I buy a DVD and I want to watch it on my phone, what should I do? PAY for it AGAIN from itunes? I think not.
I buy a game for xbox, I should be allowed to download the PC version for free as I already own the game, why should I have to pay for it again to play it on another platform?
I own Left4dead on xbox360 and would like to play it on PC too, I should be allowed.

Not really true I’m afraid. A new artist signed to a major label usually signs a contract giving them 12-15% royalties, the record company take around 85%. Yes the record company pay for studio time, promotion, the video shoot, fly the artist around the world etc. However, the record company then CHARGE the artist for all of this. That’s right, the artist ends up paying for all of the record company’s work from their meagre 12-15%. Google Toni Braxton and see what happened to her, she ended up having to declare herself bankrupt for this very reason to protect herself from her record label, who made millions of her album sales. She is not the first and won’t be the last. Some artists are more savvy to this, and they set up their own production company. In that way they sign a flat rate deal for a set amount (Robbie Williams did this with his £80 million deal). The record label rely on the artist producing so many albums, that sell well to recoup the money they pay and make a profit, so in this case it is a risk for the label but not so much for the artist as he or she has already been paid. In some cases the deal is more complex, a flat rate for so many albums and a share of the profits is not unknown for very well known artists. The artist’s production company pays for studio time, video shoots etc. The production company also take the profits from live shows, although in some cases the music label shares the profits depending on the deal struck. This is why big artists become sometimes richer than their record label. For most artists though this isn’t an option because they aren’t powerful enough, well known enough, or don’t have enough money at the start to finance all of this.

The big record labels are just as corrupt as governments and pirates, look at how Edwyn Collins (remember him) was and still is, being treated by Warner Music. When he fell ill he negotiated a deal that meant ALL copyright in his works reverted back to him. However, MySpace recently removed some of his music from his page after a takedown notice from Warner Music, even though they have no right as they DO NOT own the copyright anymore. He has now discovered Warner selling his music via iTunes, illegally, and pocketing the profits. Warner are being the very pirates they accuse all of us of being.

Back to this debate, RM and other’s argue well, but won’t change my mind or anyone else’s to be honest. I rarely download illegal music or movies, I don’t need to myself. I earn a decent wage but I will not pay the inflated prices for new music and movies. Instead I wait a few months, buy my DVD’s from second hand stores or Ebay for 2-3 pounds each, and sometimes even less. When it comes to music I do much the same, if I want the CD I’ll again wait a bit and generally pick it up for a couple of quid, or listen to it via Spotify. Occasionally I’ll download a track of an old song that is difficult to get hold of but that is rare. The reason I don’t download illegally much is more to do with the fact that, when it comes to music anyway, there is just nothing much I actually like anymore. We get one bland, manufactured artist after another. A song from AKON sounds just like a song from Taio Cruz, which sounds just like a song from a hundred other artists who all sound the same. Katy Perry sounds like many others, Lady Gaga does too, Girls Aloud and the Sugababes..what’s the difference?. I get a lot of music from small labels who DO give away music for free, yes they exist.

The big 4 labels destroyed the independent music labels in the 70s, 80s and into the 90s so that now all the better known smaller labels are actually owned by the big 4. The internet has given some smaller labels a way of getting themselves known and promoting their artists that the big 4 don’t like. The smaller labels are much quicker at embracing new technology, some give away whole albums and ask you to donate (which I have done many times), if I think the music is good enough.

The big labels need to wake up and stop trying to protect an outdated business model that isn’t working anymore. Plastic discs are so last century.

If it wasn’t for piracy we would NOT have iTunes and the other online stores. Napster, Audiogalaxy and theiur ilk showed that there was a demand for the downloading of music online. Previously the big labels dismissed it. MP3 as a mass format would not exist if it wasn’t for piracy. Online video sales are the same, they would not exist if it wasn’t pioneered by the pirates. DIVX was not invented as a commercial venture at first that came later. P2P technology pioneered by pirates lead to the rise of Hulu in the US (and the others) and BBC IPlayer, Channel 4OD and the others in the UK as well as to Spotify.

None of these would exist without internet piracy.

Well done labour. You can’t FAIL.

Because an Election is coming up and if every one picks a party that will not pass this legislation, we will not have to worry about it.

Even non file shares should care as they will end up footing the bill as well, in there internet subscription costs.

First, spending over £300m on something only losing £200m (if that’s even accurate) is stupid.

