What we really need is for artists to have a way to be paid through a system like paypal(but not paypal), where anyone needing to pay to use music goes to a site fills out a form and transfers money directly to an artists account.
Why should there be a middle man. Maybe have the collection society to investigate whether people are not paying or getting a licence to play the music they want to play. If an artist wants to use the collection society then they pay a certain percentage recouped from businesses not paying for using a registered artists music.
A very low percentage , or even have the business using music illegally have to pay costs to the collection society.
Control of the music needs to be returned to the artists, the world is a much smaller place where anyone anywhere can sell to someone around the world with almost no cost to themselves.
Artists do not need collection societies any more, or if they do they need them to concentrate on resolving problems with studios and big businesses trying to take advantage of artists.
The old system is collapsing and they are doing anything they can to stay relevant , this is why they are doing this , trying to make sure they have control over every sale in America.
LOL actually i have purchased a few tablet from China and there quality is really improving a lot, prices are not as low as you would think but you get more bang for your buck and they have devices that are approved by Google so have the google play store. Yes there are bad knock off's but there are good copies if you spend some time weeding out the good from the bad, I mean the one I purchased recently has a real true ips screen with excellent viewing angles and a clear sharp image. Prices are dropping but the Chines are starting to learn that they need local suppliers and some form of customer service, even if it is just sending a replacement if the one you got was faulty.
If there quality control is improved and they spend just that little bit more time in designing the devices they can and do compete with the best on sale everywhere.
I wrote a big comment but decided to cut it down to a few sentences.
Authors are going to have to find a way to compete with free, just as music and video has to.Maybe even more so than music and video because there are so many books that can be added to a collection from places like Amazon, by new and upcoming authors for free and legally.
The publishing houses are an old business model that is just not working in this age of technology, locking down content trying to tell people they are only buying a licence to read and nobody else can read a book you have purchased is not going to work.
The only thing that will help authors is if they find ways to give extra content, maybe the author going to chat on there web page on a regular basis , discussing there books and answering questions, or selling merchandise to fans.
I don't know how the publishing houses are going to save themselves, I personally don't see them being around in a few years, but you never know maybe they will realsie that what the customer wants is important and give it to them by lowering prices offering more and not treating all of there customer like they are thieves just for wanting to share a book they have read with someone they know
I wonder if this has anything to do with them using the judge's comment about the samsung not being as good as the apple in all of there advertising , or comments all over the internet...but then he is probably doing it for reasonable reasons like teaching apple a lesson in why not to bring stupid charges and trying to destroy a businesses name by taking them into every court in the world. This should slow that down a little i think. well especially in the UK.
I own a Samsung fridge a Samsung tv a 3 x Samsung laptops a Samsung camera, and to be honest i really like them all, not because they are Samsung, but because they have more functions than other manufacturers and have proven themselves to be more reliable, oh and if i have a problem customer service is not bad at all, not that i have had to use them much but hey that's Samsung.
That is all you can do, they will ignore the public again because losing with 2 treaties is not much seeing they pass new treaties all the time, Only when they lose tpp and the next one after that will they start really getting worried that the public has actually caught onto the anti everyone but the industry farce they keep trying to push through for approval. Personally i doubt TPP will pass, is has similar ideals as the two they previously tried to pass so why would this be different,
Simple solution to all the problems .
1. give all artists there copyright back, and no copyrights are allowed to be passed on to anyone be it a business or an individual.
2. Anyone is allowed to download all content free for personal use.
3. Any business that wants to generate money from an artist must pay 80% as a minimum of all profits to the artist.
If a song is sold for 99c then 90c or 80c must go to the artist.
4. If any label wants to use an artist or keep there content on there label they must have an agreement with the artist for a maximum of 1 year, this could be extended but if a label is not generating enough for an artist they must have a cut off point where they can go elsewhere.
5. Any person or buisness entity that uses an artists content must pay for the use of that content , a fee structure could be set up for various distribution uses.
i.e if in an advert $20 000 if on a cd $20 000 plus 80% of the sales of said cd.
