'Storage Tax' for 'right to copy'?

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Evil Bastard, Oct 8, 2005.

  1. Evil Bastard

    Evil Bastard Guest

    I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
    the rights to:
    - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use

    (*) There'd need to be some clarification of which works are 'fair game'
    for download/copy. Possibly this category could exclude works which are
    out of the peak of their life cycle - eg movies at pre-release or
    premier screening phase, or songs in the top 20, but allow
    anything/everything else.

    This could be a huge win-win for consumers and publishers.

    Consumers could have inexpensive and legal access to a vast abundance of
    material, while publishers/artists could earn a passive income without
    the massive marketing/distribution costs they have historically incurred.

    This would also do away with the frustrations of the 'legal downloads'
    biz - with its relatively high cost per song/video, its DRM and other
    stupid restrictions and complications.

    Many artists will flourish if their work is allowed to spread virally,
    without needing to be 'pushed' via heavy marketing outlay.

    A good precedent for this is the APRA regime for performing 'cover'
    versions of songs in live venues, and recovering bulk royalty payments
    from live venues - this regime worked really well for everyone during
    the 'pub rock' boom of the 70s/80s. Applied to P2P, there could be some
    kind of monitoring which works are being trafficked and how much, to
    determine each artist/publisher's deserved share of the tax take.

    Thoughts?

    --
    Cheers
    EB

    --

    One who is not a conservative by age 20 has no brain.
    One who is not a liberal by age 40 has no heart.
     
    Evil Bastard, Oct 8, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Evil Bastard

    Harry Guest

    Evil Bastard wrote:

    >
    > I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
    > the rights to:
    > - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    > a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    > - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
    >


    Maybe you should also be allowed to steal freely provided you pay some taxes?

    Perhaps you should try stealing from some *friends* and sharing the
    proceeds with some other *friends*. With friends like you we can
    all have everything for free! Whoopdedoo!
     
    Harry, Oct 8, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Evil Bastard

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Evil Bastard wrote:
    > I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
    > the rights to:
    > - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    > a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    > - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
    >
    > (*) There'd need to be some clarification of which works are 'fair game'
    > for download/copy. Possibly this category could exclude works which are
    > out of the peak of their life cycle - eg movies at pre-release or
    > premier screening phase, or songs in the top 20, but allow
    > anything/everything else.
    >
    > This could be a huge win-win for consumers and publishers.
    >
    > Consumers could have inexpensive and legal access to a vast abundance of
    > material, while publishers/artists could earn a passive income without
    > the massive marketing/distribution costs they have historically incurred.
    >
    > This would also do away with the frustrations of the 'legal downloads'
    > biz - with its relatively high cost per song/video, its DRM and other
    > stupid restrictions and complications.
    >
    > Many artists will flourish if their work is allowed to spread virally,
    > without needing to be 'pushed' via heavy marketing outlay.
    >
    > A good precedent for this is the APRA regime for performing 'cover'
    > versions of songs in live venues, and recovering bulk royalty payments
    > from live venues - this regime worked really well for everyone during
    > the 'pub rock' boom of the 70s/80s. Applied to P2P, there could be some
    > kind of monitoring which works are being trafficked and how much, to
    > determine each artist/publisher's deserved share of the tax take.
    >
    > Thoughts?
    >


    I think it is a bad idea for two reasons:

    1 - why should I subsidise other people's "free" music? Since I don't
    download and burn commercial music I have no interest in subsidising
    others who do this. I mostly use CDs for backups, distributing software,
    photographs and for trying various Linux distributions.

    2 - you are well out of date, who uses CDs for music anyway? Music that
    I do download never makes it onto CD; it is much easier to manage on a
    fileserver. In fact every CD I buy goes onto the fileserver immediately
    anyway (not that I even buy many these days).
     
    -=rjh=-, Oct 8, 2005
    #3
  4. Evil Bastard

    thingy Guest

    Harry wrote:
    > Evil Bastard wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
    >>the rights to:
    >> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    >> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    >> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
    >>

    >
    >
    > Maybe you should also be allowed to steal freely provided you pay some taxes?
    >
    > Perhaps you should try stealing from some *friends* and sharing the
    > proceeds with some other *friends*. With friends like you we can
    > all have everything for free! Whoopdedoo!
    >


    Not quite the same argument. The cost of distribution, & re-production
    is just about zero, the artists get their % from the % put on CD-rs, so
    there is no stealing.

