PDA

View Full Version : Blackout threat for music thieves.


DeSnousa
Apr 14, 2007, 07:05 PM
An outrages idea, that will never be allowed.

-Tough guidelines to stop illegal music downloads
-ISPs in plan to cut services to thieves
-18 per cent of Australians download 30 illegal songs a month

PEOPLE who illegally download music would have their telephone and internet services cut off under a radical new plan proposed by the music industry.

Fed up with falling sales, the industry - which claims Australians download more than one billion songs illegally each year - has been discussing tough new guidelines with internet service providers (ISPs) since late last year.

Record labels, music publishers and other copyright holders are involved.

The value of CDs sold in Australia between January and March this year fell by more than 20 per cent - from $100 million to $80 million - compared with the first three months of 2006.

Link to article (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21555941-421,00.html)

Besides this being ridiculous a lot a people in Australia still have like 200-1000 mb downloads a month.

Scarlet Fever
Apr 14, 2007, 07:20 PM
i know a lot of people who download a LOT more than 30 songs a month. a guy i know downloaded the whole AC/DC collection (several hundred songs) in a month.

if people are downloading music, maybe something needs to be done about music stores. Sanity rarely have any good CDs for less than $30. At those prices, is it any wonder people download music.

i hate it how the music industries think they can write their own laws. they act as if they are a government of their own.

freebooter
Apr 14, 2007, 08:30 PM
i hate it how the music industries think they can write their own laws. they act as if they are a government of their own.

No less so than do the energy industries. :mad:

rockthecasbah
Apr 14, 2007, 10:00 PM
i don't understand how they have the authority to cut a service that isn't even provided by the same company. Internet is crazy enough, but if you have a different company for internet than phone they can override that shut your PHONE off?!?! Phone service doesn't even have a single thing to do with music downloads!!!

CanadaRAM
Apr 14, 2007, 10:26 PM
Sorry, I'm going to take a devils advocate position here.

If an illegal act is committed (and it's the government that 'makes' the copyright law, and defines the legality or not of the act, BTW) then what right does the person have of having their bandwidth protected?

If a business is operating illegally (such as a restaurant that fails health inspection), then their city business permit can be revoked. If a tenant stiffs a landlord for rent, the electricity can be cut off. If a person is convicted of drunk driving, their license (the right to operate a vehicle on the public road) can be taken away. If you bounce cheques, the payee can have your account or salary garnisheed.

This seems to be a more immediate and effective means of enforcement than suing someone for damages. All assuming that the plaintiff would have to go through due process under the law to establish the infraction and apply for the remedy. (I'm assuming also that cutting phone service would relate only to those who use dialup or phone company service to engage in the theft of material)

EricNau
Apr 14, 2007, 10:32 PM
Sorry, I'm going to take a devils advocate position here.

If an illegal act is committed (and it's the government that 'makes' the copyright law, and defines the legality or not of the act, BTW) then what right does the person have of having their bandwidth protected?

If a business is operating illegaly, then their city permit can be revoked. If a tenant stiffs a landlord for rent, the electricity can be cut off. If a person is convicted of drunk driving, their license (the right to operate a vehicle on the public road) can be taken away. If you bounce cheques, the payee can have your account or salary garnisheed.

This seems to be a more immediate and effective means of enforcement than suing someone for damages. All assuming that the plaintiff would have to go through due process under the law to establish the infraction and apply for the remedy.
I agree completely.

Although, if such a plan were enacted, I would hope there would be a real human reviewing each case to ensure innocent people didn't loose their service.

Also, if the phone line were disabled, I would hope it would leave the line open to call emergency services.

...but other than those two things, I don't see any problems. If your downloading music illegally you should just be happy your not sent to prison.

insomniac321123
Apr 16, 2007, 12:31 AM
That is a horrible idea. To completely shut a persons internet and telephone down with out a single warning. What if they had an emergency and couldnt call the authorities. This is absolutley rediculous.

CanadaRAM
Apr 16, 2007, 12:45 AM
That is a horrible idea. To completely shut a persons internet and telephone down with out a single warning. What if they had an emergency and couldnt call the authorities. This is absolutley rediculous.

Read the frickin' article

"Under this system, people who illegally download songs would be given three written warnings by their Internet service provider.

If they continued to illegally download songs, their internet account would be suspended or terminated.

Those with dial-up internet could face having their phone disconnected. "

Not Internet AND phone
Not without warning

And more likely, the dial up customer would lose their ISP account rather than their voice service.
Also notice the use of the word could in the article -- which means it is the reporter's opinion that it is a possibility, not that it is current fact.

Sheesh.

