[Gllug] Re: Anti-DRM event in Central London tomorrow!

[Leo Hickey]

> Did the original artist of the music make up every note, or was it 
> "influenced" by other music ? 

If the film maker had himself created music influenced by other music he 
would not have been asked to pay the royalties.

> Is $400,000 a reasonable amount to pay for using one piece of music ? 

If the guy made $10m from his film, then yes. I don't know how much the 
guy made, I'm just saying its relative.

> Is there a better model...

Quite possibly, but Lessig does not discuss any other models.

> You seem to be tied into an either/or mindset, either somebody who wants 
> to use a work pays up whatever extortion the rights-holders see fit to 
> charge, or else it's theft.

I am not of any mindset. I am open to persuasion, and my point was that 
I was not particularly persuaded by Lessig's presentation. While we are 
on the point, a lot of the discussion about DRM seems to be either/or. 
Either we have draconian, evil DRM or nothing.

>> Another example was someone who remixed Beatles tracks without 
>> permission and was not allowed to sell the remixes. So what? why 
>> shouldn't the Beatles be able to say they don't want these remixes sold?
> 
> ... Because it's hardly likely to make 
> even a tiny dent in the Beatle's income ? 

So you would like to have the power decide that when an artist becomes 
too rich then they are no longer entitled to any more royalties?

> I believe the tune "Happy Birthday" is copyrighted by somebody. How 
> would you feel if you had to pay a licence fee every time you sang it ?

Rather annoyed. But I don't, and neither do I have to pay a licence fee 
when I sing a Beatles song in the same context ie in my own house.
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug