Comments on: Stop Stealing From Artists

By: SaberJim

SaberJim — Sun, 10 May 2009 16:29:58 +0000

If it can be digitized it can be copied. Simple as that. All forms of information distribution are going to radically change. Attempts to force people back into old paradigms with regulations will fail utterly.

Information producers will have to adapt or perish professionally. People want good information and entertainment and will pay for it as they always have. New and hitherto un-thought of ways to market it will emerge. As my old teacher used to say, “Put on your thinking caps”.

By: John Wilkenson

John Wilkenson — Thu, 07 May 2009 15:48:10 +0000

Hi Ellen,
You said, “The artists want absolute protection. Simply put, if you use it, you pay for it.”
Copyright law is something I am familiar with. The bottom line is that you don’t get to make money off of somebody else’s work. The recording industry, for the most part, are a bunch of weasels, and the consumer knows it. Enlightened artists who have their own websites and welcome downloading are thriving.
I’m older than you, so I’m not one of the file sharing generation, but I know artists don’t (and shouldn’t) have an “absolute” right to be paid everytime somebody plays one of their songs. They are not entitled to what the U.S. Supreme Court called “multiple tribute”. It is (and should continue to be) perfectly legal for me to buy a CD/DVD and make a copy of it to use, thereby extending the life of the product I PAID for.
The recording associations are in the habit of deception. Like you, they seldom define their terms unless cornered. They wanted people to have “clogging licenses” just to dance for free at old folks’ homes to the music of a DULY BOUGHT AND PAID FOR tape or CD. They tried to pretend that the statutory language “compensated for performance” was identical in meaning to “reimbursed for expenses.” When I offered to go into federal court in a “friendly” declaratory judgment suit, the chief counsel for BMI admitted that I was correct.
The reason the standard industry practice is to 1) pick on poor people who don’t know the law and don’t have the money to hire a good lawyer, and 2) ask for “statutory” damages instead of actual damages is precisely because these manipulative scum cannot prove how me dancing for free to a copyrighted record negatively impacts the sales of their record (I already bought my copy) or their ability to make money.
There is enough ignominy regarding this issue to go around for everybody, so I wouldn’t bother wasting my time trying to sound overly noble, if I were you. A huge majority of music consumers already know better! (And that doesn’t count the clueless purple-haired nose prongers who couldn’t care less.)
Your old libertarian pal,
John Wilkenson

By: Stop Stealing From Artists

Stop Stealing From Artists — Tue, 05 May 2009 10:06:47 +0000

[...] VIEW ARTICLE SOURCE [...]

By: Jay Goodman Tamboli

Jay Goodman Tamboli — Mon, 04 May 2009 14:48:13 +0000

> Congress needs to recognize this and act now.

What do you suggest Congress do? Ratchet the penalties up to an even more ridiculous level?

For an interesting perspective on what _artists_ can do to solve this problem, check out http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/13915

By: Troy C.

Troy C. — Mon, 04 May 2009 13:29:17 +0000

“…it is hard to dispute the fact that the songwriter/artist is entitled to fair compensation for their work.”

Agreed. But to insinuate that the record companies/publishers pay artists “fair” compensation is erroneous. The record companies are a big reason why piracy of music is what it is, overcharging for CDs.

Ironically, studies have shown most who pirate music actually turn around and buy more music than the average consumer. Many artists that don’t get airplay on radio have found that releasing songs to file sharing sites actually drives purchases, while avoiding the record companies altogether.