There'll probably be more freeloaders, since the people who *wanted* to get their music for free but couldn't figure it out will have an easier time of it. But if sales are boosted enough by the good press and goodwill, the experiment will have succeeded.
what is hard to figure out about "www.thepiratebay.org"? The absence of DRM will not mean more piracy. It takes only a single breach, a single copy stripped of DRM protection, to assure everyone who wants it over the internet gets their wish.
I'm getting really tired of assertions like this one that less drm = more piracy.
Death knight tanks depend on parry rather than block.
There isn't enough parry gear in LK to sustain a DK tank. I play a healer, i know these things. They take way too much damage and it's not their fault when there just isn't itemization for them.
Who would have thought the real prudes wouldn't be over zealous religious players and instead dowdy old government goons
on the risk of beating this very, very dead horse, you seem to think these two groups are mutually exclusive and have apparently never seen bush or rumsfeld in action
Here in Germany I see more no-name mp3 players than ipod and zune COMBINED. What does it matter if he's an apple or windows guy? It's not linux, so why does it matter?
The point is that someone who once had lessig as a tech advisor is using arguably the most locked down personal media player ever put on the market.
The ground breaking features which were supposed to make it an ipod killer are drmed to hell, like its wireless sharing capabilities.
I wouldn't give a damn if it were any other mp3/personal media player, but he may as well have been caught with an MPAA representative handing him a suitcase, which then bursts spilling hundred dollar bills everywhere.
Actually, the reason for this is because of the heat consumption. As the power of a chip grows, the heat consumption grows much faster, and more cores are a much better way to get more speed with less power consumption and heat.
All of the reasonable ways of throwing transistors at getting faster straight-line code execution have already happened. Hell, even the unreasonable ones have been implemented, like fast 64-bit division units.
You, and the chipmakers, have apparently become stale.
There have been claims like this made throughout history. The patent office was closed because of this, bill gates once declared a maximum filesize we'd ever need, and the list goes on and on.
If today's major chipmakers are too lazy and uncreative to come up with new ideas, then academics and entrepreneurs will come and eat their lunch.
The EFF proposed voluntary collective license 6 or so years ago, and were told to get bent. It looks, however, like the music labels are coming around.
This is actually a good thing, as it applies radio style licensing to the internet. Assuming this pilot program is put in place, it will provide serious credit to efforts of EFF and other such organizations to implement this across the entire internet.
From there it could go international, and assuming its implemented universally it could undermine the MAFIAA's stated purposes for the DMCA, resulting in reform!
In the grand scheme of things, this is an excellent development!
This UID and mod combination is in direct violation of the most fundamental scientific law of slashdot: UID and mod points granted are always inversely proportional.
It does, however, exist.
The breakdown of this fundamental law was referenced by nostradamus as the first sign of the end times, and as such I think it's time to ready my space helmet and silver broadsword.
Concerning yourself too much with the numbers only can be a bad thing.
stop attacking my poor numbers! what did they ever do to you?
he's not attacking them you tinfoil hatted loon! he's NEGLECTING THEM! They would kill their first born for attention, even if it means being attacked!
actually, there is a middle ground between versioning and continuous save.
MS word and other full bodied word processors use it.
save to filename.backup, and only commit when the command to save is made, but if you lose the program to a crash, lost power, etc, it's still continuously saved to backup.
SImple, just have every document not "saved" by the user go into a folder named after the app in "documents" (has equivalents across all major operating systems)
A configurable OS variable could be used to clear documents not re-saved or touched for -x- amount of time (default 15 days)
make a guideline of "untitled-datehere-timehere" format and its pretty good
I said you can't call them name and look serious in front of congress
None of the lobbying organizations i've listed to you have ever done this. However, your implied accusation of this behavior against the ACU makes me wonder whether you've been away from your Rand shrine a little too long.
Lol.. You really think I look like a nutjob because I pointed to where the problem was compared to you who pointed to breaking the law, evil corporations, and resorting to violence. Come back to reality.
you mean the reality you are implying in which corporations are not abusive, manipulative, and out to subvert public process at its most fundamental levels for financial gain?
You live in a delusion if you do not acknowledge this
But go ahead, do prattle on about the holy, blameless corporations.
