- This topic has 5 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 24 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
This is potentially very wonderful news… VERY COOL!
CD creator burns copy-protection efforts
AND
Philips moves to put ‘poison’ label on protected audio CDs
Yay Philips! <img>
And here’s a link to the Ars Technica thread that I found this all out. <img>
Phillips goes to war against RIAA and MPAA!<img>
Matt,
Sorry it took so long to reply. You know how it is….I say good to go for Philips. A battle of this proportions is just what is needed to even what seems to be the overwhelming advantage the industry groups has over the consumer. My only concern is that compromise may start and end with the two opposing sides appeasing one another. Obviously, the implications are that the consumer will benefit from not having to buy encoded and locked merchandise. I think the fight though is making the industry tone down the extent of their power abuses. It would be nice if the Philips thing could make a benchmark and then the mainline could be tapped, so to speak. I would be interested to hear what you think about this Matt or anyone for that matter.
Tom
I know it’s an old argument, but really, did you ever hear this amount of shiznit with the advent of the cassette player/recorder?
Which reminds me, I gotta get my turntable fixed…
Tom, how do you think the two sides could appease each other? They seem pretty diametrically opposed.
If everything were encrypted, sales of Philips burners (and other Philips products that are incompatible with encrypted cds) will go down, right? And on the other side, the RIAA will not only have a monopoly on the market, but will probably see fit to start suing the pants off of consumers….Napster was just the start….what about private websites, built by music FANS, that include midis or mp3s as part of a soundtrack? Or what about sites that provide song lyrics and tabs? Are they going to start sending secret agents onto the buses and subways of America, to entrap kids who are listening to homemade mixes on their headphones?
More importantly, are recording contracts going to change at all to accomodate share-ware? Will they add an optional clause for the artist, so the artist can determine whether s/he will have the option of taking legal action against fans who share? Can artists sign such a clause while retaining their copyrights?
</font><blockquote><font>quote:</font><hr><font> The far-reaching DMCA, enacted in 1998, bans any attempt to circumvent copyright protections. Critics complain that the law puts too much power in the hands of media publishers, denying consumers the right to use products bought for personal consumption in whatever ways they see fit. </font><hr></blockquote><font>Yeah, and who was responsible for that Act in the first place? A bunch of doddering old men on Capitol Hill who A) don’t invest the larger part of their paychecks in cds & records, B) don’t know enough about the technology in question, and C) haven’t considered the larger implications on consumer rights in general.
Technology has its tentacles in entertainment, science, and communications. It’s important for people to realize that it is a phenomenon that must be regulated carefully, because if you mutilate one tentacle, you still have all these other tentacles to deal with, and they’re all part of the same beast.
As far as consumer rights– well, I’ve said before that I’m all for artists’ rights. I support musicians by buying their albums and going to their shows. If I heard that some of them didn’t want me to bootleg or share, I would respect that, just cause I’m a nice girl that way. But ultimately, they ARE pushing a product, and who is to decide how I use that product in my home and in my life? Is the RIAA going to break into my house and turn down my stereo because the neighbors can hear?
I know I’m giving more questions than answers. But really, I don’t have any answers at this point….I’ll keep thinking on it though <img>
take care
rosaHowdee do there Rosa!
Two points I’d like to comment on (I don’t use the quotes, so please correct me if I have responded around or past something you were trying to convey, please. Thanks.) :
1. You hit the nail on the head in what I generalized about, as far as "the mainline". The Philips folks are going to play a crucial role if they are able to stave of the two industry disorganizations from punishing all consumers further for violations commited by some.
I could get heavy-duty with the Constitution on this, but as an interpreted document, I stand only to offer my views on what I think is right, beginning a point/counterpoint debate. If they use the new Anti-Terrorism bill as any indication of how the current political climate may influence matters, we might have a shot, the Philips/consumer side that is.
However, I do not like the chances in the Supreme Court, until Rehnquist retires at least. Word is O’ Connor might be the new Chief. If so, I think we stand a chance with the Black Robes.
which brings me to point #
2. Please allow me to light upon the indispensable role of the lobbyist. This political creature is, for many members of Congress, the primary source of information for bills with specialized concerns outside of things like defense spending, education, taxes etc.. (no disrespect to lobbyists for those concerns, but again, lobbyists were be on a more equal plain with the politicians themselves due to the familiarity factor with these issues)
A main concern with Congressmen and Presidential candidates is taking the necessary steps to remain in office for as along as possibile. For Presidents, they can run an agenda and satisfy the most pressing concernss on the lips of the commoner, or at least those commoners he deems fit to acknowledge with the pen or the pocket. Congressional office holders, however, do not have term limits. Therefore, they need to constantly change gears in order to suit not just the individual or collective constituency, but the donors and patrons they hope to keep on hand.
One big way
many legislators keep their power base is the old backscratching technique known as logrolling. Many votes go down by members who do not have the faintest idea what they are voting for, yet due to the fact they want their bills to pass through down the road, the blind vote has to be cast. This is where lobbyists come in. They bang the doors, ring the phones, bring their presentations, offer funding for home projects through affiliates etc (pork barelling etc….) I think I covered things ok on the process.Far as this situation on its dynamic, who can say. I do think appeasements is very possibile. Either way, the fact Philips is willing to sacrifice capital to maintain capital says a lot of the future type of sacr
ifices needed to keep the momentum and move on the cost repricing and further licensing of the Mp3 providers with the blessing of the industry. Greed must be destroyed first, if possibile through vanguard cases such as this and perhaps a class action suit if this current round of oppostion fails.Nighty-nite don’t let the fascists bite. Kick their teeth out (with approval of course <img> )
Tom
throughout every technological advance in history, there has been a way to get around everything that everyone has come up with.
nuff said.
<img>
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.