MSE News: Illegal music downloaders face internet blackout

chriswatts

The issue of if it's right or wrong that the law abiding pay for stuff, while free loaders download for free is a separate issue.

Just on the point if the music industry has made a loss and jobs are at risk, if the freeloading leaches aren't going to pay for it anyway and the music industry hasn't one less track to sell, they can't of made a loss and any jobs in the the music industry are at the same risk as they were before that illegal download was downloaded. (of course if that freeloading leaches was actually going to buy it, that would change the suituation)

Microsoft tried this arguement a few years ago, they claimed that illlegal downloading of Vista throughout the world had forced them to increase the cost of the product. It was then pointed out that majority illegally downloading Vista weren't the target market and couldn't even afford Vista if they had to purchase it, thus weren't actually having any effect on sales.

Watto1990

Remember everyone: home taping is killing music! :mad:

The music industry isn't losing anywhere as much as they'd like you to think from illegal downloading. Each download is treated as a lost sale, which is bull. Most people who illegally download are not going to buy the music even if they lose the ability to download it for free.

blind-as-a-bat_2

Sony, for one, should look at there past, before crying the poor tale of the future they created;)

Wonder if they would have resisted introducing macro vision into there VCR's if they had known then they would own a big chunk of the movie industry now?

They built there empire on technology that was designed to copy stuff, from tape to tape, to writeable CD's etc

It was not until they acquired a big chunk of the music and movie industry did they realise the monster they had created.

pugsley29

what with the petrol prices and now this, feel like joining a revolution, but think I may have to start one instead as there really hasn't been the expected reaction from the British Public hope they wake up soon or all our civil liberties will be gone forever.


I don't like clause 8, reads like it was drafted by a two year old
:mad:
I will just get a VPN anyway, the Labour party does not own the internet, however much they would like to.

SocrateS_2

JasonLVC wrote: »

I thought there was a shift from P2P downloading (the bit that this bill is really focused on and concerns people 'sharing' content) and more towards direct downloads from file depots such as megaupload, hotfile, etc.

The only copyright theft taking place then is the host - who removes the content when requested - (and then someone else uploads it again), the person downloading isn't 'sharing' anything and so circumnavigates this new bill entirely (if I am understanding the bill properly that is).

Trust Labour to introduce a law that is out of date before it is enacted.

Actually,the bill had cross party support, so it was introduced and supposedly read by ALL MPs in the house, that's not just Labour, but Tories and Lib Dems too. So they are infact ALL responsible for its introduction, just Labour carried the can for proposing it.

That said, yes its another incident of MPs thinking they know about a subject when infact they probably don't know anything more about computers than they require electricity and someone to stop them making mistakes, because being human and quite arrogant, people such as 'they' don't make mistakes... ever!

Still I would rather they make these mistakes, so others don't have too. A friend of mine had youtube video uploaded and then it had one of those 'BMG' recognised lables applied and nobody could listen to it, the problem was it was just him talking and explaining what he was doing during the course of some experiment.

He was advised that 'your knowledge COULD be classified and so the lable was applied'. Now imagine the situation in a couple of years, you upload something but some organisation does NOT want anyone else to go reporting something they claim is theirs. This will happen, the likes of Apple are claimed to be making a xxxx widget, someone uploads that to youtube and bang they find they've got no audio because well Apple has decided it would take out a patent to cover that aspect of a future device and as a consequence YOU are not allowed to talk about the concept because it breaches their copyright!'

What the companies have fundamentally done is bring back region coding. It will be a few years but they'll eventually have you restricted to accepting news only from a few sources as for us to venture off online and go and get news from somewhere like Algazerra.net or Reuters.com just because the likes of Murdoch believes he should be able to output the news to a certain country, afterall 'he's invested heavily in providing such services... its only fair!' he'll undoubtedly argue, that or like he did against the BBC, its 'its unfair to his business model or some such nonsense for a publicly funded organisation to offer news free whilst they have to fund journalists etc.

