6 ms·

Music Industry Starting to Target "Copy Left / Free Culture" Enemy

11 points by ALee 18y ago

jerf 18y ago
I'll be intrigued (in the academic sense) to see what they come up with. The GPL couldn't be fought (I consider the fight basically over after the last court ruling) because it gives rights where most software licenses remove them. In a way it is on firmer legal footing than conventional licenses, because it is much more clearly a contract; the law grants you these rights, but if you do X and Y, you get Z from me in return. It's hard to imagine how to eliminate the GPL without also eliminating software licenses. Similarly for the creative commons; how can you block open culture which gives people rights they wouldn't have without losing the same legal structures you use to remove rights? Removing rights exercises those legal mechanisms far harder than a standard contract, just like with the GPL vs. standard EULAs. I suppose they could try a pure social approach but I submit that they've already lost that fight. Trying to advertise that people shouldn't use the free thing is going to be one of the fuddy-duddiest things an industry has done in a long time, and calling further attention to free culture is unlikely to do them any favors.
- misuba 18y ago
  They haven't lost the social fight; it hasn't even started. The average person has yet to even think to question bog-standard intellectual property practices; that Overton window has a long ways to move yet. I'm not hopeful. Lessig, for one, is so bad at speaking to the uninitiated about these issues that he lost a debate with Stephen Colbert, who was trying to _make fun_ of the opposing position.
  - jerf 18y ago
    They've lost the leading edge already... and how do they propose to roll even that back? "No, that free stuff which you can freely examine and come to your own conclusions about sucks because we say so, come spend $20 on thirty minutes of generic music again?" They've lost because there's just no way to dress this up in a way that can get past the cynical 21st century consumer.
  - cabalamat 18y ago
    > The average person has yet to even think to question bog-standard intellectual property practices I'm not sure that's true. Many of my friends aren't computer geeks or copyfighters, but most of them share music and movies and use P2P applications. For many people the concept of recorded music as something you buy just doesn't exist.
numair 18y ago
I'm sure most people here will consider me crazy for saying this, but I really hope the music industry manages to make some inroads with these initiatives. Here's my problem with the free culture / "information wants to be free" crowd -- when you decide you no longer place monetary value on intellectual property, you are merely impoverishing intellectuals and keeping those who run enterprises such as oil and mining companies in control of the world's wealth. Rather than making the world a better place by making intellectual property free, you're putting it into the hands of the very people many in this crowd hate. I'm not saying that intellectual monopolies/oligarchies such as those seen in the 20th century are sensible; I'm merely saying that the free culture is, quite literally, economically retarded. Allowing creatives and intellectuals to pursue their art as a profession is one of the greatest accomplishments of modern society, I think; even better is the fact that you can pursue these things and make a significant amount of money which can be used to do lots of interesting things. We really need to figure out a way to preserve this -- the balance of power created by wealthy creatives pushing initiatives that run counter to the aims of wealthy industrialists is extremely important (Bono not withstanding, of course -- kidding).
- pwk 18y ago
  Allowing creatives and intellectuals to pursue their art as a profession is one of the greatest accomplishments of modern society... ...We really need to figure out a way to preserve this... It's possible to agree with this sentiment while still believing that the music industry, as currently incarnated, is not the best vehicle to accomplish this goal. The current shift we're seeing does seem to limit the instances of extreme success for individual creatives. This might not be a bad thing, if it provides a venue for more individuals to succeed, if at a smaller level. I think this is happening as the record companies slowly get moved out of the loop, but it's still early days and the new models for success are most certainly not yet fully fleshed out.
- d0mine 18y ago
  On impoverishing: If you have one apple and you give it to me then I have one apple and you are left with nothing. If you have an idea and you share it with me then I have the idea and you have it. Information is not oil.
cabalamat 18y ago
The idea behind copyleft boils down to "I'll share with you if you share with me". And Creative Commons boils down to "I've got some copyrighted work; I choose to share it under certain contitions". If ASCAP want to argue against these ideas, they've chosen a hard task for themselves. Probably all they will achieve is reinforcing the music industry's image of being out-of-touch dinosaurs living in the previous century.

