Senates new Anti Piracy Bill, Will it really help Sales?

[terrytee]

Just incase you were not already aware, in the US a new bill has been approved to allow tighter restictions on P2P networks & procecutions towards ppl downloading, illegally, music software & so on. It seems to have been pushed through with the reasoning that the music industry & other sector are seeing a huge loss in sales becase of P2P.

So what do you think, will this increase sales over the long term or even change the culture of music from being focused on singles to be focused on Albums again? IMO if it works, which i am skeptical as i feel most young ppl today have grown up with the culture of stealing there music, we may see a change in the type of music being pushed.

Senate Approves P2P Enforcement Bill

September 12, 2008
By a 14 to 4 vote, the Senate Judiciary Committee has approved a bill backed by the RIAA - the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Act - that would give federal prosecutors the power to file civil lawsuits against file-sharers who violate copyright laws. The bill will create stricter IP laws and toughen civil and criminal laws against counterfeiting and piracy. The act also expands the power of the White House by creating an IP Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC) position within the executive branch, and the IPEC will direct other agencies in a coordinated strategy to fight counterfeiting and piracy.

"We all know that intellectual property makes up some of the most valuable, and most vulnerable, property we have," said Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), according to CNet News. "We need to do more to protect it from theft and abuse if we hope to continue being a world leader in innovation."

Leahy added an amendment to the bill that expanded mandatory, court-issued protective orders to cover any records seized by law enforcement, in order to protect potentially confidential or private information. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) also added two successful amendments to the bill. One adds the Department of Agriculture as a member of the interagency intellectual property enforcement advisory committee, and the other ensures a transition of power from the government's current IP efforts to a new IP coordinator, once he or she is confirmed by Congress.

Mitch Bainwol, Chairman/CEO of the RIAA, commented, "Intellectual property is widely recognized as an important economic engine for this country. Real, bipartisan efforts to protect this national resource with new, meaningful tools are necessary to energize the economy and maintain our global competitiveness. This legislation is a welcome verse in a great song."


FMQB: Radio Industry News, Music Industry Updates, Arbitron Ratings, Music News and more!

[turbo46]

They're convinced that P2P killing the discography, they want make more moneys every years, it's correct, it's business but stopping bulls***, the technology/music evolved the ppl don't go to buy a CD never listened it before, it's finished time 25 million copies of Thriller, it's true thing. I think that the P2P can help the ppl to value the songs, stop.

[ryst]

Originally Posted by turbo46

They're convinced that P2P killing the discography, they want make more moneys every years, it's correct, it's business but stopping bulls***, the technology/music evolved the ppl don't go to buy a CD never listened it before, it's finished time 25 million copies of Thriller, it's true thing. I think that the P2P can help the ppl to value the songs, stop.

[terrytee]

Originally Posted by turbo46

They're convinced that P2P killing the discography, they want make more moneys every years, it's correct, it's business but stopping bulls***, the technology/music evolved the ppl don't go to buy a CD never listened it before, it's finished time 25 million copies of Thriller, it's true thing. I think that the P2P can help the ppl to value the songs, stop.

I guess what your trying to say is that it's not P2P thats killing sales but quality of product yeah? If so i kind of agree although i think now we live in the digital age the game is very different.

Back when CD's, or even vinyl, was the main way ppl bought there music i think the listener may have felt more of a affinity to there purchase. Just due to the fact that you get a physical item as opposed to just a MP3 with a thumbnail picture, & as a result the type of songs being made may have been gear towards longevity.

Now the ring-tone is big business, some say more than MP3's Itunes & so on, maybe the sound is being steered in a different direction.

But with all this said will clamping down on P2P and prosecuting a few users be enough to scare the rest of todays fans into buying music again?

[Volodia]

Originally Posted by terrytee

I guess what your trying to say is that it's not P2P thats killing sales but quality of product yeah?

If that was true , only the best product would sell, that's not what I'm seeing (and hearing) .

[rickrock305]

nope. just more short-sighted, knee jerk reaction from the RIAA. this isn't going to stop anyone from downloading or anything else.

they need to stop spending their time fighting technology and learn how to make it work for them. its their own fault they are losing sales because they have spent all their energy fighting new technology. thats a waste of time. they need to focus on adapting to new technologies. but of course that would take some thought and possibly some money in research, so its probably not going to happen with the major labels.

