Subject: RE: Napsterized
From: Arthur Corliss (arthur@corlissfamily.org)
Date: Wed Jul 17 2002 - 06:35:26 AKDT
> In a word...yes. Much as I despise the money-grubbin' yadda-yaddas
> at = RIAA et al, their argument has a core of hard truth: it is
> illegal to = copy the "intellectual property" of others...songs,
> stories, even HTML = code...without their permission. In the Linux
> community that is negated = by the fact that the license normally
> states something about "freely = distribute"...a blanket pre-
> authorization. Let's face it...were I the = one who made my living
> writing and performing songs I'd want to be able = to do that
> without people taking without paying (not, necessarily, that = I'd
> demand eight figures a year out of you or the money to send my =
> executives on "talent searches" to the Bahamas...but that's not
> really = the point). Basically, if you created it, it's yours to do
> with as you = like (to a large extent, anyways); if you did not
> create it, it's not = yours. If you bought it, there's an argument
> that I kind of agree with = that you should be able to make backup
> copies or transfer to other media = for your own enjoyment...but
> that doesn't include setting up a server to = distribute it to
> others to enjoy as well.
>
> The p2p system, at its core, is a violation of the copyright laws, I
> = believe. The reason folks like Morpheus et al get away with it is
> that = nobody can prove they have control over the "data" which is
> shared, so = effectively they get a "it's not our fault!" argument
> out of it. Were = you to download a copyrighted song from a p2p
> system it would be you = breaking the law, not them. You setting up
> an ftp/ssh/web site doesn't = have the same protection, though, and
> your only real protection from the = RIAA hounds would be in your
> obscurity. These days that's a chancy = thing to bank on (though
> one could add not much chancier than the stock = market, eh? <grin>).
Not that I have time to get into a discussion, but: Bull. Let's apply some
common sense:
-- P2P has legitimate uses beyond copyright infringement
-- Even copyrighted material distribution can be legal under "Fair Use"
doctrine (i.e., you have the CD, but don't/can't rip it yourself
for use on your MP3 player)
And to further play devil's advocate:
-- It's illegal to conspire to do price-fixing, but record companies do
-- The record industry has some of the highest profit margins in *any*
industry
-- In reality, the only people that could possible lose money are the
ones rolling in it (established big names), the smaller artists
(which is 95% of the industry) rarely sold CDs even before P2P, and
even more so, this has proven to increase sales of many of these
artists, since what do they need more than anything to build a fan
base? Exposure. For an example, see Janis Ian's excellent take from
an inside perspective:
http://www.janisian.com/article-internet_debacle.html
In short, cry me a freaking river for every "illegally" copied MP3. The RIAA
and MPAA has been screwing the buying public for far too long, and, in a
twist of irony, are battling one of the greatest business opportunities to
hit the industry. Keep in mind that these are the same Luddites that fought
desparately against personal recording devices.
--Arthur Corliss
Bolverk's Lair -- http://arthur.corlissfamily.org/
Digital Mages -- http://www.digitalmages.com/
"Live Free or Die, the Only Way to Live" -- NH State Motto
---------
To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a23 : Wed Jul 17 2002 - 07:22:56 AKDT