Lol.. SO your into history revisioning now are your? The DMCA came from two copyright treaties that were part of the WIPO before we had the fist DMCA law introduced in the US. It was later turned into law as we ratified the two WIPO treaties. The bottom line is that the WIPO treaties existed before we made a law concerning it.
History revisioning?
This oversimplified assertion of yours is true, the treaty which resulted in the DMCA came through wipo.
What I have said is also true. Before this, it was bandied around the backrooms of congress, where even the most totalitarian nutjobs told them to sod off. It was then brought to several international bodies where others told them the same. THEN it was reintroduced in closed meetings just like ACTA is today, signed by unelected appointees, and used to twist the arms of congress into ratification.
My uncle IS a doctor, not "was". he still practices, and he now runs, if I remember correctly, 8 clinics.
And when did anyone, anywhere, suggest being paid for things that happened in the past?
persons like yourself who claim artists should be paid for their work.
When you buy a song you are not paying because the artist wrote it, you are paying because you want to hear it. That is now, not in the past.
Did they work to create that extra copy? I contend they did not, because I can click an icon, click 3 more times, and it have 4 copies of the file. Copying is not work.
The contract society has made with content creators is that we pay when we use the content, not when it is created.
that contract was made before the internet came along, and most importantly it was made for limited times and with much more limited scope.
Since then, the powerful publishing interests which have emerged from this contract have been altering it against "our" (the public's) interest for almost a century now.
At this point, it's no longer even about just controlling distribution, it's about ruling the god damn world by proxy through the DMCA. Let me know when ford can demand full regulatory control of all roads and businesses accessible through their vehicles.
The denial of free speech rights, the slow strangulation of the greatest technological advancement since the steam engine, and the pillaging and extortion of tens of thousands of defenseless people, among many other things, were not part of this contract.
They breached it first, they shot first, and just like japan, they have awakened the sleeping giant.
I can tell you from personal experience that I regularly exceed 4GB memory usage (transcoding a DVD while playing a BluRay movie while...)
Ok now I know you're lying.
Inserting a blu-ray into a vista machine causes the operating system to beam an MPAA operative into your house, and the gun he points to your head assures you will never ever transcode a dvd at the same time.
Just because you don't like the messenger doesn't mean the message is bad.
No, the message is bad because it's deliberately fallacious.
copyright infringement is not remotely equivalent to theft, nor is it a fixed concept like theft.
I've provided you examples of other technologies/activities over the past century these self-interested paranoid luddites have equated to your little "dine and dash" analogy which have been time and again ruled "fair use".
The legal definition for copyright infringement is completely divorced from the legal definition of theft for a reason, and the rampant graft and propaganda used by a media industry with a direct conflict of interest between copyright and its role in preserving an educated populace has not changed the moral equation: Participating in your culture through non-commercial sharing of what you consider valuable is NOT evil.
Enforcement of anti-trust law should happen, as monopolies are bad whether its the public or other businesses who get screwed, because it all comes back to bite everyone otherwise. (case and point: apple and other CE manufacturers compelled to cave on "screen-blanking" because of monopoly power)
And don't say "only monopoly abuse is bad". Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and any monopoly will result in a dead weight loss, heavily weighted toward niche market participants who are no longer serviced.
It is inconsistently and hypocritically enforced, but you should attack the government for instances where it has NOT enforced it rather than when it has.
Do you get to charge license fees in perpetuity for the lines of code you write for your employer? If you do they're morons, because that's not standard.
architects don't either.. they're paid hourly or salary same for graphic designers local bands are paid by the gig and for merchandise by fans
I don't know of anyone who has lobbies congress over the issue.
The EFF, public knowledge, the american library association, the american conservative union, the christian coalition (in one instance), the FSF, google, and numerous independent media organizations, among many more.
At best, they just rant on Slashdot of some other venue and usually and up going on some binge over some evil corporation or scary agency that makes them look like a nut job.
over 60% of the US and even more outside the US think too much power is centralized in the hands of corporate owners/controllers. I guess that makes you the nutjob if you don't think so. Further, this opinion is supported by a mountain of evidence which, if made physically manifest, would cause the universe to collapse under tremendous gravity. The newest example: companies so huge and posing such systematic risk to the economy that they can blackmail the government using the threat tens of millions of lost jobs. With the exception of military force, companies are more powerful than the most powerful government in the world at this point and are virtually unaccountable to the public. That should scare you.
