On Tuesday 29 June 2010 15:18:04 Mark Knecht wrote: > On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Andrew C <countfuzzball@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Mark, > > YouTube is an interesting case. I didn't read what the decision was > but I hear they won a judgment against (I think) Viacom a few days ago > allowing them to keep posting stuff, or at least to leave it online if > someone else posts it. There's a big mix of things going on within > YouTube and (to some extent) I think the music producers see it as a > marketing tool using lousy quality video and audio. (Much as they > allowed VHS to continue without copy protection until it died for lack > of interest.) Well, I am no lawyer but I am told the DMCA has a "safe harbor" provision and that google complies with that and so is not breaking the law. Imagine there was no safe harbor provision for the real world. I come along and post the lyrics and music (think fake book) to a song in a super market on the cork board. The folks representing the songwriters come along and sue the supermarket. For who knows what it is these days? $150,000.00? $30,000.00? Now imagine I post them on a tree in your front lawn one day and they see it there and sue you. > > Anyway, I don't suppose my views are very popular among the majority > of folks that might be reading this. Possibly, but it might be worth looking for nuances. > I actually think it's very > important that artists be paid a living wage. Sure, but which ones? Those doing art that no one appreciates? Who decides? It is possible that heavy handed collection activities from places playing live music is hurting more small time musicians that it would ever help. > Once we start bringing > the 0.1% of them that are monster money makers into the discussion it > gets pretty crazy pretty quickly but the 99.9% of them that cannot > make a living really are, in my opinion, hurt financially by all of > this. > > Keep in mind that this is not _only_ about the headliner - it's also > about composers, arrangers, back-up musicians, etc, that never make a > penny from the band playing live. Since I write lyrics and don't ever see myself playing live, I feel you from the heart on that. There is a but though. > > But again, that's just me. My problem is that I think the laws are way over the top already. The civil side and the criminal side. One the civil side there are huge fines, no need for proof beyond a reasonable doubt, statutory damages and so no need to prove actual damages. On the criminal side, in my country, fairly serious jail time, so I am told, for simple possession of a non-legit CD or DVD for instance. All of that but it is supposedly still not enough to "protect" the artists. They need "new laws to better protect them. Worse laws for everyone else, abusive laws. Crazy laws. I am sorry, if the only way we can "protect" the artists is to ruin our free society then the price is too high. The artists just need to find a new path. I am not sure I believe that is the only way we can protect artists, but the ones making noise and being listened to say so. Three strikes and you're out? When a strike is just being accused of a copyright violation? Really? > > > Also, I do agree with Louigi. Should there be a mandatory price on > > creativity? > > I agreed with a lot of Louigi's points, but disagreed with a couple > and felt it was coming from a POV I couldn't quite understand right > now. Personally I didn't think I could answer it well at this time. All of this being said, I do think it is important that people who would like to make a living from their art and are good enough to do so, find ways to do so. And it is important for those of us who like the art being made by such people to help in finding those ways. However, those that are currently depending on the new laws to "protect" the artists game can't count on much support from me. Those trying the money with Freedom play can count on all the support I can muster if I like their stuff and likely some support even if I don't like their stuff. And finally, people like ASCAP and BMI could learn to play a nuanced game and coexist and perhaps thrive with Freely licensed music. They could even represent songwriters putting their works under licenses like Creative Commons BY-SA or perhaps even BY. And still perhaps collect for such uses. (Anyone from those organizations wanting to know how are free to contact me. I was actually trying to find out from BMI if a BMI songwriter could use cc BY-SA as a license but could not get and answer. I think because we never actually understood one another.) > > Cheers, > Mark all the best, drew _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
