Brit music body BPI lobbies hard for 'UK file-sharers database'

Britain's biggest ISPs are in talks with copyright-holders to find ways to nag broadband subscribers about illegal file-sharing or downloading that may have happened on their connections. But plans apparently tabled by the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) that include maintaining a database of customers whose IP addresses …

[Anonymous Coward]

The BPI are a bunch of turds...

They really are. I understand why they don't, but what they SHOULD be doing is turning around to the music industry and encouraging them to get innovative, and find new ways to sell music to customers more profitably and more cheaply.

I walked into HMV last week and an album is still £12+, yes it has always been this sort of price, but it doesn't mean that it always should be.

BPI - I would like:

1) Cheaper albums.

2) Free digital copies when purchasing a CD.

3) DRM-free music when purchased online.

Work with the technology industry to deliver these items, and I will feel better about buying music (and I already do), but for the time being, the organisations for whom you are lobbying are still considered a greedy, out-dated, old-fashioned, worse-than-bankers bunch of ...w...(rhymes). Sort THEM out.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

To be fair, most on-line music stores are DRM-free now, so that particular turd-hose should be directed at the movie industry and not music.

However, your point about CD sales getting you on-line value is something they should be looking at. I prefer to buy physical media for various reasons, and it would be better value for me if it came with on-line for free. After all, I am not going to pay twice, just rip the CD, but it would make that £12 a lot more appealing.

[MrXavia]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

Well.... Don't you have what you ask for already?

No 3 you get with Google Play, Amazon and others, but I'd like lossless options over MP3 as an option..

No 2 is pretty much a given as so far I don't think they are after anyone who rips a CD for their own usage, in fact I seem to remember a statement where they would not pursue anyone who rips for their own usage, and of course the simple fact that it is a civil offence not criminal, and the courts would laugh them out if they tried to (unless of course the person was uploading everything massively after ripping)

No 1, albums are only around £6-£8 online when I've brought them, HMV are always expensive...

[Piro]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

All three happen with Amazon. Amazon actually gives a shit.

It's even retroactive. Purchased a CD on Amazon long ago? Check your account.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

"All three happen with Amazon. Amazon actually gives a shit."

Try selling your Amazon download music collection. You can't, it dies with you, physical media is the only way to have some control of music you paid for.

[gc73]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

BPI & content providers insist music is software and licensed to purchaser, regardless of physical format or delivery...

European Court declares software publishers have no right to restrict resale of licenses..

Discuss..

[Tom Chiverton 1]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

You shouldn't be posting here if you are unable to sort out a local / off line backup of any stuff you may have floating around the cloud...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

"All three happen with Amazon"

Only for certain albums. I have plenty missing.

[Gordon 11]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

It's even retroactive. Purchased a CD on Amazon long ago? Check your account.

No need to. They mail you about it.

At least they did me, last week. So apparently I now have access to the on-line versions of CDs I bought as presents for other people.

So Amazon is actually giving me access to music I do not own!

I expect the BPI to be suing Amazon shortly...

[g e]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

Buy secondhand, isn't like the quality is degraded over time as on LP or Cassette.

No it doesn't support the artist but there's more effective ways to put money in their pockets like merchandise (which presumably gets a higher % of sale price into their bank?)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

They also still take the arse about face approach of upping prices on new formats, rather than reducing the price of older formats (the model the rest of the technical word follows)..

e.g. a DVD cost 15 quid. Blueray gets established... so they cost 20 quid, DVDs still 15 quid.

It's stuff like that that really gets on my tits. every opportunity of putting prices up, they take it, and when people say - feck off, its not worth it, they send in the lawyers.

Grow some balls and give us real, decent pricing and no DRM and we'd go for it - DRM does cock all - blurays have been ripped the day of their release the same way as DVD were.

pay 20 quid for a blueray or get it for free off the net (and in a nice digital format that can be stored on a media server)

pay 5 quid for a digital non DRM version similar to what can be had off the net (1080p, DD or DTS, etc) that can be stored on media server and most current 'pirates' would buy it I reckon.

what have they got to lose ? not giving the world a non-DRM version - we have em already ripped the day of the release. So what's the problem ? All I can think of, is that their BUSINESS MODEL now actually relies on pirates (and the fines, etc they pay). ?