11 points by ALee 18y ago

jerf 18y ago

I'll be intrigued (in the academic sense) to see what they come up with. The GPL couldn't be fought (I consider the fight basically over after the last court ruling) because it gives rights where most software licenses remove them. In a way it is on firmer legal footing than conventional licenses, because it is much more clearly a contract; the law grants you these rights, but if you do X and Y, you get Z from me in return. It's hard to imagine how to eliminate the GPL without also eliminating software licenses. Similarly for the creative commons; how can you block open culture which gives people rights they wouldn't have without losing the same legal structures you use to remove rights? Removing rights exercises those legal mechanisms far harder than a standard contract, just like with the GPL vs. standard EULAs. I suppose they could try a pure social approach but I submit that they've already lost that fight. Trying to advertise that people shouldn't use the free thing is going to be one of the fuddy-duddiest things an industry has done in a long time, and calling further attention to free culture is unlikely to do them any favors.

misuba 18y ago
They haven't lost the social fight; it hasn't even started. The average person has yet to even think to question bog-standard intellectual property practices; that Overton window has a long ways to move yet. I'm not hopeful. Lessig, for one, is so bad at speaking to the uninitiated about these issues that he lost a debate with Stephen Colbert, who was trying to _make fun_ of the opposing position.
- jerf 18y ago
  They've lost the leading edge already... and how do they propose to roll even that back? "No, that free stuff which you can freely examine and come to your own conclusions about sucks because we say so, come spend $20 on thirty minutes of generic music again?" They've lost because there's just no way to dress this up in a way that can get past the cynical 21st century consumer.
- cabalamat 18y ago
  > The average person has yet to even think to question bog-standard intellectual property practices I'm not sure that's true. Many of my friends aren't computer geeks or copyfighters, but most of them share music and movies and use P2P applications. For many people the concept of recorded music as something you buy just doesn't exist.

numair 18y ago

I'm sure most people here will consider me crazy for saying this, but I really hope the music industry manages to make some inroads with these initiatives. Here's my problem with the free culture / "information wants to be free" crowd -- when you decide you no longer place monetary value on intellectual property, you are merely impoverishing intellectuals and keeping those who run enterprises such as oil and mining companies in control of the world's wealth. Rather than making the world a better place by making intellectual property free, you're putting it into the hands of the very people many in this crowd hate. I'm not saying that intellectual monopolies/oligarchies such as those seen in the 20th century are sensible; I'm merely saying that the free culture is, quite literally, economically retarded. Allowing creatives and intellectuals to pursue their art as a profession is one of the greatest accomplishments of modern society, I think; even better is the fact that you can pursue these things and make a significant amount of money which can be used to do lots of interesting things. We really need to figure out a way to preserve this -- the balance of power created by wealthy creatives pushing initiatives that run counter to the aims of wealthy industrialists is extremely important (Bono not withstanding, of course -- kidding).

pwk 18y ago
Allowing creatives and intellectuals to pursue their art as a profession is one of the greatest accomplishments of modern society... ...We really need to figure out a way to preserve this... It's possible to agree with this sentiment while still believing that the music industry, as currently incarnated, is not the best vehicle to accomplish this goal. The current shift we're seeing does seem to limit the instances of extreme success for individual creatives. This might not be a bad thing, if it provides a venue for more individuals to succeed, if at a smaller level. I think this is happening as the record companies slowly get moved out of the loop, but it's still early days and the new models for success are most certainly not yet fully fleshed out.
d0mine 18y ago
On impoverishing: If you have one apple and you give it to me then I have one apple and you are left with nothing. If you have an idea and you share it with me then I have the idea and you have it. Information is not oil.

cabalamat 18y ago

The idea behind copyleft boils down to "I'll share with you if you share with me". And Creative Commons boils down to "I've got some copyrighted work; I choose to share it under certain contitions". If ASCAP want to argue against these ideas, they've chosen a hard task for themselves. Probably all they will achieve is reinforcing the music industry's image of being out-of-touch dinosaurs living in the previous century.