arstechnica.com — A new 22-page report on the RIAA's four-year campaign against file-sharing argues that "suing music fans is no answer" and calls on the industry to embrace P2P and file-sharing for the benefit of all parties.
Aug 29, 2007 View in Crawl 4
mrunderbridgeAug 30, 2007
Blanket license isn't all that likely to be workable. First, it better not be mandated by the government because I don't want to be taxed for the benefit of private corporations I choose not to patronize. Second, 'fair' with regard to the record companies means it better make them as much money as they are now, and I don't see that happening.For this argument to be workable, it has to be a convenience issue, not a cost issue, and I don't think that's entirely the case. People want the record companies to just accept the fact that they're not going to make the money they want, and that's living in fantasyland.
spyrochaeteAug 30, 2007
You need a very good ear for sound to be a successful audio engineer. Knowing how to record each instrument in its own channel, normalize and tune the audio, balance the dynamic range, assign panning, and setting chorus and reverb are very minute and precise.Having an ear for music is not the same as having an ear for sound. Most musicians simply know how to play their instrument. Electronic artists are superior in this way since they must be aware of instrumentation as well as post-production.
Closed AccountAug 30, 2007
Then you are anti-constitution. Copyrights and patents are encapsulated in Article 1 Section 8.
markofthedeadAug 30, 2007
The first rule of usenet is you do not talk about usenet.
travelsonicAug 30, 2007
How exactly is it socialist? Please elaborate more than you rambled.
Closed AccountAug 30, 2007
What a f**king stupid argument. If that is all you've got, don't ever try to debate again.
Closed AccountAug 30, 2007
You say that because you want to download a lot. That does NOt make that system good.There is NOTHING wrong with the current system. Owning music is NOT A RIGHT! If you want it, you pay what the owners ask. Period. Everybody pays the same amount. That is fiar. Someone paying $10 a month to download 5 songs while another pays the same $10 to download 100 songs is not fair, and a far worse system.I want an iPod to be $25. Does that mean I should be able to have one for $25? Nope. I must pay what Apple asks. Same f**king thing.
okdewitMar 3, 2009
I am against THE constitution? The USA constitution is not THE constitution.Where I live (holland) copyright is not constitutional, thus, I am not against my constitution.We do however have a copyright law, which is a derivative from the Berne Convention.<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Literary_and_Artistic_Works">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention_for_ ...</a>But that is not the point... are laws always true? are the rules always to be followed?I do support those who dare to think about new solutions for this problem. Even if they are unconstitutional in the USA.