[computa]

i know a few cats who stopped downloading after they recieved a cease and desist and where threatened with a lawsuit. one for $880,000.

I dont know if it will help sales but I do know that the technology exists for them to tap many an IP and build a case pretty easily against large amounts of people after this ruling. Internet providers r like paypal they gonna open up quickly.

[terrytee]

Originally Posted by computa

i know a few cats who stopped downloading after they recieved a cease and desist and where threatened with a lawsuit. one for $880,000.

That type of stuff is getting more & more common with Bit-Torrent users due to the fact that they need to seed the torrent, which in legal terms means they are also distributing pirated stuff.

It going be interesting to see how things will span out, when ever i speak to young ppl on the piracy subject it seems that almost all of them have never bought a MP3 in there lives & have been brought up with the culture of piracy. Funny When i was a teenager i spent nearly all my wages on records.

[DROPKICK]

I think downloading is responsible for the sink in sells! There are millions of people who download music and if they all purchased music we would have higher sells in music. Lil wayne might of went diamond if it wasn't for downloading. In the future more people will probably get most of there music off of the cellphone than anywhere else.

[MYAMS]

Originally Posted by rickrock305

nope. just more short-sighted, knee jerk reaction from the RIAA. this isn't going to stop anyone from downloading or anything else.

they need to stop spending their time fighting technology and learn how to make it work for them. its their own fault they are losing sales because they have spent all their energy fighting new technology. thats a waste of time. they need to focus on adapting to new technologies. but of course that would take some thought and possibly some money in research, so its probably not going to happen with the major labels.

This bill might result in more persecutions but will do little to stop the illegal distribution of music. For better or worse, singles and even album leaks have become an integral part of the process.

[Jake Gilla]

Originally Posted by terrytee

The bill will create stricter IP laws and toughen civil and criminal laws against counterfeiting and piracy. The act also expands the power of the White House by creating an IP Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC) position within the executive branch, and the IPEC will direct other agencies in a coordinated strategy to fight counterfeiting and piracy.

More bureaucracy and more pointless laws. This is going to fall into the trend of most post 9/11 laws and turn into a huge invasion of piracy.

The government needs to stop stepping in to help big business and let the entertainment industry work out its own problem. If the entertainment industry wants people to stop stealing music then it is THEIR responsability as a producer and supplier of a product to develope a better method to reach their target audience through a new profitable venue. As long as the entertainment industry continues to blame their CONSUMER (especially with government support) they are not going to make any progress.

I'm sorry but the 90's are over, people are not going to pay 10 to 14 dollars for a physical medium, nor for a digital copy that they don't actually own (itunes).

[rickrock305]

Originally Posted by MYAMS

For better or worse, singles and even album leaks have become an integral part of the process.

thats another interesting point. it has become commonplace to leak some records on the internet to build buzz for a project. so at the same time these labels are leaking stuff for download, they're going to go after the people downloading. it makes no sense.

[Jake Gilla]

Originally Posted by rickrock305

thats another interesting point. it has become commonplace to leak some records on the internet to build buzz for a project. so at the same time these labels are leaking stuff for download, they're going to go after the people downloading. it makes no sense.

I'll admit I bootleg alot of music, mainly because I buy vinyl, and the fact that every LP doesn't come with a free download is prepostorous, I'm not buying the music twice.

Anyway there has been a few torrents specifically where the artist includes a .txt file with the download asking you to buy the album when its released. Whether this is actually the artist or some one posing as the artist I don't know, but it is an interesting facet to the business.

[author]

Originally Posted by rickrock305

they need to focus on adapting to new technologies. but of course that would take some thought and possibly some money in research

I don't think research is necessary, just sue the ISPs for distributing stolen goods.

[Brian!]

Originally Posted by rickrock305

nope. just more short-sighted, knee jerk reaction from the RIAA. this isn't going to stop anyone from downloading or anything else.

they need to stop spending their time fighting technology and learn how to make it work for them. its their own fault they are losing sales because they have spent all their energy fighting new technology. thats a waste of time. they need to focus on adapting to new technologies. but of course that would take some thought and possibly some money in research, so its probably not going to happen with the major labels.

yep. a 20 year old business model is not going to work especially when it's tied into some sort of technology.

