You mean Kris Allen isn’t quality ?

/’Vote For The Worst’ Member for 4 years.
// Voted for Sanjaya

Sounds like the best way to keep the old guard in power is to just tax everybody to create an infinite “revenue stream” regardless of quality or technological change; Bennet Lincoff has done a great job mocking up just such a proposal. Why compete in a free market when you can literally get the government to hand you money?

Thanks Crosbie, well put.

This is why, the last time Billy asked what I was willing to ‘give’ for the FAC to change it’s stance I answered with such things as ‘A picture of my cat’, ‘My sister-in-law’, and other such stupid answers. I was really unable to express how silly it was to ask such a thing of me, or anyone else here, and why it was an unanswerable question.

Aspergers is hell

@John Barron, what would you think about putting something like that together just to see what people think? Jon Newton has put up a poll about using Lincoff’s proposal as a starting block?

Despite a2f2a comprising 24 interested people, half of whom are on Billy’s side, Billy is apparently desperate to portray himself as in negotiations with the governing body of all file-sharers. In order to do this he also has to be seen to win a concession from them to take back to FAC, which in turn requires some semblance from a2f2a that such a concord has been reached.

What Billy fails to appreciate is that there is no such governing body. File-sharers are simply billions of individuals risking the enjoyment of their natural, cultural liberty despite the potential for prosecution by copyright cartels for doing so.

The only file-sharers Billy can negotiate with, like ANY artist, are those individuals within his audience, i.e. those listening to what he’s saying or singing. He can say to them “I don’t mind if you copy my work, but please fill in my online memorandum of understanding agreeing to be sued if you profit from using my work without my permission”, but there is no scope for a2f2a agreeing to such a thing on behalf of all file-sharers everywhere.

a2f2a is certainly a talking shop, but it doesn’t have to comprise only people who all fundamentally agree on principle in order to start arriving at practical techniques and approaches for artists and fans to deal directly. Just as atheists, Catholics, Jews, Buddhists and Muslims can all provide practical advice and help in the event of a natural disaster without having to first agree on whether there is or isn’t a god, and whether or not a god would have allowed it to happen, etc.

The Pirate Party on the other hand is in pursuit of a democratic mandate and so can poll their existing members to see if they wish to change their manifesto to support the enactment of an Internet tax – on the basis that that it would obtain more support from the populace than an untaxed Internet. If Billy would like to be seen to be negotiating with an organisation that is qualified to negotiate then it would be more appropriate to approach PPUK, and then possibly the international umbrella organisation.

A dozen guys interested in the phenomenon of file-sharing and developing practical business models (irrespective of whether they are in support of legislative change or the introduction of taxation) can’t exactly homogenise their disparate viewpoints to pretend a consensus that through Billy’s induction represents a concession from all file-sharers.

I’ve made a simple questionairre to see how many others agree with that.

It’s here http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/P9YGZ3N

You can add your name in the comment box — if you want to

Cheers!

Do you realize how much sense that last comment made, versus all the rest of your comments made in the last few weeks?!

So, you admit you don’t have “FAC support” at the moment for any campaign against 3-strikes-style legislation. And you affirm some other things that needed affirming.

Let’s start with a few things at a time…

How do you propose the user community could “represent itself”, and to whom? And, why would they even agree to hear “us”?

I believe that what Billy is trying to do is go to the FAC and say, “look guys, we may have made a mistake with our position on 3-strikes.

That should already be a “topic for discussion” at the FAC! With, or without our input. Either they genuinely support 3 Strikes or they genuinely denounce it – no “political” games should be attached to it.

To clarify, I don’t need any explanation of the benefits of “documented consensus” or the polls used to collect such data. That’s all fine and constructive.

What I object to is the constant inference to a “position” held by the FAC on 3 Strikes being used as some sort of “bargaining chip” it can’t possibly be.

We’re being told, the FAC will *consider* campaigning against 3 Strikes IF AND ONLY IF everyone else agrees that “copyright changes” will be supported “in principle”. And, let us not forget that all these “new copyright” proposals we’re hearing mostly contain some type of usage fees or another designed to “compensate” copyright for its own failure, and require and encourage all sorts of unwanted corporate interference in order to be implimented.

We’ve been saying all along, we’re not here to “negotiate” with artists on such things, as they’re all counter-productive to the very health of the Internet, and threaten a number of human rights that fall well outside of the realm of “music” and “legal rights entitlement”. These are a few things that none of the people pushing for “trade-offs” seem to even consider.

It doesn’t seem to be about “consensus” as much as it seems to be about *concession* to the ideas that the labels and the FAC want us to submit to.

The message I’m getting is, “Fuck the Free Internet! Let them corporatize the whole damned thing so we can get paid better! So what if it takes more money and cooperation from everyone connected than reasonable?!”

We’ve been fighting the same shit from marketers and other corporate interests longer than you’ve been online, and we’re not about to throw that away just for “music” – the principle is far more important and reaching than that.

I want you P2P people to organise so that you can engage in the debate about the new digital music industry.

I want you to represent yourselves instead at the table instead so that we can talk to you instead of talking about you.

I want you to bring your technical know-how to the aid of artists who are struggling to free themselves from the dead hand of the record industry.

I want you to be free to share files without being hunted down by the majors.

I want you to help me to convince my fellow artists that three strikes is a mistake.

Let no one be in any doubt that, even if we are able to find a consensus here, we would still have to win over our own communities. That would be a long hard slog. But we can’t take the all important first step on that journey until we can agree on a platform that involves compromise from both sides.

Now I have offered to do my best to convince the FAC to drop their support for three strikes. If that is not worth anything to you then I guess all we have here is a talking shop.

Billy, we’re just individuals. We don’t have any organization or negotiating power. I can only speak for myself.

Here’s what I personally can offer you (or any artist):

I am willing to pay you to listen to your music. In person or on recording (coming to Honolulu any time soon?). But I want to pay YOU, not some faceless corporation that wants to sue me. And I want it to be easy to pay you, and easy to find exactly what music I want in the format I want.”

I am willing to pay a small ‘license fee’ or ‘internet tax’ if it means I can download music without threat of a lawsuit. But again, I want that money to go to YOU. ”

If I like your music well enough, I am willing to promote you for free. I will get my friends to come with me to your concert, buy them your music, and tell people about it.”

I am willing to buy other stuff you make. T-shirts, macaroni necklaces, whatever – as long as the money goes to you and it supports more music.”

I am willing to try other music you suggest. But I’m not willing to pay for it without hearing it first. I am willing to pay when you collaborate with that artist, though, especially if it’s Wilco

“What more do you want from me?”