No, Not really. Or at least as you would make it out to be. The DMCA and copyright law is the way it is today because of international treaties, not becuse of corruption.
please read up on the full history of the DMCA.
It was introduced in local legislatures first, and everyone told them they were nuts and to get bent.
They then brought it up in various trade organizations, and were again told to get bent
they then invented their own procedures and foisted the signed treaty on the government, saying "we signed this, fail to ratify it and everyone else who did will kill your economy"
The removal of decisions from elected officials into secret rooms is otherwise known as corruption.
I think I would have to support any punishment that they get. Especially for option 3.
I'm with you on option 3, but you can go to your local grocer and get beer right now because as many people broke the volstead act as do break the DMCA right now.
There are huge think tanks dedicated to fabricating controversy and providing plausible explanation through fallacy or fraud for legislative efforts against the public interest.
The two most successful of these groups, technology and economics, have accomplished their goals by taking advantage of a lack of proper education among the populace.
Except controlling distribution of your creative work is a Constitutionally protected right:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries
sorry, it's not. Here's the full quote, with the part you conveniently left out (emphasis mine)
The Congress shall have power To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries
You see, in 1776 it was little more than a generation after the crown finally abolished copyright, which had given rise to one of the most abusive publishing cartels prior to the 20th century.
They understood copyright to be contrary to liberty on numerous levels, such as freedom of expression and giving rise to permanent aristocracy. If they were to come forward to 1998, they would probably have explicitly forbidden copyright law in the constitution.
Jefferson in particular recognized an already rising corporate political machine, and if he saw our nation today would either die of heartbreak or launch into a psychotic, assault weapon wielding rage.
Let's compare this to the bill of rights, which are amendments to the constitution. I'm pretty sure any lawyer will agree that amendments are supposed to take precedent over previous portions of a given piece of legislation, including the supreme law of the land.
thus, copyright law should only go so far as they don't violate:
the first, fourth, fifth, and eighth amendments. They have traveled far beyond that point.
This is why copyright reform has to happen at a Constitutional level, and why the Supreme Court cases are so important. As it stands right now, copyright holders are within their rights to protect their works using any passive means such as DRM, even if it ends up violating fair use rights. Someone using a fair use exemption is protected from prosecution for copyright infringement
the exemptions don't matter because people who are exempt are not able to buy the tools, the construction of which is illegal with no exceptions.
It does not (currently) mean the copyright holder has to go out of their way to accommodate access for fair use.
they have gone out of their way to actively prevent access for fair use. It is illegal under all circumstances to manufacture tools for circumvention, even if they're meant to be used for purposes exempt from anti-circumvention law.
This is directly comparable to weapons control laws. Imagine hunting being legal but the manufacture and sale of any weapon being prohibited without exception.
Adapting and moving on because of a public good (and yes a highway is a public good) is one thing, adapting and moving on because you are in essence dinning and dashing without paying your bill, well that's another. In other words, copyright is in place to benefit society.
stop spewing shameless propaganda.
The MAFIAA said the same thing about piano rolls, and the phonograph, and radio, and the VCR, and the dual cassette deck, and now MP3's/internet.
Don't say its different because it's on a massive scale either. How many hundreds of millions of dual cassette decks with "high speed dubbing" and blank tapes were sold?
Every technology before has been clearly vindicated and proven not to be the industry's downfall, and this one is suddenly treated differently, even though it's arguably an exponentially greater good to the public than some extra home appliance.
The internet and copyright are mutually exclusive principles. Nearly every single webpage carries hundreds if not thousands of copyright violations. We should not neglect the necessary reforms simply because few people choose strict enforcement.
I quote harry potter:
"neither can live while the other survives"
make your choice: internet or copyright(as it is now)
There is only one option which will prevent this: a strict bifurcation between commercial and noncommercial use, with broad exemptions for the latter.
Slashdot Mirror
There'll probably be more freeloaders, since the people who *wanted* to get their music for free but couldn't figure it out will have an easier time of it. But if sales are boosted enough by the good press and goodwill, the experiment will have succeeded.
what is hard to figure out about "www.thepiratebay.org"?
