adikgede Posted September 16, 2003 Report Share Posted September 16, 2003 By the same token the people who own IP are going to have to come up with some more creative ways to license thier work. Unfortunatley rather than producers and consumers coming together to agree on whats fair I just see more intrusive oversight and monitoring to enforce contracts that seem outdated in the current era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 16, 2003 Report Share Posted September 16, 2003 I agree the IP owners have to come up with some real 'workable' royalty schemes, not just hire lawyers and complain how they are being ripped off. Spent an evening with one of this new breed of lawyer who had just turned down a partnership at a presitious law firm to go on his own specializing in IP. He obviously feels that there will be huge changes in the laws and attitudes to IP. In many ways i feel strict enforcement of trademarks, patents, and copyrights will benefit everyone in the end. I should create an atmosphere where sharp young creative geniuses will see opportunities to do an end run around the existing system and market their ideas. The creative mind has always been more interested in recognition than material gain IMO. So do you think that Redhat etc would have had the growth and interest if M$ would have been a more open and accessable venue.? Or does that restrictive monopoly attitude create more opportunities for opener competition.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted September 16, 2003 Report Share Posted September 16, 2003 Not sure I understand the concept that letting someone else "borrow" my music files should be against the law. If I buy a book, read it, and loan it to another, the publisher doesn't complain. If I sell the book at a used book store, again, no complaints. It is not just the medium I am selling, but the IP of the author as well is it not? The same could be said for any item really. Most people buy the stuff they really want, download stuff they like, but don't want to spend money on... I am a big fan of the Grateful Dead! From their very first concert, they allowed people to tape their shows at no cost, allowed free trading of the various recorded shows. This never really cut into their bottom line profit, as people loved them and still bought their albums/CDs. I blame part of the music industrys loss on the fact that they were forced to lower prices to widen their market. Lets face facts, it is a bad economy, everyone is losing money. I don't feel sorry for a rock star who has millions, bitching about the few pennies he may be losing on a 12 year old downloading a song or 2... Oh, one more thing, remember the old days when people used to record songs off the radio? or borrow an album from a friend and make a recording of the songs they liked? or what if you actually buy an album, make a recording of it for your car, walkman etc...all still against the "contract"/law, but done none the less... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 16, 2003 Report Share Posted September 16, 2003 This is part of what has to be redefined, both in law and in people's minds. When you buy some computer programs , you may legally only use them on one machine, others on any machine you own, other etc. etc. The industries must define their licencing better and clearer. Prime example is Win XP, not really allowed a backup copy or put on your brother's computer. Everything will head that way if new attitudes are not implimented. Already we have self destructing Videos that only allow a single play. What's next. The problem is mankinds nature ....basically greed and something for nothing. Of course not many who 'borrow' have ever spent hours, days or years ever 'creating' anything. They only consume. As consumers only, they have no appreciation or understanding of the effort, time and expense involved in creating. They are only concerned about 'their' end. You are an aircraft mechanic. So after 20 years of skinning knuckles, you come up with an idea or a tool, or a process that , saves money, saves time and makes some area of your work easier and more efficient. A friend 'borrows' it, idea or system or process and gee, it works for him too. In a few months/years all the new guys coming from school are telling you about how this new idea really works good, they like it and use it everyday. They have it for free and the 20 years you put into figurung it out count for nothing. Now you may be an altruistic fellow who really doesn't mind the world using your creations. There are many who are and put great effort into ensuring that what they create is freely available to all that want it. Many are musicians, programmers, writers and their philosophies greatly benefit all. Most however want some recognition, be it monetary or otherwise. Imagine if the game KS devoted 100s of hours to creating became a runaway hit. Do you believe he deserves compensation for his time, energy and creativity? Or should we all just 'lend' it to our friends and in the case of most, total strangers. I am not sure of my own position on these matters OH. But I certainly can sympathize more with the creators than the consumers. It is more doubt going to be a debate for many years/decades that will see fundimental changes to attitudes and practises. As did the reduce, reuse, recycle concept that was foreign to most of us 40 years ago. and as we all know....just because everyone else is doing it....doesn't make it right.....or legal in many cases. (Think Visa service, think drink and drive, think.....) