Quote:
|
My point is it's beyond organized control. I understand how distressing this is, but like Hiroshima, once the Genie came out of the bag, there was no going back.
|
Actually, since 1945, atomic bombs have never been used in war. Thank God people didn't have your fatalistic " you can't resist technology" attitude.
I'll outsource this one to the Cynical Musician:
Quote:
First and most importantly: the debate was never about technology and it is our mistake – on the rights holder side – that we ever allowed it to be framed as such.
Technology determines – to an extent – what is possible. The law determines what is permissible. This is a key distinction. For a start, a law that addresses the impossible is redundant: we have no laws regulating flight by flapping your arms or living forever. On the other hand, when something hitherto impossible becomes possible, new laws may be made if it is considered necessary.
Prior to the rise of aviation, we had no laws dealing with flight. We do now; quite a lot, in fact. Anyone who has had even a passing experience of the rules and regulations a pilot has to deal with (compared to an automobile driver, say) will realise that this is one of the most heavily regulated areas of human activity. There’s a very good reason why this is so: “the rules of aviation are written with the blood of dead aviators”.
The important thing to understand is that laws deal with people, not technology. This is just as true for copyright as it is for homicide: it doesn’t matter whether you distribute music files or set up a vinyl-pressing plant, any more than it matters whether you kill with a gun, a knife, a hammer or a rock.
|
LINK
There is zero reason, technologically, why the Internet cannot be set up to the protect rights holders. It is a matter of historical accident why the Internet is set up as it is, and why the law is as inadequate as it is. Both can be fixed. David Lowery again:
Quote:
Especially since within the Tech sphere you see many current examples of very very strict IP protection encouraging innovation not inhibiting it.
The Apple App store as a closed and protected system ensures software developers will be rewarded for their efforts. There is virtually no piracy in the apple app world. Innovation has blossomed. Developers, Consumers and the platform creators have all been richly rewarded.
The computer gaming world? The best talent, the most popular games and virtually all the money is in the DRM (digital rights management) protected ecosystems like Xbox or Playstation. Microsoft even goes so far as “banning” individual xbox’s from their servers if they detect “cracked” or pirated games. If in fact copyrights inhibiting innovation why isn’t it hurting the console gaming companies with their hyper strict DRM? Shouldn’t their sales an innovation be lower?
Valve software which operates the Steam™ platform and is usually seen by gamers to be less restrictive than the console gaming companies, is ultimately just a digital rights management system. A system for protecting the creators rights to profit from their copyrights. And once again a highly innovative ecosystem of independent game makers has developed around this platform.
|
LINK
IOW, there are ways to set up the Internet to prevent large scale violation of artist's rights. All it takes is brains and the will. No scheme will be perfect but then perfection is not of this world. It just has to be better than the current system.