    The argument is you pay a lot more for CD-r blanks instead of paying
    directly for a "real" CD. I have issues with that, but Canada etc does
    this sort of thing on a smaller scale.

    regards

    Thing
     
    thingy, Oct 8, 2005
    #4
  5. Evil Bastard

    thingy Guest

    -=rjh=- wrote:
    > Evil Bastard wrote:
    >
    >> I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
    >> the rights to:
    >> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    >> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    >> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
    >>
    >> (*) There'd need to be some clarification of which works are 'fair game'
    >> for download/copy. Possibly this category could exclude works which are
    >> out of the peak of their life cycle - eg movies at pre-release or
    >> premier screening phase, or songs in the top 20, but allow
    >> anything/everything else.
    >>
    >> This could be a huge win-win for consumers and publishers.
    >>
    >> Consumers could have inexpensive and legal access to a vast abundance of
    >> material, while publishers/artists could earn a passive income without
    >> the massive marketing/distribution costs they have historically incurred.
    >>
    >> This would also do away with the frustrations of the 'legal downloads'
    >> biz - with its relatively high cost per song/video, its DRM and other
    >> stupid restrictions and complications.
    >>
    >> Many artists will flourish if their work is allowed to spread virally,
    >> without needing to be 'pushed' via heavy marketing outlay.
    >>
    >> A good precedent for this is the APRA regime for performing 'cover'
    >> versions of songs in live venues, and recovering bulk royalty payments
    >> from live venues - this regime worked really well for everyone during
    >> the 'pub rock' boom of the 70s/80s. Applied to P2P, there could be some
    >> kind of monitoring which works are being trafficked and how much, to
    >> determine each artist/publisher's deserved share of the tax take.
    >>
    >> Thoughts?
    >>

    >
    > I think it is a bad idea for two reasons:
    >
    > 1 - why should I subsidise other people's "free" music? Since I don't
    > download and burn commercial music I have no interest in subsidising
    > others who do this. I mostly use CDs for backups, distributing software,
    > photographs and for trying various Linux distributions.
    >
    > 2 - you are well out of date, who uses CDs for music anyway? Music that
    > I do download never makes it onto CD; it is much easier to manage on a
    > fileserver. In fact every CD I buy goes onto the fileserver immediately
    > anyway (not that I even buy many these days).


    1) I agree, I do not download music, I dont see why I should heavily
    subsidise the people who do.

    I also fail to see why a Linux, or BSD user should pay a music tax to
    make install cds and why anybody should pay a music tax to do backup to
    CDs, that is unfair.

    If I did downlaod I would be happy to pay $1~2 per song that saves me
    getting the 8 or 10 other crappy songs on the album I dont want and
    doing my own "best of" mix on a CD is then way easier.

    What I would consider unfair is to pay for a CD that I was copying music
    to off my vinyl records or to make best of sets off a collection of CDs,
    Ive paid the artist, once, that is fair. This is one of the things that
    really gets my goat, So I could either "break the law" and carry 1 or 2
    cdrs of my favourite mixes or carry 10~20 originals with the danger of
    damage and theft just so some fat suit gets to make even more money,
    sorry that is not fair.

    2) Media centres are the way to go, want to go out? just squirt songs
    onto the ipod / phone and you are off...

    regards

    Thing
     
    thingy, Oct 8, 2005
    #5
  6. In article <>,
    Harry <> wrote:

    >Evil Bastard wrote:
    >
    >> I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
    >> the rights to:
    >> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    >> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    >> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use

    >
    >Maybe you should also be allowed to steal freely provided you pay some taxes?


    And so another USENET debate descends into a typically emotive morass.

    I thought EB made a point worthy of some thought, and here all you can
    think of doing is responding in a mindless knee-jerk fashion, and push
    your "close-mind" button by using the word "steal" to pre-empt further
    debate, thereby suggesting that anybody who believes EB has a valid
    point must ipso facto be advocating criminality.

