Life in the Network

The video was very interesting. Was that music in a number of shows from the late 60’s to early 70’s? The first show that came to mind was “I Dream of Jeannie�…I may be way off since my memory for television & movies is poor. Or, was I just influenced by Barlow’s question of “Is the genie out of the bottle?� (page 2)

I, like a previous poster, was not impressed by Jack Valenti’s interview. He has some good points and I imagine that to gain lobbying ground, it is better to push for stricter laws. I was not aware of the VCR issues (“unhappily, by a 5 to 4 decision, the Supreme Court said no .� As a consumer though, I do think I have the right to make a back up legally, whether it is software, music, or a movie. Yes, if I bought a lawnmower and someone ran over it, I don’t have a backup. But, I do have the option of repairing it.

The DRM issue sounds like a corporate fight without regards to the artists making the music. The music company wants to make a profit as well as Apple. I believe Job’s statement “DRMs haven’t worked, and may never work, to halt music piracy.� As a consumer, I should not be locked into one type of device to play music I legally purchased. If the CD is purchased from a retailer, I have the option of playing and downloading that song to any device I own. Why can’t I do that if purchase it from iTunes or Microsoft? “Apple doesn’t sell music because of DRM—it sells music in spite of DRM,� is a great summary statement. Personally I don’t buy music online or even download it (I actually purchase CDs). My kids’ friends don’t do that. They do a more P2P thing. They’ll each buy a different CD and then pass it around to whoever wants a copy. They find it’s faster and easier than downloading from the Internet. Others just get if from the P2P sites. Like Doctorow writes, many people have their iPods full of the 10,000 songs. How many spent $9,900 (or even half) for those songs? I would venture to say very few. Which leads me to wonder, how many people will truly pay more for a DRM-free song (from the EMI Group article). The analysts say “lifting the restrictions could boost sales of online music, which currently account for around 10 percent of global music sales.� I don’t think the increase will be that much. Most consumers of music are young and don’t necessarily have the money (or want to spend the money) to pay for music. This is especially true when there are P2P sites where music is free and downloadable. As Barlow writes “…there were kids who don’t give a flying byte about the existing legal battlements, and a lot of them possess decryption skills sufficient to easily crack whatever lame code the entertainment industry might wrap around “its� goods.� Besides, “free access increases it, and should be encouraged rather than stymied.� “It� can mean music as well as software. Artists are aware of this concept. Get their product out in the public so it is recognized. Consumers can’t copy the experience of going to a concert, buying a T-shirt or other items. Barlow tells us this experience of taped concerts and the filling of auditoriums with lots of Deadheads. Maybe the Grateful Dead and their followers should be given more credit....they both seem to be in a win-win situation.