It will happen, the organisations concerned just need to figure out how far they can push and how far respective governments will bend. As we're finding now our government is afraid of some media organisations whilst others curry favour from such, however, they'll expect payment in the future and they'll get it using laws such as these.

SocrateS_2

pugsley29 wrote: »

what with the petrol prices and now this, feel like joining a revolution, but think I may have to start one instead as there really hasn't been the expected reaction from the British Public hope they wake up soon or all our civil liberties will be gone forever.

Unless you were to take a week and provide your time free and sat the 'Great British Public' down and explained to them what they're losing in playschool like tones, complete with language changes and coloured cards. You would bet that 98% of them wouldn't know what you were on about.

The other 1% would get bored and comment 'dunt understand it grandad' as they skulk off to go stab a fellow hoody, for walking down 'their' side of the street! Why? Well 28Cent sayz u gotta show sum respek yeh for our neighbourhood'.

The final 1% would be wondering where it all went wrong.

Here's a start: modernliberty.net/research/what-weve-lost

I don't like clause 8, reads like it was drafted by a two year old
:mad:
I will just get a VPN anyway, the Labour party does not own the internet, however much they would like to.

Labour party don't think they really want the internet, afterall its the other parties that all joined in the bill and want 'something done about the internet' right now its to do the age old 'protect the children from !!!!!philes, the ones that 'The Sun' says are lurking around EVERY corner ready to grab a child!'

They then offer 'proof' in the form of those two 'Drs who left their children without a babysitter as proof that there's a !!!!!phile everywhere, even in Spain!' If you tell them 'there's babysitters too, though those two Drs didn't want to fork out a couple of quid for one' they remove the 'comment box' and pretend you didn't say that as it goes against their message.

Get ready for a lot more of this, they know can claim ownership of information and a whole lot more. Meanwhile the 'Great' British public, well if you can motivate them which I seriously doubt not without throwing a few motivating words at them like 'the assylum seekers are voting: No!' they'll simply not be bothered about it because they don't understand it.

macwrath

OneADay wrote: »

Coz its election time (finally) and pre elections, governments like to push through all the carp unnoticed. And the imbeciles who are elected as members of parliament are more bothered about their Easter holidays and saving their own bacon.

I was so busy watching the diversionary tactics of the Digital Economy Bill that I missed them pushing carp through the chamber - the sneaky, devious carp-pushing devils!

Paulgonnabedebtfree

tomstickland wrote: »

Here's the list of shame (ayes):


http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmdebate/32.htm#hddr_2

I note that my MP, Government rubber stamp extraordinaire, Laura Moffatt voted in favour. I do sometimes wonder if she has a mind of her own or is a government built android (like Thatcher in the old Spitting Image series). At least she bothered to turn up though and at least she didn't milk the expenses like some.
I can see why artists would be peed off with not getting paid for their work though. I certainly would not be happy about people accessing my work and not paying me. I can also see possible reasons why the theft act might have difficulty in covering illegal downloads. I will admit to having downloaded just a few tracks some years ago but I did delete them and went out and bought the CD once I had satisfied myself that I wanted it. Without those downloads I might not have - hard to say really. So it can work the other way too.

chriswatts

Paulgonnabedebtfree wrote: »

I will admit to having downloaded just a few tracks some years ago but I did delete them and went out and bought the CD once I had satisfied myself that I wanted it. Without those downloads I might not have - hard to say really. So it can work the other way too.

That was another reason why music companies don't make so much loss, it was reported your not the only one, of the people who do illegally download, a number will delete and buy the whole album later if they like it.

The music industry doesn't like this because before downloads a album was made up of five to seven good tracks and the rest filler. :mad: So even legal downloading has now resulted in companies having to fill a album with good tracks when they could previously be spread over two albums. Although you can get the same free trial service with a site like Last.fm without having to result to illegal downloading.

MikeyH

tomstickland wrote: »

[/B]
From the Guardian discussion.

This is the obious result of the new laws. As soon as I discovered that my ISP had kept copies of all of my emails back to 2002, I immediately encrypted all of my internet traffic. This will, as it did in Sweden, wake many more people up to the need to do so.