The absence of DRM will not mean more piracy. It takes only a single breach, a single copy stripped of DRM protection, to assure everyone who wants it over the internet gets their wish.
I'm getting really tired of assertions like this one that less drm = more piracy.
Death knight tanks depend on parry rather than block.
There isn't enough parry gear in LK to sustain a DK tank. I play a healer, i know these things. They take way too much damage and it's not their fault when there just isn't itemization for them.
Who would have thought the real prudes wouldn't be over zealous religious players and instead dowdy old government goons
on the risk of beating this very, very dead horse, you seem to think these two groups are mutually exclusive and have apparently never seen bush or rumsfeld in action
Here in Germany I see more no-name mp3 players than ipod and zune COMBINED. What does it matter if he's an apple or windows guy? It's not linux, so why does it matter?
The point is that someone who once had lessig as a tech advisor is using arguably the most locked down personal media player ever put on the market.
The ground breaking features which were supposed to make it an ipod killer are drmed to hell, like its wireless sharing capabilities.
I wouldn't give a damn if it were any other mp3/personal media player, but he may as well have been caught with an MPAA representative handing him a suitcase, which then bursts spilling hundred dollar bills everywhere.
this may be true, but the crux is "that we know about".
pretty much every major advancement was a result of research and discovery.
there were people talking about the limits to computers back before the integrated circuit as well.
Actually, the reason for this is because of the heat consumption. As the power of a chip grows, the heat consumption grows much faster, and more cores are a much better way to get more speed with less power consumption and heat.
and what about optical chips?
All of the reasonable ways of throwing transistors at getting faster straight-line code execution have already happened. Hell, even the unreasonable ones have been implemented, like fast 64-bit division units.
You, and the chipmakers, have apparently become stale.
There have been claims like this made throughout history. The patent office was closed because of this, bill gates once declared a maximum filesize we'd ever need, and the list goes on and on.
If today's major chipmakers are too lazy and uncreative to come up with new ideas, then academics and entrepreneurs will come and eat their lunch.
The EFF proposed voluntary collective license 6 or so years ago, and were told to get bent. It looks, however, like the music labels are coming around.
This is actually a good thing, as it applies radio style licensing to the internet. Assuming this pilot program is put in place, it will provide serious credit to efforts of EFF and other such organizations to implement this across the entire internet.
From there it could go international, and assuming its implemented universally it could undermine the MAFIAA's stated purposes for the DMCA, resulting in reform!
In the grand scheme of things, this is an excellent development!
This UID and mod combination is in direct violation of the most fundamental scientific law of slashdot: UID and mod points granted are always inversely proportional.
It does, however, exist.
The breakdown of this fundamental law was referenced by nostradamus as the first sign of the end times, and as such I think it's time to ready my space helmet and silver broadsword.
you forgot the link to the vista sales page under bloated..
other funny substitutions include itunes (the program not the store), vuze, or imovie 08+
Concerning yourself too much with the numbers only can be a bad thing.
stop attacking my poor numbers! what did they ever do to you?
he's not attacking them you tinfoil hatted loon! he's NEGLECTING THEM! They would kill their first born for attention, even if it means being attacked!
actually, there is a middle ground between versioning and continuous save.
MS word and other full bodied word processors use it.
save to filename.backup, and only commit when the command to save is made, but if you lose the program to a crash, lost power, etc, it's still continuously saved to backup.
SImple, just have every document not "saved" by the user go into a folder named after the app in "documents" (has equivalents across all major operating systems)
A configurable OS variable could be used to clear documents not re-saved or touched for -x- amount of time (default 15 days)
make a guideline of "untitled-datehere-timehere" format and its pretty good
oh yeah. forgot to add:
I said you can't call them name and look serious in front of congress
None of the lobbying organizations i've listed to you have ever done this. However, your implied accusation of this behavior against the ACU makes me wonder whether you've been away from your Rand shrine a little too long.
Lol.. You really think I look like a nutjob because I pointed to where the problem was compared to you who pointed to breaking the law, evil corporations, and resorting to violence. Come back to reality.
you mean the reality you are implying in which corporations are not abusive, manipulative, and out to subvert public process at its most fundamental levels for financial gain?
You live in a delusion if you do not acknowledge this
But go ahead, do prattle on about the holy, blameless corporations.
