Why this will never happen in Canada
In Canada, most ISPs are related in one way or an other to the recording industry, publishers, radio stations, etc. So the day that an ISP will go to court to protect its users' privacy is not about to come.
A German court has refused to order ISPs to hand over user details to the music industry. The incident is not the first in Germany, and follows the opinion of a European Court of Justice Advocate-General backing the stance. A court in Offenburg, Germany refused to order ISPs to identify subscribers when asked to by music …
In my little corner of Canada, the only ISP available is a small family business. I don't think they are related to anybody in the recording industry. Canada, however, is generally a pretty right wing place and, just like in the US, many people would consider filesharing as a matter of "public safety or national security". It's refreshing to see that Europeans can distinguish between civil and criminal law.
May be but Telefonica were probably more worried about being sued but it's own customers for handing over private information without just cause and in breach of data protection laws.
I'm sure it's only a matter of time before the media industries PR campaign kicks into gear. If anyone knows how to do it...
It was a year or so back. The Canadian equivalent of the RIAA took Videotron and Sympatico to court to request the information. The ISP said they were willing to do it, but needed a court order. The court refused to give the order. The ISPs aren't the ones who refused to do it, it was the court. If I remember correctly, the judge went along the lines that the cost to the users and the court system was too high compared to what the music industry had a chance to get back out of it.
The RIAA/MPAA (and all they proxies) sue all they want in the USA because they actually run the country. Any one with enough money can buy any juge, court of law or congressmen in the US. So that openly criminal organisation like the MPAA/RIAA that have no legitimate (and legal) reason to exist can destroy 1000's of families (and life) because a kid d/L 1 soung or 2.
Lucky for the Canadians and europeans. It's a little bit harder to buy your own justice in those country. Plus in Canada there is levy on recording media (like 21 cents per CD-R) to goes to a special fund for the artists.
The MPAA/RIAA is the most dangerous criminal organisation in the word, since the 1930's. They must be stop at all cost. And the 1st step is to stop buying any product made by it's members. But make sure that everyone in every country can still listen/view they product. to hurt them where its count the wallet.
But I am sympathetic to the cause. It's right to think that denying the RIAA your hard earned cash is the right way to go. But to blatantly encouraging people to steal as a countermeasure is not the way to go.
I'm sure he's thinking of official 'civil disobedience' but CD actually calls for taking the legal hit associated with it. Most of us don't want to end up in a civil court over this nonsense so my advice is to simply stop purchasing RIAA enforced music and instead try and track down a few indies that you actually like and purchase their music directly. When they start reaping the rewards that used to belong to the big six the industry will change. And you don't wind up in court somewhere.
(bias alert. I'm an indie producer at www.thrillahill.com)
'The MPAA/RIAA is the most dangerous criminal organisation in the word, since the 1930's.' - this is just nonsense. Plus I'd like to meet anyone whose life has been 'destroyed' over these matters.
'the MPAA/RIAA that have no legitimate (and legal) reason to exist'
The RIAA is a LEGAL organization and does have a right to exist. It just pursues policies that are in fact harmful to the music industry in full. Mectron clearly doesn't believe in unionized labor. What the poster is suggesting is that artists (and their duly selected reps) have no rights to their own work. Why is it that in the modern world 'property is theft' only when concerning artists?
Sorry to rant but it's bad hyperbole like this that paints the issue into good guys v. bad guys and makes all of us wishing for reform look like people who just want to justify taking anything we want without rewarding anyone - period.
The fundamental claim of the RIAA is that all this royalty money is required to encourage artists to produce more creative work.
However, most audio recording artists retire from creative work after only a few successful years.
The retire on the exorbitant royalties of their work. (They may continue to perform, but merely preform what they have already created. And while there are some exceptions, these exceptions are motivated to create by something other than money: perfecting their art, communicating with people, or fame.)
This contrasts with successful painters, sculptors, and broadcasters, who generally continue creative work their whole lives.
It is an example of what economists call the "backwards bending supply curve of labour".
1. In general, pay workers more per unit of work and they initially they work longer.
2. Once workers have most of the material possessions they really want, they start to purchase leisure time: Workers use their increased rate of pay to reduce the duration of their work they do.
In other words, exorbitant royalties cause most audio recording artists to retire from creative work after just a few years.
(This is starting to apply to the medical profession in many countries. Pay your physicians and surgeons enough, and you will see them start to spend more time on holiday.)
I understand what you're saying however most of it only applies to the minority of extremely successful artists. Many smaller artists struggle to get by, let alone earn enough to retire in luxury after a few years. Through one sided distribution deals and royalty agreements it is the big record labels represented by the RIAA that usually end up with most of the money
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022