    You suck.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 8, 2005
    #6
  7. T'was the Sun, 09 Oct 2005 10:21:01 +1300 when I remembered Lawrence
    D'Oliveiro <_zealand> saying something like
    this:

    >And so another USENET debate descends into a typically emotive morass.
    >

    <snip>
    >
    >You suck.


    Uh, did you just comment about someone turning a debate into emotive
    morass, then said the person sucked?
    --
    Cheers,

    Waylon Kenning.
     
    Waylon Kenning, Oct 9, 2005
    #7
  8. Evil Bastard

    steve Guest

    Evil Bastard wrote:
    > I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
    > the rights to:
    > - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    > a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    > - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use


    I have hundreds of writeable CDs and perhaps ONE of them contains any
    music I have captured from CD to play on my lounge DVD player.

    I'd not be happy with the assumption that most discs are used to copy
    music.
     
    steve, Oct 9, 2005
    #8
  9. Evil Bastard

    MarkH Guest

    Evil Bastard <> wrote in
    news:4347b8cd$:

    >
    > I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange
    > for the rights to:
    > - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    > a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    > - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use


    I would much rather see new download sites for MP3s, Movies and TV
    programs. They should have very fast download speeds with mirrors all
    over the world and should contain all available content including the
    latest movies just released and TV programs aired this week. The
    quality should be high and free of glitches.

    I would happily pay in US$ around $0.50 per song, $1 per TV program and
    $2 per movie. This could easily provide a tidy profit for all involved
    due to the very low cost of providing the bandwidth (3-6MB per song,
    350MB per TV program and 700MB per movie - all very high quality).

    Once set up then I would have no problem with some heavy punishments
    going out to those that setup illegal pirated download sites.

    I would happily pay $20 with my credit card for $20 credit with this
    legal download site, after downloading $20 worth of content then I can
    pay again.

    I have already tried to join Napster, but with no success (I don't think
    that they accept overseas CCs). It doesn't seem too bad to pay US$1 per
    song if they can provide good content that I want.

    As long as the artists receive about 50% of the money collected then
    they could make quite a tidy profit - especially for the musicians that
    skip the recording label and offer the music to the site themselves.
    (How much do the musicians earn for each CD sold now?)


    On the idea of paying a piracy tax on CDs and DVDs, how do I claim a
    refund for the failed burns (like when the Knoppix CD didn't work due to
    a corrupted .iso file, after redownloading and burning again it worked
    fine) and non pirated materials. I pay for the internet connection that
    I use to download the Linux .iso files, I pay for the blank CD and DVD
    disks - why should I pay more?

    I notice that Debian Sarge is available on 14 .iso files - a piracy tax
    on CDs would make it cheaper to use the network install, unless you need
    to install on a large number of PCs.

    Basically I am completely against the idea of taxing CDs and DVDs just
    in case they get used for writing pirated content. It would only
    encourage people to back up to a 2nd HDD instead of DVDs anyway.


    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 5-September-05)
    "The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a
    young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken
    for a young man in any language, especially Braille."
    Maskerade
     
    MarkH, Oct 9, 2005
    #9
  10. Evil Bastard

    XP Guest

    On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 03:39:40 GMT, MarkH <> wrote:

    >Evil Bastard <> wrote in
    >news:4347b8cd$:
    >
    >>
    >> I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange
    >> for the rights to:
    >> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    >> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    >> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use