6. Any business that uses a creators content must have there accounting done in a way that is clear and easily understood by an artist. If any other costs are to be paid by the artist they must firstly be agreed to by the artist and must come from the 20% of profits the artist gives to the distributors/lables.
If a label cannot cover costs for a tour on 20% of the profit they must look for other ways to get the money together , an artist will always be paid there 80% of costs before any other costs are looked at.
Only artists are allowed to sue for infringement of there content and they can only sue the owners of the websites or manufacturer of cd /dvd's with the intent to generate profits, be it from sales to advertising.
Personally i think we should all be ignoring the copyright monopolists and coming up with a plan for the future, they are not prepared to discuss the future, they even ignore the present so why would we have them as part of the discussion, yes they are a part of the market but the market is much bigger than them and if they insist on abusing there power and trying to dictate to us we must get the creators together and come up with a solution and a remedy to the wrongs created by the copyright monopolists.
Why not get all of the authors and musicians and directors together via the internet, lets discuss what we can do without restricting fair use and without infringing on peoples right to share. Lets start talking about how copyright needs to be reigned in, to become more acceptable to customers/consumers.The MPAA and RIAA and all of there lackey need to be banned from the discussion, they are not interested in the creators they are only interested in there bottom line, how much they can make.
Until the actually people on both sides remove the middleman from the equation we are both going to get nowhere, with pirates not paying and creators not getting the compensation they could be getting, if they were not being seen as evil monopolists controlled by the Copyright cartel.
If i download a movie so that i can use part of that movie to create a youtube video of specific clips in a legal fair use way(say as a review,or humorous comment) would it make downloading the movie in the first place legal.
I have just come off REDDIT. I watched a few videos by Richard Feynman on physics and wow was i amazed , he explains how a train stays on the tracks , yes i know you think you know, but just do a youtube search of his name and prepare to be absolutely amazed. This is how we learn from the internet , someone points out something and all our preconceived ideas are blown away.
Because it is easy i had a look at his Wikipedia and found that he is the most intelligent man of our time, being involved in creating the first nuclear bomb amongst many other things.
You would not go amiss watching all of his videos on youtube.
when explaining something to someone we try to explain it simply so the other person will understand , whereas if we point out the obvious to people they can understand things more easily. For example the train staying on the track.
The Movie Industry knows they could make money from supplying movies at no charge. I would download a movie that had advertisements in it if i knew the quality was good. I would even be prepared to pay to download official hd releases if the price was 2.00. There is money to be made, i mean how many people already wait for a few months before downloading a movie because they do not want a cam copy, how many people would be prepared to wait for an official high quality release.I would even seed for a month if it was a free download , thereby giving the movie industry a free distribution network
All I want is what i get if i had to download a torrent. Easy of use and no restrictions at all.
Their problem comes when they try to take people to court , in England if you lose a case you pay the defendants costs from bringing the case against them. There will possibly be a few cases because of this new law but when the music industry realises they will lose most of the time they will stop. There are too many valid reasons to argue a case. The first that comes to mind is downloading instead of ripping the cd which you have in your posession or digitising damaged cd's lp's etc. And if you don't have the cd in your possesion it is easy enough to get one from a friend or ebay for the court to see. This is known as fair use, the music industry itself has said repeatedly you are buying the right to listen to the songs on a cd/tape to justify their high prices.I am sure that there are intelligent people on here can think of some other valid legal arguments for sharing music online.
Somebody one day will start creating an internet only , unsigned artist only, top 40. Hopefully they will create something that grows as facebook or Google have grown. Then the radio stations must get on board and start airing the internet top 40. At this point the recording studios will go bankrupt and music will be free again as it was before their greed made it all about money in their pockets and not the artists.
BestNetTech has not posted any stories submitted by Andrew.
UK
What we really need is for artists to have a way to be paid through a system like paypal(but not paypal), where anyone needing to pay to use music goes to a site fills out a form and transfers money directly to an artists account.
