A new ridiculous EU law - for whom it may concern

[Amn]

European Union (EU) has proposed a law which forbids any form of transferring music and other digital information bought on CDs for private use to other mediums, including MP3, CD, and DVD so far. This means, if you bought a music CD, you could face charges if you as little as burned a copy of it to listen to in your car stereo. How is that for a democracy ?

I personally think, this is an example on our hands, which tells how delusive and abusive word like "democracy" can be, and that in reality only thing that seems to matter to many is cashflow and power. Sad thought indeed. If this law should be accepted, I am afraid piracy will accelerate to skyhigh levels, at least because of people's bitterness over such a braindead, unweighted and ignorant and egoistic proposal for a law. Such a law will be hard to maintain.

In Denmark the law is stepping into power on December the 22th. Who's next ? Norway is most likely to obey this political failure as well - upcoming summer. How are things in U.S ? Or Asia ? Or Australia ?

Please, make yourself useful - vote...vote here, and vote wherever you live...

Rephrasing a popular quote:
"Never underestimate stupid corrupted politicians in large groups".

[Garrett Headley]

First of all, you need a checkbox for "Politicians really are that stupid".

Anyways, it sounds like one of those laws that will be impossible to enforce, since everyone does it. In the US, it is already illegal to make casette copies of albums/CDs, but I doubt any home user has ever been prosecuted for doing so.

[Amn]

"Politicians really are that stupid" is incorporated as the poll option "Again, Amn, that's life"

Besides, i cannot edit my own poll
But hey, moderators here are known for editing polls

[dimm_coder]

And why are U so surprised?

I think, that if some music group or single performer does what he does for creation, not for money, he can let to get his music even over Internet for download ("open source" ). And he or they can get money from their concerts for example.

This is world of money.

Pink Floyd - Money
___________________________

Money, get away.
Get a good job with good pay and you're okay.
Money, it's a gas.
Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash.
New car, caviar, four star daydream,
Think I'll buy me a football team.

Money, get back.
I'm all right Jack keep your hands off of my stack.
Money, it's a hit.
Don't give me that do goody good bullshit.
I'm in the high-fidelity first class traveling set
And I think I need a Lear jet.

Money, it's a crime.
Share it fairly but don't take a slice of my pie.
Money, so they say
Is the root of all evil today.
But if you ask for a raise it's no surprise that they're
giving none away.

[Simon666]

In Belgium one party is planning even worse : you would be allowed to copy it. Now I hear you shout : Yippieeee!!!!!

But wait, here comes the clue: the artists rights (read : music business CEO's fat paycheck) would still be paid and this would be done by raising taxes upon the sale of information barers such as cd's, hard disks, possibly the computer itself, ...

This means that everybody who doesn't download music from the net (read : me) who have to pay for these bosos through paying a fat tax surplus upon the purchase of cd-rw's and computers (through hard-disk or entirety). Also note that there are already taxes on cd-rw who are then send to the organisations managing these rights.

Luckily, it's still just a proposition. Just to let you know that even if you do not have to pay for this or if this will not be forbidden, people will beat the money out of your pockets. That is also why I voted I don't care.

[Elrond]

Originally posted by Simon666
But wait, here comes the clue: the artists rights (read : music business CEO's fat paycheck) would still be paid and this would be done by raising taxes upon the sale of information barers such as cd's, hard disks, possibly the computer itself, ...

Belgium are small players

In France, they are planning to do both. In fact, I think the tax on CDs already exists (it has to be confirmed), and this EU law may be accepted as well, helped by som new technologies that would prevent copyrighted product to be copied. It means that you will not be able to do private copies any more, but will pay taxes when you buy CDs (even if not to record or copy music) and that this money will end up in the pocket of the artists. Isn't that wonderful

The end result is that the price of insurance will increase for cars, because when your car is broken in, people will steal original copies instead of private copies of your CDs. I don't have a CD car radio anymore. Insurance:"We don't care! Pay!".

[Simon666]

Originally posted by Elrond
In France, they are planning to do both. In fact, I think the tax on CDs already exists (it has to be confirmed),...

I already said it exists in Belgium for some time. Maybe it is in the entire EU, don't know. Anyway, I don't buy that many CD's any more - expensive and good metal is hard to find on the radio - so I am rather angry I have to pay extra on my backup CD's and stuff for people that do download music. Not that I am angry at them. I'm wondering : why can't music just be free for download, and artists make there money out of concerts, selling T-shirts and other goodies with their name on it. If they really or in it for the art (hahahahahahahahahaha... ) they shouldn't object.

