handdator

Visa fullständig version : Copyrights


edjay
2009-04-19, 19:51
This is a subject that I have been trying to follow from over in Wales. As time goes on, it gets more complicated......it's time for me to try to formulate some answers.



So, how does an artist/musicain/writer go about making a crust from a copyrighted work then?



This has nothing to do with Intellectual Property Rights.

John Nilsson
2009-04-19, 21:04
edjay (2009-Apr-19)So, how does an artist/musicain/writer go about making a crust from a copyrighted work then?

Assuming you're asking how to make money in a world where digital distribution is free.



I suggest you take a look at what Chris Anderson has to say on the subject (http://www.thelongtail.com/).





(At the time of this writing the top post on the blog linked to was a survey of free business models online (http://www.longtail.com/the_long_tail/2009/03/terrific-survey-of-free-business-models-online.html))

edjay
2009-04-20, 13:59
Thanks for the reply John



These models are intersesting but, they still don't seem as practical as tracking a basic copyright:



M.R.W



White Label

The end-user can brand/tailor the online service and re-sell it as their own (typically taking a percentage of the generated revenue, or paying a fixed subscription cost to the original service).



I.P.U



Pay-per-use

Micropayments: the end-user is charged a fee to use an online service (one-off, or for a limited time). This includes the 'brokerage' model, where user(s) are charged a fixed-price or percentage per transaction (e.g. ebay). This also includes the purchase of ‘credits’ e.g. 10 uses of the service for a fixed cost. Discounts can be offered for bulk purchases.



I.T.L



License Content

Third-Parties are given access to re-use the content from the web-site for their own purposes.



The emphasis of "The Long Tail" from your links is all about advertising: So, if I want to gain revenue through advertising to support my music, I have to allow Pepsi(drugs) McDonalds(proven carcinogenic junk) Boeng(Military with tax breaks) or any of the multitude of New World Order monopolies onto my web site. Unless I were to consent to this objectionable material being on a website for my music, I would not be able to survive from my music as I would have to give it away for free?



Am I understanding you correctly: I have to give away my original music for free and survive from the advertising revenues generated from a website?

John Nilsson
2009-04-20, 18:24
edjay (2009-Apr-20)Thanks for the reply John



These models are intersesting but, they still don't seem as practical as tracking a basic copyright



I think that the models that will be most prevailing for culture workers will be versions of the freemiun models like the one Nine Inch Nails employed to sell signed discs for 300$ while at the same time offering the music as lossless quality as free downloads, fan club memberships ans associated subscription services, and what else you can think of.



There might be some increase in the street performer protocoll, but I don't think it will be one of the major models.



I also belive that the most important revenue stream will be from services like live performances, special adaptations, freelancing for periodicals or websites, and other services that will have an increased demand as a result of the marketing gains from digital distribution of completed works.



There is also the interesting combination of crowd sourcing and freemium that Ace of Base employed to get their fans to create re-mixes whith tools they could use for free or buy extended capabilities on the bands website.

edjay
2009-04-23, 10:32
Hi John



I've looked at the NIN site /wiki and I can see that there is a realistic struggle against record labels going on there. However, record labels are surely only a problem if you give (...or are forced to sell or deal) them your copyrights in the first place; so that you can have the benefit of their distribution network/facilities/monopoly.



I completely agree with NIN's stance on his music being used for the purposes of torture - he is excercising his right as the copyright holder. And here, there is a good example of why I have a problem with the fact PB is against copyrights: With no respect for peoples copyrights either morally or financially, this is exactly the kind of freedom that will be given to anyone that wishes to abuse those copyrights. Not good. (There was an instance recently where the Queen song Mr Fahrenheit (Having a good time) was used by the US military to give a buzz to a video of the expansion of their military infrastructure. Disgusting, I wish I'd kept the link.)



So far, I still feel that a copyright is the hard-won right of an artist/musician/writer and, that right should be protected. This right is not to be confused with the term "Intellectual Property Right" which apperars to be mostly an idea to protect the writers of software - it also appears that it is being used to confuse people as to the nature of copyrights in the hope that these rights (Laws) can be taken away and destroyed under the mantle of IPR.



