For what it’s worth I have created an alternative to SOPA and PIPA where what we now call piracy become free advertising and distribution. Here’s how it works.
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
Crowd-sourced distribution means the owners loose control over their channel. They can’t franchise, withhold, withdraw, segment or re-market their product. Income is only part of the issue.
You don’t “loose” control of something, you “lose” control of it.
Thank you.
You are describing the “shareware” concept that has been around for years.
Actually, there is no law I am aware of that would prevent any creator of intellectual property to do what you describe.
A number of musical artists are experimenting with free downloads and whatnot, but I am not aware if their initiative has been successful.
This would be an interesting subject to research.
Along the same lines: Music for Nothing and the Fans for Free
http://allthingsd.com/20111028/music-for-nothing-and-the-fans-for-free/
From the article:
Patronage
The other sponsorship model is direct fundraising from fans – also known as crowdsourcing. In 2007, Radiohead released its album “In Rainbows” for free, asking fans to pay as much or little as they pleased. And more recently, Nataly Dawn from Pomplamoose used a Kickstarter campaign to fund her forthcoming solo album. She set out to raise $20,000 but fans overfunded her project by $104,788. This may not seem like a huge sum, but crowdsourcing will make all the difference for indie artists worrying how to pay their rent.
The article fails to mention what revenue was generated by the Radiohead initiative in 2007.
Nataly Dawn raised a small sum from crowdsourcing for the production of an album, but there is no mention of the distribution or sales results.
Not enough information.
I would also point out the million+ bucks that Louis C.K. took in with his video.
Dying businesses prefer to control politicians who are willing to accept money. They get them to rewrite the rules.
It’s even easier than winning in the marketplace, if you are a very large business.
There is piracy out there all right. I have never seen any credible actually numbers how much harm is done by piracy vs. the cost of doing stupid things like this.
O, WAIT!
“…All files will carry ID tags and public keys etc that identify the copyright owner, rights information, how and where to buy the product, web site of copyright holder and/or artist.
Media players will recognize these ID tags and be able to allow user to immediately purchase anything with a single click that is tied in through Paypal or Google wallet or iTunes and apps store or any number of micro payment system. … ”
What kind of Progressive nincompoop have arrived to this!? NO to tracking and labeling and regulating anything and everything. Your basic premise eliminates the most fundamental value protected by fighting SOPA/PIPA: FREEDOM. There must be absolute NO to any demand that everything be labeled and registered under some idiotic “protecting” scheme. Unlabeled files must be free to deliver whatever content. Files produced must be free to be labeled or not according to creator wishes. What’s next RFID chip in each of our foreheads so that if we see content it can be immediately charged to us?
As for media players recognizing these tags? – Again absolutely NO to any mandate. If I want to make media player that just plays content it can – I must be free to do so. Absolute NO to built-in mandates. This is exact step in direction C.Doctorow recently spoke on – attempt to regulate and obstruct general computing. If general computing machine wants to play labeled or unlabeled content it MUST be free to do so without any other additional “mandatory” functionality like offering purchase or anything else. If not, there goes our freedom. If someone wants to make such machine -OK, but I must be able to compete against it with machine which does just what user wants…
So, please stop with just another scheming. Digital media is out there. It can be pirated. Stop bothering general public and go find pirates (on your own effort), compose legal cases against them (in whichever legal system they exist), prosecute, prove damages and get satisfaction. That is hard? Boo-fing-hoo! Not an inch of personal media consumption freedom, freedom of expression or freedom to have and operate general computing machines that do whatever they want to do is worth protecting somebody else problem.
Content creators must invent how to do business in the world where these freedoms exist. Completely possible.
ARRGH!!! IT
NO to tracking and labeling and regulating anything and everything. Your basic premise eliminates the most fundamental value protected by fighting SOPA/PIPA: FREEDOM. There must be absolute NO to any demand that everything be labeled and registered under some idiotic “protecting” scheme. Unlabeled files must be free to deliver whatever content. Files produced must be free to be labeled or not according to creator wishes. What’s next RFID chip in each of our foreheads so that if we see content it can be immediately charged to us?
AHH! Fuck you and fuck this site which takes a carriage return and instead submits the fuckin’ comment before I’d finished it.