Second, it won’t work. VPNs, proxies, Furk.net… Plus, I can even download music videos off of YouTube from my fucking mobile phone. That’s virtually untraceable and the music on YT is usually licensed too. Plus, as a lot is uploaded by the record companies themselves, it’s high quality.

Third, decrease piracy by 70% in two years? They might as well say they’ll make pigs fly in two years, it’s more likely to happen.

Fourth, this will apparently happen in 2011, and there will be an election in 2010 which our current government is unlikely to win.

Fifth… Good on Talk Talk for standing up to this bullshit!

“Greedy MAFIAA must adapt their archaic business model or die.” While this might be good advice, I wouldn’t try to use industry greed or poor models as justification for any illegal action.

“All information should be free.” It’s a utopian thought but I’m too much of a capitalist to go that far.

“Sharing spurs legitimate sales.” Sure, in some cases that’s true but it’s certainly difficult to quantify and the easy counterclaim is that the added sales don’t offset the losses.

“I wouldn’t buy it anyway.” Again, it might be true in many cases but like the previous argument, it’s hard to quantify and simply defies common sense.

To be taken seriously and actually gain ground, focus on where overreaching laws defy sensibility, where penalties are disproportionate to offenses and where enforcement creates unacceptable collateral damage to civil liberties. There are plenty of these examples and it’s easy to garner widespread support. For example, argue that USA copyright terms are too long. Recall that the standard term used to be 14 years. Stop a minute and imagine how great P2P technology would be if all software, music and videos prior to 1995 was legally free!

Today the maximum term can easily reach 150 years. Furthermore, the maximum has always been retroactively extended every time Mickey Mouse (1928) is about to go free. Copyright protection has become effectively eternal. Nothing “falls” into public domain unless it is placed there. Not only does this policy stiffle legitimate use cases for P2P networks, it seriously deters the advancement of art and science in general.

Also, it’s a silly rule that I haven’t seen enforced in my experience, but .US domains are supposed to be hosted within American territories.

tut tut Talk Talk.

Also, I thought the EU had something to say about Frances idea to do this. Really, do politicians not read the news?

Every reasonable artist has a website where you can buy their stuff directly be it mp3′s or merchandise, effectively cutting out ‘the big labels’.

The old gods are dead. Unfortunately their priests are taking too long to die.

Nuff said.

http://www.laquadrature.net/en/amendment-138-46-adopted-again

You seem to be mistaken that artists have to pay for studio time, etc…

The record company pays for these things; the deal being that they will pay for this, the artist makes an album for them to distribute in return.

If anything the artist makes very very little (if anything) from recording an album, the record label offers to make them popular in return for signing away their artistic offering to them.

The best the artist can hope for is that from the sale of that album people like and become fans, those people then purchase merchandise and go to concerts, this is where the artist makes money.

The record label wants to control the distribution of this album, but for an artist it isn’t required who distributes it only that it is distributed so that their talents can be heard.

If they offer a ‘pay what you want’ sale – don’t download it for free or we’ll never get anywhere.

They’ll be like, well, that didn’t work.

Why is the Cheryl Cole single currently #2 in the Worldwide Sales Chart when it only charted in the UK?

http://www.mediatraffic.de/tracks-week44-2009.htm

Despite the illegal download option, the fact remains that 243,000 people bizarrely still chose to pay good money to purchase this crap song while we’re in a recession. How can the music industry possibly be in danger with sales like that?

And regarding Radiohead, I’m proof that people are still prepared to pay for quality when a free copy is available. I’m a huge fan of the band and actually purchased the £50 box set.

Yes that is why open source companies are making millions without any protection.

That is why although piracy is rampant the 10% top artists that make money today are making more money then they have at the beginning of the decade. Because nobody is paying nothing…right! I see now.

So there would be no music, no films and no games or software?

Explain, how is that miro have thousands of free video channels?
Explain how open source software is so bad that the U.S. army is saying to their officers to use it more.
Explain why is that even with free music on the internet and around the house of millions people still manage to go buy crap from artists?
Why people go to theaters?
Why people buy apparel?
Why people buy action figures?
Why the f*** people are still paying for things?

You moronic copyright enthusiasts are called morons for a reason.

If artists don’t get money from filesharing they sure are getting from somewhere. Music have many revenue streams and some are bitching about one or two that are dying.

People didn’t have to pay before and they paid anyways. What, you don’t believe me? so explain what is free radio and TV and exactly how much people who watch free TV or listen to free radio paid in all these pass decades?

