lawrence Lessig, the control they seek is of "culture". If you accept that much of culture in our society is commuted through music and film, then you may begin to see that the RIAA and MPAA have evolved beyond controlling their respective businesses and are on the precipice of controlling certain aspects of the transmission of culture in our society.
Look at the top lobbys in congress, the RIAA is strangely in the top 5. Why should they feel the need to spend millions and millions on public policy. The tech lobby on capitol hill is tiny by comparison, although the market for tech product is an order of magnitude larger.
Peoples opinions may vary, but I remember back to the Fall of 2001, during the creation of the Homeland Security legislation. A friend on the hill informed me that the RIAA was trying to insert language into said legislation affording them freedom from liability in the event they hack someones computer insearch of copyright infringments and "accidentally" destroy said computer. Imho this is a total abuse of power.
To further calrify which way the scales are tilted at the start of a "contract" relationship, among other things, the loan is given to the artist at an astonishing rate. I'm talking in the dbl digit percent range. Maybe not in every case, but certainly the majority.
"Export abuse"? This is a point that has been lost on me for a long time now. Why on earth does music need to be controlled from an export/import perspective. Can anyone answer that question?
Slashdot Mirror
Allow me to take this up another level.
To paraphrase Lawrence Lessig, the control they seek is of "culture". If you accept that much of culture in our society is commuted through music and film, then you may begin to see that the RIAA and MPAA have evolved beyond controlling their respective businesses and are on the precipice of controlling certain aspects of the transmission of culture in our society.
Look at the top lobbys in congress, the RIAA is strangely in the top 5. Why should they feel the need to spend millions and millions on public policy. The tech lobby on capitol hill is tiny by comparison, although the market for tech product is an order of magnitude larger.
Peoples opinions may vary, but I remember back to the Fall of 2001, during the creation of the Homeland Security legislation. A friend on the hill informed me that the RIAA was trying to insert language into said legislation affording them freedom from liability in the event they hack someones computer insearch of copyright infringments and "accidentally" destroy said computer. Imho this is a total abuse of power.
To further calrify which way the scales are tilted at the start of a "contract" relationship, among other things, the loan is given to the artist at an astonishing rate. I'm talking in the dbl digit percent range. Maybe not in every case, but certainly the majority.
Jack Valenti brokered the deal of course.
"Export abuse"? This is a point that has been lost on me for a long time now. Why on earth does music need to be controlled from an export/import perspective. Can anyone answer that question?
From what I understand of it... the FCC is leaning towards firewire (1394 a and b) because of an encryption scheme called 5C.