Lol.. SO your into history revisioning now are your? The DMCA came from two copyright treaties that were part of the WIPO before we had the fist DMCA law introduced in the US. It was later turned into law as we ratified the two WIPO treaties. The bottom line is that the WIPO treaties existed before we made a law concerning it.
History revisioning?
This oversimplified assertion of yours is true, the treaty which resulted in the DMCA came through wipo.
What I have said is also true. Before this, it was bandied around the backrooms of congress, where even the most totalitarian nutjobs told them to sod off. It was then brought to several international bodies where others told them the same. THEN it was reintroduced in closed meetings just like ACTA is today, signed by unelected appointees, and used to twist the arms of congress into ratification.
My uncle IS a doctor, not "was". he still practices, and he now runs, if I remember correctly, 8 clinics.
And when did anyone, anywhere, suggest being paid for things that happened in the past?
persons like yourself who claim artists should be paid for their work.
When you buy a song you are not paying because the artist wrote it, you are paying because you want to hear it. That is now, not in the past.
Did they work to create that extra copy? I contend they did not, because I can click an icon, click 3 more times, and it have 4 copies of the file. Copying is not work.
The contract society has made with content creators is that we pay when we use the content, not when it is created.
that contract was made before the internet came along, and most importantly it was made for limited times and with much more limited scope.
Since then, the powerful publishing interests which have emerged from this contract have been altering it against "our" (the public's) interest for almost a century now.
At this point, it's no longer even about just controlling distribution, it's about ruling the god damn world by proxy through the DMCA. Let me know when ford can demand full regulatory control of all roads and businesses accessible through their vehicles.
The denial of free speech rights, the slow strangulation of the greatest technological advancement since the steam engine, and the pillaging and extortion of tens of thousands of defenseless people, among many other things, were not part of this contract.
They breached it first, they shot first, and just like japan, they have awakened the sleeping giant.
I can tell you from personal experience that I regularly exceed 4GB memory usage (transcoding a DVD while playing a BluRay movie while ...)
Ok now I know you're lying.
Inserting a blu-ray into a vista machine causes the operating system to beam an MPAA operative into your house, and the gun he points to your head assures you will never ever transcode a dvd at the same time.
Just because you don't like the messenger doesn't mean the message is bad.
No, the message is bad because it's deliberately fallacious.
copyright infringement is not remotely equivalent to theft, nor is it a fixed concept like theft.
I've provided you examples of other technologies/activities over the past century these self-interested paranoid luddites have equated to your little "dine and dash" analogy which have been time and again ruled "fair use".
The legal definition for copyright infringement is completely divorced from the legal definition of theft for a reason, and the rampant graft and propaganda used by a media industry with a direct conflict of interest between copyright and its role in preserving an educated populace has not changed the moral equation: Participating in your culture through non-commercial sharing of what you consider valuable is NOT evil.
Why is this tagged "blackmail"?
Enforcement of anti-trust law should happen, as monopolies are bad whether its the public or other businesses who get screwed, because it all comes back to bite everyone otherwise. (case and point: apple and other CE manufacturers compelled to cave on "screen-blanking" because of monopoly power)
And don't say "only monopoly abuse is bad". Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and any monopoly will result in a dead weight loss, heavily weighted toward niche market participants who are no longer serviced.
It is inconsistently and hypocritically enforced, but you should attack the government for instances where it has NOT enforced it rather than when it has.
Now it's risk is it?
My uncle, who is a doctor, took the risk of launching his own practice.
I guess he should be paid in perpetuity by every one of his patients until his grandson is 40.
Risk does not "entitle" you to be compensated for work you have long since ceased doing.
No they dont.
Do you get to charge license fees in perpetuity for the lines of code you write for your employer? If you do they're morons, because that's not standard.
architects don't either.. they're paid hourly or salary
same for graphic designers
local bands are paid by the gig and for merchandise by fans
I don't know of anyone who has lobbies congress over the issue.
The EFF, public knowledge, the american library association, the american conservative union, the christian coalition (in one instance), the FSF, google, and numerous independent media organizations, among many more.
At best, they just rant on Slashdot of some other venue and usually and up going on some binge over some evil corporation or scary agency that makes them look like a nut job.
over 60% of the US and even more outside the US think too much power is centralized in the hands of corporate owners/controllers. I guess that makes you the nutjob if you don't think so.