Wake up morons. It was always free. Double decks was created for what? those connections behind every VCR to connect 2 of them was for playing?

Oh, right but this time is a perfect copy. BS, download any video file and it is not a DVD quality is more like video tapes. MP3 are not high quality so sod off.

Besides you guys keep using the word stealing when it is not.

@reasoned behind-you wouldn’t know a fact if i forcefully inserted it in your butthole dip shit.

The only cure for these traitors of the people is a lead lobotomy!!!

Just shut the fuck up already. I’m sick of you arrogant wannabe intellectual philosophers telling us what is a right and what is a privilege. You can shove your debates up your ass. The internet is anarchy and it’s the only true freedom we have left in this world. If you want to be a cocksucker for the New World Order goons then take your own internet away because it’s a ‘privilege’ and leave the rest of us in peace. I pay almost $100 for the ‘privilege’ to connect to the WWW. IT’S NOT FUCKING FREE YOU.

When was the last awesome good movie, like Terminator 1, or Star Wars 3-6, or Goonies, or even Matrix. Movies now just suck which make people resort to NOT GOING TO THE MOVIE’s.

You are assuming 100% of the people who download won’t buy. That’s a lie – I’m proof it’s a lie. I’ll scan my original God of War II I just bought and the copy I got from TPB and post somewhere if needed.

I can also do that with my Nightwish folder. I bought 3 CDs from them already. None of them were ever played (I listen to the mp3 I downloaded) and all of them were just bought BECAUSE I downloaded (I might have never got in touch with the group if ti wasn’t for a friend pointing me a torrent to get the songs).

That said, explain me how piracy means no sales. Please. And don’t go telling I’m the minority. Most of my friends do that too.

I’m waiting for sane prices and a decent source to buy various songs online. And maybe movies too. And softwares too.

Remember, there’s almost no cost in replicating digital media. The environment won’t suffer if you lower your prices by 50% and sell 10 times more.

Actually a couple of British people have been captured by Somali Pitaes

Presumable these Pirates also think they have a right to “goods” peoples property and rights for nothing?

I’d like to see some of the people who argue something for nothing or free warez is good sail out there and not raise a fuss when their goods are captured for nothing. I’d bet they’d want the law to come rushing to their aid then?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6896168.ece

Using a VPN to dload Radioheads give aways(legally) I got 150kb/s so Talk Talk are throttling to protect the “user experience”

In no way should ISPs police the internet, and why should people lose the use of the internet entirely.

But make no mistake, mass stealing via “sharing” will not be tolerated and ISPs will never support that, it is illegal, afterall.

One way or another mass piracy will be and needs to be stopped, otherwise they will be no music or films to leech without contributing.

Music will all be live, god knows what’ll happen to films , but if it’s not vastly reduced, there will be very little TO pirate. PC games will go, as no-=one will produce for them, it’ll be all consoles. NO Music, no PC games, no DVDs, life will be poorer, all beacuase pwople believe they have a right to “something for nothing”

The onlke ones who can put a semi-cogent argument for illegal torrents are the ones taht argue that Hollywood et al need to change their distrubtion mode, that is unquestionably right. I’m sick of all the “added extras” and fluff that come ithe CDs and DVDs, rootkits DRM etc etc.

But I stillk fail to see how that gives peoiple the right top own “something for nothing” and not contribute to the artists whose talent should be rewarded.

Yes Posh spice is paid an obscene amount of money as is her husband Beckham. So is Matt Damon, Jonny Depp and Neo, how many millions do you need? Yes (in my opinion) Lily Allen’s music is crap. But how does that give people the right(?) to have a copy withouit paying for a copy? Just beacuse they can?

At one time, the powers that be, when VCRs first came out, decared that “timeshifting” a program was illegal. This is TV program put out on terrestial TV, free-to-air, either paid for by advertising or a licence fee in the UK (pre Sky days)This meant, technically, that you could only uise a VCR to watch pre-recorded tapes(!)or record you own stuff.(From a camcorder. Eventually the law was changed by Parliament in the UK so that you could “timeshift” a program, i.e, record it to watch it later, but (again) technically once watched, you are (legally) supposed to delete it, as “archiving” a program is breaking copyright as all programs have that (c) symbol and a date on them and a (c)opyright owner.

I’m sure that now in the days of the internet and DVD recorders that all seems a bit twee.

