 |
 |
It seems to me that Mike's point is well taken, although in some ways Disney's use (abuse ?) of the laws bothers me somewhat less because they at least keep releasing the material, usually in a well done manner. That said, just throwing up our hands at the impossibility of getting saner laws isn't doing our jobs either. Not saying that there are those that aren't trying, to be sure. I'm just wondering if we aren't going about it wrong. With that many Ipods out there, there is a large group of people (with money to spend, that is apparent) that might be stimulated to action by the right kind of internet campaign. It is done in nearly every other area, and this is just another form of politics and advertising. If we can't compete with the Disneys in terms of money (that is certain), then another approach is needed. Sure, unless we have a model of a fair law that also looks to the rights holders as well, there isn't a chance of anything working. But what group of people are going to understand the situation / desperation better than the kind of folks here ? Perhaps I'm being simplistic or just not well enough informed... But as was mentioned in another thread on this list, "...somethings got to give..". Steven and others have done some fine work to put in real statistics what everybody here seemed to understand intuitively. This is good ammo to use, if we can just find the right leverage. If we can't compete with the special interests money with our money, then we need to get others to make the noise with us. Just one man's opinion... But somehow there has to be a way found. -----Original Message----- From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mike Richter Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 10:03 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] legal action, and libraries & archives Karl Miller wrote: > How can this be changed? I would suggest that, like any unenforceable > law, like prohibition, change comes from the populace pushing the envelope. Permit me to suggest that "the populace" does not give a tinker's dam about this issue; that even the Elvis addicts are too few to support the industry; above all that the irresistible force of money will contiue to move the legislature against the broader interests of society. Disney is a unique American institution with a particular view of value. They reissue their most lucrative titles one at a time for a brief period each during each phase of technological or packaging development. I am told that their legal office for infringement is a profit center for the corporation, earing its way by awards resulting from suits. Among the names applied to the Sonny Bono law are Mickey Mouse and unprintable variations on the names of other characters. While Disney is far from the only force behind the legislation in the U.S. and now in Europe, it appears to be the most open-handed one when measured by campaign contributions. But the broader point is that the population is far too busy following the exploits of the current superstar - yesterday's nonentity and tomorrow's has-been - to care about expiration of copyright. Fifteen minutes of fame suggests and indeed seems to deliver that at sixteen minutes the famous become the forgotten. That there is a minute cadre of aficianados who bemoan the injustice of it all has little relevance; there is no Disney behind a move to equity. Mike -- [log in to unmask] http://www.mrichter.com/