    >
    >I would much rather see new download sites for MP3s, Movies and TV
    >programs. They should have very fast download speeds with mirrors all
    >over the world and should contain all available content including the
    >latest movies just released and TV programs aired this week. The
    >quality should be high and free of glitches.
    >
    >I would happily pay in US$ around $0.50 per song, $1 per TV program and
    >$2 per movie. This could easily provide a tidy profit for all involved
    >due to the very low cost of providing the bandwidth (3-6MB per song,
    >350MB per TV program and 700MB per movie - all very high quality).
    >
    >Once set up then I would have no problem with some heavy punishments
    >going out to those that setup illegal pirated download sites.
    >
    >I would happily pay $20 with my credit card for $20 credit with this
    >legal download site, after downloading $20 worth of content then I can
    >pay again.
    >
    >I have already tried to join Napster, but with no success (I don't think
    >that they accept overseas CCs). It doesn't seem too bad to pay US$1 per
    >song if they can provide good content that I want.
    >
    >As long as the artists receive about 50% of the money collected then
    >they could make quite a tidy profit - especially for the musicians that
    >skip the recording label and offer the music to the site themselves.
    >(How much do the musicians earn for each CD sold now?)
    >
    >
    >On the idea of paying a piracy tax on CDs and DVDs, how do I claim a
    >refund for the failed burns (like when the Knoppix CD didn't work due to
    >a corrupted .iso file, after redownloading and burning again it worked
    >fine) and non pirated materials. I pay for the internet connection that
    >I use to download the Linux .iso files, I pay for the blank CD and DVD
    >disks - why should I pay more?
    >
    >I notice that Debian Sarge is available on 14 .iso files - a piracy tax
    >on CDs would make it cheaper to use the network install, unless you need
    >to install on a large number of PCs.
    >
    >Basically I am completely against the idea of taxing CDs and DVDs just
    >in case they get used for writing pirated content. It would only
    >encourage people to back up to a 2nd HDD instead of DVDs anyway.




    There is still a copying Tax on Tapes here.
     
    XP, Oct 9, 2005
    #10
  11. Evil Bastard

    Harry Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > Harry <> wrote:
    >
    >>Evil Bastard wrote:
    >>
    >>> I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
    >>> the rights to:
    >>> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    >>> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    >>> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use

    >>
    >>Maybe you should also be allowed to steal freely provided you pay some
    >>taxes?

    >
    > And so another USENET debate descends into a typically emotive morass.
    >
    > I thought EB made a point worthy of some thought, and here all you can
    > think of doing is responding in a mindless knee-jerk fashion, and push
    > your "close-mind" button by using the word "steal" to pre-empt further
    > debate, thereby suggesting that anybody who believes EB has a valid
    > point must ipso facto be advocating criminality.
    >
    > You suck.


    Thank you for raising the quality of debate.

    But perhaps you should pass your drivel through your hypocrisy-checker
    before hitting the send button.
     
    Harry, Oct 9, 2005
    #11
  12. Evil Bastard

    Harry Guest

    thingy wrote:

    > Harry wrote:
    >> Evil Bastard wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
    >>>the rights to:
    >>> - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    >>> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    >>> - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >> Maybe you should also be allowed to steal freely provided you pay some
    >> taxes?
    >>
    >> Perhaps you should try stealing from some *friends* and sharing the
    >> proceeds with some other *friends*. With friends like you we can
    >> all have everything for free! Whoopdedoo!
    >>

    >
    > Not quite the same argument. The cost of distribution, & re-production
    > is just about zero, the artists get their % from the % put on CD-rs, so
    > there is no stealing.


    If you are implying that such a scheme would fairly reward the artists
    then what could possibly be wrong with just charging an amount directly?

    Or are you implying that there needs to be a mechanism for people to
    steal works without paying, and of passing the cost onto others.

    >
    > The argument is you pay a lot more for CD-r blanks instead of paying
    > directly for a "real" CD. I have issues with that, but Canada etc does
    > this sort of thing on a smaller scale.


    Why not just pay money for the product that you want?
    Isn't that really simple and fair?

    If you don't want it, then don't pay for it and don't have it.
    If you really want it, then shouldn't you be prepared to pay for it?
     
    Harry, Oct 9, 2005
    #12
  13. Evil Bastard

    Gordon Guest

    On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 01:16:32 +1300, Evil Bastard wrote:

    >
    > I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
    > the rights to:
    > - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    > a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    > - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
    >

    Bugger off. I buy DVD/CDs so that I can back up *my* copyright material.
    WTF should I pay extra to do so??
     
    Gordon, Oct 9, 2005
    #13
  14. Evil Bastard

    thing2 Guest

    Harry wrote:
    > thingy wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Harry wrote:
    >>
    >>>Evil Bastard wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
    >>>>the rights to:
    >>>>- freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    >>>> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    >>>>- burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Maybe you should also be allowed to steal freely provided you pay some
    >>>taxes?
    >>>
    >>>Perhaps you should try stealing from some *friends* and sharing the
    >>>proceeds with some other *friends*. With friends like you we can
    >>>all have everything for free! Whoopdedoo!
    >>>

    >>
    >>Not quite the same argument. The cost of distribution, & re-production
    >>is just about zero, the artists get their % from the % put on CD-rs, so
    >>there is no stealing.