When did progressive become a dirty word? You obviously don’t know English, you stupid, ignorant bloviating turd. Fuck that pisses me off!
Anyway, I used .m4a and .m4v tags on my podcasts to allow the podcast listened/viewer the option of finding out more about whatever was on the ‘cast by clicking in the image that was on the screen at that point in my podcast.
These lknks included the complete written text of my ‘casts, when I was playing music, I included any band sites, any additional information about the band (like upcoming gigs, their website, selling their records, etc) or for any product I choose to advertise I would include links to the product/producer.
I am sorry but I believe in making it as painless as possible and as unobtrusive as possible for a visitor to find out as much as he can.
What kind of Progressive nincompoop have arrived to this!?
That would be Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX). Who just happens to have copyrighted videos on his website.
Seems that laws never apply to killers, thieves and lawyers* or the congress critterz who write the laws.
They seem to think themselves above or at least beside the law.
*) With apologies to Tom Waits who thinks “God’s Away On Business.
It looks like the White House is weighing in against the bill. Let’s see if this milk dud of a President can get this one right. Which is kill the bill.
My idea is to give the media players a piece of the transaction in order to make them want to be part of it.
here’s a little ditty to sum it all up
http://www.privateerdragons.com/music/potc.wma
Didn’t they use to give away 13 CDs for a penny once upon a time? Columbia Record House?
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5175/5584822951_3c4ee67be7_o.jpg
The music is merely suffering a bubble effect. Music skyrocketed in the 1960s through the 1980s. Now a sufficient body of work exists and the ideas have run out, as a result that market is gradually shifting to normal state of things.
“Here’s how it works.”
What? No squirrels?
Yeah? Well check out the copyright controversy of Woody Guthrie’s songs. Supposedly all in the public domain. But this isn’t stopping various concerns trying to own them and control their use.
The US Congress helped trample the concept of public domain, for music and films, in 1998. Works that would have fallen into public domain, got a 20+ year reprieve of corporate control. So naturally, these were no longer super cheap and free to do with whatever one wanted to. Like make parodies similar to this one.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=3qvqP_EzrHU
So thanks to the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998. Cagney’s Footlight Parade (1933) was pulled from YouTube for copyright violation. The extension is at least 95 years from first creation. But it may be even longer, if it’s renewed somehow. That’s not clear to me. In fact a lot of the “pre” and “post” year terminology is confusing, and contradictory.
BTW, I call it the Mickey Mouse / Scientology protection act of 1998. As Sonny’s widow and Jack Valenti wanted the law to say “forever”. Not just a 20 year extension. The earliest anything’s copyright expires is now 2019. And other works, “pre” or “post” 1972, not before 2067. If that makes any sense.
How about this:
Everybody gets to download a limited amount of intellectual property without penalty (say: 500 MB per year). Knock yourself out, but choose wisely.
After you’ve reached your limit, you are subject to geometrically progressive fines and then jail time.
It’s like traffic citations and tickets. Warnings followed by increasing fines that are eventually intollerable. Behave yourself until next year, and you get to do it all again!
No past record (but no carrying forward of “unused” downloads).
The rules would apply to all individuals and group entities, so aggregate services would have to cease operation or limit themselves to the 500 MB per year.
Oh yeah, if you’re caught distributing internationally (i.e. exporting wealth and damaging the US economy), you are subject the full wrath of the federal law.
A bit rough, but a starting point.
Who owns those bits over there?
Content owners figured that eternal copyright would grant them the artificial scarcity they need to make their business model go. How’s that working out for them? Those $12 music CD’s selling okay? They refuse to lower the price to where it would need to be to sell more of the damn things (economics 101 says $3) & would rather let the whole segment die because disks are just vehicles for piracy anyway. People that would love to own music CD’s from legitimate sources as backups & for format shifting stay away from them in droves & seek out easy pirate methods instead.
Copyright: Forever Less One Day
(YouTube)
Worst… Ideas… Ever…
Too much regulation required to start such a system.
Just let society run its course… The record labels are NOT losing money… Really? 75 Trillion lost because of LimeWire? Yet they are bringing more than ever? Bull SHIT. I don’t think we have a broken system at all. I think the record labels want more money. Greedy, Greedy. We just need to squash their attempts at controlling the Internet and move on.