Bono showing his incompetence and age — cries out for stricter copyright/web policing, reduction in consumer rights.

Joining the likes of Metalica’s Lars Ulrich and U2 manager Patrick McGuinness, U2 frontman Bono is starting off 2010 showing his incompetence and complete lack of understanding of the music marketplace in the digital age. In an article in the NYT, Bono claims the entire world needs stricter web copyright policies and more policing. This is the exact opposite of what really needs to happen. The real solution is simple — change your decades old business model (which does not work in a digital world/market) and reinvent your sphere of the commercial market.

Sadly, while I did enjoy U2′s music, it just won’t be the same for me anymore. How can I continue to support someone who automatically thinks I’m a criminal, not to mention wants to make my experience with music harder and full of countless more roadblocks, rules, and stipulations?

It could be worse however. I could live in Britain. Over yonder, rules have been set in motion to attach a £25 fee to every broadband bill in the country to help fund a universal web monitoring program that will set out to weed the internet of illegal files. The only hiccup is that a wide range of groups oppose the measure. Groups such as ISP’s, MI5, and intelligent musicians have all spoken out against the monitoring program as a bad idea. So why press on?

The world is run by lobbyists, not the very people who vote to put those in power in their positions. It’s a cold hard truth. They can push stronger policing efforts all they want. At the end of the day, the pirates and those they’re trying to catch will always get away while the rest of the general public suffers.

Stop on by TechDirt at any point and you can find countless articles showing how countries around the world with less emphasis on copyrights and IP law have more innovation. There’s some false belief in the States that more copyrights and copyright laws will somehow make more inventions. Case in point: Google won’t put multi-touch apps on the Android platform themselves for fear of legal attack by Apple’s lawyers. (Why HTC, Palm, and several others do and get away with it remains a mystery). If it is in fact Apple’s lawyers keeping Google from using the feature, their copyright is preventing innovation. Google could come out with a revamped multi-touch experience or use it in a way we’ve never thought of. Unfortunately we’ll have to forever wonder what it would be like.

The most telling example of Bono’s utter lack of intelligence when all things digital are concerned, he cites the movie industry as succeeding in quelling piracy and online file sharing problems. First of all, I can find any movie I want online just as easily as I can music. They (the movie industry) has not solved anything. Second, the movie industry is even more removed from the equation. With even stricter web/digital policies on movies, they are even worse off. Why someone would want to replicate such a poor example of how to run a business and distribute content is beyond me.

It’s quite sad really. The movie industry has gotten to a point where they’re lobbying congress to pass rules to let them disable analog outputs on TV’s for select movies/TV shows under the guise of “reducing piracy” and help them more easily release movies on TV before being made available via normal retail channels. It’s complete BS. It’s an easy way for them to milk our wallets even more. Just imaging if some music labels banned together and tried to disable outputs and other pieces of our audio gear to prevent file sharing/end of the world? It would be a legal shit storm to put it mildly.

It is people like Lars, Bono, and McGuinness who are destroying the music industry and any chance they have to actually making a good impression/fully maximizing potential in the digital age. With every rule, every DRM scheme, every web monitoring plan, they are pushing themselves further and further into irrelevance. These people completely miss the point of the digital age — it is not to steal, but to share and share openly. That is why the internet was invented for. Intelligent music artists whom are breaking away from the traditional music label structure and instead going it alone or at least commanding more control over their works are finding fans and income greatly benefit.

It is the year 2010. You cannot charge $10-$15 for 8-15 digital files that cost absolutely nothing to reproduce, distribute, or “package”. Plain and simple.

Pocket-Lint > NYT

TorrentFreak

UK to soon see the end of the internet? Above the law “Pirate-Finder” being created to police the web, invade privacy and freedoms!

Living in the UK and using the internet, particularly any type of torrent or P2P software/service whether legal or illegal is soon going to become a nightmare. The reason for the hoopala is because of an planned change to the Digital Economy Bill currently under debate by Pariliament. The person seeking those changes, Secretary of State Peter Mandelson, is aiming to create a “secondary legislation” that can amend laws and bills at will and without debate or approval from any other government party as long as it’s in the name of “copyright protection”. Bullshit. This guy is a f’ing idiot. It gets worse…

Piracy Payback: too simple a solution for a situation that is too complex?

Having a continence based guilt trip because you downloaded that one Hanson song back in the day that you had to have? Or, are you a full fledged pirate who is eschewing old ways of plunder and instead looking for a way to give back? Leak water from your eyes no more as Piracy Payback is here to help. Now, if you’re thinking what I think you’re thinking (follow that), yes this is real and no this is not a joke. Aiming to give back to artists and copyright owners, Piracy Payback users can donate to the site and have their donations given to the various labels. Drew K, the Australian proprietor of Piracy Payback got the idea back in the day when he couldn’t find one of his fave TV shows and instead turned to downloading it…illegally. Feeling bad, he wanted a way to repay someone for what he had done. Behold: Piracy Payback.

PP is a relative baby all things concerned as it was just launched in January of 2009. Again, the main purpose of the site is to donate money which PP turns around and gives to “beneficiaries”. Who are they? What label do they belong to? Which artists are actually getting accurately paid? All said details are in the dark as those involved don’t actually want people to know they’ve partnered with PP as they feel it would encourage further illegal file sharing ways. Besides paying back all of those artists you stole from, 12% of donations get held back for site upkeep. Hey, they have to make money somehow don’t they?

Personally I see this as a good idea…on paper. Translated into the real world however isn’t as promising. For one, I’m not about to give money to a company that I haven’t the slightest clue where my money is going. Not to mention such small problems as artist A getting more than artist B all while not knowing extremely important facts such as many times was artist A or B’s songs actually downloaded. You see, this is a an entirely too simple solution for an entirely too complex situation.

Finally, there’s this whole idea that big labels and content owners sipmly can’t get t hrough their think skulls, that is, simply slapping a price tag on any product or service has absolutely no correlation to value. If you’re product is deemed worthless of or little value by the public, no matter how valuable you feel it is, no one will pay. Create something actually worth consumers’ time or money and you have yourself a money tree.

More power to them. But they won’t see a dime of my money. What do you think? Good idea?

Ars Technica

Image Source

Copyright laws have become nothing more than freedom killers

At one point in time, someone dreamed up the idea of copyrights and associated laws that would protect the creators content and idea yet at the same time encourage new and innovative products to come forth. In the decades that have passed, sad events and misinterpretations of copyright law have transpired. It is so bad that today, copyright laws and the greedy, senseless dickhead lawyers that enforce them are nothing more than gold diggers and money grabbers who could care less about an individuals freedom. What has our world come to when some stupid record label board member can tell you what to do with your purchased product?