    >
    >
    > If you are implying that such a scheme would fairly reward the artists
    > then what could possibly be wrong with just charging an amount directly?


    None, and the best way IMHO, by that I mean really directly ie avoiding
    the record labels, just straight to the artist(s).

    > Or are you implying that there needs to be a mechanism for people to
    > steal works without paying, and of passing the cost onto others.


    I believe we were discussing ways of recovering / alternatives to buying
    CDs, and here you go claiming its stealing, a very emotive word and not
    needed, so back off.

    >>The argument is you pay a lot more for CD-r blanks instead of paying
    >>directly for a "real" CD. I have issues with that, but Canada etc does
    >>this sort of thing on a smaller scale.

    >
    >
    > Why not just pay money for the product that you want?
    > Isn't that really simple and fair?


    Yes, but there is no reason not to look at alternatives, I certainly
    think bypassing the record labels and established sales channels should
    be the way to go. (also see below).

    > If you don't want it, then don't pay for it and don't have it.
    > If you really want it, then shouldn't you be prepared to pay for it?


    Yes, we are discussing different forms of how to do it. By raising the
    issue/alternatives of "add a cost to CDrs" we hi-light how unfair that
    would be for OSS and backup users. In effect we create a government
    enforced monopoly were none is needed. Now the music industry would love
    a tax on each cdr, they would then have zero civil enforcement costs and
    collection costs are done by/through the Government, a win-win for
    them......so in effect businesses are looking for handouts from the
    government.....so much for let business do the business.

    The problem is without doubt many people dont seem to want to pay for
    films and music, they illegally download and burn to blank CDs, so in
    effect legit users are paying for others music, also unfair.

    I see this as sorta balanced though by the huge margins the music and
    film companies make due to their monopoly so I dont feel that sorry for
    them.

    regards

    Thing
     
    thing2, Oct 10, 2005
    #14
  15. On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 02:16:32 +1300, someone purporting to be Evil Bastard
    didst scrawl:

    >
    > I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange for
    > the rights to:
    > - freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    > a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    > - burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
    >

    *SNIP*

    That's what Canada had. Now they're about to lose that right, but it's
    incredibly unlikely that the levy on blank media will be removed.
    Also, the money doesn't end up with the artists. None of the money taken
    by the Canadian equivalent of RIAA went anywhere other than into the
    grubby paws of the labels. If the artists get nothing, why feel bad about
    copying the music? You're not depriving the people who did the work of
    anything extra.

    --
    Matthew Poole
    "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."
     
    Matthew Poole, Oct 10, 2005
    #15
  16. Evil Bastard

    Harry Guest

    thing2 wrote:

    > Harry wrote:
    >> thingy wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Harry wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Evil Bastard wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange
    >>>>>for the rights to:
    >>>>>- freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    >>>>> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    >>>>>- burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Maybe you should also be allowed to steal freely provided you pay some
    >>>>taxes?
    >>>>
    >>>>Perhaps you should try stealing from some *friends* and sharing the
    >>>>proceeds with some other *friends*. With friends like you we can
    >>>>all have everything for free! Whoopdedoo!
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>Not quite the same argument. The cost of distribution, & re-production
    >>>is just about zero, the artists get their % from the % put on CD-rs, so
    >>>there is no stealing.

    >>
    >>
    >> If you are implying that such a scheme would fairly reward the artists
    >> then what could possibly be wrong with just charging an amount directly?

    >
    > None, and the best way IMHO, by that I mean really directly ie avoiding
    > the record labels, just straight to the artist(s).


    That is a ridiculous expectation in the real world.
    Most people are totally incapable of effectively promoting
    themselves, or marketing their product. And those things have
    to be done to get the product effectively distributed.

    You are living in crazy fantasy land.

    >
    >> Or are you implying that there needs to be a mechanism for people to
    >> steal works without paying, and of passing the cost onto others.

    >
    > I believe we were discussing ways of recovering / alternatives to buying
    > CDs, and here you go claiming its stealing, a very emotive word and not
    > needed, so back off.