Some relevant statements I read about the PB:



A fundamental tennet of the PB is: ....to link people and information... There is no conflict with copyrights in that statement.



The PB (As a European Political Party.) will: ...promise to fight against the zeal to control, censor and monitor the communications of ordinary people... There is no conflict with copyrights in that statement either.



Link to the above: Google Translation (http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=en&js=n&u=http%3A%2F%2Fpress.piratpartiet.se%2F2009%2F04%2F17%2Finternet-kokar-piratpartiet-har-nu-fler-medlemmar-an-fp%2F&sl=sv&tl=en)



These are both important points that a global administration would not want to have in the hands of a democratic facility such as the PB. There is also no conflict with copyrights in this statement.



This is saying to me that there is a conflict in understanding regarding what the PB is actually about. Could it be that the "media" is focusing on the copyright issue as a smoke-screen for the actual fight to protect peoples fundamental rights of association and the open distribution of information?

John Nilsson
2009-04-23, 19:40
edjay (2009-Apr-23)I completely agree with NIN's stance on his music being used for the purposes of torture - he is excercising his right as the copyright holder.



Article 3 in the Swedish copyright law sates A work may not be changed in a manner which is prejudicial to the author's literary or artistic reputation or to his individuality, not may it be made available to the public in such a form or in such a context as is prejudicial in the manner stated.

The Pirate Partys official stance on copyright is that this Article should be kept or maybe even strengthened.



In this particular case however I don't think copyright is applicable as it doesn't cover what is done in a private setting. And I gess we can assume torture to be performed in a private setting.



For me personally I agree that authors should have a moral claim towards their work. But I don't agree that it has to be legislated. Just as we culturally abhor adultery, but still don't pass laws to regulate it, I think an authors moral claim towards his/her works is something to be controlled by cutural norms rather than laws.





This right is not to be confused with the term "Intellectual Property Right" which apperars to be mostly an idea to protect the writers of software

I am a writer of software and I don't agree with the statement that it somehow protects me. On the contrary I often feel it constrains me.



IPR is as far as I understand it it's marketing term used to promote a "sollution" to USA:s trade "deficit".



A fundamental tennet of the PB is: ....to link people and information... There is no conflict with copyrights in that statement.

Apparently the Swedish legal system disagrees. This is precisley the act they have been found guilty of. Note that no copyrighted material ever touched TPB's services.





The PB (As a European Political Party.)I think you are confusing TPB and or PB with PP. The Pirate Party (us) has no official connection with The Pirate Bay (the torrent website) or Piratbyrån (a lobby group).





will: ...promise to fight against the zeal to control, censor and monitor the communications of ordinary people... There is no conflict with copyrights in that statement either.

As you have discovered the Pirate Party has more things than copyright in it's political programme.





This is saying to me that there is a conflict in understanding regarding what the PB is actually about. Could it be that the "media" is focusing on the copyright issue as a smoke-screen for the actual fight to protect peoples fundamental rights of association and the open distribution of information?

Assuming you mean PP by PB, yes there is still lot's of confusion about what PP is about. So foar the media attention has focused on the filesharing issue. But slowly they are beginning to understand the more nuanced reality of our effort.

2009-04-23, 22:11
Hi John



I think you are confusing TPB and or PB with PP. The Pirate Party (us) has no official connection with The Pirate Bay (the torrent website) or Piratbyrån (a lobby group).



Hey please excuse me, I thought this was the forum for the Pirate Bay! LOL :D



You seem to have a fair few pirates over there in Sweden?



http://tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:6p4Ok541dbsOgM:http://bnp.org.uk/files/2009/03/pirates-in-parliament.jpg



Funny how the subjects overlap: I agree that IPR are for restrictions. I also agree that a world full of unecessary and non-regulated snooping is fundamentally destructive. I wish you all the best with the PP. Right, I'm off to hunt some more Pirates.



:)

Da_Nerd
2009-04-23, 22:38
Hey please excuse me, I thought this was the forum for the Pirate Bay! LOL [BigGrin]



Hehe, you do know that the pirate bay is´t a political party right?



we are the political wing of the swedish pirate movment...

2009-04-23, 23:00
Well, I know now! :hehe:



I've just joined TPB with the same questions.