Even playing a record (CD) these days to a public audience requires a licence, hence our very small haidresser salon requires a PBS certificate to play CDs, otherwise they are breaking the law by playing music to an audience! All very archaic to todays everytnings free on the net. Take Spotify, a much lauded music service, free to anyone with a pC, buit they(Spotify) are still paying a fee to play that music.

“Home taping is killing Music” No it didn’t because you had a poor copy that detoriated over time. OK to listen to try but if you liked it you bought a real record (or CD)
Much like the argument some people usse on here. The big difference is though, the internet has brought mass copying and sharing(stealing) with perfect copies, no degradation, no hiss, no dropout.

I agree that the best way to counteract this is to offer reasonably priced methodologies to acquire content via the internet, without all the nonsense like DVD extras, prety leaflets and sleeves nobody ever looks at or watches.

I have stacks of legally acquired DVDs that have useless extra DVDs with claptrap such as Directors commentarys(!) Hilarious deleted scenes(!) that I have never watched.
Prett sleves and usless info I never look at. Like at lot of people I just want to watch the film, play the game use the software, listen to the music.

Radiohead had the right idea. You can dload it, no fancy sleeve, no jewel case putting more plastic into the environment, name your price (I paid £2 instead of about £8) the money went to Radiohead, instead of some corporate at EMI. Radiohead facilitated the way I’d like to buy media or content.

The problem that many people on this board cannot understand though is this:-
Radiohead are relatively rich haviing ahd a successful 14year carrer. They could aford to takle the risk. It probably worked and they got paid, probably more than they would have got if they’d have stayed with EMI, and fans got the music at a lower price.

But I still obtained it legally. I didn’t borrow it, share it, or steal it, whichever term you wish to use.
Nay CDs I buy, say Muse’s latest. AM I allowed to copy it so I can have the original in the CD player, a copy on my hard drive, and a burnt copy in the car. If one is only on one media at a time that is OK, but if my son wants to play the copy on the hard drive, my wife wants to listen in the car, and I listen o0n the CD player, I should have 3 copies. As I don’t own the music, (Muse’s publisher owns it) I only have a licence to play a copy on my CD player.

But at least I have still bought 1 copy in the first place.

However in the “pirate” world” only 1 person needs to buy a copy of Muse’s latest CD.

If they then uplaod it to TPB and all 25m unique peers dload it (unlikely, I know, but possible) Muse aint going to make any money are they. They’ve had to pay for Studio time, technicians, euipment etc etc, they aint gonna keep doing that are they?

Pirate will make the argument that enough people will still buy it so it’s OK for me to have a copy without paying for it as all the other stupid people i.e over 40 will still but it from Play, Amazon HMV etc etc. But as the genie is now out of the bottle and as the ” internet generation ” grow up and get replaced by internet savvy kids, the people wiling to buy physical media/dloads etc etc will decrease and die out. The opinion on here mainly seems to be I want it for free, you cant put a fee on 1s and zeros, I want it, it may be against the law but that law is stupi and anyone who disagrees, is alos stupid. Now I have n o time for Mandelson, he is a snake, and has been thrown out of Parliament three times, but the Conservatives in the UK are even more brown nosed with Big Business, and believe me, you haven’t seen anything yet.

But that isn’t an argument for I’m standing up for my rights I want it free.

I use flickr. My photos are there on a creative commons licence, people can use them. But If I was really god, I would want payiong for my time and efforet, my investment, if someon wants to use my hard work, they should damn well pay for it. If it commands £500 pounds or £10,000. I presume most people on this site, if they are old enough, and aren’t Kiddee Pirates ankle biters, earn money or may do so in the future. I presume they think they work hard and think they should get a fair days pay for a fair days work. Imagine working for BP say, as a geolist, discovering an oilfiels after 6 months hard work and BP sya well done for finding that oilfiels after 6 months hard work using your skills in some godforsaken jungle in Sth America. now piss off you are sacked , oh and by the way we want it for fre, beacuse we can, how can you claim any money, it’s just atoms right? Any one could have found it, if they l;ooked in the right place? Sod you, we don’t agree with paying you for hard work, we are giving oil away for free. What’s the incentive to get another job?

