Soon You May Have To Pay For Every Time Your Computer Caches A Song Copy
from the pay-pay-pay-pay-again dept
Steven Leach writes “This will be a busy week in the House — Congress goes into summer recess Friday, but not before considering the Section 115 Reform Act of 2006 (SIRA). Never heard of SIRA? That’s the way Big Copyright and their lackey’s want it, and it’s bad news for you. Simply put, SIRA fundamentally redefines copyright and fair use in the digital world. It would require all incidental copies of music to be licensed separately from the originating copy. Even copies of songs that are cached in your computer’s memory or buffered over a network would need yet another license. Once again, Big Copyright is looking for a way to double-dip into your wallet, extracting payment for the same content at multiple levels. Today, so-called “incidental” copies don’t need to be licensed; they’re made in the process of doing other things, like listening to your MP3 library or plugging into a Net radio station. If you paid for the MP3 and the radio station is up-to-date with its bookkeeping, nobody should have to pay again, right? Not if SIRA becomes law. Out of the blue, copyright holders would have created an entire new market to charge for — and sue over. Good for them. Bad for us.” The EFF has more on the bill, which the industry is hoping to sneak through. Both sites have ways to contact your elected representatives if you feel this change goes too far.
Comments on “Soon You May Have To Pay For Every Time Your Computer Caches A Song Copy”
Bill you everywhere, everytime.. and even more tha
Paying for cached copies could even include those managed by the network-card and the audiobuffer.
Very involving and rediculous.
I like the old times where you could buy a record, movie or photograph, and look at it, and look at again. I could tell my friends.. “i bought a record, its cool.. you wanna listen to it?
You may want to buy it too.”
Re: Bill you everywhere, everytime.. and even more
I remember that time as well. In fact i encourage everyone to bring that time back. It will be a cold day in hell before i pay for a buffer copy.
OK
I hope they have some sort of DRM that tracks all this. That way I can rip a small track from CD to a three 320gb raid 0 configuration and then copy it a few hundred thousand times.
Then when I get the bill for it I can make a roucous about how completely asinine copyright law has become.
Re: OK
youre killing me man!!!
hHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
holy shit! that is so funny!
ill do it with you!
Wow
Amazing [EOM]
This Just In...
…RIAA proposes new initiative to charge for singing in the shower, humming that dumb song stuck in your head and some forms of table drumming.
MIT has just submitted a student patent for thinking and Playboy’s Hugh Heffner was awarded a patent on the nipple. Breast feeding royalties to be retroactive….
In other news, a Cambrige study showed a correlation between “monkey get bananna” and contemporary lobby practices.
Re: This Just In...
That is suitable for framing. Hilarious!
pay pay and then pay again
well I keep looking for the day i have to pay to get in my bathroom I mean somebody somewhere has got to have a copyright on shi*ing
pay pay and then pay again
well I keep looking for the day i have to pay to get in my bathroom I mean somebody somewhere has got to have a copyright on shi*ing
pay pay and then pay again
well I keep looking for the day i have to pay to get in my bathroom I mean somebody somewhere has got to have a copyright on shi*ing
Re: pay pay and then pay again
you don’t have to triple flush here
I almost wish..
I really wish that some case the RIAA -would- win. Something like the Apple case, where they as the RIAA wanted to set the price of all songs on THIER choice, and not let Apple have any control. When that happens, we need to all chip in a few bucks, and bring the RIAA down on price fixing. They are TRYING to price fix, they are trying to be an illigal (c-something, when there is no compition becouse you are illigaly sharing information and prices acting as a sort of psodo monoloply) but until they sucseed, we can not bring them down. I say start an Anti-RIAA fund NOW, and then smash them when they finaly win the wrong case.
Re: I almost wish..
Music companies have already been found guilty of price-fixing. It hasn’t stopped them from demanding that Apple change their pricing structure nor has it stopped them from supporting DRM, DMCA, and other technology/legislation that tramples over fair use and the government granted time-limited monopoly that is supposed to encourage invention/innovation/etc.
Re: I almost wish..
Cartel is the word you were thinking of. The music Industry is acting as a Cartel. Fix prices, bargain collectively, artifically inflate demand.
Yeah, a Cartel.
Weeee!
When are people going to start getting patents for specific music notes? That’ll be great! Death to music, everywhere!