[MJI]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

Pay a fiver for a Blu ray when it is a bit older.

That said last 5 I bought were £5, £5, £5, £5, £40

The expensive one was full of fungus

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

I don't believe you can fit £40 worth of shrooms in a dvd case....

[Suburban Inmate]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

@ AC - Worth is whatever someone will pay for it.

[MJI]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

Looks like you guessed.

It is not only films found on Blu Ray

[MJI]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

Blu Ray at £40

Fungus - cordyceps

I thought it was obvious

A data one with a game on it

And WELL WORTH £40

[Gav]

Re: The BPI are a bunch of turds...

Seriously? People are still trotting out these excuses like they are at all relevant?

>1) Cheaper albums.

You can get albums online for as little as £5. How much cheaper do you want?

>2) Free digital copies when purchasing a CD.

Amazon do this. Every computer equipped with a CD player can do this. If you are buying a CD you already *have* a digital copy.

>3) DRM-free music when purchased online.

You mean you can still find places that sell music online with DRM? It must take a special kind of determined stupidity to buy from them.

[plrndl]

The BPI is attempting to resuscitate the corpse of a business model that has been rendered redundant by modern technology. They refuse to recognise that the genie has left the bottle and cannot be made to return.

The government should tell them to stop whingeing and find a business model that is relevant to the 21st century. This would be in the best interests of all stake holders.

[g e]

Mostly because

That corpse is mostly the BPI's

[Vladimir Plouzhnikov]

Re: Mostly because

It's all a lie - the effect of piracy is negligible if not positive. All that fuss is the BPI Mafia creating a case for continuation of their own existence. A scam. An extortion racket. Nothing to do with music.

[Anonymous Coward]

The BPI is attempting to resuscitate the corpse of a business model that has been rendered redundant by modern technology

Yup, but you must admit they would be using very modern methods: blatantly ignoring the right of people to due process. Any database compiled that lists something negative about someone better creates a very compelling case and hard proof, because it can otherwise quickly lead to automated slander and reputational harm, which (thanks to many celebrity cases) fairly rapidly leads to large amounts of damages for people so alleged. Personally, I hope they get this established, because it will be the quickest way to ruin ever.

But the BPI wants to take the process one step further by keeping a record of which subscribers had already received such a missive. Presumably that information could then be used to build a case against repeat offenders.

Warnings <> facts. I can send you a gazillion warnings about you not trimming a branch which overhangs my property, but the moment I involve a 3rd party (for instance by publishing) I have to be very, very certain I have my facts and my interpretation straight or I get a deserved kicking in court.

Beware of databases - especially when you share them you can attract all sorts of problems. Unless you're Google and UK law doesn't apply to you, of course.

[James 51]

When ever the spooks break the law to keep as all safe in our beds, the law is changed so they're not so naughty any more. My guess is that the music industry will 'lobby' till the same thing happens here.

[Aristotles slow and dimwitted horse]

This is an issue for the music business to solve...

... and not an ISP issue.

Despite the difference between criminal and civil, it is the music industries problem to solve for the same reason that it's the responsibility of the Police to catch bank robbers as they flee the scene, rather than the Highways agencies.

And when I say it's the responsibility of the Music industry to solve, I wasn't inferring that they simply try to pass that buck onto other businesses.

[banjomike]

TalkTalk say WHAT?

...our customers' rights always come first and we would never agree to anything that could compromise them...

Didn't TalkTalk monitor all the web activity of their entire customer base? How hypocritical, not to say lying, can they get.

[Fido L Dido]

Should music be free?

I can't help but think that if music had just been invented, it would be free. Look at all the services available online for free, and free games in app stores. There are many business models where the core offering is free, and money is made out of the extras - music is only different because it 'came about' as a commercial entity before such business models were viable and has failed miserably to keep apace of what works and what doesn't.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Should music be free?

The music industry has become just like the business world, very uneven in pay and perks. There are a few very overpaid artists who get blanket coverage, flash expensive videos and who spend up to millions recording a record.

At the other end of the spectrum you have people who are talented and produce great music for a fraction of the cost of the big names. They can't get their music played because of the dodgy deals made between big labels and TV/radio stations

[Suricou Raven]

Re: Should music be free?