Rodimus Prime
Apr 16, 2007, 01:55 AM
I getting sick of how the music indrustry is blaming downloading music for falling sells. The reason why I have not bought a cd in a few years now is because there has really not been anything new in over 6 years now. The new stuff and the stuff from 10 years ago sound quite a bit a like.
The reason sells are falling is because the music industry is not willing to try anything new and has gone stagnated because they will not sign stuff that is radically difference from what been playing the past 10 years.

That is why I have not bought a cd in a few years. The new music I want now is normally from sound tracks and those I get as gifts. The cd that been sitting in my car for a while is very difference from what I been hearing on the radio for the past 10 years and hell I like it quite a bit.

If the music industry would get it though their thick heads that people are getting sick of hearing the same stuff for the past 10+ years so we are not buying anything because it has not changed. It is not because of downloading. Hell downloading music oddly enough INCREASED the number of cds I have bought over the past 10 years.

EricNau
Apr 16, 2007, 01:57 AM
I getting sick of how the music indrustry is blaming downloading music for falling sells. The reason why I have not bought a cd in a few years now is because there has really not been anything new in over 6 years now. The new stuff and the stuff from 10 years ago sound quite a bit a like.
The reason sells are falling is because the music industry is not willing to try anything new and has gone stagnated because they will not sign stuff that is radically difference from what been playing the past 10 years.

That is why I have not bought a cd in a few years. The new music I want now is normally from sound tracks and those I get as gifts. The cd that been sitting in my car for a while is very difference from what I been hearing on the radio for the past 10 years and hell I like it quite a bit.

If the music industry would get it though their thick heads that people are getting sick of hearing the same stuff for the past 10+ years so we are not buying anything because it has not changed. It is not because of downloading. Hell downloading music oddly enough INCREASED the number of cds I have bought over the past 10 years.
That doesn't make stealing OK.

Those who commit illegal activities deserve to be punished.

Henri Gaudier
Apr 16, 2007, 04:38 AM
This kind of play school moralism doesn't help anyone. The music industry can die in agony as far as I'm concerned. They are gangsters ripping everyone off so they can pay Michael Jackson and Phil Collins, Paul Macartney Cher etc 100 million euro deals.

Illegal downloading is the new Punk.

With Nau's attitude to illegality, we will no doubt be seeing him on the news with wire cutters at Guntanamo Bay. Can't wait. Stop wanting to criminalise every little act. Authoritarianism is for wankers. The music industry has only itself to blame with it's throttling of talent to self created market guidelines and ridiculous salaries for an elite. ****** 'em!

discodave
Apr 16, 2007, 05:09 AM
Excellent Idea. I think that this should be implemented the world over.

@ Henri Gaudier- Don't be so moronic. Your response to this doesn't even justify an argument.

emotion
Apr 16, 2007, 06:15 AM
I am against any kind of illegal downloading myself but I fail to see how this move will do anything to increase music sales.

I'd say most illegal downloads are done just because people can. A download does not necessarily translate to a lost sale. In fact I believe the argument that some P2P dowloads can act as effective promotion for some releases. I have one friend that runs two small independent music labels that thinks this way.


@ Henri Gaudier- Don't be so moronic. Your response to this doesn't even justify an argument.


Regardless of how moronic you think that sounds I'm not sure that attitude is out of the ordinary for teenagers. The younger generation feel no attachment to the 'package' of music and are very happy with downloads (witness the popularity of ring tones) and as they generally have no money to buy the releases they see promoted to them everywhere on billboards etc they feel it necessary to use P2P.

I'm not advocating that behaviour but that's how it is.

Abstract
Apr 16, 2007, 09:29 AM
I getting sick of how the music indrustry is blaming downloading music for falling sells. The reason why I have not bought a cd in a few years now is because there has really not been anything new in over 6 years now. The new stuff and the stuff from 10 years ago sound quite a bit a like.
The reason sells are falling is because the music industry is not willing to try anything new and has gone stagnated because they will not sign stuff that is radically difference from what been playing the past 10 years.


If bad musicians, bad music, and bad variety and lack of artistry and innovation in music is the reason people aren't buying CDs, then why do people bother downloading new albums? New music sucks, right?

Or maybe.....juuuuust maybe......people download music rather than pay for it because downloading is free, while paying $25 for a CD isn't nearly as cheap as free. Or maybe a CD is worth around $12-15 to most people, and not the $25 that Sanity charges for albums. I don't know. I just know that this isn't an excuse for stealing.


On the other hand, I started downloading music "illegally". :p I started doing it 1 year ago when the RIAA was really getting on my nerves with the lawsuits and all. I think of downloading an album and trying it out in the same light as trying on a shirt at a store. If I don't like how the shirt fits, I don't buy it. If I like the shirt, I'll buy it. If I don't like it, I delete it from my computer. Lost sales? I don't think so. I wouldn't have bought it anyway, and I don't keep the files if I enjoy the album.