What's that noise overhead? Hey look, a black helicopter. What the...? Aaaaarrrggghhh....

[Elrond]

Originally posted by Simon666
I already said it exists in Belgium for some time.

Sorry, I misunderstood. "the artists rights would still be paid and this would be done by raising taxes" sounds like it's not done yet.

Maybe it is in the entire EU, don't know. Anyway, I don't buy that many CD's any more - expensive and good metal is hard to find on the radio - so I am rather angry I have to pay extra on my backup CD's and stuff for people that do download music. Not that I am angry at them. I'm wondering : why can't music just be free for download, and artists make there money out of concerts, selling T-shirts and other goodies with their name on it. If they really or in it for the art (hahahahahahahahahaha... ) they shouldn't object.

There's a few very good reasons for that. The first is that registering a CD is a hard and expensive work.

The other, even more appropriate is that some people do music that no one will go see in a concert for one of the two following reasons:
- This is music made to be listened at home, or in Dance clubs, ...
- The artists are just crap in live music.

I've seen a few group that I loved to listen on my stereo, and that have disappointing me a lot in live concert. I still continue to buy their CDs, and I agree to pay for the pleasure they give me, but I will not go to see them again in concert.

And (almost) only teenagers buy T-shirt from their favorite groups. It's not relevant for all kind of music.

On the other, this would make concert MUCH more expensive, as the artists would still have to live, and people would not go.

Piracy is a real problem, that should be solved, but I don't know how. Sure it's a problem when people not concerned by it have to pay for it.

[Simon666]

Originally posted by Elrond
Sorry, I misunderstood. "the artists rights would still be paid and this would be done by raising taxes" sounds like it's not done yet.

Sorry, should have added "even further". But this is only the case for cd-rw's, I don't know if this is already the case for hard disks.

About the rest, you are right. But they will never be able to make it impossible to copy although they are still trying, as you can always record the played music analog and convert it back to digital, albeit quality loss. So they try to make it illegal. It's been tried with alcohol, but given up, it's still "working" for cannabis, but people are slowing given that one up also, so for music it will certainly also be impossible, in my opinion.

Anyway, I'll guess we'll have to wait a few years and see what happens.

[irona20]

Originally posted by Elrond
Piracy is a real problem, that should be solved, but I don't know how. Sure it's a problem when people not concerned by it have to pay for it.

Piracy is good for musicians too. I have bought many CDs of groups that had not known if before other CDs had not copied.
And I have gone to concerts for the same reason.

I do not buy less CDs than before, on the contrary, with piracy I buy more CDs because I can listen to more music.

[Amn]

I don't object artists making money, that would be totally out of line. I respect their art, and I am willing to pay for it. However this law has nothing to do with it.

I object the record industry, ruthlessly "going over dead bodies" to get their will, no matter what it will cost, no matter the freedom, no matter the opinions of others. They are basically like a flock of wild animals running over prairies. Horrible. This will hit us from behind, i am telling you. They are so desperate, and so desperately broke. They are broke, because of their unwillingness to move their lazy butts and start thinking creatively about what new mediums to invest to, and how does P2P work, and why is it so successful. If they had been a yota smarter, they would have figured out even how to make P2P work for them. But as long as the arena is dominated by fat, old, greedy businessmen, there is no room for free thought, but merely for enslavement for own purpose.

[John E]

Originally posted by Amn
the arena is dominated by fat, old, greedy businessmen

This has been a personal hobby horse of mine for a LONG time - and I have to say that nobody could have put that statement better! For years, the music industry has blamed every new technology for the fact that it's losing revenue. They're currently blaming MP3 and the internet but this nonsense goes right back to the earliest days of the personal cassette.

The REAL reason why the industry is losing money is because it consistently fails to invest in the talent it needs to sell records. Back in the 60's and 70's (I don't want to sound like an old fuddy duddy) artistes were nurtured by YOUNG record company executives for their talent and originality. From the Beatles and the Stones, right through to Pink Floyd (via Motown and Reggae, Bubblegum, Rock, Punk, New Wave and Heavy Metal et al) the record industry was bursting with diverse and ORIGINAL artistes - and the result was a large and varied audience aged between 14 and 30 (i.e. an average age of 22).

