Give me a break.

“When ISPs realize there’s money to be made on the biggest users”? They already do that. Why should we pay extra for what we already pay for? You mean YOU want it. “Hassle people enough and they’ll pay” eh? You think so really? We’ll see then won’t we? I refuse to pay you a red cent, and never will. In fact I’ll guarantee it. I’ll make it part of my life’s agenda to resist and ignore you. But spend all your days plugging away if you like. Who knows ..

If the actual system were a sociialist one and it didn’t work either and someone proposed a more private system, the sane words as quoted above would apply too.

And just because we don’t live in a ideal world should we privatize the courts and the police?

I say that regardless of the human imperfections that affect the private and pblic sectors equally, whatever system is chosen has to be as ideal as possible. My proposals are based on the ideal system as I see it.

You’re talking of a system very close to socialism, which is a dirty word to many
people.
In an ideal world, where everyone is honest and be counted on to do the ‘right’
thing, this could work.

However, this is not an ideal world, and you can COUNT on someone abusing such a
system.

I don’t have an answer either, Rafael, but rest assured … no reasonable solution
will ever be accepted by the RIAA members.

Thoroughout the world people finance eductation, health. security. transporation, museums, etc. through public general taxes. Tax money is used to pay the policeman, the teacher, the soldier, construction workers, doctors, lawyers. etc.

Why not finance the artists such as songwriters, musicians, poets, writers) with tax money. Just put the artists with proven talent in the Arts Department payroll or pay them for their time and/or the works they produce, which would then enter the public domain. The same artists and the rest can still make money by charging for their performances and and products they may sell. This would do away with copyright, copying restrictions and all the racketeering in between. Then the arts will flourish again. Has no one noticed that most all the great works of art and architecture were done when the copyright word and concept and art racketeering did not exist.
RV

You will never get that assurance .. ever.

That’s why they want blanket licensing under THEIR terms.

Besides, let them have it and who’s next ?
The photography industry ?
Software publishers ?
Book publishers ?

The list of those in line for a similar hand out is endless.

How much can YOU pay for internet access ?

All blanket licensing schemes to date are fraud. It is because there is no reliable reports for music usage, audience size and whatever data records there are cannot bee seen b the public or the artists. Then the accounting is never honestrly audited. Under such conditions there is no way there is going to be a fair distribution of the money. Then, anyway, the money passes through unscruupolous music publishers who do with the money whatever they want because the musica usage records cannot be seen and there are no audits of the books. There was no way the system could work except o make a few millionaires and many poor artists.

So a new blanket licensing scheme can only lead to the same sstem manipulations and the same results….unless the system is universal (for Internet/radio/concert/bar/etc. music usage) private hands and public. To make it work it must be all public and all records and data open for inspection by any citizen and audited by government accontants. In other words, there is no room for private orgabizations. ALL PUBLIC, nothing private.
RV

No.

You can’t trust corporations of parasites to be fair or be reasonable. You have to hammer them into death.

This mean that whatever this parasites do, does not matter. We are NOT! going to buy their shit anymore, period!

We will pay the artist directly instead. Actually I am already doing just that. The majors are not needed and not wanted and they should be destroyed like the terrorists they are.

May be because since the 4 majors are now in deep shit as a result they are trying to deny that they did this?

Perhaps, but if anything, this also (especially?) applies to corporations. For far too long have they been unfair and unreasonable with their terms to artists and consumers alike, simply because they can. The internet has turned the tables now and they no longer have us grabbed by the nuts. It is US who will hammer them into it until someday, hopefully, they will get over their million$ withdrawal syndrome and come to terms with their diminished role in the digital age.