Killyp
Apr 16, 2007, 09:37 AM
Maybe if the record industry didn't charge such absolutely ridiculous prices for CDs (18 for some!), then people wouldn't be as inclined to steal...

Queso
Apr 16, 2007, 09:49 AM
The music industry as a whole needs to get a grip. A large number of artists have now worked out that they make more money on tour t-shirts than they do on record sales. Some are even giving away the music as an advert for the gigs, where the real profit lies, which of course cuts the record companies out of the picture entirely.

The traditional business model is changing, since anyone with a website can now distribute their creations directly to a worldwide audience. Although I don't advocate people stealing, I can't help thinking these tactics are the desperate actions of a group of people who know their time is up.

Rodimus Prime
Apr 16, 2007, 10:04 AM
If bad musicians, bad music, and bad variety and lack of artistry and innovation in music is the reason people aren't buying CDs, then why do people bother downloading new albums? New music sucks, right?

Or maybe.....juuuuust maybe......people download music rather than pay for it because downloading is free, while paying $25 for a CD isn't nearly as cheap as free. Or maybe a CD is worth around $12-15 to most people, and not the $25 that Sanity charges for albums. I don't know. I just know that this isn't an excuse for stealing.


On the other hand, I started downloading music "illegally". :p I started doing it 1 year ago when the RIAA was really getting on my nerves with the lawsuits and all. I think of downloading an album and trying it out in the same light as trying on a shirt at a store. If I don't like how the shirt fits, I don't buy it. If I like the shirt, I'll buy it. If I don't like it, I delete it from my computer. Lost sales? I don't think so. I wouldn't have bought it anyway, and I don't keep the files if I enjoy the album.

hence the reason the amount of money the RIAA has gotten of me has increased. If I like the music I tend to buy it.
What bothering about the RIAA they claim each illegal download is a lost sell which is bull crap. A lot of people would not of bought the music any how. I now I would not. I have quite a few cds that I bought because I download one or 2 of the songs. Also I "illegal" music to replace a damage CD that I own but I do own the cd just it got scratch to hell or it was cracked.

The next thing that makes me not believe the RIAA was when the got busted for illegally raising prices on cds. As a group they decided to raise the prices of Cd's which is illegal and got busted for it.

So now lets see they claim lost sells and blame it on downloading songs yets
1. There has been nothing really new in 10 years
2. They illegal raised the prices of the music and that in turn cause demand to decrease
And they wondering why sells have gone down.

For me personally the stuff I tend to like now is stuff I never really heard before which oddly enough is still general older stuff just it be the first time I heard them and I really like. I have the Decembers in my car right now that I got as a gift from a friend and I love it and it a complete difference style than I normally listen 2. It be when some exposes me to something new that I like.

The RIAA just needs a new style to come out since it been stagnated for 10 years now.

emotion
Apr 16, 2007, 10:11 AM
So now lets see they claim lost sells and blame it on downloading songs yets
1. There has been nothing really new in 10 years


This assertion holds no water at all.

I'm not saying that the mainstream music around now is good or bad but to say it hasn't changed in 10 years just isn't true.

There are many more things to take into consideration when analysing why music isn't selling as much these days.

Rodimus Prime
Apr 16, 2007, 10:45 AM
This assertion holds no water at all.

I'm not saying that the mainstream music around now is good or bad but to say it hasn't changed in 10 years just isn't true.

There are many more things to take into consideration when analysing why music isn't selling as much these days.

how? The stuff on the radio I hear that on the station that plays "new" stuff I remember hearing years ago. Listen to songs from a years ago and listen to a lot of the new stuff in mainstream. It sounds a lot like. I still do not think it has change that much in 10 years.
I know RIAA is afraid to try new stuff out of their known working formulas in styles of music and they limit it. That much we know so that limits changed which cases it to go stagnant. Music is no longer changing as rapidly as it was in the 40's 50's and 60's

Start jumping decades when you listen to music. The style from the 30's-80's (each decade) sounded very difference than the one before it or after it.
Now lets look at the 90's and 00's They sound a lot a like. No huge difference like it was between the 80's and 90's. That is why I saying that it gone stagnated. It not changing very rapidly at all.

Plus you still have point 2 to look at. They raised the price allegedly got and got busted for it. You damn right sells are gong to go down if you increase the price because that cause demand to drop.