If libraries were just invented today, publishers would be lobbying for them to be banned immediately.

Industries work to protect their business model. That's just what they do.

[Tom 7]

Re: Should music be free? Industries work to protect their business model.

Its a shame the customer and producers get screwed in the process.

Fortunately, as has almost always been the case, the best music is by unsigned musicians - but now we can access this for cost plus a little profit for the musicians. I've just got a cd, a bunch of mp3s that constitute the said cd and a t shirt for £15.

I've no problem with the BPI protecting their business model - so long as they dont fuck up others who choose not to play their stupid games then capitalism will do the right thing and send them to the wall and a new more efficient replacement will be in place.

[Toastan Buttar]

Re: Should music be free? Industries work to protect their business model.

"Fortunately, as has almost always been the case, the best music is by unsigned musicians"

Well, the 'best' music is what you like the most, and the 'worst' is what you like the least. There is no objective definition of 'good' or 'bad' music.

In my case, the 'best' music came from those artists who could afford the studio time and a stress-free creative playground that wealth allows. Do you think an album like Dark Side Of The Moon or Abbey Road or Moving Pictures could be made by an unsigned band today? Do you think they could continue to produce such high-quality output by selling T-shirts at gigs where they played lesser 'live interpretations' of the (definitive) recorded article?

The same goes for movies. Could some novice 'unsigned' director create something like "2001: A Space Odyssey" or "A Few Good Men" in their 'spare time' with local amateur actors? Would file-sharing that film be in that director's (or the film industry's) best interests?

Maybe the managers at Pixar should get rid of the existing distribution method and pay all the animators and artists from the 10p contributions that file sharers 'would pay, if push came to shove'. In fact, who actually supports those creative workers in having a decent income while they make their latest 'product' the first time (before digital sharing/copying for free)?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Should music be free?

There is a lot of truth in that. The current model has only run for 70 years or so give or take.

Why a musician expects to get paid when not actually doing anything strikes me as very very weird.

Perform, get paid.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Perform, get paid

Yeah, fuck films, lets go to the theatre, no difference there either....

[Gav]

Re: Should music be free?

They get paid "when no actually doing anything" because most of the value of what they do is not realised at the at time they do it.

You'd be as well arguing that programmers shouldn't get paid when someone buys software they coded, because they're not actually doing anything when the software is used.

"Type code, get paid."

[ChrisC]

Re: Should music be free?

How many programmers actually do get per-sale royalties, and how many are simply paid a fixed salary or hourly contract rate regardless of how many copies of their code get distributed?

[heyrick]

Re: Should music be free?

"and free games in app stores" - by that logic, music would be free but your song would be interrupted every 25 seconds for a brief advert, plus you would need to purchase add ons such as "final chorus" and "awesome rock intro".

Yes, in many places online, the content is indeed free and money is indeed made out of the extras and those extras are splattering adverts everywhere possible. Or did you not read the recent story where Facebook will ignore any rights you might think you have over your likeness in order to flog shit to other people? It is interesting in the case of Facebook in that the user is both the product and the consumer, but its a very flakey business model, just ask MySpace... This very site that you are reading now. Content is free, dumb comments like this one can be posted without a subscription. In return I am expected to notice the advertising. It says in the right "Top 10 database hacks!" In bright blue.

Would you like to have the same applied to music? If it wasn't as obtrusive as inserted spoken adverts, we'd instead have Ellie Goulding singing about her Toyota, Miley Cyrus doing a rock number that's something to do with aftershave, Lady Gaga extolling the virtues of Fairy Liquid, and Lana Del Ray warbling about how you can get a better deal with Wonga.......it would make Simon Cowell's desecration of the music industry seem like a minor blip.

[Miek]

"We are involved in discussions about measures to address illegal file-sharing and ultimately would like to reach a voluntary agreement." -- I have a suggestion. Content Rights Holders should be made to offer their complete catalogues without exception in a digital format watermarked but not prohibitively "protected", so as to identify the original purchaser. They should then use a system similar to iTunes or other digital store to record purchase history and allow a customer to re-download content at will. This, I feel would convince customers that they "owned" the content for the purposes of personal consumption in their preferred format.

