Eisner wants to control your computer...

[carnellm]

This just in from ZDNet. Read it at http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/stories/story/0,10738,2854528,00.html.

And I quote "LAST MONTH, Eisner, Chernin, and other representatives of the entertainment and media establishment were in Washington, complaining to Congress that their customers were ripping off their copyrighted content. Part of their proposed solution? Require the PC and consumer-electronics industries to build next-generation products that would prevent even casual copying. "

Seems like he should be concentrating on producing quality entertainment instead of trying to be big brother.

Michael

 

[raidermatt]

Those using computers are not immune from copyright law. Napster proved that.

 

[hopemax]

On the Laughing Place boards, someone who is following the proposed legislation a heck of a lot closely than me, is that the effects would basically make CD drives "read-only" which means no back-ups, and in this age of viruses not to mention regular system foul-ups is a no-backup computer world a good thing or a bad thing?

 

[carnellm]

This legislation is the equivilent of outlawing pencils because I can write down what I see, hear, or read. Never mind that there are legitimate, socially advancing uses for the pencil -- profits might go down! Or more likely, just not go up as fast.

 

[Eeyore2U]

Originally posted by carnellm
This legislation is the equivilent of outlawing pencils because I can write down what I see, hear, or read. Never mind that there are legitimate, socially advancing uses for the pencil -- profits might go down! Or more likely, just not go up as fast.

Are you this upset with the music industry? Should we toss the copyright laws out the window?

Michael, I'm sure when you create something you'll want it protected by the same coopyright laws you disagree with.

 

[HorizonsFan]

The difference is, copyright laws have always been sort of on the "honor system". It seems as if now, we're presumed guilty and must have any tools removed that might enable us to violate the copyright laws.
I can photocopy a play, why don't we outlaw Xerox? And why on earth do we have so many copiers in the LIBRARY?

 

[raidermatt]

Good point, Horizons, but as I'm sure you know, money is the ultimate motivation. Even with access to a Xerox, it was fairly difficult and expensive to make copies of a book (for example), then do your marketing, sales and distribution and turn a profit. The Internet makes this much easier and less expensive, increasing piracy. Companies (not just Disney) are going to do whatever they can to protect their assets.

 

[hopemax]

Are you this upset with the music industry?

But in music, it is legal to take a CD and make a cassette tape for use in your car's tape deck. (Audio Home Recording Act of 1992). But manufacters of cassette tape recorders do pay a royalty fee (which I assume is passed onto the consumer).

 

[raidermatt]

But don't you first have to purchase the CD?

Also, the inherent quality loss when doing this makes mass distribution and piracy un-profitable.

Quality becomes almost a moot point with digital-to-digital. Perfect copies can be made, and the internet make it easier to sell and distribute those copies.

I'm not saying the proposed solution is the right answer. I'll need more info before forming my opinion. But there definitely needs to be new protections of some kind.

 

[hopemax]

And all I'm saying is this proposal isn't the right answer. That consumers shouldn't sacrifice all their fair-use rights even if they feel that changes are necessary.

Why should I have to give up the ability to make my own personal U2 greatest hit's CD, by burning songs from 5 different disks all of which I purchased. My husband has loaded the songs from the CD's we own onto a computer so we have a basically infinite number of CD changer, is this wrong? Should this be taken away?

 

[seashoreCM]

New upcoming problem: Hollywood (do we call it the enemy?) wants to limit high definition TV shows to new TV sets with a "DVI/HDCP" (sp?) interface, namely a sealed electronic path from channel selector to picture tube that inhibits copying.

THe problem is that the HDTV sets now on sale in the stores or which some of you already own won't be able to receive those shows, except as watered down low definition TV.

We need to write our congressmen and the FCC and fast: Demand that TV stations broadcast all their HDTV in a way that today's HDTV sets will receive the shows in their full glory.

