Absolutely the best description outside WholeWheatRadio.org I’ve read of the RIAA, in a comment on a CNET story of all places:
Sunday 11th July 2010
Sunday 27th June 2010
In [the] Czech Republic you actually have to pay OSA (they collect money for music usage) if you want to publish your own work (they actually claim that they will return you 70% of that if you sign with them).
Does anyone know if this is true? If it is, I wonder how many Czech internet users are breaking the law with their podcasts? Another case of technology always being two [hundred] steps ahead of the law.
My dad, sis and I went to Plzeň in the Czech Republic in January. Some really beautiful old buildings and great food. Good thing I didn’t attempt to publish any of the audio I recorded while I was there!
Saturday 15th May 2010
I’m an avid reader of Deutsche Welle’s English news site and subscribe to their Twitter feeds because my dad is German, and they tend to be far less sensationalist and more factual than other news sources. Still, this recent story shows even they can fall into the trap set for them by large software companies.
I tend to be skeptical of class action lawsuits because often the solicitors or lawyers keep more of the money than the clients they represent, but in this case I’m making an exception, if only for a very selfish reason ;).
Friday 14th May 2010
You know that now notorious error message you sometimes see on YouTube videos claiming the music in a video was copyrighted and had been disabled?
Wednesday 05th May 2010
Google has announced they’ll start selling books, presumably in electronic form unless they’ve extended their search algorithm to include people frantically working in libraries with magnifying glasses.
Friday 30th April 2010
I was refraining from comment about this issue for the longest time, but I’m fed up and need to say something.
Monday 22nd March 2010
Doing my bit. Will be donating as soon as I get paid for my latest work.
Tuesday 17th February 2009
My avatar for my Twitter profile as of yesterday
With all the lunacy surrounding Senator Conroy’s hopelessly misguided crusade against the intertubes in Australia which even if we were to ignore the social implications it still technologically wouldn’t ever work… we’re now reminded that our friendly neighbours over to the east in New Zealand are also having to deal with nonsense. Simply replace "failed before it even starts filter" with "guilty when accused".
It really is blood chillingly scary stuff.
From the Creative Freedom New Zealand site:
Join The New Zealand Internet Blackout to protest against the Guilt Upon Accusation law ‘Section 92A’ that calls for internet disconnection based on accusations of copyright infringement without a trial and without any evidence held up to court scrutiny. This is due to come into effect on February 28th unless immediate action is taken by the National Party.
I think what really gets to me with all this nonsense is the thought that some law makers in Australia and now New Zealand have obviously heard these ideas and written up legislation and proposals which means… they thought they were good ideas.
Normally I like to think of myself as a [mostly] rational person, but it’s hard to be cool and level headed when nonsense like this comes up. I’m already not feeling very well, and this just makes me feel worse.
Tuesday 13th February 2007
In the criminal justice systems of the countries I have lived in (and given my server logs, most probably yours too) it’s not only accepted that you are innocent until proven guilty, it’s the law.
DRM, or digital restrictions management is a series of technological measures implemented by paranoid corporations to protect them from the biggest evil force in the world: consumers. Give a consumer the freedom to use the content in the way it was originally intended to be used and they’ll end up just ripping you off and not use your technology to use said content right? Horror of horrors!
This arrogant position of most media companies will be their undoing eventually, but in the meantime it just bugs me that they’re taking advantage of consumers and taking away our rights that are written in law and unwritten in common decency.
Steve Jobs from Apple even admitted that he wouldn’t be using DRM in iTunes if media companies were reasonable. I’m a tad skeptical, but at least he said that instead of nothing.
Now there seems to be some legitimate reasoning behind DRM. By theoretically preventing the copying of media they can protect themselves from piracy. The problem is DRM is rarely used for this purpose; instead of protecting themselves media companies seem instead to be using it so they can re-sell you the same content over and over again. Why let someone buy media to play on their TV, their portable media player, their phone and in their cars when you can sell it over again for each one?
But the part the really boils my blood is that by using DRM companies are sending out a clear message: they don’t trust us with their content. They assume we’re all out to destroy them, and that we have nothing but malicious intent. They’re treating us like little kids; it’s beyond contempt.