[Gav]

How many days you think would pass before a way of stripping the watermark was freely available online?

My estimate; maybe 14, tops. At that point your suggestion becomes useless.

Some MP3 sellers already do something similar to this, by embedding a code within the MP3 tags. But it is simplicity itself to remove it.

What happens if someone hasn't stripped their watermark, and then the file is found copied all over the internet? They get prosecuted? "Not my fault. My MP3 Player was stolen with my entire MP3 library. Someone hacked my computer and copied the lot. Prove that I uploaded them..."

Again, useless, as nothing can be proved.

[Miek]

Obviously, there will be holes in any protective system and it was only a suggestion. The importance of my post is more about how the customer can obtain and use the media, not how they can abuse it. I believe, personally, that DRM (and other protective measures) really only impede genuine paying customers. Why would you want to strip out the watermark if you are not sharing this with World+Dog ? Many computer based music players can fingerprint music and identify a copyrighted work, if that work doesn't bear a watermark, it is illegitimate*

* most people's current ripped MP3s (where they owned a physical copy of the media) would be deemed illegitimate by this measure, so still not a perfect suggestion.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why pirate music?

The radio and Spotify are there if you really can't afford to pay...

The only media piracy I actually understand the reason for is Movie & TV...

Movie, you have to wait for ages after the Cinema release before buying on DVD/Blu-Ray, I know often I'll watch a film at the cinema and want to buy it, OR there will be a film I want to see, but I don't feel like going to the cinema so I'll wait for the Blu-ray, and then if it is too long I'll forget and end up watching it when it finally hits the TV, if they released at the same time onto Blu-ray, they would get an extra sale...

TV, if your a fan of something and its 2 weeks until the UK release, you would not pay to watch it as you can see it on TV for free, BUT you might not want to wait if you engage with others online to discuss it, hence people will pirate it, and they won't pay £3+ an episode as they can see for free on TV with adverts as did the original broadcast... start simulcasting around the globe, offering downloads with embedded adverts, and then you will cut piracy massively yet increase the viewership and advertising revenue...

Finally the other reason is format, with blu-ray's I own that have digital copies, I don't usually use them, as they are not easily portable, so I rip them to a portable format, I like to be able to play on my TV, my phone, any pc I have without needing more than to stick it on my NAS, also if I am in a hotel I like to stick a USB stick into the TV and watch my owned media, or even use DLNA to play from my phone to TV..

[Dick Emery]

Re: Why pirate music?

With regards to movies it's a problem due to cinema release schedules. Unlike music and TV which is instantaneous movies get exclusively shown on cinemas first. Then of course the promotion of them requires actors and directors to be available in each country. Something they cannot do worldwide at the same time.

The only way to encourage people to buy would be perhaps to release DVD/BluRay at the cinema which is only available to buy when you purchase a ticket. But then it would get ripped and uploaded (catch 22).

Whatever they do there will always be the hardcore few who refuse to pay and download instead. All they can do is continue to encourage casual downloaders to buy instead through special offers. Trying to get ISP's to police the internet is a waste of time and money and only causes further friction with their honest customers.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The radio and Spotify are there if you really can't afford to pay...

Not if you are in the UK and want to listen to music in other languages. And CD's of such artists are often not available on the likes of Amazon etc

[Sureo]

The solution is simple...

Using readily available technology commonly in use today. Every computer/device must be equipped with a webcam that cannot be turned off. Monitor and record all traffic in and out of each computer device, including photo of the user. It is mostly already being done today anyway. Using facebook and google technology identify each illegal item downloaded/uploaded and the individual responsible. Lock them up. Pay bonuses.

[frank ly]

Re: The solution is simple...

I've got some readily available technology - a little piece of masking tape; it's simple.

[VinceH]

Re: The solution is simple...

"I've got some readily available technology - a little piece of masking tape; it's simple."

And I have an excellent business opportunity for any Dragons willing to invest. The product is called a WIFFIE (Webcam Identity Falsifier). It consists of a clamp, arm and photograph holder, and comes with a choice of photographs. It attaches to your device so that the phorograph holder faces inwards, allowing the webcam to see the mounted photograph, and nothing else.

The choice of photographs supplied with the device include key personnel from the BPI, all taken by embedded webcams such as those you proposed, showing said personnel using such devices, thus making them look plausibly like they are using yours.