Why should there be a middle man. Maybe have the collection society to investigate whether people are not paying or getting a licence to play the music they want to play. If an artist wants to use the collection society then they pay a certain percentage recouped from businesses not paying for using a registered artists music.
A very low percentage , or even have the business using music illegally have to pay costs to the collection society.
Control of the music needs to be returned to the artists, the world is a much smaller place where anyone anywhere can sell to someone around the world with almost no cost to themselves.
Artists do not need collection societies any more, or if they do they need them to concentrate on resolving problems with studios and big businesses trying to take advantage of artists.
The old system is collapsing and they are doing anything they can to stay relevant , this is why they are doing this , trying to make sure they have control over every sale in America.
Re: Re:
LOL actually i have purchased a few tablet from China and there quality is really improving a lot, prices are not as low as you would think but you get more bang for your buck and they have devices that are approved by Google so have the google play store. Yes there are bad knock off's but there are good copies if you spend some time weeding out the good from the bad, I mean the one I purchased recently has a real true ips screen with excellent viewing angles and a clear sharp image. Prices are dropping but the Chines are starting to learn that they need local suppliers and some form of customer service, even if it is just sending a replacement if the one you got was faulty.
If there quality control is improved and they spend just that little bit more time in designing the devices they can and do compete with the best on sale everywhere.
Books
I wrote a big comment but decided to cut it down to a few sentences.
Authors are going to have to find a way to compete with free, just as music and video has to.Maybe even more so than music and video because there are so many books that can be added to a collection from places like Amazon, by new and upcoming authors for free and legally.
The publishing houses are an old business model that is just not working in this age of technology, locking down content trying to tell people they are only buying a licence to read and nobody else can read a book you have purchased is not going to work.
The only thing that will help authors is if they find ways to give extra content, maybe the author going to chat on there web page on a regular basis , discussing there books and answering questions, or selling merchandise to fans.
I don't know how the publishing houses are going to save themselves, I personally don't see them being around in a few years, but you never know maybe they will realsie that what the customer wants is important and give it to them by lowering prices offering more and not treating all of there customer like they are thieves just for wanting to share a book they have read with someone they know
apple oh apple
I wonder if this has anything to do with them using the judge's comment about the samsung not being as good as the apple in all of there advertising , or comments all over the internet...but then he is probably doing it for reasonable reasons like teaching apple a lesson in why not to bring stupid charges and trying to destroy a businesses name by taking them into every court in the world. This should slow that down a little i think. well especially in the UK.
I own a Samsung fridge a Samsung tv a 3 x Samsung laptops a Samsung camera, and to be honest i really like them all, not because they are Samsung, but because they have more functions than other manufacturers and have proven themselves to be more reliable, oh and if i have a problem customer service is not bad at all, not that i have had to use them much but hey that's Samsung.
laugh at them
That is all you can do, they will ignore the public again because losing with 2 treaties is not much seeing they pass new treaties all the time, Only when they lose tpp and the next one after that will they start really getting worried that the public has actually caught onto the anti everyone but the industry farce they keep trying to push through for approval. Personally i doubt TPP will pass, is has similar ideals as the two they previously tried to pass so why would this be different,
What to do.
Simple solution to all the problems .
1. give all artists there copyright back, and no copyrights are allowed to be passed on to anyone be it a business or an individual.
2. Anyone is allowed to download all content free for personal use.
3. Any business that wants to generate money from an artist must pay 80% as a minimum of all profits to the artist.
If a song is sold for 99c then 90c or 80c must go to the artist.
4. If any label wants to use an artist or keep there content on there label they must have an agreement with the artist for a maximum of 1 year, this could be extended but if a label is not generating enough for an artist they must have a cut off point where they can go elsewhere.
5. Any person or buisness entity that uses an artists content must pay for the use of that content , a fee structure could be set up for various distribution uses.
i.e if in an advert $20 000 if on a cd $20 000 plus 80% of the sales of said cd.
