Although some people have mentioned it here and there, I'd like to point out why this law is but a poor excuse to the problem that the growing number of downloads causes.
As of now, the proposal is a flat rate and (as far as I know) optional tax.
The main point is there's absolutely no way to guarantee where your money will go. Even if the SACEM (the company that handles royalties redistribution and other copyrights related taxes) evenly redistributes the tax, what criterion would they use ? Safe to assume they'd use number of copies sold.
So in the end, who gets the money ? The label produced artists (and/or the labels themselves).
Which means the end user cannot choose to help the artists he wants, he'll just blindly throw away his money for labels to churn out more crap (and if you think America is bad, I doubt you've heard much french pop. And I won't quote any names because I would feel bad for single handedly damaging some people's ears.)
So sure, fanatic leechers might go and shout "Viva La France" or god knows what, but a global license definitely isn't the way to go to solve the current media crisis.
The French government created a very nice site (http://www.lestelechargements.com/ , litterally "thedownloads.com") about why the DRM law (that caused all of this ruckus, including the global license proposal) is good for your health, cures cancer, and saves all of the artists from poverty.
On a funny note, if you type "site de propagande" on google (which means as you may have guessed "propaganda site"), you find in first position the website concerning the DRM law, and in third position the above mentioned website.
Slashdot Mirror
Is that supposed to stand for Mangled English ?
Although some people have mentioned it here and there, I'd like to point out why this law is but a poor excuse to the problem that the growing number of downloads causes. As of now, the proposal is a flat rate and (as far as I know) optional tax. The main point is there's absolutely no way to guarantee where your money will go. Even if the SACEM (the company that handles royalties redistribution and other copyrights related taxes) evenly redistributes the tax, what criterion would they use ? Safe to assume they'd use number of copies sold. So in the end, who gets the money ? The label produced artists (and/or the labels themselves). Which means the end user cannot choose to help the artists he wants, he'll just blindly throw away his money for labels to churn out more crap (and if you think America is bad, I doubt you've heard much french pop. And I won't quote any names because I would feel bad for single handedly damaging some people's ears.) So sure, fanatic leechers might go and shout "Viva La France" or god knows what, but a global license definitely isn't the way to go to solve the current media crisis. The French government created a very nice site (http://www.lestelechargements.com/ , litterally "thedownloads.com") about why the DRM law (that caused all of this ruckus, including the global license proposal) is good for your health, cures cancer, and saves all of the artists from poverty. On a funny note, if you type "site de propagande" on google (which means as you may have guessed "propaganda site"), you find in first position the website concerning the DRM law, and in third position the above mentioned website.