The problem with this argument is that the technology doesn't respect the consumer's right to choose. The technology currently removes rights under fair use, and breaking that technology also involves breaking a (ridiculous) law. It's a broken situation all round, and it doesn't come down to whether anyone's saying content creators should be paid. Course they should. Blanket licensing would solve this, for instance, without any DRM technology required. There are other ways and means of generating revenue, and certainly a slew that the collective minds haven't even thought of yet... I for one welcome the new business models. Let's try them all and see what sticks in this new and shiny digital world, rather than trying to brute force yesteryear's analogue models onto the world of upload once, copy forever. A.
=========================== Alice Taylor VP, Digital Content BBC Worldwide Americas, Los Angeles t: 1-818-299-9716 m: 1-818-239-9380 4144 Lankershim Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 91602 (US) http://www.bbcworldwide.com <http://www.bbcworldwide.com/> (UK) http://www.bbc.co.uk <http://www.bbc.co.uk/> -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of James Cridland Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 11:24 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [backstage] HD-DVD " how DRM was defeated" Dave, The fact you deliberately linked to the print version of Vanity Fair - thus removing the chance of the publishers to earn money from your visit from advertising, and/or effectively market the other content on their website, is very telling. I am deeply sorry that you don't want people to earn money from creative work; and disappointed that you object to the idea that content-creators need to control the distribution of their content. You've made your point very clearly on this list a number of times. It's now turning from charmingly naive discussion to something rather more irritating. Perhaps, for the sake of all our sanity, I could leave it with this real-world observation, that I hope even you agree with. - Some content-creators will want to have 'Content Restriction And Protection' on their content. - Some content-creators will choose not to have 'crap' in their content. - It's the content-creators choice to have crap in their content or not. - Some consumers won't want content with crap in it. - But some consumers won't care whether the content has crap in it or not. - Ultimately, the consumer will choose whether they want crap or no crap. - Content-creators may gain more benefit from controlling the use of their crappy content. - But content-creators may gain more benefit from leaving the crap out of their content. - The gamble for the content-creator is whether to put the crap in or leave the crap out. - Content-creators need to make the right individual choice. - Consumers need to make the right individual choice. - We both need to understand and respect each other's right to choose. -- http://james.cridland.net/