[VinceH]

Re: The solution is simple...

D'oh! Quoted the wrong post.

[Dick Emery]

Re: The solution is simple...

Go away David. I won't be voting for you come next election.

[andreas koch]

@ Sureo - Re: The solution is simple...

I'd have another solution: Why doesn't the BPI just route the entire UK internet traffic through their headquarters? Then they have all the control over every user and every byte. I'm sure that the savings from the cessation of piracy would easily make up for the expense to buy hardware that can handle and check 2.5 TB per second*. They can also print all of this out and send a copy to Devizes, so that the local MP there can vet the data and look for porn, prawn, pawns and whatever else she thinks harmful. Think of the children.

*This figure is based roughly on the upgraded 100Gb bandwidth of the backbone fibres GCHQ tapped into, together about 200 Petabyte a day. This would be seriously heavy iron (probably would need some new breakthroughs in parallel processing . . .) and good for the industry. Unfortunately it'd also eat about 120 GW, so that the national grid would fry. Having nothing left to run your pirating pervert computer with, the problem is thereby solved!

Back to the dark ages, just avoid Wiltshire.

[Anonymous Coward]

Does this imply Virgin Records vs. Virgin Media?

[Frankee Llonnygog]

Does this imply Virgin Records vs. Virgin Media?

There's only one solution: fight!

[arrbee]

Presumably Spotify will be on the list, since last I heard they were still providing unlicensed music tracks.

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder

I, nor anyone I know, haven't downloaded any movies / tv series / music that is avaliable to us by legal means for many many many years now. I think the only thing any of us download now is Anime, And that's because we normally have to wait a year or so for the funimation dub, which is horrible. And tbh I don't even download anime since most of it I get on Crunchyroll.

Perhaps they'd be better off lobbying to lower the tax on entertainment so we can get some of teh content they release on services like netflix in the US, which we don't get over here due to costs etc. I'd quite literally kill for a universal netflix library. (rather than using mediahint)

[HamsterNet]

Re: I wonder

I'll give you one. There are No 3D 1080P streaming services available for films.. Yet I do have the bandwidth to stream such things, its only 12GB a film.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I wonder

There's no way in hell you'll get anything approaching tolerable quality if you crunch a 1080p 3D film down to 12GB. 20 to 30gb will get you acceptable quality for straight-up 1080p24; anything less and you *will* sacrifice quite a lot.

If you're watching on a horrid little panel with sky-high black levels in a brightly-lit room and not paying too much attention, or if you're blind as a bat, or if you're red/green colorblind and can tell your compressor to throw out one channel, I guess you might not notice it too much, but compression artifacting is even worse in 3D since the macroblocking tends to make everything look like it's covered in little crazy sugar crystals. It's awful.

The streaming thing really pisses me off as a home theater guy, because if (when?) physical media gets the boot, we're going to be thrown right back to the mid '90s where picture quality is concerned. As with low bitrate MP3s and revolting, tinny little 2" speakers on iPod docks, most people won't notice - but it's a shame for the people who actually care about watching or creating good stuff.

[ForthIsNotDead]

Just use YouTube...

...no need to pirate anything.

And anyway, the BPI are flogging a dead horse. A certain percentage of people will simply NOT pay for music. Whether or not they can *afford* to buy the music or not is actually irrelevant to them. It's just against their principles to pay for it, so they will simply steal it. It's just the new generashun of tape-to-tapers that would wait for their mates to buy an album so that they could tape it. It's the same thing. Live with it. I'm in a position where I can afford to buy new music, but mostly don't, because it's a load of shit. The last thing I paid for was just last week. ZZ Top's Tres Hombres, from 1974 (from Google play) which says a lot about the musak of today. Bought some John Mayer recently too. I can't be bothered risking a virus on my PC (or even searching around the web) for torrents. If I want it, I'll buy it. But not everyone will.

Lastly, in many cases, those that download via torrents, same as those that taped their mates' vinyl albums, would NOT have bought it anyway - because they are tight theives who don't care about the artist or the record company, and are quite happy to let their mate shell out *their* hard-earned, so no sale was actually lost.

