I guess I should finish this post, since it is a couple weeks old, and omo started a nice little discussion with a relative thought. One of the strong points I found was this:
There is always going to be hubbub about downloading digitized media information, but the legal solutions suck ass! And I’m not very fond of DVD’s especially when they take ages to be released, what the hell is the point of fiber-Earth anyway. I question this because 98% digital media, particularly J-media, is still slow as molasses when done legally [or the quality is a stream, please, it sucks].
Disclaimer: I have no power in the business world, and I’m not a board member at a large media company, so this idea is just blown into the digital wind.
Transportable Information License
In concept, licensing of a product is always for commercial benefit, and never because the information is just so pure, true, and beautiful that the public needs to experience it (never, even in the case of すてき ARIA). It’s all about money, and consumers would be exploited by companies if they could get away with it; price-gouging is REAL. lol @ $50 Blu-Rays
One solution I believe could compensate for corporate greed, but still please consumers like myself is a Transportable Information License or a “take it anywhere” license. With respect to not owning the information, such a license would allow the holder right to keep the given information, end of story. If such a transportable license existed, it would not be illegal to have a digital copy of a title on the computer; getting it there may still be illegal.
The suggestion of a transportable license ensures that a license holder owns the right to experience the information in any form, but the said license would not allow distribution [for commercial benefit], or require the licensee to yield any physical copy of the information (paperless).
Naturally, an item this powerful would require a greater cost, but those recording those nice HD series from the airwaves would have a way to legally own access to what was recorded, and others who have somehow obtained a digital file would no longer be in the legal red, just because they have it.
Would there really be anything for consumers to complain about if they hold the license which allows them to store and experience a title in any digital form?
On another note, the core concept of such a license is the noncommercial nature.
Just one - that the license may mean fees are attached which are payable at any set schedule the media companies set, and that they may raise those rates or limit (or even) revoke licenses without any explanation or recourse. You don’t own the media… but at least you owned a copy of it, with which you could view or do anything with it that didn’t violate the rights of the copyright holder - the person who purchased the VHS tape or cassette tape had the right to listen to it anywhere they wished, however they wished, so long as they weren’t playing it on a boombox and charging others to listen to it for example.
Well, I was talking sort of like this … http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/tt/license/noncommercial/index.shtml
I guess since it’s corporate, they’d want to setup those hidden fees and the right to change, but it’s all about KISS.
Simply, it’s not purchasing a copy or ownership, but the right to possess the information. It’s saying, “yes, this person is allowed to have this specific pattern of information.” It’s total win for the companies, because they’re getting paid, and there is no medium traversal (nothing is physical about the transaction).
Corporate says: We’re not giving you a DVD copy, but if you happen to make a copy of your friends DVD and keep the file, you’ve already paid to have that information, and you’re friend shouldn’t have let you borrow their DVD, but we can’t do jack; again, we’ve already been compensated.
That’s not going to happen - because a perpetual license is not in their interests, and brings up the possibility the license could be transferred. Also, it would open up the possibility of them being able to invade your personal records or privacy should they even SUSPECT you don’t have a license… whether you have one or not, and then do what they will. Plus, who would issue the licenses? As the DRM argument has brought up, if the person who holds the keys goes out fo business or sells the business to someone else, then you’re screwed as they’re under no obligation to continue to support that license. Hell, they may charge you again for what you already own, because of that.
With physical media, the advantage was that you ‘owned’ that copy of the pattern and could do with it as you wish under copyright law. With digital media, you don’t even own a license to the pattern… and the companies in question are unwilling to reliquish any ‘rights’ to you as a consumer, seeing these as new business opportunities to exploit.
Doesn’t this happen anyway when someone gets nabbed for p2p? I don’t think they could invade your records though, why would they? It shouldn’t be government mandated or regulated, so a private company should have no authority in saying, this person doesn’t have a license… how are they going to know, really, unless someone openly states it and yields their real name + location, then the company sends in elite computer spies that cost more money than a settlement would even pay off, just to haxor wifi and an ipod.
This is the idea, you buy the _right_ to possess the information pattern, that’s it, there’s no copy, they sell you air, and the info is obtained via wild goose chase. If it is somehow revoked and out of the agreement, the consumer has as must right to prosecute as the company; if it is in the agreement then best not to signup (boycott) until it changes.
I’m not saying this is a good idea, but both parties are vulnerable in this situation, and I like that fact. Actually, I still like the idea of masses of ppl sending the actual creators donations, in music this is done via concerts, but for broadcast media there’s no such method.
[...] - Aloe Dream: One License to Rule Them All saved by walt2009-08-15 - Endangered Ethiopians saved by michaelbrett372009-08-10 - Omo on [...]