Comments on: WMG disowns music licensing ‘presentation’ http://www.p2pnet.net/story/17801 p2pnet.net - reader powered Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:11:09 -0300 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Henry Ermich http://www.p2pnet.net/story/17801/comment-page-1#comment-905374 Henry Ermich Fri, 05 Dec 2008 19:09:06 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/17801#comment-905374 It's about time they reconsidered the "litigation based approach" -- it hasn't worked, and -- at most -- can only target a vanishingly-small number of people who, thanks to the fluidity if IP addresses etc. implicit in how the Net works -- may not even be the ones who they want. Moreover, as we need to keep hammering every chance we get, Copyright as it now exists serves NOT as an "incentive to create", but as a passive income-stream in perpetuity for already wealthy corporate megaliths. Not to mention the fact that when threatened with the expiration of one of "their "copyrights, they'll just buy themselves another extension in the same way that the Sonny Bono bullshit happened. Everyone knows this, which is why a sizable proportion of the world's population doesn't see anything wrong with file-sharing or p2p apps. So the corporate shmucks know that the "litigation based approach" (suing their best customers) won't work, and has so far only succeeded in alienating their key demographics -- teenagers and music-fans. They know this can't work, and they also know that all of their attempts to strengthen IP "protection" have pretty much failed as well. Booby-trapping their own product (a la Sony) failed, and pissed a whole lot of people off to boot. So, just behind all their obfuscatory bloviating, we all know what's really going on: they know full well that they'll HAVE TO do some kind of "constructive solution" like blanket licensing or drastic copyright reform of some kind, simply to save face and attempt to stay relevant. You know you're adversary's pretty much beaten when they start taking about "pursuing constructive solutions". Did they talk about "constructive resolution" with Napster? No. Did they talk about a "constructive resolution" when they destroyed mp3.com? No. Now, after years of (failed) jackbooting and against ever-improving forms of p2p technology, when an entire generation of people has already grown up in a world where file-sharing is a commonplace and they're recognized for the corporate lobbyists they are, and treated accordingly -- NOW is the point where their carefully-maintained facade slips. Those four words: "pursuing a constructive solution" -- amount to the RIAA member-companies acknowledgement that they've already lost, and are fully aware of that face. I'll gladly stay tuned -- just to watch them crumble. It’s about time they reconsidered the “litigation based approach” — it hasn’t worked, and — at most — can only target a vanishingly-small number of people who, thanks to the fluidity if IP addresses etc. implicit in how the Net works — may not even be the ones who they want.

Moreover, as we need to keep hammering every chance we get, Copyright as it now exists serves NOT as an “incentive to create”, but as a passive income-stream in perpetuity for already wealthy corporate megaliths. Not to mention the fact that when threatened with the expiration of one of “their “copyrights, they’ll just buy themselves another extension in the same way that the Sonny Bono bullshit happened. Everyone knows this, which is why a sizable proportion of the world’s population doesn’t see anything wrong with file-sharing or p2p apps.

So the corporate shmucks know that the “litigation based approach” (suing their best customers) won’t work, and has so far only succeeded in alienating their key demographics — teenagers and music-fans. They know this can’t work, and they also know that all of their attempts to strengthen IP “protection” have pretty much failed as well. Booby-trapping their own product (a la Sony) failed, and pissed a whole lot of people off to boot.

So, just behind all their obfuscatory bloviating, we all know what’s really going on: they know full well that they’ll HAVE TO do some kind of “constructive solution” like blanket licensing or drastic copyright reform of some kind, simply to save face and attempt to stay relevant.

You know you’re adversary’s pretty much beaten when they start taking about “pursuing constructive solutions”. Did they talk about “constructive resolution” with Napster? No. Did they talk about a “constructive resolution” when they destroyed mp3.com? No.

Now, after years of (failed) jackbooting and against ever-improving forms of p2p technology, when an entire generation of people has already grown up in a world where file-sharing is a commonplace and they’re recognized for the corporate lobbyists they are, and treated accordingly — NOW is the point where their carefully-maintained facade slips.

Those four words: “pursuing a constructive solution” — amount to the RIAA member-companies acknowledgement that they’ve already lost, and are fully aware of that face.

I’ll gladly stay tuned — just to watch them crumble.

]]>