Following the draconian censorship policies of Gordon Brown’s “Digital Britain”, and undoubtedly the success of the Swedish arm winning 7.4% of the votes to gain a Member of the European Parliament, it seems the UK Pirate Party is reborn.
The last time I looked it was a website whose last update was years previous and it was pretty much dead. Now, they are officially a political party and can run candidates in the next general election!
Don’t let the name deceive you – it’s easy to instantly jump onto the bandwagon that it’s all about ripping off other people’s stuff. It’s not. Here are the three main policies of the Pirate Party:-
• Reform copyright and patent law. We want to legalise non-commercial file sharing and reduce the excessive length of copyright protection, while ensuring that when creative works are sold, it’s the artists who benefit, not monopoly rights holders. We want a patent system that doesn’t stifle innovation or make life saving drugs so expensive that patients die.
• End the excessive surveillance, profiling, tracking and monitoring of innocent people by Government and big businesses.
• Ensure that everyone has real freedom of speech and real freedom to enjoy and participate in our shared culture.
I wouldn’t disagree with any of that but as ever with parties like this, without proportional representation they are wasting their time. Sure, it might work in the European elections, but we had them only a couple of months ago. So whilst this is an honourable mission by the Pirate Party, I can only see it being a financially impossible one.
loading…
I’m generally sympathetic to The Pirate Party, but I think some of their IP policies are a bit, hmm… naive?
I’m all for reform of copyright and licensing laws – after all, I find it bizarre that we allow cartels like MCPS and PRS to extract money from people who’ve already paid to use IP products they’ve already purchased.
Why do we pay money to PRS every time a song is played in a bar, for example, but we don’t pay a royalty to, say, Ford, every time an ambulance goes out to save a life or when Tesco delivers shopping?
I profit from (some of) the things I was taught by my teachers – do they not deserve royalties for my use of prior intellectual property?
Music is an art and, for some lucky few, a business. If you can’t make a financial success out of it by fair and level means, you shouldn’t go about using the threat of law and penalties to force others to hand over more money to you.
loading...
Quite right NQH, I agree that the Pirate Party are naive, but then I suspect most startup political parties are.
Those analogies are more or less spot on; the PRS is a self serving non entity, but one which provides the cash flow to musicians so there would be a reluctance to get rid of it.
I don’t think that musicians or any other creative artist should be paid again and again every time one of their tunes is played. I don’t have to keep paying Bosch every time I use my drill, whether it’s for commercial or private use. This business model was created by the music industry, but it’s now being confirmed as a right by legislation in the form of “Digital Britain”.
I mean, what’s the difference between copying a music track via the internet or lending your mate the CD to tape onto his cassette recorder?
The only difference I can think of, aside from the media involved, is that they can enforce the former in conjunction with the likes of the BPI so they are now bringing in legislation to force ISPs to start monitoring and blocking peer to peer traffic and to allow the BPI to bypass courts to obtain your personal details so they can sue you directly.
Even if you agree that the copyright laws are fine as they are, there are infinitely more uses of peer to peer technology than sharing a few music tracks and this draconian measure is pure censorship and means we can and will be monitored ever more closely.
loading...
Ah but I agree with the copyright laws. There’s a big difference between those two comparisons – music has a mixed private/commercial use. If you’ve written a piece of music why shouldn’t you get more for those who use it commercially than those for private enjoyment? Should a teenager be charged as much for listening to the recording as a professional nightclub would be charged for playing it?
The ambulances and Tesco delivery vans however are priced according to the commercial market.
If copyrights are abandoned music is one area in which people would no longer be able to earn a living writing or recording it and they’d no longer be ANY professional artists. And you’d say goodbye to a professional film industry too – ooh and any designer clothing -and non-Chinese made items. More worryingly it’d also be a quick death to the pharmaceutical firms so no more new drug treatments.
loading...
“If copyrights are abandoned music is one area in which people would no longer be able to earn a living writing or recording it and they’d no longer be ANY professional artists.”
Nobody’s suggesting that copyright be abandoned – simply that it be reformed.
Just because the music industry cannot come up with a fair business model doesn’t mean they should expect to use special exceptions in law to charge people more for the use of IP.
The idea that people would abandon creating music just because the industry no longer had a cartel to rely on for its income is unrealistic.
loading...
I should add that music is also priced according to the commercial market.
It makes no difference – the point I was making is that both products rely on IP, but only one of them makes money for its producers every time it gets used by the owner.
loading...
Why not charge every time for commercial use? It’s simply a form of charging. Most people pay everytime they use a car park – though some do bulk deals (season tickets) which give little discount. Personally I’d rather pay on that sort of basis than a massive up front fee which would restrict the amount of music I could buy, just in case I played it lots and lots. The returns are a nuisance though and administration costs must be huge – but it’s a commercial decision to fit in with existing technology not just in the commercial sector but the private one too.
loading...