a2f2a

Hi all:

The article below is my own personal and admittedly extremely biased view of the just-announced Digital Britain plan, and doesn’t in any way represent a2f2a.com, or any of its members, musicians or fans. But as a member of this site, I felt the need to post it.

Cheers!
Jon Newton

___________

“Legal framework for tackling copyright infringement via education and technical measure.”

This innocuous looking sentence is the lead item in the BBC’s summation of UK government plans to gain control of the Internet on behalf of  Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music, with trumped up allegations against P2P file sharers as the linchpin, and the Queen’s speech as the excuse.

“Plans for tackling pirates will be a two-stage process, according to the Bill,” says the Telegraph. “Initially the Government will aim to educate and those identified as downloading unlawfully, will be sent letters. If this proves insufficient, technical measures will be introduced – including the powers to disconnect pirates.”

Spelled out, that means Gordon Brown’s Labour  government intends to install entertainment industry business plans aimed at gaining total control of product distribution online, as law in Britain.

And it’ll drive a huge wedge between online music lovers and the coterie of music makers who belong to the Featured Artists’ Coalition and  who recently, and unanimously, came out in support of the scheme.

Predictably, “The music industry, who has lobbied the Government hard to tackle illegal downloading, has welcomed the Bill,” says the Telegraph.

However, “internet service providers have been critical of the proposals, and BT claims that forcing ISPs to police piracy could cost the industry £1m a day,” it says, and, “Consumer organisations have warned that plan to cut off subscribers infringes the rights of internet users.”

‘Serial copyright infringers’

‘Education’ means UK politicians will be parroting Big Music mis- and disinformation as though it’s reliable and accurate material emanating from credible sources.

And it’s already begun. “It is good news for fans of British music,” the story has BPI boss Geoff Taylor stating.

It is, of course, the exact opposite. The only ones to benefit will be the Big 4 labels. Everyone else, including the musicians who wrong-headedly voted to penalise their own fans, will be  left out in the cold.

Says Computing.co.uk, “Downing Street made it clear the proposal to disconnect serial copyright infringers from the internet are ‘reserve powers’ which will only be used ‘if needed’.

“The main plank in its two-stage approach to copyright is to make legal action more effective and educate consumers about copyright online.”

The assertion is, of course, completely worthless. The entertainment cartels, not the politicians, are calling the shots and Big Music in particular is noted for favouring the sledgehammer approach when it comes to ‘negotiating’ with members of the online P2P constituencies, and file sharers.

“The Open Rights Group is urging people to contact their MP to oppose the plans,” says the BBC, quoting it as stating:

“This plan won’t stop copyright infringement and with a simple accusation could see you and your family disconnected from the internet – unable to engage in everyday activities like shopping and socialising.”

‘Offline, no-one can hear you whine’

In a Reader’s Write to the open letter to the FAC, “It is important to recognise that 3-strikes is fundamentally unjust/unethical given that no evidence is required,” said Digital Productions‘ Crosbie Fitch summed it up, going on >>>

The victim is simply given two warnings (tipped-off as to what’s about to happen without any way of preventing it) before they are disconnected.

He adds >>>

Your evidence of innocence has to wait until after your ISP has disconnected you, after your PC has been confiscated, after your assets have been seized, after you have located a lawyer willing to take on your case, after you have paid your lawyer to demonstrate at a tribunal that you have grounds to plead for an appeal against your disconnection, and then at your appeal your evidence can be presented (if you still have it).

Maybe, you will then be reconnected … until the next time.

There is NO SANCTION for 3 strikes, even for suspected terrorists, let alone suspected file-sharers. Read The Crucible to get a vague clue as to why incrimination upon suspicion/accusation is such an abomination.

If you thought being sued for copyright infringement in court was an injustice, wait until you suffer disconnection at the whim of the MAFIAA.

The sad thing is, no-one will notice your anguish because you’ll be disconnected, and as they’ll say “Offline, no-one can hear you whine”.

What’ll happen? Nothing.

The only people who haven’t been consulted and who haven’t had a say in any of this are the fans and the electorate, the millions of citizens who keep the politicians, the labels and musicians — contracting and independent, both — alive.

What’s going to happen?

To all intents and purposes, nothing.

The music is out there, and has been since last century. Nothing can change that. File sharers will continue to share files, the labels  will continue to haemorrhage customers, and online music distribution will ultimately be in the hands of cooperating and independent providers and labels who are inexorably  replacing corporate music industry.

The online communities will continue to grow and as they do, their powers of persuasion will expand exponentially while the waning influence of Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music will continue to be reduced proportionally, as will their consumer bases.

The cookie-cutter, formulaic ‘product’ is in 2009 being steadily supplanted by exciting, innovative works from independent musicians, and, “what was previously known as promotion becomes known as discovery,” said Fitch in a comment to a post to The sky isn’t falling! on a2f2a.com, launched under the premise that musicians need to be paid, and fans want to pay them.

“Instead of record labels pushing their music into the remote corners of the world so it meets the widest possible audience, the widespread audience instead sucks the music they like to them from the farthest reaches of the Internet so their desires find the greatest number of artists possible,” said Fitch, adding >>>

Instead of artists having promotion agencies, audiences have discovery agencies (bloggers, etc.). Pandora is an example of a discovery agent.

Artists liberate the public to share their music, and so make themselves as easy to discover as possible. The audiences then have the task of finding the music they like, and the respective artists they would commission to produce more.

Audience=potential fans, auditioning and seeking music.
Fan=someone who’s discovered some music they like, and the artist thereof.

Audiences pay artists with their attention.
Fans pay artists with their money.