Canadian musicians’ file sharing plan

p2pnet news | Music:- Canadian musicians in the Songwriters’ Association of Canada (SAC) and Canadian Music Creators Coalition (CMCC) say although the Net and mobile phone networks have become major sources of music, “songwriters and performers typically receive no compensation of any kind when their music is shared or illegally downloaded”.
And it’s time to rectify the situation, the say.
“The plan we propose would not change or interfere with the way Canadians receive their music,” they say on their new site, going on:
“No one would be sued for the online sharing of songs. On the contrary, the sharing of music on Peer-to-Peer networks and similar technologies would become perfectly legal. In addition, Music Publishers and Record Labels would be fairly compensated for the crucial role they play in supporting Canadian music creators.”
The site includes space for people who, “agree with this summary of our proposal” to sign.
Here’s what their proposal proposes >>>
1. Whereas:
* An estimated 1.6 billion music files are shared online in Canada each year.
* The total number of purchased downloads in Canada was 38 million in 2005.
* The proportion between these two is 98 to 2 – 98% shared file and 2% purchased downloads.We Therefore Believe:
Consumers have clearly demonstrated their wish to access music by file sharing.
2. Whereas:
* Virtually every song ever recorded is available through P2P file sharing 3 (more than 79 million recordings)
* Only 3 million songs are available on legal sites.We Therefore Believe:File sharing is both a revolution in music distribution and a very positive phenomenon. The volunteer efforts of millions of music fans creates a much greater choice of repertoire for consumers while allowing songs – both new and old, well known and obscure – to be heard.
All that’s needed to fulfill this revolution in distribution is a way for Creators and rights holders to be paid.
OUR PROPOSAL
3. We propose an amendment to the Copyright Act which would establish a new right: The Right to Equitable Remuneration for Music File Sharing.
4. We define Music File Sharing as the sharing of a copy of a copyrighted musical work without motive of financial gain.
Since the new right is limited to activities that take place without motive of financial gain, parties who receive compensation for file sharing would not be covered by this right. Therefore, this new right is distinct from rights licensed by legal music sites like iTunes and PureTracks.
5. The new right would make it legal to share music between two or more parties, whether over Peer to Peer networks, wireless networks, email, CD, DVD, hard drives etc. Distinct from private copying, this new right would authorize the sharing of music with other individuals.
6. In exchange for this sharing of their work, Creators and rights holders would be entitled to receive a monthly license fee from each internet and wireless account in Canada.
7. We propose a licence fee of $5.00 per internet subscription, per month. Payment of this fee would remove the stigma of illegality from file sharing. In addition, it would represent excellent value to the consumer, since this fee would grant access to the majority of the world’s repertoire of music. Existing download subscription services generally charge considerably more than $5.00 per month, while offering a mere fraction of the file-sharing repertoire. 6
8. In addition, this would present a major financial improvement for the music industry. Since the license fee would be paid by all internet and wireless accounts, the amount of income generated annually could adequately compensate the industry for years of declining sales and lost revenues, and would dramatically enhance current legal digital music income. Sales of physical product would continue to earn substantial amounts, albeit gradually decreasing. Masters would continue to be licensed to movies and television. Radio would continue to sell advertising and pay royalties on music. 7
We believe strongly that by giving Canadian music Creators a solid business model for the 21st century, this endeavor would initiate a golden era for music in Canada. Ultimately, we see this model being adopted internationally, and we are working with Creators groups around the world to effect a global system of remuneration for the sharing of music files.
9. Existing music sites like iTunes and PureTracks would continue to be licenced directly by Creators and rights holders and would continue to develop the attractive ‘value added’ services and security features that keep them distinct from file sharing activities.
10. The collective would track internet and wireless file sharing activity on a census basis. Virtually all sharing on the internet and wireless devices would be tracked. Companies who currently do this type of tracking have prepared themselves and are ‘waiting in the wings’. Creators and rights holders will be paid with a level of speed and accuracy never before possible.
11. CANADIAN COPYRIGHT AND LEGISLATIVE ISSUES
Regarding WIPO implementation, we are not opposed to the legal protection of Technical Protection Measures (TPM) or ‘digital locks’, however we believe the obvious economic benefits of the $5.00 per month model make such protection measures obsolete. Given the consumer aversion to TPM’s, we believe their use will inhibit the success of recordings in which they are embedded, and they will simply fall out of use.
We support Rights Management Information (RMI) protection since RMIs will assist in the identification of files and the attribution of rights without posing any problems for consumers.
The Songwriters and Recording Artists of Canada are in the process of consultation with the broader music industry, as well as consumer groups and Internet Service Providers, in order to gather support both in Canada and internationally for this proposal. We look forward to discussions with all concerned to make this proposal a reality that will be of great benefit to all.
Definitely stay tuned.
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for the download, and here for details. Click here or here to learn how to by-pass censorship in your area.







