[Wolves] BBC & Winows DRM - shouldn't we complain?
daveh at bvsc.org
Mon Feb 26 09:08:07 GMT 2007
> Do we believe that musicians own the music they create and have a right
> to control its distribution? If so, then 'free software DRM' would be OK.
> Or is music like software and once you've written it you must give it
> away and try to make a living by selling the service of performing it?
> This question has been troubling me for some time because I can't see
> the difference between software and music/content. They both take
> creativity, time and money (or lost earnings) to create.
A prostitute provides a service, a musician provides a creation (providing
he/she is writing his/her own music). The confusion between whores and
musicians is easily explained given the number of outrageous pimps that the
music industry plays home to these days and the similarity between the two
professions, both largely placed upon them from others who seek to control,
and profit from, their actions.
By making out the musicians actions as a service rather than a creation, the
industry can steer us towards the idea of paying everytime for the service
just rendered, instead of a one off payment for a copy that you then get to
experience at your leisure.
As for the BBC, maybe we should storm Broadcasting House armed with torches
and pitchforks in the time honoured tradition as all simple folks do
when "things up the big house on the hill take a turn for the worse".
As solutions go it probably has as much merit as writing to them. (And would
arguably get a lot more attention).
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
More information about the Wolves