Further, this opinion is supported by a mountain of evidence which, if made physically manifest, would cause the universe to collapse under tremendous gravity. The newest example: companies so huge and posing such systematic risk to the economy that they can blackmail the government using the threat tens of millions of lost jobs. With the exception of military force, companies are more powerful than the most powerful government in the world at this point and are virtually unaccountable to the public. That should scare you.
No, Not really. Or at least as you would make it out to be. The DMCA and copyright law is the way it is today because of international treaties, not becuse of corruption.
please read up on the full history of the DMCA.
It was introduced in local legislatures first, and everyone told them they were nuts and to get bent.
They then brought it up in various trade organizations, and were again told to get bent
they then invented their own procedures and foisted the signed treaty on the government, saying "we signed this, fail to ratify it and everyone else who did will kill your economy"
The removal of decisions from elected officials into secret rooms is otherwise known as corruption.
I think I would have to support any punishment that they get. Especially for option 3.
I'm with you on option 3, but you can go to your local grocer and get beer right now because as many people broke the volstead act as do break the DMCA right now.
that would be the entire point.
There are huge think tanks dedicated to fabricating controversy and providing plausible explanation through fallacy or fraud for legislative efforts against the public interest.
The two most successful of these groups, technology and economics, have accomplished their goals by taking advantage of a lack of proper education among the populace.
Except controlling distribution of your creative work is a Constitutionally protected right:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries
sorry, it's not. Here's the full quote, with the part you conveniently left out (emphasis mine)
You see, in 1776 it was little more than a generation after the crown finally abolished copyright, which had given rise to one of the most abusive publishing cartels prior to the 20th century.
They understood copyright to be contrary to liberty on numerous levels, such as freedom of expression and giving rise to permanent aristocracy. If they were to come forward to 1998, they would probably have explicitly forbidden copyright law in the constitution.
Jefferson in particular recognized an already rising corporate political machine, and if he saw our nation today would either die of heartbreak or launch into a psychotic, assault weapon wielding rage.
Let's compare this to the bill of rights, which are amendments to the constitution. I'm pretty sure any lawyer will agree that amendments are supposed to take precedent over previous portions of a given piece of legislation, including the supreme law of the land.
thus, copyright law should only go so far as they don't violate:
the first, fourth, fifth, and eighth amendments. They have traveled far beyond that point.
This is why copyright reform has to happen at a Constitutional level, and why the Supreme Court cases are so important. As it stands right now, copyright holders are within their rights to protect their works using any passive means such as DRM, even if it ends up violating fair use rights. Someone using a fair use exemption is protected from prosecution for copyright infringement
the exemptions don't matter because people who are exempt are not able to buy the tools, the construction of which is illegal with no exceptions.
It does not (currently) mean the copyright holder has to go out of their way to accommodate access for fair use.
they have gone out of their way to actively prevent access for fair use. It is illegal under all circumstances to manufacture tools for circumvention, even if they're meant to be used for purposes exempt from anti-circumvention law.
This is directly comparable to weapons control laws. Imagine hunting being legal but the manufacture and sale of any weapon being prohibited without exception.
Adapting and moving on because of a public good (and yes a highway is a public good) is one thing, adapting and moving on because you are in essence dinning and dashing without paying your bill, well that's another. In other words, copyright is in place to benefit society.
stop spewing shameless propaganda.
The MAFIAA said the same thing about piano rolls, and the phonograph, and radio, and the VCR, and the dual cassette deck, and now MP3's/internet.
Don't say its different because it's on a massive scale either. How many hundreds of millions of dual cassette decks with "high speed dubbing" and blank tapes were sold?
Every technology before has been clearly vindicated and proven not to be the industry's downfall, and this one is suddenly treated differently, even though it's arguably an exponentially greater good to the public than some extra home appliance.
The internet and copyright are mutually exclusive principles. Nearly every single webpage carries hundreds if not thousands of copyright violations. We should not neglect the necessary reforms simply because few people choose strict enforcement.
I quote harry potter:
"neither can live while the other survives"
make your choice:
internet or copyright(as it is now)
There is only one option which will prevent this:
a strict bifurcation between commercial and noncommercial use, with broad exemptions for the latter.