On Thu, Aug 17, 2006, E L wrote about "Re: DMCA ן�½�?ן�½�?ן�½�¨ן�½�¥ - ן�½�¢ן�½�?ן�½�¨ן�½�? ן�½�?ן�½�¦ן�½�?ן�½�?ן�½�?ן�½�¨":
> Yes, exactly, it will make it right to download and share music.
> More people will share music, people who doesn't have money now to buy
> ultra expensive cds will be able to get songs and TV shows for their kids.
> Is that wrong? More publicity to the owner of the copyright, less money is
> wasted on distributions and more new bands can sends their songs to the net
> and make money out of it without selling their souls to the record
> companies.
> How about it? I'm sure you didn't think about that it might actualy support
> culture in israel right?
Let's imagine your scheme works. I pay 10 shekels a month and I can copy all
the songs I want for free. Now, who decides how the 10 shekels get divided
to the copyright owners? Does it go only to Israeli copyright holders or
also abroad? And who decides that I should pay 10 shekels, or perhaps it
should be 100 shekels a month? or maybe 1000 shekels?
Same way you decide about any other tax,
or about the prices or water or electricity. The goverment together with the kenesset will control
it and decide how much exactly. There were few suggestion about how to split it amoung copyright owners
non of them is 100% fair. But then again no law or tax are 100% fair, but even 80% will be a huge improvement.
In short, your suggestion is basically a "all you can listen to" music
buffet. But instead of suggesting that this is a service that companies
should sell (like IPOD, but a all-you-can-listen-to plan), and that the
free market determines its price, you suggest that it's a thing that the
government should maintain such a plan, define and collect its costs. Why?
I see no sense in this.
Sorry? How am I going against the market?
Look how successful online music selling services are. They can still sell songs and give extra value,
beside that they will also get money for something they didn't get money for before.
So in the end they will only earn more money. And please don't tell me that if it will be legal people won't buy from online services.
File sharing being ilegal is not what stoped people from sharing in the first place. It's just those online services give you added value
like fast download.
> advantages, of course nothing is perfect, you also pay tax now about empty
> cds you buy, I don't see you go and complain about it. And of course there
I pay 76 agorot per blank CD. This is so low, that I seriously doubt this
includes any special "piracy" tax. Are you sure there's such a tax in Israel?
Pretty sure. But there is always the chance I'm mistaken.
> The poor person you talked about above who doesn't have any money, probably
> doesn't have money to go to concert or hardly any money to buy cds, now all
> the sudden for not so high sum he can expuse his kids to culture variaty he
> haven't seen before.
Eli, have you ever listened to the... Radio?
This is how I was exposed to music when I was a kid. We couldn't afford
buying cassettes, and listened to music on the radio and recorded songs
from the radio on cassettes.
Radio is already partially funded by your taxes. I don't see the need to
pay more taxes to give more money to the music industry. They are already
getting enough of our taxes exactly for this purpose: to give the general
population a legal way to listen to music.
Radio? No not really, they made me listen to music they like, when they like it.
Why will I want to do that? Now why when I have a car I need to pay radio tax?
How rude is that for someone like me who doesn't listen to sucky radio?:P
Nothing is free, as you see the music companies get money out of your taxes anyhow.
> Note also that this will also make it easier for intrenet radio station to
> brodcast something that can become very complicated now as they need to go
> company company and ask permission, while if there was a way to distributed
> money between copyright owner they could use it instead.
I don't see why internet radio should have to pay tamlugim any differently
from regular radio. If they do, akum is at fault, not the lack of laws or
taxes.
The point is that you'll need to pay tamlugim only if you make money out of it.
That will reduce the power monopolist bodies like akum has.
Yes, it's their fault, if they would have been standing at the edge of techonology isn't of slacking behind probably things would have been different. But that what we have now. Anyhow remember even if it's the law now probably in few years it won't be relevant anymore and people will cancell it. That how laws go:)
Ely
--
Nadav Har'El | Thursday, Aug 17 2006, 23 Av 5766
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |-----------------------------------------
Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |Cats are smarter than dogs. You can't get
http://nadav.harel.org.il |eight cats to pull a sled through snow.