    Theft is theft. The *emotion* is not mine, but yours only.
    There is nothing emotional about the work theft, for goodness sake!

    >
    >>>The argument is you pay a lot more for CD-r blanks instead of paying
    >>>directly for a "real" CD. I have issues with that, but Canada etc does
    >>>this sort of thing on a smaller scale.

    >>
    >>
    >> Why not just pay money for the product that you want?
    >> Isn't that really simple and fair?

    >
    > Yes, but there is no reason not to look at alternatives, I certainly
    > think bypassing the record labels and established sales channels should
    > be the way to go. (also see below).


    Ok, so I suppose you bypass the local supermarket and get all your
    food from your own backyard?

    >
    >> If you don't want it, then don't pay for it and don't have it.
    >> If you really want it, then shouldn't you be prepared to pay for it?

    >
    > Yes, we are discussing different forms of how to do it. By raising the
    > issue/alternatives of "add a cost to CDrs" we hi-light how unfair that
    > would be for OSS and backup users. In effect we create a government
    > enforced monopoly were none is needed. Now the music industry would love
    > a tax on each cdr, they would then have zero civil enforcement costs and
    > collection costs are done by/through the Government, a win-win for
    > them......so in effect businesses are looking for handouts from the
    > government.....so much for let business do the business.


    The music industry doesn't have a problem that they aren't capable
    of solving. Downloading of music is *not* a problem for the music
    industry. They just use it as an excuse for a slight decline in sales.
    But the decline is actually caused by people finding the current crop
    of music wanting.

    The music industry should drop the price of their product.
    A CD should cost around $5. After all, it doesn't exactly take a team
    of rocket scientists to record some trite collection of exciting notes
    and get them transcribed onto a CD.

    >
    > The problem is without doubt many people dont seem to want to pay for
    > films and music, they illegally download and burn to blank CDs, so in
    > effect legit users are paying for others music, also unfair.


    The ball is in the court of the music/movie producers.
    They need to price their product so that it isn't worth copying
    for your average person.

    >
    > I see this as sorta balanced though by the huge margins the music and
    > film companies make due to their monopoly so I dont feel that sorry for
    > them.
     
    Harry, Oct 10, 2005
    #16
  17. Harry wrote:

    > Theft is theft.


    And lying is lying.

    See, two can play the bald-statement game...
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 10, 2005
    #17
  18. Evil Bastard

    shannon Guest

    On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 19:38:18 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > Harry wrote:
    >
    >> Theft is theft.

    >
    > And lying is lying.
    >
    > See, two can play the bald-statement game...


    Hair Hair !!
     
    shannon, Oct 10, 2005
    #18
  19. Evil Bastard

    thing2 Guest

    Harry wrote:
    > thing2 wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Harry wrote:
    >>
    >>>thingy wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Harry wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Evil Bastard wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for blank CDs/DVDs in exchange
    >>>>>>for the rights to:
    >>>>>>- freely and legally download copyrighted audio/video files (*) under
    >>>>>> a 'compulsory licensing' scheme
    >>>>>>- burn these to disk for my and my friends' personal use
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Maybe you should also be allowed to steal freely provided you pay some
    >>>>>taxes?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Perhaps you should try stealing from some *friends* and sharing the
    >>>>>proceeds with some other *friends*. With friends like you we can
    >>>>>all have everything for free! Whoopdedoo!
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Not quite the same argument. The cost of distribution, & re-production
    >>>>is just about zero, the artists get their % from the % put on CD-rs, so
    >>>>there is no stealing.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>If you are implying that such a scheme would fairly reward the artists
    >>>then what could possibly be wrong with just charging an amount directly?

    >>
    >>None, and the best way IMHO, by that I mean really directly ie avoiding
    >>the record labels, just straight to the artist(s).

    >
    >
    > That is a ridiculous expectation in the real world.
    > Most people are totally incapable of effectively promoting
    > themselves, or marketing their product. And those things have
    > to be done to get the product effectively distributed.
    >
    > You are living in crazy fantasy land.


    Lots of companies sell products by direct download, and some artists
    are. Lots af artists cannot cannot get recording contracts so are trying
    to sell direct as they have no choice. Record labels only want to sell
    what they can sell a lot of, on their terms ie artists get screwed.