6. Any business that uses a creators content must have there accounting done in a way that is clear and easily understood by an artist. If any other costs are to be paid by the artist they must firstly be agreed to by the artist and must come from the 20% of profits the artist gives to the distributors/lables.
If a label cannot cover costs for a tour on 20% of the profit they must look for other ways to get the money together , an artist will always be paid there 80% of costs before any other costs are looked at.
Only artists are allowed to sue for infringement of there content and they can only sue the owners of the websites or manufacturer of cd /dvd's with the intent to generate profits, be it from sales to advertising.
Get the right people talking to each other...
Personally i think we should all be ignoring the copyright monopolists and coming up with a plan for the future, they are not prepared to discuss the future, they even ignore the present so why would we have them as part of the discussion, yes they are a part of the market but the market is much bigger than them and if they insist on abusing there power and trying to dictate to us we must get the creators together and come up with a solution and a remedy to the wrongs created by the copyright monopolists.
Why not get all of the authors and musicians and directors together via the internet, lets discuss what we can do without restricting fair use and without infringing on peoples right to share. Lets start talking about how copyright needs to be reigned in, to become more acceptable to customers/consumers.The MPAA and RIAA and all of there lackey need to be banned from the discussion, they are not interested in the creators they are only interested in there bottom line, how much they can make.
Until the actually people on both sides remove the middleman from the equation we are both going to get nowhere, with pirates not paying and creators not getting the compensation they could be getting, if they were not being seen as evil monopolists controlled by the Copyright cartel.
Re: Fair Use
Just a quick question,
If i download a movie so that i can use part of that movie to create a youtube video of specific clips in a legal fair use way(say as a review,or humorous comment) would it make downloading the movie in the first place legal.
Re: Learning
Just for interest sake have a look at his video on fire.
Learning
I have just come off REDDIT. I watched a few videos by Richard Feynman on physics and wow was i amazed , he explains how a train stays on the tracks , yes i know you think you know, but just do a youtube search of his name and prepare to be absolutely amazed. This is how we learn from the internet , someone points out something and all our preconceived ideas are blown away.
Because it is easy i had a look at his Wikipedia and found that he is the most intelligent man of our time, being involved in creating the first nuclear bomb amongst many other things.
You would not go amiss watching all of his videos on youtube.
when explaining something to someone we try to explain it simply so the other person will understand , whereas if we point out the obvious to people they can understand things more easily. For example the train staying on the track.
business models for the riaa mpaa
The Movie Industry knows they could make money from supplying movies at no charge. I would download a movie that had advertisements in it if i knew the quality was good. I would even be prepared to pay to download official hd releases if the price was 2.00. There is money to be made, i mean how many people already wait for a few months before downloading a movie because they do not want a cam copy, how many people would be prepared to wait for an official high quality release.I would even seed for a month if it was a free download , thereby giving the movie industry a free distribution network
All I want is what i get if i had to download a torrent. Easy of use and no restrictions at all.
Thank You Thank You
Thanks to the movie moguls for bringing this site to my attention,i now have a site that i will use every day.
legally shareing music online
Their problem comes when they try to take people to court , in England if you lose a case you pay the defendants costs from bringing the case against them. There will possibly be a few cases because of this new law but when the music industry realises they will lose most of the time they will stop. There are too many valid reasons to argue a case. The first that comes to mind is downloading instead of ripping the cd which you have in your posession or digitising damaged cd's lp's etc. And if you don't have the cd in your possesion it is easy enough to get one from a friend or ebay for the court to see. This is known as fair use, the music industry itself has said repeatedly you are buying the right to listen to the songs on a cd/tape to justify their high prices.I am sure that there are intelligent people on here can think of some other valid legal arguments for sharing music online.
The Future
Somebody one day will start creating an internet only , unsigned artist only, top 40. Hopefully they will create something that grows as facebook or Google have grown. Then the radio stations must get on board and start airing the internet top 40. At this point the recording studios will go bankrupt and music will be free again as it was before their greed made it all about money in their pockets and not the artists.