December 5th, 2007 at 9:19 am
For the groups of people who do not share music which are % wise larger
, why should they subsidize the down loaders.
This is just like the RIAA methods, force people to buy music. BAD PLAN.
December 5th, 2007 at 10:09 am
Might happen in Sweden too i heard, i dont realy care since i dont download music. I rather use Internet radios instead with great shows while gaming
I do download movies though once in awhile, would be great if they made the same thing for movies. I wouldnt mind paying a bit more on my internet to finaly solve all this..
Aslong as it isnt huge amounts, witch it wont be as long as everyone pays a little
I think its a great idea, but leaves a HUGE problem.. The music industry cannot die once implemented, if a new industry merges that somehow competes with music industry it competes on unfair grounds etc, its a permanent monopoly witch would forever feed Hollywood…
But hey i wouldnt realy care aslong as i could download stuff without being called terrorist supporter by anti-pirate organisations.
And they could start hunting real pirates that sell burned CDs on the streets instead of this internet cat/mouse game..
There are better solutions though, but this is the best one so far that could actualy happen..
December 5th, 2007 at 10:15 am
About time. That makes complete sense.
December 5th, 2007 at 10:27 am
“I think its a great idea, but leaves a HUGE problem.. The music industry cannot die once implemented, if a new industry merges that somehow competes with music industry it competes on unfair grounds etc, its a permanent monopoly witch would forever feed Hollywood… ”
Hmm,
Payments go to creators (not rights holders) and the creators pay the rights holder.
This way in the future the rights holders can migrate back to being the rights holders. i.e. they do not have to beg the corporations for their money.
December 5th, 2007 at 10:33 am
@ readers write above
And change the copyright law so that creators can only ‘rent’ out their rights for X years, not sell them. That way the rights return to the creator after a set period of time.
Copyright law that protects the creators from organizations that feed off of their creativity.
December 5th, 2007 at 10:47 am
” Might happen in Sweden too i heard, i dont realy care since i dont download music. ”
That’s a big reason why you SHOULD care.
You don’t download music, and yet you will be forced to pay for it anyway.
Maybe you only donwload non-RIAA music.
Those non-RIAA artists won’t get a dime of this.
” Copyright law that protects the creators from organizations that feed off of their creativity. ”
Copyright law currently protects the organizations that hold those rights from the
annoying creators of those works, that deserve some pay and recognition.
Gotta love monopolies.
December 5th, 2007 at 10:57 am
I don’t think it’s fair that everyone has to pay the fat cats that run the music and film industries when not everyone downloads!
I give away a tutorial DVD I made using BitTorrent, I don’t like to think that in order to get it, people have to pay that $5.
Also I think that file sharing should be legal for personal use and the bands make their money from getting their egotistical, spoilt backsides on the road and work for their money like most working class people do!
After all. it’s not just money they get for doing a ‘job’ that they love doing anyway, they get the fame too.
December 5th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
DON’T FEED THE DINOSAURS!!!!! This is unfair, for reasons stated above, people who don’t download music should not be forced to pay out $$. The RIAA has made no attempt to adapt to changing technology or compromise in any way, they should not be rewarded by a nice fat influx of cash. Let them die.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
Why does the music industry get to partake and no one else? Now maybe if you could download all the movies, ebooks, games, apps, TV shows, etc. that you want for 5.00?
Never happen. Isn’t practical. How the heck would you divide up the proceeds?
December 5th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
” Why does the music industry get to partake and no one else? ”
You’re absolutely right.
If the RIAA gets this .. the MPAA will be there with THEIR hand out next ..
then the BSA ( software ) .. Photographers … Book publishers .. etc ..
That 25.00 a month internet access will jump to 500.00 before you can spell
‘bullshit’ .
December 6th, 2007 at 10:02 am
Today, none of us fans get sued for downloading in Canada, due to the fact that we pay the tariffs on recordable CDs.
But we are being soaked to the tune of $30 million a year for this exchange.
This proposal would just add a new tax to the pile. (or shift it – who knows what the new law will be).
I do not download any music.
I am currently able to escape the tax by using recordable DVDs instead of CDs to back up my files and photos.
(Recordable DVDs are cheaper because they have so far escaped the added tariff).
How do I escape THIS proposed tax?
Cancel my internet access? – oh you got me now, eh.
Please go back to the drawing board.
December 27th, 2007 at 12:13 am
All you posters above should give your heads a collective shake. The purpose of the 5 bux/month is to protect the Downloader, not the music industy. It protects you from a lawsuit. Period.
It also helps to some small degree musicians that you haven’t paid for their songs.
To those that say they don’t download songs so why should they pay, I say this…lots of people don’t have cars but they have to pay taxes to pay for roads even though they don’t use them…how is this different?…according to your logic, if you don’t use something you shouldn’t have to pay taxes?
Give me a break. This solves a gigantic issue so for once in your lives consider the collective good over your own tightwadded wads.