On top of that the RIAA clearly failed to adapted to the new market. Online stores work great and people clearly are willing to buy individual songs at a reasonable price. They failed to move on that for years and it was not until what 2003 before any type of major iTMS was up and running. By my count that was at least 5+ years that they failed to move on it. They are slow to changed to the new market. CDs sells are dieing because no one wants them any more. Mp3 is where everything is moving. Just they failed to adjust to the new market.
They are failing to push a single standard for a DRM and more leaving it to other to push for it. They are not getting involved and all the RIAA does is really just complain and whine but are not willing to do anything to address the problem. Instead they go after suing 10 years old and not addressing the problem that they have failed to adapted.

emotion
Apr 16, 2007, 10:58 AM
how? The stuff on the radio I hear that on the station that plays "new" stuff I remember hearing years ago. Listen to songs from a years ago and listen to a lot of the new stuff in mainstream. It sounds a lot like. I still do not think it has change that much in 10 years.
I know RIAA is afraid to try new stuff out of their known working formulas in styles of music and they limit it. That much we know so that limits changed which cases it to go stagnant. Music is no longer changing as rapidly as it was in the 40's 50's and 60's



Don't get me wrong I possibly agree with you more than disagree but, for example, R&B/hip-hop has changed in a lot of respects over the last 10 years. In some ways owing more to techno in some production techniques that it did before (and being more stripped down as a result).

I digress though. I have very little interest in mainstream music as a whole, viewing it as an industry I don't really participate in even though I spend roughly 50 quid a week on music (mainly vinyl, some downloads from junodownload.com and beatport.com).


Start jumping decades when you listen to music. The style from the 30's-80's (each decade) sounded very difference than the one before it or after it.
Now lets look at the 90's and 00's They sound a lot a like. No huge difference like it was between the 80's and 90's. That is why I saying that it gone stagnated. It not changing very rapidly at all.


You could have said that jumping from any decade. Honestly, you could.

It's only with hindsight that it's obvious there is a change.

I think I have a pretty good grip on music history too. My music collection (of vinyl) spans music from the 60s to the present day across many many genres.


Plus you still have point 2 to look at. They raised the price allegedly got and got busted for it. You damn right sells are gong to go down if you increase the price because that cause demand to drop

I'm not disagreeing here.

As a whole I view the major label people with massive disdain. Then again their behaviour at the end of the 70s with the "Home taping is killing music" nonsense is not much different to now. It's just now the change they face is massive and they have some way of backing up their threats with technology.

CanadaRAM
Apr 16, 2007, 12:05 PM
hence the reason the amount of money the RIAA has gotten of me has increased.

You don't pay the RIAA when you buy a recording. You pay the people who wrote, recorded, manufactured distributed and sold the product.
The RIAA is an industry lobby group not unlike the College of Physicians and Surgeons or the Teacher's unions. It is funded by membership dues of the member firms.

What bothering about the RIAA they claim each illegal download is a lost sell which is bull crap. A lot of people would not of bought the music any how. I now I would not. I have quite a few cds that I bought because I download one or 2 of the songs.

Lame justification. There are previews on iTunes and most band sites. There's radio, Internet streaming radio, listening stations in stores, magazines like Paste that have CD samplers of new bands, many ways to hear music. Doesn't require stealing it.

The other part of the agument is: Downloaders would not have bought the music anyway. Get it straight. If the music had no value to you, you wouldn't miss it if there were no downloads available. So there'd be no beef if you couldn't listen to it.
The music you listen to has value to you therefore. Why won't you pay for it?

What entitles a downloader to expect me to pay for music; yet issue themselves an exemption? "Everyone else can pay but I'm entitled to get it free."


So now lets see they claim lost sells and blame it on downloading songs yets
1. There has been nothing really new in 10 years

That is so absurd a statement, I won't even respond.

2. They illegal raised the prices of the music and that in turn cause demand to decrease And they wondering why sells have gone down.

How, exactly? What kind of backup do you have for that statement?


They are gangsters ripping everyone off so they can pay Michael Jackson and Phil Collins, Paul Macartney Cher etc 100 million euro deals.

Great rationalization, it can work both ways. You advance the theory that either:

1: A large artist (who I admit that I never listen to) makes too much money for my liking, so I will take money out of the pocket of the bands I do listen to by taking their music without paying. That'll show Cher and Celine!

Or: Record companies give artists a bum deal, they cheat the artists out of a fair share. So to redress that, I myself will cheat the bands I do listen to by taking their music without paying.

Combine that with the poster above, and you can get:

3: No bands are recording or releasing any new music for the past ten years. When I do find some music worth listening to, in protest of that, I will cheat the bands do produce music worth listening to by taking their music without paying.

:rolleyes:

You don't like the $25 CD price at whatever store? Then buy it on iTunes for $9.99. Or wait for the price to drop on the CD. Or buy a used (genuine) CD. Or listen to the radio. Don't rip off the people who write and record and manufacture and promote and distribute the music you like because -- they will stop doing it if they don't get paid.