Re: MP4


Subject: Re: MP4
From: Michael Gogins (gogins@pipeline.com)
Date: Thu Sep 01 2005 - 12:40:50 EDT


This whole issue actually indicates a true crisis in our civilization.

I agree that the best solution is a bottom-up 'pay per access' system. This would be the ideal combination of capitalism (individual responsibility, individual ownership) and socialism (to each according to his need, from each according to his due).

Unfortunately I do not know how to implement such a 'pay per access' system. Perhaps one of the filesharing systems such as eDonkey or BitTorrent could be modified to do this. There would have to be a completely unhackable channel for tracking downloads and accounting for payments. Payment, also, would have to be as easy as typing in credit card information or using PayPal.

At any rate, I don't imagine big companies are going to create such software. Unfortunately as Richard says, I don't think the net community can get its mind around the need for payment.

I would imagine that the quality of files available on a 'pay per access' filesharing system would be higher than the free stuff, and that it would be cheaper than the 'major' stuff.

In the long run, I think such a system could replace stores and banks for many purposes. It might also supplement or even replace independent labels in the music business. Perhaps, in the very long run, such a system or its descendent would form a new economic system.

Or perhaps marketing and advertising will simply mutate to survive in this brave new world.

Regards,
Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Wentk <richard@skydancer.com>
Sent: Sep 1, 2005 12:25 PM
To: cec-conference@concordia.ca
Subject: Re: MP4

At 05:19 01/09/2005, you wrote:
>actually the current laws dont discriminate between personal and private
>use and filesharing - only the EULA in say, Apple's license grants
>permission for copying. Technically, copying music for use in your car has
>always been illegal even under prior British law - see the flyers at
>www.ukcdr.org.

Possibly, but as I said you're just not going to get arrested for this, no
matter what the law says. Nor are you going to get arrested for cracking
for your own use.

File sharing is a different issue because (the lawyers believe) it has a
direct effect on their revenue stream. But that's a different level.

Personally I wouldn't at all mind some kind of electronic version of a
rights collection service like PRS/MCPS, even on a pay per play basis. The
big problem for music today isn't securing the technology, it's the
lockdown the majors have on the important distribution channels.

A system where it was just as easy to find and play music by A.N. Other as
by Joe Superstar, and both would be paid equally for their efforts would be
a good thing. You could then filter/promote/curate from the bottom up by
buyer interest instead of from the top down by marketing saturation as
today. (iTunes comes close to this, but you still get a ton of promotional
nonsense thrown at you if you try to use it, which favours the big players,
so it's not there yet.)

I would be very surprised if a system like that didn't create a huge
explosion of interest in all kinds of music - probably not enough to make
anyone really rich, but there would be a lot more awareness of the
diversity that's out there, instead of the various monocultures that are
around at the moment.

Of course it's not going to happen because the majors have no interest in
giving up their distribution monopoly, and the anarchists have decided that
paying to listen to music is an anachronism anyway.

Neither of these are good for artists, but it's the way things seem to be
moving.

Richard



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:10 EST