Video hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/video.htm

 

[HorizonsFan]

Note this tricky situation: I am a theater instructor and I want to have my students put on a play. I go out and copy from the library one version of "Our Town" and recopy it at my school for the students. Halfway through production, I decide that these students really need a reward for their hard work so I decide to charge admission of $0.50 to the play. The play takes place, I collect the admission funds, give the students a pizza party, and am completely out of copyright compliance. I need to pay the playright for as many copies of the play as I made b/c the copies directly lead to the expression of the play, which is Ibsen's expression. Just b/c I have students does not negatate the copyright need b/c I charged admission to see Ibsen's expression.

Well, I am a theatre instructor. Royalties are due on all performances of a play whether admission is charged or not. In fact, students have been sued for performing scenes in college classes without getting permission to perform "scenes from" or paying royalties. Play royalties are charged per performance, not per script. In other words, even though I purchased 20 copies of The Diviners I still owe Samuel French $360 for 6 performances. Permission is never given to photocopy all or part of a play and royalties for schools are the same as for your local community theatre.
BTW, Thorton Wilder wrote Our Town and he's been dead for a long time. Why should his estate continue to collect royalties on intellectual property when the intellect that created it no longer exists?
Ibsen's work is now in the public domain, however if you wish to perform one of the many English translations you may have to pay royalties.
Who's making the money here, the artists or the publishers?

 

[raidermatt]

In the case of Wilder, he has/had the right to pass on his estate to his heirs. Children don't make the money that belongs to their parents, but if their parents wish, the children get it when they pass.

The English translation example is more sketchy, IMHO. To me, its a technicality that probably should not be allowed. I am in favor of lengthening copyright protections, however, when they expire, there shouldn't be loopholes for translations and the such.

 

[HorizonsFan]

In the case of Wilder, he has/had the right to pass on his estate to his heirs.

If it were as simple as that, I'd have less of a problem with it. Take for example, Elmer Rice. For years, as long as he was alive he had no problem with making cuts in his scripts and staging his plays in unusual, off-the-wall ways. They were even available to us Texas theatre teachers to cut down to 40 minutes for our one-act contest. Since his death, his heirs have denied all requests to cut any dialouge and staging must conform to the written stage directions (even though these are from the original production and were not written by Rice). Because his children think they know better than their father how to license the plays, they are very difficult for amatuers to produce. The heirs have removed several classic American plays from the hands of the common people and students that their father spent his life trying to communicate to and for. Ironic, isn't it?
Much the same may be said for the plays of Thornton Wilder (although to a lesser extent) and Max Frisch. The Frisch thing really upsets me. He wrote a play called Herr Biedermann and the Firebugs which is about a man who's open-mindedness leads him to allow two arsonists to move into his attic, bring in drums of gasoline, and eventually give them the matches to burn down the town. He does this even though he is warned against it throughout the play by a Greek style chorus of firemen. This is a powerful metaphor for what happened to this country on 9/11 and should be performed in every town in the USA. Unfortunately, Frisch's heirs can't agree on who should get the biggest share of the royalties so I was denied the right to perform the play.
Art (the way I see it anyway) is created to be a gift to humanity. It's value comes from being seen or heard. By all means, the artist should benefit from his creation to the greatest extent that he/she possibly can and should use that money if possible to make life easier for his family. When the artist is dead, his/her heirs should not put themselves between the legacy that the artist left the world and the world to whom he/she left that legacy.
Art is communication of ideas. If an audience can't enjoy it, there is no communication. If there is no communication, there is no art.
Sorry for the rant...

 

[raidermatt]

Fair enough, Horizons. It's not so much that I feel differently about what I'd like to see people do, because I think basically we are in agreement. I hate to see things kept from the public or stuck in litigation because people are fighting over relative pennies.

However, I still feel it's the right of the heirs to make the decision, just as the author had the right. What they decide sometimes may not make sense to you or me, but it remains their right, IMHO.

 

[Snowgod]

I work at a private school and take care of the computer network. One of the biggest problems I have is that the students are downloading movies (some aren't even released yet) and storing them on our servers. None of these are legally obtained. Having seen the results of napster, I wonder what any of you would do if you had your hard work taken from you with no one willing to pay. I do enjoy making personal recordings of material I own but I also understand why studios are trying to do anything they can to prevent the loss of their products. If you don’t want this to happen then you must make a stand. Contact your state representatives and let them know how you feel before laws are passed.