[Jake Gilla]

Originally Posted by author

I don't think research is necessary, just sue the ISPs for distributing stolen goods.

Why? They'll just sell out their customers and we're right back to this point.

[rickrock305]

Originally Posted by author

I don't think research is necessary, just sue the ISPs for distributing stolen goods.

i was talking about research and development to take advantage of the new technologies instead of merely fighting against them.

ISPs are not distributing stolen goods. you could make that case, but i doubt it would stand up in court. you don't sue the manufacturers of the highway when you get in a car accident.

[author]

Originally Posted by rickrock305

ISPs are not distributing stolen goods.

Sure they are -- they are the only real pirates here. Someday, somebody's going to sue them for x trillion dollars. And win.

[Jake Gilla]

Originally Posted by rickrock305

i was talking about research and development to take advantage of the new technologies instead of merely fighting against them.

A good idea, but I think market research is more important and less costly than R&D at this point.

What is the value proposition of buying a CD? Seriously there is no incentive offered by these company's to buy it when you can download it for free. There are ton of options here, but more importantly is this medium even still relavent enough to be the primary media for a release?

Also, labels need to reevaluate there profit centers. Product Placement, Merchandise and Ringtones are possible revenue drivers that, other than possibly the latter, are not being exploited to their full potential. Add in things like Video Games, Movies, Television and Advertising and who knows the possibilities.

I personally believe that at least virtual media has pretty much lost its value at this point, and the sooner that the industry accepts this and moves on to other sources of income, the better.

[rickrock305]

Originally Posted by author

Sure they are -- they are the only real pirates here. Someday, somebody's going to sue them for x trillion dollars. And win.

how do you figure?

they simply provide the pathway, its up to the end user what to do with that pathway.

and I'm sure the ISPs have covered themselves as such, so that when you accept their service contract, you accept that you are responsible for what you do with it.

like i said, thats like suing the manufacturer of the highway you were driving on when you got in an accident.

[themanager]

ISP's are now starting to limit high bandwith customers. I think it should start there. Its like if you lock up a dude on the street selling dope as soon as he is in the car and off to jail another dude is gonna take his spot and open up shop. You have to stop it somewhere in the pipelines b4 it hits millions of homes. I don't think limiting is the perfect solution but I think some kind of way they could block it.

Comcast, the largest provider of cable-based broadband service in the U.S., will limit residential customers to 250GB of bandwidth a month beginning Oct. 1, the company announced late Thursday.
Free IT resource
Microsite: Smart Ways to Grow Small Business IT
Sponsored by AMD

Comcast will contact customers who go above the 250GB limit and ask them to curtail their use, Comcast said. If a customer goes over the monthly limit again during the following six months, Comcast will suspend service for a year.

Currently, Comcast contacts high-bandwidth customers and will suspend their accounts if they don't curb their use, but it has not set a firm bandwidth limit until now. Most customers contacted about their bandwidth usage agree to limit their activity, according to Charlie Douglas, Comcast's director of communications.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission struck down Comcast's past network management practice of slowing BitTorrent peer-to-peer traffic in an effort to reduce congestion. The FCC ruled that Comcast was violating so-called net neutrality principles by targeting a certain kind of Internet traffic.
The new bandwidth cap will affect less than 1 percent of Comcast customers, Douglas said. Those customers "are using so much bandwidth that they are degrading the experience of other users," he added. "Two-hundred-and-fifty gigabytes is an extremely large amount of data."
Some high-bandwidth users have asked Comcast to identify a specific cap so they know where the line is, Douglas added. Some other broadband providers also warn customers about excessive bandwidth use.
An average Comcast customer uses two to three gigabytes of bandwidth a month, Comcast said. To reach the 250GB limit, a customer would have to do one of the following: send 50 million e-mails, download 62,500 songs, or download 125 standard-definition movies, the company said in its announcement .
Comcast has also looked at charging high-bandwidth users additional fees, and it still has not ruled out doing so in the future, Douglas said.
Comcast is also looking at "de-prioritizing" heavy users' traffic during times of network congestion. The plan Comcast is considering would slow heavy users' traffic for up to 20 minutes during times of the most congestion.
Comcast will notify customers of the new bandwidth limits using several methods, including banner ads at Comcast.net and notices sent with monthly bills, the company said. Some net neutrality advocates criticized Comcast for not telling customers of its previous network management plan to slow P-to-P traffic at times.
Some net neutrality advocates have said Comcast's new network management plans of targeting individual users is preferable to blocking Web applications. But others have suggested that those efforts may be equal to penalizing their best customers.