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adikgede Posted September 17, 2003 Report Share Posted September 17, 2003 Well first off a book is not a good analogy for the reason I stated above because its bound the the physical media. A book can only be used by one person at a time. Although in Indonesia we do see xerox copies of books, some of them quite convincing. Making a duplicate of a song and redistributing it is another story. You may have numerous people using an identical copy of the item simultaeneously. See the difference, so we aren't really talking about borrowing, we are talking about redistribution. Furthermore recording off a radio and producing digital duplicates is not altogether different. However the difference in quality and scale are enormous. You record off the radio in real time and at lower fidelity. Digital duplication is capable of an exact clone, is as fast as your storage media, and redistribution as fast as your network connection, if thats how its being distributed. I was never big on the Dead but I think that people who are trying to figure out what the hell to do with IP really need to look at how the open sharing of bootleg music has probably helped to strengthen the community of Dead Heads and in the end increased the sales of anything that was being sold. I don't particulary like what the music industry is doing, but rather than cheat I choose not to participate when possible. Of course thats not always possible. I have a rather ownerous contract with my present employer that pretty much says that they own any creative thought that comes out of my head, if it occurs during employment, is inspired by my employment, or occurs for a period after my contract expires. If my job actually required any amount of original thinking I would have thought twice and probably refused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted September 17, 2003 Report Share Posted September 17, 2003 "...You are an aircraft mechanic. So after 20 years of skinning knuckles, you come up with an idea or a tool, or a process that , saves money, saves time and makes some area of your work easier and more efficient. A friend 'borrows' it, idea or system or process and gee, it works for him too. In a few months/years all the new guys coming from school are telling you about how this new idea really works good, they like it and use it everyday. They have it for free and the 20 years you put into figurung it out count for nothing..." Like Adekgade, I am also on the losing end here in that all I develope on the job or pretaining to the job belongs to the company, I get an hourly salary and that is all. I do see some of the points raised here, but my main question remains the same, where is it going to stop? this is all fueled by greed and nothing more. IP is a great concept for someone to take and exploit, only to make more money. And as long as Lawyers see a new venture into the leagel profession, I see nothing good to come of it, unless of course it is for the lawyers...bottom line is, those who like the artist, will buy it, otherwise, they will just get what parts they want elsewhere, no way to ever stop this. Perhapes the mass spreading of music files can be curtailed, but you will never stop sharing at small levels... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted September 17, 2003 Report Share Posted September 17, 2003 O.k. a bit more gas on the fire...if I buy an album, for $10 and in 20 years it is worth $500 (has happend and then some), do I owe anyone other than myself any cut of the money? and, am I breaking the law by selling it at auction, with no further royalties to the artist or their estate...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 17, 2003 Report Share Posted September 17, 2003 Nope, it's yours..to do with as you please. You paid the royalties when you paid for it originally. Now whether the new owner has a legal obligations to the original artist is one of those moot points as of yet that others can argue (probably for more money than you paid for the whole thing originally. ) What was that line about money being the source of all evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redbaron Posted September 17, 2003 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2003 Wow, didn't intend to cause a storm here (although some great points raised).. What's right/wrong. Who knows? Morally I suppose it's wrong, but as OH says, if we are big fans of an artist, we'll continue to buy the CD's, DVD's, go to the concerts and buy the t shirts... I can't see any big stars going broke over this. Up and comers don't generally make much money from selling CDs either (I think they make it from performances mainly). Not a 'victimless' crime though, people/corporations do lose money over this. Anyone know the chances of one being prosecuted? I assume there are millions "breaking the law" here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palatkik Posted September 17, 2003 Report Share Posted September 17, 2003 Says Redbaron: I assume there are millions "breaking the law" here. Yes, there are 3.6 million users logged onto Kazaa right now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.