Up until now, the only two main ways the RIAA and many other music organisations could come up with to tackle end user piracy is to file lawsuits against hose suspected of file sharing of their copyrighted music and for its labels to infect music sold online with DRM. Both have serious side effects: The settlements the RIAA asks for mainly picks on the less well off (such as students) and are generally issued without any previous letter of warning. The DRM measures seriously limits what devices one may listen to their music on, how one may use their purchased songs and also picks on those who legitimately buy music, however, at least EMI and Universal are giving DRM-free MP3 music a try.
France has now come up with a far more sensible approach over the RIAA method with the creation of a new policy to tackle pirates. Its anti-piracy body's plan is to have Internet Service Providers issue warnings to those found to be illegally downloading or sharing music. Second time offenders will be issued a threat of suspension or termination of their contract and those caught a third time may be banned from their Internet service. The chairman of the French retail chain store FNAC believes music sales have declined as a result of online file sharing, but also believes that large fines and prison sentences that are part of the current French law for copyright infringement are "totally disproportionate", saying that a ban on Internet access is a more reasonable punishment.
Discuss this article with your fellow community members! We appreciate your valuable input, but please keep the reaction policy in mind and make sure your reaction is constructive.
With 4 TB hard drives coming out in the future I guess we'll just use good ol' sneaker net.
http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/Hitachi-announces-new-increase-of-hard-discs-capacity-Press-Release.html
Seems the policy follows the path US ISPs have been working with. WOW for one has been sending notice to subscribers for a couple of years now. Plus the recent action by Comcast also parallels this program.
ISPs have stated they don't want to be net police. They only provide the infrastructure and shouldn't be forced to monitor user activity unless ordered to do so by a court of law. This message was edited at: 28-11-2007 01:07
Interesting. Sorta silly for them to say sales are still tanking. After they closed down the popular music sharing services and suing heavy downloaders & sharers, you would think their sales would start increasing.
All that trouble of suing everyone and their grandma's, they claim they are still losing money. I do admit they were losing some potential buyers at first. But on the other hand, it was free advertisement and they probably made more with it, then without it. Plus, the people who did download music from p2p probably wouldn't have bought the music in the first place. Perhaps it is time to do what every other business has basically done in the last 5 years....downsize! Time for them to make corporate decisions on how to save money and run more efficient.
Their decision to sue and shut down P2P should have worked if it truly was effecting their sales. But wait, it didn't work and things seems to be getting worse. Perhaps the cause now is the lack of consumer trust, DRM protections, and lack music for the pre teens youths to get them addicted to music. I think video game consoles and PCs are the hottest thing on the market for pass time. Unlike the past when someone got bored, they read books and listened to music.
It would be interesting to see how they figure they are losing money. Do they figure on average that 1 person buys 5 music Cd's per year? Or an average person spends $ per year? Or do they figure the we could have had this many sales, if this didn't happen.
I believe what now is happening the the 'cause and effect' theory. If they hadn't done anything then everyone and their cousins would be showing others how to use P2P sites and get free music, it could be good or bad (Probably bad). But now that they did shut down P2P sites and restrict music Cd's with DRM, the effect is now starting to show. They could be shooting themselves in the foot, then suing the consumer for medical costs. It is a no win situation for them.
Considering that the government is receiving major tax money from the RIAA. It wouldn't make much sense for the senate, government, or courts to rule against them. just my 5 cents.
Interesting. Sorta silly for them to say sales are still tanking. After they closed down the popular music sharing services and suing heavy downloaders & sharers, you would think their sales would start increasing.
All that trouble of suing everyone and their grandma's, they claim they are still losing money. I do admit they were losing some potential buyers at first. But on the other hand, it was free advertisement and they probably made more with it, then without it. Plus, the people who did download music from p2p probably wouldn't have bought the music in the first place. Perhaps it is time to do what every other business has basically done in the last 5 years....downsize! Time for them to make corporate decisions on how to save money and run more efficient.
Their decision to sue and shut down P2P should have worked if it truly was effecting their sales. But wait, it didn't work and things seems to be getting worse. Perhaps the cause now is the lack of consumer trust, DRM protections, and lack music for the pre teens youths to get them addicted to music. I think video game consoles and PCs are the hottest thing on the market for pass time. Unlike the past when someone got bored, they read books and listened to music.
It would be interesting to see how they figure they are losing money. Do they figure on average that 1 person buys 5 music Cd's per year? Or an average person spends $ per year? Or do they figure the we could have had this many sales, if this didn't happen.
I believe what now is happening the the 'cause and effect' theory. If they hadn't done anything then everyone and their cousins would be showing others how to use P2P sites and get free music, it could be good or bad (Probably bad). But now that they did shut down P2P sites and restrict music Cd's with DRM, the effect is now starting to show. They could be shooting themselves in the foot, then suing the consumer for medical costs. It is a no win situation for them.
Considering that the government is receiving major tax money from the RIAA. It wouldn't make much sense for the senate, government, or courts to rule against them. just my 5 cents.