TiVo failed in the UK…

True. I noticed that recently a few DVDs/Blu-rays are being sold with a digital copy you are allowed, i.e., it is legal to rip to a portable video device, e.g. iPod. I admit, I haven’t bought one yet, but I have heard that the quality is down right shit and you are allowed do it once only. Does this mean that it is o.k. to rip all movies to my iPod, or only the ones that come with Digital Copy.
This does raise a serious problem. I use Imtoo DVD Ripper, a program that you have to pay for (I cracked mine). It provides a high quality DVD ripping service, but such an act is illegal. Yet, the legal alternative is of a fair lower quality. So why should people choose the legal method, when the illegal method offers better quality, better features (you can encode subtitles) and more copies.

Sooner or later they have to come to terms with where they stand legally anyway. Probably will be cheaper for them anyways if those terms like came yesterday already.

I just wanted to say…well done, simply splendid. That is one of the most well thought out, worded, and reasonable posts I’ve ever seen in the comments section.

Im also curious what their strategy is going to be when this has failed to have the desired affect of 70% reduction in 2 years.

its only going to push piracy more underground by means of encryption.

Anyone else smell a white list internet coming along?

I wouldn’t mind it too much if they could actually prove they are loosing money due to piracy.

… how people think it is right to share stolen material I have yet to see a cogent argument.

Here is your cogent argument…

Your premise is biased. I will agree that it is not right to share stolen material. However, I do not agree that your description accurately portrays the central issues of this debate.

It is appreciated that you at least said “share” instead of “fence” but copyright infringement does not fit the legal or common definition of “stealing.” If I buy a DVD and give a copy to you, I’m not sharing anything stolen. Now, reframe your premise using common language that doesn’t immediately bias the debate in your favor. Is it right to make a copy of a work so that you now have two copies? In some cases, yes. That’s called fair use. Is it right to give a copy of a work to somebody who has not paid for it? In some cases, yes. That’s called lending. It happens everyday in libraries around the world.

Is it legal to make a copy, give one away and keep one for yourself? No, it’s not legal. Is it right? In some cases many people would say, yes it’s right. For example, you record a TV show and I record the same show. Your copy is accidently destroyed. I give you a copy of mine. Take a survey and you’d find most people consider that alright even though it is illegal. This is a clear example where the law begins to misalign with public opinion. There are lots of examples. How come CD rentals are illegal but DVD rentals are OK? How come you can rip a CD for a iPod but can’t rip a DVD for a Video iPod? Why are out-of-print works still protected by copyright? Why is Tivo OK and Slingbox is OK but a Tivo/Slingbox combination is illegal? Why does Hulu only work in the USA? Why does Zune allow sharing photos but not music when both are equally copyrightable? Why is TPB contributory infringement but Smith and Wesson isn’t contributory murder? Sure, there is a story and rationale behind each of these questions but to the average man on the street the laws and enforcement appear illogical and arbitrary.

Now try offering some cogent arguments entering the debate from the opposing side. Are the term lengths for copyright appropriate? Do copyright laws best serve the advancement of art and science? Should anti-circumvention trump fair use? Should hiding the secrets of CSS trump the free-speech right to publish or even link to DeCSS algorithms? Why are ISPs responsible for enforcing copyright law? Where is the line on contributory infringement and how do you decide when a service or technology has crossed it?

Not the connection, the way they are trying to disconnect the users without a fair trial.

RM, you keep blabbing nonsense as a parrot. Obviously there are people in the p2p community that don’t give a sh*t about the artists or the structure behind a movie/song/etc. However, it’s not because of those people that the majority should be labeled.

It has been said, stated, researched a whole lot of times that what the consumers want is sane prices, availability and sensible use of the copyrights. The industry and people like you that fail to see ahead are responsible for their own failures. The door is there, wide open, you just have to go through it and start profiting with a new model.

Why the fear to change? Why the resistance?

By the way, Google just launched a nice music search tool. Awesome! Thumbs up for the initiative! Hope the results include sites to buy in my country.

In a sense intellectual property is a selfish scheme that don’t improve anything, it hold back evolution, creates a disproportional market that is unsustainable and will fall eventually.

If filesharing is recast as legal to take product without paying, we should expect an assault on all prices pushing all gods to be freely available and underwritten by crushing taxes. There IS NO FREE lunch, folks.

If filesharing is recast as legal nothing will happen or the music industry would have already flopped a long time ago. It been more then 10 years now and people still support their favorite artists. Nothing changed that much.

Did you know that in the U.S. is against the law to trash talk about the food industry?

When did they pass those laws?

Dying economies love intellectual property although it will kill them in the end they still love it. Intellectual property behaves exactly like cancer and have the same consequences for their host LoL