Decius wrote:
] ] Brad characterizes file-sharing as ripping off artists,
] ] and goes on to say that it is right to condemn people
] ] who get all their music without paying. And yet the EFF
] ] continues to tacitly endorse such file-sharing, running an
] ] ad campaign that says "file-sharing is music to our
] ] ears."
]
] This is a good collection of links. I think the EFF supports
] file sharing because its popular to do so. Calling them on it
] is reasonable. Expecting them to solve all of the problems is
] not. There needs to be a serious effort to organize artists
] outside of the present system. The EFF has made motions in
] that direction, but they always feel a little like political
] stunts. They are too focused on the law and not focused enough
] on the music. We need something that is really music centric
] that works differently. We need a counter example.

yeah, i agree that this guy got it right... for all it's good deeds and motives, the EFF comes off a bit scatterbrained sometimes. i don't think they're doing anything improper, just weakening themselves by not having a clear voice on these issues.

in my opinion, the only way we're going to get the organization you mention is for the artists to create it themselves. There's already a fairly substantial group of major artists (whose acronym i've now forgotten, alas) who hate RIAA tactics as much as we do. It needs to be them to set up a non-profit collective of artists dedicated to producing music without major label assistance, establishing cross promotion within the community, and mediating (at least) discussions regarding licencing to 3rd party distributors. the average guy-in-a-band who just made some music in his apartment doesn't know dick all about IP law, and shouldn't, but he also shouldn't have to sell the rights to his art in order to make a buck. a community of his already successful peers should be available to work on his behalf to get the music properly licenced, distributed and promoted.

this obviously can't happen on a scale like RIAA can manage, because, the money just isn't there... the revenue model can't be trivial at all. The key point in all this is that the artists get to keep the rights, agreeing only to allow the organization they join to manage those rights for as long as they appear to be doing a good job. i think it could be made to work, with the collective taking only enough to cover it's operating expenses and passing the rest back to the artists who retain all the rights they ought to.

again though, this will only happen if the artists do it for themselves... there's no huge profits in it, so it has to be done for the sake of the art, which is a tough thing to pull off.

RE: [Politech] Reply to EFF over its position on RIAA, file swapping [ip]