Nowadays BUSINESSMEN manufacture bands from kids who have some (though often little) talent and even less originality. The result is that modern artistes sound professional enough but their songs are often unsophisticated and unsophisticated songs only appeal to people with unsophisticated tastes (i.e. SCHOOLKIDS). It's a fact that the average record-buying age at the moment is about 12 - nearly half of what it was 20 years ago.

Now it stands to reason that 12 year olds don't have as much money as 22 year olds. Therefore music revenues are falling. But this isn't because of piracy - it's because music today is bland and samey. It has to be like that because it's meant to appeal to 12 year olds. BUT (and it keeps coming back to this) 12 year olds DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY - and THAT is why the music business is in the doldrums.....

[Yves M]

Complicated topic...

I do think like Simon that it is unfair practice and even coercion that the RIAA (ok, we should really say the gang of 5 music giants) is making money off the CDs I use to backup my computer every now and then. It is unfair that they should get a dime when a company buys 100 new PCs for their running business. A computer is NOT a cassette deck and has many more uses for non-MP3 or music piracy related activities than otherwise.

Like John said, one of the big problems in the music biz is the fact that it is too consolidated. There are 5 record companies, that's all. There is ONE radio station operator in the US. Think about that... With consolidation comes power and they are using it to coerce these kind of laws.

But, I think the problem will get better. Why is everyone downloading MP3s instead of going to a record shop, listen and maybe buy one or two CDs ? Simply put, because
a) You have a larger choice. The number of bands that your local shop stocks might not include the ones you are actually looking for.
B) Fine-grained choice. You like a certain track. Why do you have to shell out 20ˆ for a CD where you only like one track ?
C) Easy to access. You are at home, relaxed, no traffic and can just browse to see if you like something.
D) Playlists. CDs hold 12 songs. My computer holds 1000 songs or even more. I have methodically ripped all my CDs to MP3s, just so that I can make nice playlists and don't have to worry about changing CDs anymore.
E) Cost. I put this as the last reason, since IMHO it's not the most important one. It is important for the schoolkids that John mentions, but for many people, the reasons above are already compelling enough.

So the day that you will be able to do all this from a music company's website, without hassle, even paying for the songs, then illegal MP3 will be less of a problem.

Anyways, the day we have to use Palladium, we even won't be able to listen to our own ripped MP3s anymore :/

[galathaea]

It is definitely a problem with the industry. Artists who publish their work independently on their own label can make up to 4 or 5 dollars U.S. per CD sold, whereas major labels will give them a couple of dimes. Most major artists make most of their money on tours, and even there it is only a small fraction of the money available. It is the cash-hog industry execs who, instead of trying to understand the dynamics of their industry, are pushing to sterilize it from any innovation (including artistic and distribution model) to hold on to their big pieces of property. And the only way that pops through their narrow little minds is by the gunpoint of law...

[Amn]

It's very refreshing to hear opinions of such great thinkers as you guys

Because for a moment i thought I am surrounded by greed. Of course everyone has to put food on table, but amounts of food execs can buy far excceeds reasonable human needs
This all also proves that smart people don't rule dumb people - dumb people, elected by other dumb people, rule both the dumb and the smart. Smart don't like it though.

Yves, I also agree with you on the definite advantage of new digital media. CD's are history - they are big, bulky, easily distorted and scratched (as much as they are praised for their long lifetime), while MP3's are usually stored on modern harddisks, which are much more crash proof than CD's, and virtually can each hold half of the average music store database. Only a lunatic would choose CD's over MP3's. Or only where its REALLY necessary, like with a legacy car CD player. All other cases, I am afraid, are not favoured.

While i am not afraid of any protection technique in use today, simply because they suffer the same lack of creativity and/or decency, Palladium will be the first thing to REALLY affect piract. It is simply completely another approach to the matter. It is one thing to encode a DVD stream with a public key, sell (note the word SELL) the public key to DVD player manufacturers under oath of silence, and then claim DVD is copy protected, but its another thing to hide whole strategy in hardware. It will make it MUCH more difficult to crack, cimply because another level of skills is needed, which not many 16 year old hackers posess, and even if they do, the whole computer runs Palladium circuits, and it will be like complicated surgery to perform such a cracking task. Personally i welcome Palladium system, but I fear it will bring with it more than we really want. It not only contributes to functioning copy-protection, but also to semi-legal person surveillance, data monitoring and a whole bunch of doubtfull benefits. We will have to live with it at least a year, before details will start to show up.