[Jake Gilla]

Originally Posted by terrytee

"We all know that intellectual property makes up some of the most valuable, and most vulnerable, property we have," said Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), according to CNet News. "We need to do more to protect it from theft and abuse if we hope to continue being a world leader in innovation."

Leahy added an amendment to the bill that expanded mandatory, court-issued protective orders to cover any records seized by law enforcement, in order to protect potentially confidential or private information. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) also added two successful amendments to the bill. One adds the Department of Agriculture as a member of the interagency intellectual property enforcement advisory committee, and the other ensures a transition of power from the government's current IP efforts to a new IP coordinator, once he or she is confirmed by Congress.

Mitch Bainwol, Chairman/CEO of the RIAA, commented, "Intellectual property is widely recognized as an important economic engine for this country. Real, bipartisan efforts to protect this national resource with new, meaningful tools are necessary to energize the economy and maintain our global competitiveness. This legislation is a welcome verse in a great song."


FMQB: Radio Industry News, Music Industry Updates, Arbitron Ratings, Music News and more!

I just read this again and only one word came to mind.

YouTube.

Thoughts?

[terrytee]

Originally Posted by Jake Gilla

I just read this again and only one word came to mind.

YouTube.

Thoughts?

Very true, which reminds me of a thing i heard recently about shows uploaded to you-tube. For example if you watch an episode of lets say south park or something similar which is available on TV or DVD your IP address is automatically logged to a data base which in theory is going to be used for prosecution. Now no one has been fined for that yet......... but the IP address's getting logged is a very real fact.

If a handful of people get successfully prosecuted for the infringement via P2P it's going open the flood gates for all sorts of things including you-tube.

Just did a little search on the you-tube subject found this.

Judge Orders YouTube to Give All User Histories to Viacom
By Ryan Singel July 02, 2008 | 7:16:54 PMCategories: Copyrights And Patents
Google will have to turn over every record of every video watched by YouTube users, including users' names and IP addresses, to Viacom, which is suing Google for allowing clips of its copyright videos to appear on YouTube, a judge ruled Wednesday.
Viacom wants the data to prove that infringing material is more popular than user-created videos, which could be used to increase Google's liability if it is found guilty of contributory infringement.
Viacom filed suit against Google in March 2007, seeking more than $1 billion in damages for allowing users to upload clips of Viacom's copyright material. Google argues that the law provides a safe harbor for online services so long as they comply with copyright takedown requests.
Although Google argued that turning over the data would invade its users' privacy, the judge's ruling (.pdf) described that argument as "speculative" and ordered Google to turn over the logs on a set of four tera-byte hard drives.
The judge also turned Google's own defense of its data retention policies -- that IP addresses of computers aren't personally revealing in and of themselves, against it to justify the log dump.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has already reacted, calling the order a violation of the Video Privacy Protection act that "threatens to expose deeply private information."
The order also requires Google to turn over copies of all videos that it has taken down for any reason.
Viacom also requested YouTube's source code, the code for identifying repeat copyright infringement uploads, copies of all videos marked private, and Google's advertising database schema.
Those requests were denied in whole, except that Google will have to turn over data about how often each private video has been watched and by how many persons.

Judge Orders YouTube to Give All User Histories to Viacom | Threat Level from Wired.com

[diggin24seven]

although finding a way to stop piracy would be sweet, as of now i think we need find a way to make money off this music thing while adapting to this new technology until they do find a way.

[sleeper1400]

this will have ZERO effect

[author]

Originally Posted by rickrock305

its up to the end user what to do with that pathway.

Of course not, and ISPs already do a lot to stop child molesters online.

Someday they'll do a lot to stop other crimes, too. But they'll have to be forced to do so, since piracy is their main business.