Just live with it, and give us better music - especially those in the 30's to 50's age group... You know... The ones that actually *have* some disposable income to spend on (quality) music. Stop concentrating on fourteen year olds who have no money (and therefore every incentive to pirate music).

Oh, and lastly, can you stop making pop videos that look like porno's?

Okay, one last thing: Can you also stop changing the shot in your videos every 0.5 seconds? When I watch a modern pop video I think I'm about to have an epileptic fit. It might suit (broke) kids with the attention span of a knat, but *adults* (with an IQ above 75) prefer something with a bit more thought than strobing video shots and soft porn.

Thank you.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Just use YouTube...

What's wrong with 4 minute pop/porn videos? I'll tell you what's wrong. They don't have IMDB entries.

[Anonymous Coward]

Recorded music has no value

Bits duplicated by machine in nano seconds.

Now if an artist comes to a venue near me, I may well put a hand in my pocket to hear them sing.

If an artist is quite happy to watch a video of a surgeon operating on their fatal disease rather than have the surgeon perform in person for them, I'll buy a download of their last album and say farewell, until then, I'll not be buying recorded music.

[Alan 6]

Re: Recorded music has no value

I suppose you don't buy books either, prefering that the author pops round to your house and reads it to you...

[Steven Jones]

Re: Recorded music has no value

"If an artist is quite happy to watch a video of a surgeon operating on their fatal disease rather than have the surgeon perform in person for them, I'll buy a download of their last album and say farewell, until then, I'll not be buying recorded music."

The very epitome of an asinine analogy.

[TheOtherHobbes]

Re: Recorded music has no value

>Recorded music has no value

If recorded music has no value, why would anyone bother downloading it?

[heyrick]

Re: Recorded music has no value

"If an artist is quite happy to watch a video of a surgeon operating on their fatal disease rather than have the surgeon perform in person for them, I'll buy a download of their last album and say farewell, until then, I'll not be buying recorded music."

I don't even know where to begin with this line of "reasoning"....." So I think I'll let the icon speak for me.

[Kevin Johnston]

Online extras

The last few CDs I have purchased c ame with online extras and all I needed to do was signup to the artists site. These are people who are popular because of their talent, not through their label pushing the whatsit out of them all over the place.

I even get regular updates with extras like remixes or collaborations to promote tours free of charge by email

[bill 20]

TalkTalk says 'our customers come first'

That'll all change once the Porn filters are switched on.

[Crisp]

The BPI declined to comment

That in itself speaks volumes.

They'll quite happily engage in secret talks with service providers, yet wont talk to the press about their schemes to keep us all on a piracy database.

[Anonymous Coward]

While I'm at it

Musicians have historically been poorly paid, technology changed this starting with a wax disc and when the populous could afford on it vinyl disks, musicians started to earn more. Now technology is taking that away, as it has taken many other livelihoods, get over it, retrain, move on. There will always be music created by those that love making art, which has to be a better outcome than the formula we get today.

[Chris G]

Re: While I'm at it

I don't think the BPI is campaigning specifically for musicians who are mostly still poorly paid, if you have a look here;- http://www.theroot.com/views/how-much-do-you-musicians-really-make youwill see that on average out of $1000 spent buying music about $23.50 goes to the artist so an average artist has got to sell a lot of stuff to be a millionaire. $42.553.000 worht of sales to net him a million.

Obviously a better known musician will be able to negotiate a better deal but the lion's share still goes to the (B) Phonographic Industry.

Musicians only supply the product, the likes of the BPI (think) they are the ones who make it successful and profitable.

The average record company exec will nail your head to the floor if he thinks you don't have the clout to stop him and take what's yours.

A music bizz model that makes good money for the musicians that create is what is needed rather than the hoards of middle men but I won't be holding my breath while I wait for it to come about.

[zaax]

What with this, PRISM and other things happening to the net I'm being more and more pushed to VPN and it will them and not the music industry fat cats how will get my oney.

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember that....

...home taping is killing music.

For the younger amongst you that was the BPI scaremongering bullshit in the 1980s and they still have the same gameplan. Much like the boy who cried wolf, nobody other than politicians (lobby cash) believes anything thay say.

BPI = 30+ years of unmitigated venal self-serving bullshit.