    A singer/band promotes themselves by touring, so in effect that is
    exactly what they do.....their fans see them and can go download tracks,
    not that hard.

    The Internet is the distribution model it is effective.

    Not in fantasy land, future land, if you want to carry on believing the
    record labels are the answer, fair enough, I dont think so. This is
    because the next generation will be even more wired than the last and
    the record labels by taking on less and less artists force the rejected
    artists to use the medium of the Internet, so the weight of artists
    doing so will drive acceptance.

    >>>Or are you implying that there needs to be a mechanism for people to
    >>>steal works without paying, and of passing the cost onto others.

    >>
    >>I believe we were discussing ways of recovering / alternatives to buying
    >>CDs, and here you go claiming its stealing, a very emotive word and not
    >>needed, so back off.

    >
    >
    > Theft is theft. The *emotion* is not mine, but yours only.
    > There is nothing emotional about the work theft, for goodness sake!


    No we are discussing alternative ways of paying for the music, you are
    the one claiming it is stealing.

    >>>>The argument is you pay a lot more for CD-r blanks instead of paying
    >>>>directly for a "real" CD. I have issues with that, but Canada etc does
    >>>>this sort of thing on a smaller scale.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Why not just pay money for the product that you want?
    >>>Isn't that really simple and fair?

    >>
    >>Yes, but there is no reason not to look at alternatives, I certainly
    >>think bypassing the record labels and established sales channels should
    >>be the way to go. (also see below).

    >
    >
    > Ok, so I suppose you bypass the local supermarket and get all your
    > food from your own backyard?


    Now this is plain silly, People do this by shopping on-line, at road
    side farm/factory outlets, supermarkets and shops get bypassed right now.

    >>>If you don't want it, then don't pay for it and don't have it.
    >>>If you really want it, then shouldn't you be prepared to pay for it?

    >>
    >>Yes, we are discussing different forms of how to do it. By raising the
    >>issue/alternatives of "add a cost to CDrs" we hi-light how unfair that
    >>would be for OSS and backup users. In effect we create a government
    >>enforced monopoly were none is needed. Now the music industry would love
    >>a tax on each cdr, they would then have zero civil enforcement costs and
    >>collection costs are done by/through the Government, a win-win for
    >>them......so in effect businesses are looking for handouts from the
    >>government.....so much for let business do the business.

    >
    >
    > The music industry doesn't have a problem that they aren't capable
    > of solving. Downloading of music is *not* a problem for the music
    > industry. They just use it as an excuse for a slight decline in sales.
    > But the decline is actually caused by people finding the current crop
    > of music wanting.


    This I agree on, and the record labels stranglehold on the distribution
    means peoples only choice is going around (form both sides) and an
    effective method is the Internet.

    > The music industry should drop the price of their product.
    > A CD should cost around $5. After all, it doesn't exactly take a team
    > of rocket scientists to record some trite collection of exciting notes
    > and get them transcribed onto a CD.


    they have a monopoly, so why should they drop it to $5? are you going to
    force them? that is just stealing by another name.

    >>The problem is without doubt many people dont seem to want to pay for
    >>films and music, they illegally download and burn to blank CDs, so in
    >>effect legit users are paying for others music, also unfair.

    >
    >
    > The ball is in the court of the music/movie producers.
    > They need to price their product so that it isn't worth copying
    > for your average person.


    I totally agree, but, they can see they have a monopoly, so want to
    charge accordingly, because they think they can.

    >>I see this as sorta balanced though by the huge margins the music and
    >>film companies make due to their monopoly so I dont feel that sorry for
    >>them.


    regards

    Thing
     
    thing2, Oct 12, 2005
    #19
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    2,618
    Chrissy Cruiser
    Aug 29, 2005
  2. =?Utf-8?B?SWduYXRpdXM=?=

    How to access the external storage unit of storage router

    =?Utf-8?B?SWduYXRpdXM=?=, Nov 5, 2006, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    988
    =?Utf-8?B?SWduYXRpdXM=?=
    Nov 6, 2006
  3. siliconpi
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    824
    Don B
    Nov 29, 2004
  4. John
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,566
    Alexander Rogge
    Mar 17, 2008
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,162
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page