Weeee!
When are people going to start getting patents for specific music notes? That’ll be great! Death to music, everywhere!
Dying Breed
The Industries are a dying breed. They look for the smallest ways to make money because they can’t do it legitamately anymore because of that horrible monster called “technology”. They have no face and we will soon be rid of them. Fret not boys and girls, for Natural Selection will save us yet.
Sort of reminds me of an insect stinging something even though the sting will kill itself in the process. Only. They haven’t figured that part out yet.
I don't necessarily agree with your characterizati
I just read through the section of that draft law where it talks about the cached and buffered copies, and it specifically refers to a “royalty-free license” when doing so. Unless I’m mistaken, that means it’s not going to cost anything. The language indicates the intent is to make sure all distribution channels employ a license when publishing the song one way or another. — Raoul http://www.comeacross.info
Way Too Far
As someone above pointed out, how exactly are these jerks gonna define “a copy?” Is it instentaneous, like a radio wave being broadcast? (Well that packet contained a certain piece of our information for a blink of an eye) or does it have to be maintained or buffered somewhere for a specific period of time? Not sure if I trust any politician to know a thing about technology anyhow. And who is gonna enforce rules that ridiculous?
I’m gonna tattoo the musical score to a song on my buttcheeks and see if they can sue my for my butt-skin.
–ProfHiB
Good for the RIAA
Karl Marx, later in life, supported capitalism, because he believed it was the fastest way to bring down capitalism. Similarly, we should support the RIAA, because that will be the fastest way to bring down the RIAA. The better they succeed in restricting and harassing people, the more people will demand fair use laws. As the pendulum swings the other way (as it always does), we will end up with better consumer protection than we have now. Any stop-gap measures created now will only succeed in postponing the inevitable, leaving us with confused consumers, marginal protections, and an electorate in the pocket of the RIAA.
Re: Good for the RIAA
CITATION:
CIRCULAR REASONING.
Uhmmm, capitalism is the fastest way to bring down capitalism? Circular logic proves that otherwise… or maybe you don’t believe those tiny transistors that your computer is using as you are typing.
–ProfHiB
Re: Re: Good for the RIAA
the point is that marx belived capitalism to be a self defeating system.
Royalty-free feed licenses
“royalty-free license”, what exactly does this mean?
I fear what musicians earn are royalties, what the RIAA and Lables collect are Fees. Therefore, Royalty-free license may mean that the musicians and bands do not get money. That does not necessarly mean it is a fee-free license. Don’t you love language?
At least… that is what I have come to understand.
lala.com
I will never an artist for another track as long as the RIAA is in existence.
Death to music?
First, music programs in our schools are cut out. Then, we suffer through decades of crap music (already in progress), then the government passes laws written by the music industry that allow them to sue us for a copy we paid for. Pretty soon, there won’t be a band worth listening to either live or recorded, nor any ‘contemporary’ music that will become ‘classic’. It’s a downward spiral.
How sad.
Re: Death to music?
It’s already affected local bands in this area…. Most clubs are afraid to hire any cover bands anymore. After being threatened with fees and fines because they might play the local radio station for the customers, or the bands might be playing cover tunes…. I don’t see the network lawyers coming in and telling them that they can’t show sports on the big screen, but heaven forbid that someone sings a karaoke song, or a band plays a cover tune….. Hell, I enjoy playing covers in my band, and I know that most every band out there started out playing covers, and it never bothered anyone, until the RIAA stepped in….
Re: Re: Death to music?
They really crack down on bands that do cover songs? Damn, there goes my career before it even began….
Re: Re: Re: Death to music?
It’s the bars and pubs that they’re cracking down on… But it’s the same thing….. It’s crazy…
For all you law gurus out there…. I have a question…
Instead of being paid to play the music, would it be helpful if bands had an agreement that was signed by themselves and the bar owners that stated, more or less, that the band is being paid for equipment costs, transportation, etc….? It’s just a question that’s been in my head for a while…. Though I’m sure that the IRS or some other group would want to get involved then, since you’re leaving a paper trail of sorts…. Damn, all I want to do is enjoy my hobby and pay my bar tab….
And perhaps there’s another place on techdirt for this sort of question… If so, point me in the right direction.
this is so ridiculous and bizzare