[Haku]

"reduce online copyright theft"

Wait a mo, you can actually steal the copyright of a song online? I thought you could only infringe on copyrights.

Quick, someone steal the copyright of Justin Beibers 'music' and hide it so they can't (legally) make any more copies.

[Frankee Llonnygog]

reduce online copyright theft

Wait a mo, you can actually steal the copyright of a song online? I thought you could only infringe on copyrights.

Quick, someone steal the copyright of Justin Beibers 'music' and hide it so they can't (legally) make any more copies.

.... I've just stolen your comment. But now there's 2 of them. How can this be?

[John Smith 19]

Note it's "The Copyright Holders."

IE F**k the artist who actually created the work.

[i like crisps]

Radio GAGA...

I've never seen a poor ' Music Producer' yet!!....that is all.

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck Off BPI

The good old licence fee payer gives your industry a massive subsidy and free advertising.

[Anonymous Coward]

Brought an Anonymous VPN for £25 per year.........

I'm on ADSL getting 8-9Mb/sec. VPNs offering OpenVPN over TCP 443 with 10Mb/sec speeds are dirt cheap. Good luck blocking that without getting shitlisted! Also means you don't need to call your ISP to get the porn turned on!

Search around and enjoy defeating David Cameron and the BPI for the cost of a weeks supply of scummy, hipster coffee (assuming approx 1-2 cups per day during the working week).

Maybe in 3-4 years time they'll catch up and by then people will dump BitTorrent for private Usenet and continue doing exactly the same all over again over an encrypted connection.

Basically, give up and make media cheap. 10p per song, £3.50 per movie to own forever and £10 per user for proprietary apps for a years license (with lifetime to use the last version you are on prior to expiry). Cheap media/software means more profit and near-zero piracy, a complete no-brainer.

[Ben Tasker]

Re: Brought an Anonymous VPN for £25 per year.........

You do realise, It'd not be particularly hard to block a VPN running on port 443. Just because you can't see what's being sent, doesn't mean you can't use what you do know to identify the connections you want to block.

For a start, just how much data do you think gets pumped over the average HTTPS connection, and how much do you think gets pumped over a VPN connection? How long do you think the average HTTPS connection is established for, and how long is a VPN connection established for.

There's nothing on the books that would let them block it (well, assuming they don't decide you pose a threat) but don't go assuming that it's impossible to work out whether a connection to port 443 is a VPN or a standard HTTPS connection, because it isn't.

[RichD]

Re: Brought an Anonymous VPN for £25 per year.........

The difference is that a lot of businesses legitimately use SSL VPNs, how do you distinguish between an SSL VPN carrying Virtual Desktop traffic for example, and one carrying a copy of the latest blockbuster movie?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Brought an Anonymous VPN for £25 per year.........

This would be assuming that your ISP cares that you're pirating over VPN. I got my very first ISP letter recently about a film I downloaded a while back (still haven't got round to watching it). The letter was obviously half-arsed and just them doing the bare minimum required to cover their backs. That spurred me on to set up a Raspberry Pi as an always on torrent box connected over VPN. I now have about 200GB a month of anonymous traffic going over my connection and a happy ISP who are still getting paid a fiver a month by me without the annoyance of letters from media industry dickheads.

Addendum: Yes, I pirate. I also purchase a reasonable amount of physical media of stuff I've most enjoyed in order to support the companies and individuals that make it. I sleep easy at night.

[Anonymous Coward]

On a separate note..... easy money for developers

On a separate note, open source and free software should have a subscription model for e-mail/ticket based support at a cheap cost (~£15 per year for home users, ~£50 per year for business).

I would pay the Debian project £75 per year as an individual home user for complete DFU/ID10T support from their development teams and packagers and many others would too - this should also be a no-brainer for easy donations.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: On a separate note..... easy money for developers

On a separate note, I've got this idea for a freemium, web-based, automatic staff rota creation system for SMEs. I've decided this thread would be the best place to discuss it.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's all good

A pirate database is a good idea so that when convicted a second time, the perps can do a manadatory 5 years in the slammer as they are too stupid to be out on the streets. First offense punishment should be a mandatory 2 years in jail plus 10,000 Euro fine, similar to Japan's mandatory punishment for pirates and hackers.